From Generative AI for Teaching | OAI+:

In an industry response to concerns around academic integrity and generative AI use, a multitude of AI detection tools are now readily available. These tools claim to be able to detect AI writing versus student-generated writing, although their accuracy varies considerably. While many tools claim high accuracy rates in identifying AI-generated content, it is not uncommon for third-party evaluations to reveal a significant rate of false positives. As such, even detectors with strong records in identifying AI-generated content may mislabel human-authored text as AI-generated. False positives carry the risk of significantly eroding student trust and motivation. Perhaps most alarming, early research and anecdotal evidence indicates that false positives are more likely to occur among students who are English Language Learners or students with cognitive, developmental, or psychiatric disabilities.

We encourage faculty to consult with their respective departments or schools to determine if there are any required AI syllabus statements or specific guidelines applicable to their discipline. Any and all generative AI approaches should be aligned with PSU’s Academic Misconduct Policy.

As an alternative to the physical monitoring which takes place during in-person exam proctoring, exam proctoring software allows student behavior to be monitored virtually. The use of exam proctoring software is driven by a variety of factors: large courses, a large teaching load, exam reuse from term to term, barriers to closely monitoring student completion of exams, lack of grading time, etc. For faculty, this software can create a sense of security, especially for online exams.

Both students and faculty, however, have voiced concerns about using this type of proctoring software. The main concern is student privacy. Among other functions, the software records students and their environments. This can feel invasive to students and erode trust. Additionally, the software records physical behaviors such as eye and head movements in order to hypothesize the likelihood that a student engaged in academic dishonesty. While this may appear helpful on the surface, these metrics can unfairly punish disabled students whose bodies often work differently than the software expects (e.g. looking around frequently). Though students with disabilities can go through the formal ADA accommodation request process to circumvent this, studies show that the majority of disabled students cannot and do not access this nor are they mandated to if they choose not to.

Finally, it’s worth noting that even in the most ideal circumstances, exam proctoring software is not foolproof. A variety of products exist that can “trick” this kind of software and render its accuracy even less reliable.

Active learning and student-centered pedagogies, such as flipped classrooms, are also highly effective in promoting academic integrity. Flipped classrooms, where students engage with course material outside of class and spend in-class time applying that knowledge through discussion and activities, encourage a deeper understanding of course content and reduce reliance on traditional exams. Active learning approaches, which include case studies, group work, and problem-solving activities, engage students in critical thinking and collaborative learning, which minimize the risk of cheating. By focusing on application instead of rote memorization, these methods make it more difficult for students to engage in dishonest practices.

Project-based learning (PBL) fosters academic integrity by linking assessments to real-world applications and outcomes, thus motivating students to engage authentically with the material. PBL assignments often require collaboration, critical thinking, and creative problem-solving, reducing the opportunity and temptation to cheat. Furthermore, incorporating meta-teaching strategies where students are guided to reflect on their learning processes enhances self-awareness and personal accountability in their academic work. This helps students understand how to apply integrity in their studies because they become more aware of their personal goals and responsibilities when it comes to learning.

Alternative assessments, such as ungrading and labor-based grading, promote a focus on the learning process rather than final results. These methods emphasize feedback and reflection, which reduces performance anxiety and fosters deeper engagement with the material. In ungrading, students receive qualitative feedback instead of traditional letter grades. This helps shift the emphasis from achieving a particular grade to improving understanding and skills. Labor-based grading, which assesses students based on the effort and time they invest in their work, also fosters integrity by valuing persistence and growth over final outcomes. Reflection assignments also encourage students to engage in metacognitive thinking that helps them internalize the importance of ethical behavior in their academic journeys.

Clear and detailed assignment sheets, rubrics, and expectations can play a significant role in reducing academic misconduct. PSU’s Writing Center emphasizes that providing transparent guidelines helps students understand what is required and reduces ambiguity, which can lead to unintentional misconduct. Additionally, using low-effort cheating reduction methods, such as randomizing quiz questions or incorporating peer reviews, helps discourage dishonesty without requiring significant changes to course design. Combining these approaches ensures that students are supported and encouraged to engage ethically with their work.

Establishing a sense of safety in the classroom is crucial for fostering academic integrity. When students feel secure—both emotionally and intellectually—they are more likely to engage in honest academic practices. Faculty can create a safe learning environment by fostering an inclusive and supportive atmosphere that encourages students to take intellectual risks without fear of judgment or retribution. Trauma-informed teaching practices are particularly important, because they emphasize flexibility, understanding, and empathy—all of which help create an environment where students feel safe to ask for help instead of resorting to dishonest behaviors when they struggle academically.
Equity and inclusion practices are also central to creating a classroom where all students feel respected and valued, which in turn supports academic integrity. When students perceive that their identities and experiences are acknowledged and respected, they are more likely to engage meaningfully with their coursework. Faculty can incorporate equity practices, such as diversifying course content to reflect multiple perspectives and using inclusive language, to make the classroom a place where all students feel they belong. By creating an authentic sense of belonging, faculty reduce the likelihood that students will feel alienated or pressured to use plagiarism to foster that sense of belonging instead.

Fostering intrinsic motivation is another key factor in promoting academic integrity. Intrinsically motivated students are driven by their own desire to learn rather than by external pressures like grades or competition. Faculty can cultivate this type of motivation by designing courses that highlight the relevance of the material to students’ personal and professional lives. When students see the value in what they are learning, they are more likely to engage deeply with the material. Incorporating student-centered strategies that create space for a wide variety of cognitive and physical needs—such as Universal Design for Learning—can enhance intrinsic motivation by giving students more ownership over the learning process.

Engaging students through active learning strategies is also essential for promoting academic integrity. Techniques like collaborative projects, discussions, and problem-solving activities not only deepen students’ understanding but also create a sense of responsibility to their peers. This collaborative accountability can deter dishonest behavior as students feel their actions can impact the learning experiences of others.