eupolicy.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
This Mastodon server is a friendly and respectful discussion space for people working in areas related to EU policy. When you request to create an account, please tell us something about you.

Server stats:

218
active users

#academicintegrity

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

We're expanding our collection of GenAI syllabus policies across higher ed!

Looking especially for:
STEM, Business, & Health courses
Gen Ed (Writing, Speech, Psych)
Prof/vocational programs

📥 Submit/update: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAI

📚 Browse policies: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d

#HigherEd #GenAI #AcademicIntegrity #Syllabi

@academicchatter @edutooters

Google DocsClassroom Policy/Guidance on AI Generative ToolsThis form is to collect and share examples of policies/classroom syllabi that are instructors are using that focus on AI Generative Tools (e.g. ChatGPT, MidJourney, Dall-E, etc.). If you have one that you would like to share, I will place it on this document with others so that folks can see these examples and help to figure out their own approach. If you have an Institutional-wide Policy that you would like to share, please use this form which will go to this resource. If you have any questions about this form or the document where this will end up, please contact, Lance Eaton. If you wish to submit yours but remain anonymous in some capacity, please email me at the contact above. Emails are collected for follow up clarifications, they will not be shared on the document unless requested in the final question ("Additional information you want to share"). Otherwise, we'll share the policy, the course name, institution, and name of the person sharing (unless indicated otherwise). Banner image - Photo by MJH SHIKDER on Unsplash.

📘 Blue books are making a comeback!
🤖 ChatGPT-driven cheating has forced professors to rethink assessments
📈 Sales surged 30–80% across major universities
✍️ Handwritten, in-person exams are rising
⚖️ But: Should we ban AI or teach students to ethically use it?

This sparks a bigger conversation on the future of learning. How should academia balance innovation with integrity?

#AI #HigherEducation #AcademicIntegrity #ChatGPT #EdTech
wsj.com/business/chatgpt-ai-ch

🎓 “You just assume that if you do your work, you’re going to be fine — until you aren’t.”

That’s the reality for students caught in the middle of flawed AI-detection systems and rising fears of academic dishonesty.

Highlights from the NYT story:
🤖 Turnitin and other detectors are flagging genuine work as AI-generated
📉 Some students are receiving zeros — or nearly missing graduation — due to false positives
🖥️ Students now screen-record themselves writing homework to prove their innocence
📊 Studies show current detectors misidentify human writing 6–9% of the time
⚠️ Non-native English speakers face even higher risks of being flagged

Several universities (Berkeley, Georgetown, Vanderbilt) have paused AI-detection tools. Others continue to use them — despite evidence of harm.

This isn’t innovation — it’s a trust crisis in the classroom.

#AIethics #AcademicIntegrity #HigherEd #EdTech #ChatGPT #Turnitin
nytimes.com/2025/05/17/style/a

The New York Times · How Students Are Fending Off Accusations That They Used A.I. to CheatBy Callie Holtermann

What is even the point of education if you don't actually intend to learn anything? I always hated oral exams, but at this point they seem like a very good idea.

“A philosophy professor across the country at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock caught students in her Ethics and Technology class using AI to respond to the prompt “Briefly introduce yourself and say what you’re hoping to get out of this class.””

nymag.com/intelligencer/articl

Intelligencer · Rampant AI Cheating Is Ruining Education Alarmingly FastBy James D. Walsh

In case you were wondering about adding an AI system as author to your next paper: ICMJE says "NO!"

icmje.org/recommendations/brow

"Chatbots (such as ChatGPT) should not be listed as authors because they cannot be responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work, and these responsibilities are required for authorship"

#AcademicChatter
#AcademicIntegrity

www.icmje.orgICMJE | Recommendations | Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors

This, in my opinion, is the best April Fool's joke I've seen this year:

linkedin.com/posts/publishing-

"Elsevier Acquires Beall’s List and launches their “Reputify” service to help publishers clean up their Image"

www.linkedin.comElsevier Acquires Beall’s List and launches their “Reputify” service to… | Publishing with Integrity | 11 commentsElsevier Acquires Beall’s List and launches their “Reputify” service to help publishers clean up their Image https://lnkd.in/gsDQ95CJ | https://lnkd.in/ggfXsAuz In what is perhaps a surprise move, Elsevier have just announced the acquisition of the Beall’s List intellectual property. This is part of a new initiative to “promote rehabilitation and re-entry into the scholarly publishing ecosystem.” The renamed platform - "Beall’s Legacy: Powered by Elsevier" - will form the backbone of a new subscription-based service called Reputify, offering those publishers who wish to refresh their image: 🔍 A tailored Ethics Health Check 🧼 A “clean slate” publishing certificate, which says that they are working with Elsevier to transition towards being a legitimate journal 📤 Fast-track consideration for Scopus indexing “We believe everyone deserves a second chance,” said a spokesperson. “They will subscribe to our service, which will be less than the cost of publishing an article in their journal and, for that fee, our expert team will work with the journal to transition from being a predatory journal, to being a legitimate journal. Once they have made the required changes to the publishing model, we will offer a fact track service to being indexed in Scopus". Two options will be offered by Reputify: 1️⃣ Basic: One-time removal from the "Beall's List", as long as the journal guarantees to change its predatory practises. 2️⃣ Elite: A tailored package to work with the Elsevier team to transition to a legitimate journal, with a fast track to being Scopus indexed. | 11 comments on LinkedIn

Our pre-print is out, just in time for Christmas vacation:

Research Integrity and GenAI: A Systematic Analysis of Ethical Challenges Across Research Phases

by Sonja Bjelobaba, Lorna Waddington, Mike Perkins, Tomáš Foltýnek, Sabuj Bhattacharyya, Debora Weber-Wulff

arxiv.org/abs/2412.10134

"We propose a set of practical recommendations to support researchers in effectively integrating these tools while adhering to the fundamental principles of ethical research practices."

#AcademicIntegrity
#GenAI
#Ethics
#Research
#AcademicChatter

arXiv.orgResearch Integrity and GenAI: A Systematic Analysis of Ethical Challenges Across Research PhasesBackground: The rapid development and use of generative AI (GenAI) tools in academia presents complex and multifaceted ethical challenges for its users. Earlier research primarily focused on academic integrity concerns related to students' use of AI tools. However, limited information is available on the impact of GenAI on academic research. This study aims to examine the ethical concerns arising from the use of GenAI across different phases of research and explores potential strategies to encourage its ethical use for research purposes. Methods: We selected one or more GenAI platforms applicable to various research phases (e.g. developing research questions, conducting literature reviews, processing data, and academic writing) and analysed them to identify potential ethical concerns relevant for that stage. Results: The analysis revealed several ethical concerns, including a lack of transparency, bias, censorship, fabrication (e.g. hallucinations and false data generation), copyright violations, and privacy issues. These findings underscore the need for cautious and mindful use of GenAI. Conclusions: The advancement and use of GenAI are continuously evolving, necessitating an ongoing in-depth evaluation. We propose a set of practical recommendations to support researchers in effectively integrating these tools while adhering to the fundamental principles of ethical research practices.