What happens when not reviwer or editor checks the Abstract…😳https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-18302-5

AI plagiarism fears may be wrong | LinkedIn The rise of AI in universities has fuelled concerns plagiarism is increasing, but researchers say there is no clear evidence that students are turning into plagiarists.

www.linkedin.com/news/story/a...

Does AI mean more uni students are plagiarising their work? A new study shows most university students who copy from AI are also plagiarising in other ways.

Here's an accessible summary of my latest research: "Does AI mean more uni students are plagiarising their work?" theconversation.com/does-ai-mean...

I've been running the same plagiarism survey every 5 years since 2004 at the same university for 20 years. The latest publication of the data from this survey is full of new insights into #academicintegrity, #plagiarism, #genAI, and educational assessment. doi.org/10.1007/s409...

I published research years ago in a fairly new journal, it was not even Q4 because it was not ranked. It was a great fit for my research. I was criticised by someone reviewing my department for not publishing enough in higher-ranked journals. Over the years, the journal has grown and is now Q1. 🤷‍♂️

It’s widely known (and, I think, pretty uncontroversial) that learning requires effort — specifically, if you don’t have to work at getting the knowledge, it won’t stick.

Even if an LLM could be trusted to give you correct information 100% of the time, it would be an inferior method of learning it.

‘We could have asked ChatGPT’: students fight back over course taught by AI Staffordshire students say signs material was AI-generated included suspicious file names and rogue voiceover accent

I've said it before and I will say it again many times, people using "AI" to design and deliver 'teaching' to students, to mark their work, and in this case to (!) generate literal voice overs are risking their jobs, and frankly they *should* be at risk if they do this sort of thing:

new paper by Sean Westwood:

With current technology, it is impossible to tell whether survey respondents are real or bots. Among other things, makes it easy for bad actors to manipulate outcomes. No good news here for the future of online-based survey research

The exulansis is real.

Making it a requirement for PhD students to publish in order to graduate, as happens in many places in the world, is a terrible idea. Even when the motivation are pure, the time delays and arbitrary decisions in some reviews etc. are no way to evaluate educational learning outcomes.

TEQSA just published 'Enacting assessment reform in a time of artificial intelligence'

We describe three pathways to assessment reform:

- taking a program-wide approach
- assuring learning in every unit/subject
- implementing a combination of these approaches

www.teqsa.gov.au/guides-resou...

New Chapter with
@cathellis13.bsky.social
: Degrees of deniability: contract cheating and the value chain of corruption in higher education—experiences from Australia doi.org/10.4337/9781...
...
The new Handbook on Corruption in Higher Education is open access...go take a look.

Hoping this link works doi.org/10.4337/9781...

New Chapter with
@cathellis13.bsky.social
: Degrees of deniability: contract cheating and the value chain of corruption in higher education—experiences from Australia
www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap-o...
The new Handbook on Corruption in Higher Education is open access...go take a look.

A multi-layered evaluation of university-wide education interventions to improve student engagement and retention The strategic benefit of student retention is financial for institutions, economic for states and personal for individual students. Nonetheless, enacting and evaluating effective innovations to imp...

Full article: A multi-layered evaluation of university-wide education interventions to improve student engagement and retention www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

I've been reading The Opposite of Cheating: Teaching for Integrity in the Age of AI by Gallant, T. B., & Rettinger, D. A. (2025). I love the premise of this book which contains many generalisable ideas. Maybe it tries to do too much, but if you only read one book on integrity, this could be it!

I agree with this, don't weight Lane 2 assessments more than Lane 1 *or* make Lane 1 hurdle tasks. But, beyond this, my advice is that if there is a genuine educational reason to limit AI use in take-home type assessments, add as much security as you can rather than throwing away needed tasks.

How AI is cheapening tertiary education at Sydney University

@guycurtis10.bsky.social at #herdsa2025 sharing 20 yr longitudinal study on prevalence of #plagiarism in Australian HE.
Most forms of plagiarism are trending downward, student understanding of what is plagiarism is up and they know it is serious. Aligned with ⬆️ mandatory education and training.

CDC vaccine report cites study that does not exist, says scientist listed as author

Mike Perkins invokes the Swiss Cheese model when discussing programmatic assessment at #ECEAI25

Protip for prospective grad students. Please don't do this:

Applicant: Here's my CV. I think I'd be a great fit with your group.

Me: But your experience and interests are in a completely different field.

Applicant: Thanks for your prompt reply. Can you recommend another prof?

#AcademicSky 🧪

And researchers and educators are worried about the security of, perhaps, putting a paper or assignment into ChatGPT 😲

A company lost value for using actual human intelligence 🤦‍♂️

Bahahahahaha!!!

Interesting. I find tools like Cadmus and Inktrail don’t feel that way to me. They let students write things over time and as a marker I look only after the assignment is submitted at the process of how it was done.