Curriculum and Learning
Scholastic Malpractice
In last week’s issue of the Especean, I wrote about the College’s Assessment Policy and information regarding assessment in Years 7 to 12 for 2025, available over the coming week on CANVASs under the respective Year pages and the TASS Parent Lounge.
One area of concern with assessment in all educational institutions is that of malpractice, that is, any activity undertaken by students that allows them to gain an unfair advantage over others. One form of malpractice is plagiarism, which is the act of passing off the words and work of others as one’s own, including one’s own previous work.
Plagiarism invariably leads to a zero mark being awarded for the submitted work. In universities, for example, the consequences for plagiarism are more severe for the student resulting in exclusion from the course and even exclusion from attending other educational institutions.
One concern shared by students, educators and educational institutions is the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in students' writing assignments. The following points represent a few challenges on the use of AI that have emerged.
Students may have genuine concerns about the accuracy of AI detectors such as in use with Turnitin as student text may be “flagged” as being AI-generated when in fact the text is the student’s own sentences.
While “passing-off” unedited AI-generated work as one’s own is considered academic misconduct, there are strong arguments for teachers to consider and incorporate the ethical use of AI for assisting student inspiration, ideas, structuring, formatting, research, and feedback in the assignment writing process.
While educators across many sectors of education are currently grappling on how to respond to the use of AI, not only for themselves but also for their students, there are very strong arguments for educators to consider and incorporate an ethical and balanced approach to technology, teaching, learning and assessment.
While AI has the capacity to enhance the writing process for students, teachers ought to be consulted in its use to maintain academic integrity.
According to NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA), unauthorised submission of material wholly or partially generated through the aid of AI is malpractice and is considered a form of collusion, i.e., inappropriate or unauthorised collaboration with another person, or group, organisation or entity to produce work that was meant for individual assessment. The penalty for unauthorised collusion also invariably leads to a zero mark being awarded for the submitted work.
The College will continue to stay abreast of developments in the ethical and effective use of AI in education.
The problem for some school students is not one of a deliberate intent to “cheat“, but one of ignorance; of not being appropriately informed and skilled in the techniques in acknowledging and building upon the work of others within the framework of their own efforts; of not recognising and differentiating between reporting research undertaken and plagiarism.
In particular, Years 11 and 12 represent a giant leap in the expectations, standards and requirements associated with assessment tasks in the Higher School Certificate course. In fact, schools are now required to report instances of malpractice in HSC assessment to the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) which may have implications for university entry.
The College goes to great lengths to inform the boys of its scholastic expectations through extensive dissemination of assessment documentation; access to resources in the McGlade Library; online resources on CANVAS; online submission of senior assignments via Turnitin; pages 52 of the College Diary; and in-class implementation during Year 10 of the All My Own Work program, publicly available on the NESA website at:
https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/hsc/hsc-all-my-own-work.
Ignorance, innocent or otherwise, is never taken as a legitimate excuse. It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that the words and work of others, including the student’s previous work, have been appropriately acknowledged in their own work.
As always, the boys are advised to consult with their teachers if they are unsure of whether elements of their work will constitute plagiarism, collusion or any other form of malpractice as outlined in the College’s Assessment Policy.
Michael Cutrupi
Director of Curriculum