No Cover Image

Journal article 380 views 266 downloads

How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment

Phil Newton Orcid Logo

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Pages: 1 - 12

Swansea University Author: Phil Newton Orcid Logo

  • 69576.VOR.pdf

    PDF | Version of Record

    © 2025 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (CC BY-NC-ND).

    Download (1.3MB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1080/02602938.2025.2511794

Abstract

There has been considerable speculation about the risk that new generative AI tools like ChatGPT pose to higher education, particularly assessments and cheating. However it is unclear how much risk the UK higher education sector is exposed to. This survey study used a modified list experiment to eva...

Full description

Published in: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
ISSN: 0260-2938 1469-297X
Published: Informa UK Limited 2025
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa69576
first_indexed 2025-05-28T13:09:48Z
last_indexed 2025-08-02T04:59:55Z
id cronfa69576
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2025-08-01T14:26:44.7165059</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>69576</id><entry>2025-05-28</entry><title>How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>6e0a363d04c407371184d82f7a5bddc8</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-5272-7979</ORCID><firstname>Phil</firstname><surname>Newton</surname><name>Phil Newton</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2025-05-28</date><deptcode>MEDS</deptcode><abstract>There has been considerable speculation about the risk that new generative AI tools like ChatGPT pose to higher education, particularly assessments and cheating. However it is unclear how much risk the UK higher education sector is exposed to. This survey study used a modified list experiment to evaluate that risk. Most students surveyed were using GenAI, and almost all were frequently assessed using methods that are vulnerable to cheating with GenAI (unsupervised online examinations, and essays). An estimated 22% of them reported cheating in academic year 2023/24 and almost all were confident that they understood the policy of their university. However the activities that they report using GenAI for were not always clearly identifiable as cheating. These findings suggest an urgent need for the use of more appropriate forms of summative assessment in UK higher education, and clarity over the policies and definitions used to support those assessments.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Assessment &amp; Evaluation in Higher Education</journal><volume>0</volume><journalNumber/><paginationStart>1</paginationStart><paginationEnd>12</paginationEnd><publisher>Informa UK Limited</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>0260-2938</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1469-297X</issnElectronic><keywords>Artificial intelligence, assessment validity, academic integrity, cheating</keywords><publishedDay>16</publishedDay><publishedMonth>6</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2025</publishedYear><publishedDate>2025-06-16</publishedDate><doi>10.1080/02602938.2025.2511794</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Medical School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>MEDS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm>SU Library paid the OA fee (TA Institutional Deal)</apcterm><funders>Swansea University</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2025-08-01T14:26:44.7165059</lastEdited><Created>2025-05-28T14:06:32.4356760</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">Swansea University Medical School - Medicine</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Phil</firstname><surname>Newton</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5272-7979</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>69576__34561__be52058d96584f77b6f0c8298b340a1a.pdf</filename><originalFilename>69576.VOR.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2025-06-24T14:27:27.2225304</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>1363009</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Version of Record</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><documentNotes>&#xA9; 2025 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (CC BY-NC-ND).</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language><licence>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/</licence></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2025-08-01T14:26:44.7165059 v2 69576 2025-05-28 How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment 6e0a363d04c407371184d82f7a5bddc8 0000-0002-5272-7979 Phil Newton Phil Newton true false 2025-05-28 MEDS There has been considerable speculation about the risk that new generative AI tools like ChatGPT pose to higher education, particularly assessments and cheating. However it is unclear how much risk the UK higher education sector is exposed to. This survey study used a modified list experiment to evaluate that risk. Most students surveyed were using GenAI, and almost all were frequently assessed using methods that are vulnerable to cheating with GenAI (unsupervised online examinations, and essays). An estimated 22% of them reported cheating in academic year 2023/24 and almost all were confident that they understood the policy of their university. However the activities that they report using GenAI for were not always clearly identifiable as cheating. These findings suggest an urgent need for the use of more appropriate forms of summative assessment in UK higher education, and clarity over the policies and definitions used to support those assessments. Journal Article Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 0 1 12 Informa UK Limited 0260-2938 1469-297X Artificial intelligence, assessment validity, academic integrity, cheating 16 6 2025 2025-06-16 10.1080/02602938.2025.2511794 COLLEGE NANME Medical School COLLEGE CODE MEDS Swansea University SU Library paid the OA fee (TA Institutional Deal) Swansea University 2025-08-01T14:26:44.7165059 2025-05-28T14:06:32.4356760 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences Swansea University Medical School - Medicine Phil Newton 0000-0002-5272-7979 1 69576__34561__be52058d96584f77b6f0c8298b340a1a.pdf 69576.VOR.pdf 2025-06-24T14:27:27.2225304 Output 1363009 application/pdf Version of Record true © 2025 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (CC BY-NC-ND). true eng http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
title How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
spellingShingle How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
Phil Newton
title_short How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
title_full How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
title_fullStr How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
title_full_unstemmed How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
title_sort How vulnerable are UK universities to cheating with new GenAI tools? A pragmatic risk assessment
author_id_str_mv 6e0a363d04c407371184d82f7a5bddc8
author_id_fullname_str_mv 6e0a363d04c407371184d82f7a5bddc8_***_Phil Newton
author Phil Newton
author2 Phil Newton
format Journal article
container_title Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
container_volume 0
container_start_page 1
publishDate 2025
institution Swansea University
issn 0260-2938
1469-297X
doi_str_mv 10.1080/02602938.2025.2511794
publisher Informa UK Limited
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str Swansea University Medical School - Medicine{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Swansea University Medical School - Medicine
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description There has been considerable speculation about the risk that new generative AI tools like ChatGPT pose to higher education, particularly assessments and cheating. However it is unclear how much risk the UK higher education sector is exposed to. This survey study used a modified list experiment to evaluate that risk. Most students surveyed were using GenAI, and almost all were frequently assessed using methods that are vulnerable to cheating with GenAI (unsupervised online examinations, and essays). An estimated 22% of them reported cheating in academic year 2023/24 and almost all were confident that they understood the policy of their university. However the activities that they report using GenAI for were not always clearly identifiable as cheating. These findings suggest an urgent need for the use of more appropriate forms of summative assessment in UK higher education, and clarity over the policies and definitions used to support those assessments.
published_date 2025-06-16T07:40:10Z
_version_ 1850743781285953536
score 11.08895

Similar Items