149

Revealed: Thousands of UK university students caught cheating using AI (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

88 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Guardian investigation finds almost 7,000 proven cases of cheating – and experts says these are tip of the iceberg

Thousands of university students in the UK have been caught misusing ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence tools in recent years, while traditional forms of plagiarism show a marked decline, a Guardian investigation can reveal.

A survey of academic integrity violations found almost 7,000 proven cases of cheating using AI tools in 2023-24, equivalent to 5.1 for every 1,000 students. That was up from 1.6 cases per 1,000 in 2022-23.

Figures up to May suggest that number will increase again this year to about 7.5 proven cases per 1,000 students – but recorded cases represent only the tip of the iceberg, according to experts.

The data highlights a rapidly evolving challenge for universities: trying to adapt assessment methods to the advent of technologies such as ChatGPT and other AI-powered writing tools.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe we need a new way to approach school. I don't think I agree with turning education into a competition where the difficulty is curved towards the most competitive creating a system that became so difficult that students need to edge each other out any way they can.

[-] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago

I guess what I don’t understand is what changed? Is everything homework now? When I was in school, even college, a significant percentage of learning was in class work, pop quizzes, and weekly closed book tests. How are these kids using LLMs so much for class if a large portion of the work is still in the classroom? Or is that just not the case anymore? It’s not like ChatGPT can handwrite an essay in pencil or give an in person presentation (yet).

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 5 points 3 weeks ago

University was always guided self-learning, at least in the UK. The lecturers are not teachers. The provide and explain material, but they're not there to hand-hold you through it.

University education is very different to what goes on at younger ages. It has to be when a class is 300 rather than 30 people.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] Alaik@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago

Depends on the course. Some are very assignment heavy and some have 2 in person test grades for the entire grade. As a rule, there's more of the former than the latter.

I do agree we should go back to the 90s/00s way of just having weekly quizzes and tests in person though.

[-] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

But like what if we just had schools present the work. Then the work force was reasonable for testing if a candidate's knowledge was acceptable. This way the onus is on the student. If they don't learn, that's on them. Professors are there to give work and grade in the sense that they challenge students to be critical of their own work. Did they cite, are the arguments logical or poor. Did they meet or exceed expectations. If they cheated.. I think I see the problem. Hmmm not sure I just think maybe school should be less a mill and more about the responsibility of the student and that the workforce is responsible for determining if someone has the skills. We've just really relied on education system for something it isn't. It's really a glorified daycare that business offloaded some responsibility on to

[-] Akasazh@feddit.nl 1 points 3 weeks ago

My dad had oral exams, we can go back to that

[-] swarfega@feddit.uk 2 points 3 weeks ago

On his knees?

[-] Akasazh@feddit.nl 4 points 3 weeks ago

That was an other occasion, mom gave him a passing grade.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] josefo@leminal.space 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It's not cheating, it's vibe studying

[-] Flamekebab@piefed.social 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm shocked. Shocked! Well, not that shocked.

Ultimately it seems pretty dumb. If you're not going to actually learn while you're there, why bother? University isn't mandatory.

That was actually my biggest disappointment with my degree - the course didn't teach anywhere near enough for my tastes. However I would hope that I was an outlier in that respect!

[-] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 10 points 3 weeks ago

The certificate is valuable i suppose, lot of job required that cert to even get a glance with the application. After that, they just gonna try their luck with bullshitting and sucking up to their higher up.

Or maybe they just like the university life and doesn't want to look like they're slacking for another few years.

Either way, yikes.

[-] Ledericas@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

employers often dont check, they look for certificate, x years of experience,,,etc.

only certain jobs require more scrutiny though.

[-] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Most people aren't paying for the education. They are paying for the degree. The education they could get for £1.50 in late fees at the library. This is not something new.

[-] notabot@piefed.social 7 points 3 weeks ago

University is about a lot more than the piece of paper you get at the end. If it's of any real quality, and you are actually engaged with it, you'll be learning from experts in your chosen field, amongst engaged and eager peers, whilst also being exposed to different viewpoints on everything from what to have for lunch through the latest innovations in your field, and adjacent ones, to the geopolitical state of the world. The people you meet, and the connections you form can, and often do, form the bedrock of your working life from then on.

All of that does make the assumption that you actively engage with university life and those around you. Make friends in different subjects, seek out your professors during office hours and talk to them about their interests, join clubs, do stupid, but ultimately harmless things.

It also assumes you are attending a 'good' university, rather than a profit driven degree mill, and those might be harder to find in some places than others.

[-] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Yes they are? Shame on you for doubting the ernestness of students.

[-] Flamekebab@piefed.social 1 points 3 weeks ago

Seems like an awful lot of debt to go into for something that's really not that valuable. If the certificate is the goal then a masters or PhD will end up being what's needed and faking your way through undergrad won't do much good.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That was actually my biggest disappointment with my degree - the course didn't teach anywhere near enough for my tastes. However I would hope that I was an outlier in that respect!

From my own experiences, and those of my own social circles, you're in the majority and its not even close. I think a lot of schools are both bad at teaching, and failing to account for the changes in the world since the internet. A lot of schools seem to want to stick to the bare minimum without changing methods or content, which unfortunately makes sense (financially), given capitalism and our current culture around schooling.

[-] CircaV@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago

No shit. I’m in postsecondary as an instructor and it is so beyond frustrating . They all use it, they don’t want to read or learn.

[-] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

None of our institutions encourage "learning"; they are built to encourage "making the grade". Why they need the grade and what it represents is irrelevant to students. It's just a barrier that society has placed in front of them.

There needs to be something done about how we, as a society, approach education because whatever we are doing ain't working. It apparently only worked at a very surface level and that was only because A.I. wasn't available yet to be an easy out.

[-] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

"Get back in that bottle you stupid genie!"

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 3 weeks ago

And thats just the ones that were stupid enough to get caught realistically I think this is more like 5% instead of 0.5%

[-] HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Three magic words - "Open Note Exam"

Students prep their own notes (usually limited to "X pages"), take them into the exam, gets to use them for answering questions.

Tests application and understanding over recall. If students AI their notes, they will be useless.

Been running my exams as open note for 3 years now - so far so good. Students are happy, I don't have to worry about cheating, and the university remains permanently angry because they want everything to be coursework so everyone gets an AI A ^_^

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Surprise motherfuckers. Maybe don't give grant money to LLM snakeoil fuckers, and maybe don't allow mass for-profit copyright violations.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] mriswith@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Actually caught, or caught with a "ai detection" software?

[-] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 14 points 3 weeks ago

"Read this document. Was it made with Ai?"

"Yes, it sure was! Great catch!"

"You're wrong, I just wrote it myself 15 minutes ago."

"Teeheehee oopsie! Silly me! I'll try to do better next time then! Is there anything else I can help with?"

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] chosensilence@pawb.social 4 points 3 weeks ago

this is only going to become more and more of a problem. and honestly, why care at this point? these students aren't going to do well in their fields. let these businesses deal with the incoming wave of ChatGPT-led graduates. the rest of the world uses these LLMs for everything else, why are the students supposed to be any different? students are not going to listen, so fighting against this and expelling everyone seems pointless.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago

Why fight against it? Because some of these students will be going into jobs that are life-or-death levels of importance and won't know how to do what they're hired to do.

There's nothing wrong with using a large language model to check your essay for errors and clumsy phrasing. There's a lot wrong with trying to make it do your homework for you. If you graduate with a degree indicating you know your field, and you don't actually know your field, you and everyone you work with are going to have a bad time.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 23 points 3 weeks ago

It's almost like we shouldn't value the importance of just passing the exam/ writing the paper and revamp our entire approach to teaching

[-] subignition@fedia.io 12 points 3 weeks ago

A theoretically correct but practically useless sentiment.

[-] aceshigh@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Ditto. A license just means you can pass a test. It doesn’t say anything more than that. That’s why you’re always advised to get 2nd opinions.

[-] grte@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Maybe we can get back to workplaces training their employees for the job they want them to do rather than putting the entire cost of training on 18 year oldish high school graduates for a job market that might not even be great (or exist) once they graduate post-secondary.

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

The output is often really good, even for STEM questions about niche topics.

[-] gigachad@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

Exmatriculation that should be

[-] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

we're doomed

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] confusedwiseman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

In some regard I don’t think it should be considered cheating. Don’t beat me up yet, I’m old and think AI sucks at most things.

AI typically outputs crap. So why does this use of a new and widely available tech get called out differently?

Using Google (in the don’t be evil timeframe) wasn’t cheating when open book was permitted. Using the text book was cheating on a closed book test. In some cases using a calculator was cheating.

Is it cheating if you write a paper completely on your own and use spell check and grammar check within word? What if a grammarly type extension is used? It’s a slippery slope that advances with technology.

I remember testing and assignments that were designed to make it harder to cheat, show your work, for math type approaches. Quizzes and short essays that make demonstration of the subject matter necessary.

Why doesn’t the education environment adapt to this? For writing assignments, maybe they need to be submitted with revision history so the teacher can see it wasn’t all done in one go via an LLM.

The quick answer responses are somewhat like using Wikipedia for a school paper. Don’t site Wikipedia and don’t use the generated text for anything but a base understanding of the topic. Now go use all the sources these provided, to actually do the assignment.

[-] meliante@lemm.ee 3 points 3 weeks ago

I agree. This is a paradigm shift, it won't get erased out of use.

[-] rescue_toaster@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago

Chatgpt output isn't crap anymore. I teach introductory physics at a university and require fully written out homework, showing math steps, to problems that I've written. I wrote my own homework many years ago when chegg blew up and all major textbook problems were on chegg.

Just two years ago, chatgpt wasn't so great at intro physics and math. It's pretty good now, and shows all the necessary steps to get the correct answer.

I do not grade my homework on correctness. Students only need to show me effort that they honestly attempted each problem for full credit. But it's way quicker for students to simply upload my homework pdf to chatgpt and copy down the output than give it their own attempt.

Of course, doing this results in poor exam performance. Anecdotally, my exams from my recent fall semester were the lowest they've ever been. I put two problems on my final that directly came from from my homework, one of them being the problem that made me realize roughly 75% of my class was chatgpt'ing all the homework as chatgpt isn't super great at reading angles from figures, and it's like these students had never even seen a problem like it before.

I'm not completely against the use of AI for my homework. It could be like a tutor that students ask questions to when stuck. But unfortunately that takes more effort than simply typing "solve problems 1 through 5, showing all steps, from this document" into chatgpt.

[-] confusedwiseman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

This is very insightful and provides good perspective.

If I boil it down to take away is that GPT is enough to get through the fundamentals of student material, students can fake competence of the subject up to the cliff they fall off at the test.
This ultimately isn’t preparing them for the world. It’s nearly impossible to catch until it’s too late. The pass or fail options aren’t helping because neither really represents the students best interests.

The call to ban it for school is the only lever we can grasp for is because every other KNOWN option has been tried or assessed.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2025

149 points (97.5% liked)

World News

48166 readers

1229 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.