After attending Ph.D. candidate Beatriz Antonieta Moya’s session on academic integrity and using Generative AI (GenAI) in higher education, I found several important ideas that I can apply in my own practice of teaching. Her focus on transparency, ethics, and the potential risks of academic misconduct, like plagiarism or contract cheating, which gave me a lot to think about. It’s clear that understanding both the strengths and weaknesses of AI tools and considering the ethical implications of using them, is key to using AI responsibly in academic settings.
One of the key takeaways from Beatriz’s presentation for me, was the importance of transparency and ethical use of AI. This is very important, especially when working with doctoral students who may rely on AI for research or coursework. She stressed that while tools like ChatGPT can help with certain tasks, they can’t replace critical thinking or creativity. In my future teaching and practice, I want to make sure my students understand that AI should be an aid, not a substitute. For example, I can include activities where students compare AI-generated work with their own, discussing how AI can complement but not replace their unique intellectual contributions.
Beatriz also discussed the risk of academic misconduct that comes with the increasing use of GenAI, particularly in areas like contract cheating or improper attribution. This is something I’m keen to address in my courses. It’s not just about telling students what the rules are. It’s about designing assignments that discourage over-reliance on AI. For instance, in reflective or discussion-based tasks, I plan to create prompts that encourage personal engagement and critical thinking, making it harder for students to misuse AI.
The presentation also covered the limitations of ChatGPT, such as its inability to provide accurate citations or stay up-to-date with recent events, which I found particularly eye-opening. Many students may not fully realize these shortcomings, and I see a clear need to raise awareness. By highlighting these limitations, I can help students use AI tools more responsibly, stressing the importance of cross-checking AI-generated information with credible sources.
Another important point Beatriz raised was the unreliability of AI detection tools like GPTZero and Turnitin. While these tools can help, they’re not perfect, and relying on them alone to prevent academic misconduct is a mistake. I also share Beatriz’s concerns about the ethical issues tied to these tools, particularly around data privacy. To counter this, I plan to focus more on educating students about responsible AI use and academic integrity in my course rather than relying solely on detection software. This will help students recognize the value of using AI and the ethical considerations that come with AI integration into their academic work.
On a personal note, I use AI regularly to help with tasks like polishing email drafts, especially when I’m frustrated by the lack of responses. AI helps me adjust my tone while keeping the content and intent of the message intact. In the same way, I would encourage students to see AI as a tool to assist their work, not as a replacement for their own ideas and efforts.
Lastly, I think Beatriz’s presentation could have dug a bit deeper into the broader topic of academic integrity. That’s something I would emphasize more in my own teaching. For instance, I’d refer to the University of Calgary’s Academic Integrity Student Handbook, which outlines key values like honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. By incorporating these principles into discussions on AI, I can guide my students in balancing the convenience of these tools with their responsibility to maintain academic integrity.
In conclusion, Beatriz’s presentation offered valuable insights into using AI responsibly in higher education. Her emphasis on transparency, ethics, and academic integrity aligns with my own teaching philosophy. By incorporating these principles into my practice, I can help students use AI thoughtfully while promoting deep learning and upholding academic honesty.
Leave a Reply