GenAI: Defining acceptable limits
When deciding whether students may or may not use GenAI tools in summative assessments, consider Assessment, Teaching and Learning Procedures (15):
Use of a particular technology, tool or resource for completing an assessment task will only be explicitly prohibited if its use could compromise:
- achievement of the learning outcomes that are intended to be assessed by the task
- assurance that the student had achieved the learning outcomes that are intended to be assessed by the task
- professional standards or requirements set by external accrediting bodies
- assurance that the principles of academic integrity were upheld in completing the task.
Prohibiting GenAI use
Where you determine GenAI should be prohibited (based on Assessment Teaching and Learning Procedures [15]), this needs to be clearly communicated to students, ideally in the assessment brief). Students should also be informed that the prohibited use of GenAI can be considered a breach of academic integrity.
Note: If you allow GenAI to be used by students as a tool to help understand content, outline ideas or research information, for example, but NOT produce content that can be paraphrased or integrated into their assessment submission, then you need to use the statement “GenAI can be used within defined limits” then specify these limits, and not the statement “Prohibiting GenAI use”.
Remember: Unit Assessors are required to be able to verify with reasonable certainty that these requirements have been met and academic integrity has not been breached (Assessment Learning and Teaching Procedures [16]).
The current GenAI Practice Guide: Signals of and How to Assess (scu.edu.au) includes a checklist of signals of potential unacceptable use of GenAI.
Note: Microsoft and Google are to embed GenAI directly into software like Microsoft Word and Google Docs (Microsoft 365 Copilot and Google Duet AI). This would mean that students will have access to text GenAI in the spaces they write (Liu & Bridgeman, 2023), making boundaries for prohibiting use and use verification increasingly challenging. GenAI will also be embedded within search engines to help anyone search and find information more efficiently and effectively. If you have the chance to establish appropriate boundaries for GenAI use in assessments and support students to learn how to leverage GenAI tools without compromising academic rigour and integrity will benefit all parties. See ‘Inform’ for assessment brief examples of communications to students prohibiting GenAI use. |
|---|
Allowing GenAI use within defined limits
If you decide that the use of GenAI within defined limits is unlikely to compromise academic rigour, achievement of learning outcomes, academic integrity, or standards required by external accrediting bodies (based on Assessment Teaching and Learning Procedures [15]), you will need to define the limits of acceptable use.
The limits of acceptable use need to be made explicit in each assessment, ideally, in the assessment brief. In addition, you should inform students that the use of GenAI beyond the acceptable limits or not properly referencing AI-generated content in their assessment can be considered a breach of academic integrity.
See the section Inform for examples of assessment briefs where the limits of acceptable use of AI have been communicated to students.
Something important to keep in mind
Where you have defined limits for acceptable use, be aware of how to check for signals of unacceptable use: use: GenAI Practice Guide: Signals of and How to Assess (scu.edu.au) (Aug 2023).
Once you have considered the Educate aspects of your assessment then continue with the rest of the assessment design process by clicking on Check, Evaluate, Analyse, Design, Act and Inform.
Note: Given the rapidly evolving nature of GenAI technologies and largely opinion-based and low-level evidence on emerging practices for use in higher education, this resource represents the status quo at the time of writing (Aug 2023). As changes to policies and technology develop and evidence for best practice emerges, practice recommendations as outlined here are likely to continue to change and develop.
