GAiIT HeaderLG
The GAiIT Framework

Motivations for Ai Abuse

[Ai goes to far]

Why students might abuse the limits on Ai

A lack of clarity

When the expectations for Ai use have not been made clear, this leads students to abuse Ai, innocently or not.

A lack of time

Not everyone has the capacity or the discipline to time manage their day. Procrastination to do more emotionally satisfying activities puts unrealistic timelines for work without help.

A lack of subject investment

Students may not find a particular subject interesting enough to invest their own time. Therefore they willfully deploy Ai to do the work instead. Unless there are guides to suggest otherwise.

A lack of subject knowledge

Students lacking the knowledge needed to successfully complete the project (for any number of fore mentioned issues). Student relies on Ai to produce the work they don't understand.

A lack of belief

Especially prevalent for online courses, the student does not believe or trust that the instructor will actually read and critique the work. So, why waste time doing it, if no one is going to read it?

A lack of technical training

In situations where the student lacks the technical training to complete the assignment. Perhaps more likely with older students, Ai is used to do the project for them. 

ANgryStudent
Bona Fide Gone Wrong

Most students want to do what is expected of them. However, that's not always true and sometimes even good students get caught into odd life-challenges that produce unforeseen and compromising situations for the students to navigate the decision to facilitate Ai beyond its recommended GAiIT Level.

Student_Ai
All-GAiIT Levels

You seen an abuse... now what?

While still in the minority of students, broken trust still happens

Suggestions when students cross the line

Ai has EXPLODED onto the learning scape like an explosive shockwave traveling across the Nevada desert when the U.S. government was testing nukes back in the 1960s. Microsoft's Corporate Secretary Carolyn Frantz stated in a 2019 article that Ai would change the world's workforce - that was 2019! Did she have any idea that it would be where it is now? 

More than just the work force, the "learn force," teachers, professors, and instructors everywhere have been washed over by this tidal wave of options for students. Our nation's instructional corps both K-12 and higher-ed have a daunting task to figure out how to manage these tools not as adversaries but as collaborators and advisors. We are all facing the same swell of causal events brought about by Ai at the same time. 

With that in mind, great consideration centered on how to respond when students blow past the expected limits and turn in work that utilizes Ai past the point of it being a collaborator and more like a conspirator. Our first reaction when the line has been crossed decidedly encouraged questioning over accusation. As Dr. Temple suggested many times, "Be always the inquisitor, never the accuser." With that, our strategy begins with a conversation with the student and the work in question. The conversation could start with questions like:

  • I'm curious about your post you made, can you go further into detail about 'x' and 'y'.
  • Share with me your thoughts about the work, what brought about your entry and can you present more information on what 'x' had to do with 'y'?
When we investigated situations where students knowingly use Ai past Bona Fide, the student received an opportunity to re-do the post, though some of us on the committee felt the work should be tagged with the same penalty that's associated with late work.

The student could be confronted with suggestions like this:

  • After our discussion, I have a suspicion that you may have used Ai beyond what we the assigned GAiIT level for the assignment. Use of Ai near impossible to prove at 100% certainty, so rather than giving the assignment a zero, as would be the case for confirmed academic dishonesty, I will offer you the ability to redo the assignment within the next 48 hours. Though, longer than that, the assignment will be given a zero.

We, the students and the instructional staff, are both learning about how to manage Ai together. In developing the GAiIT framework we felt it important to make as many of these incursions as possible learning experiences rather than taking overt disciplinary measures. Investigation is important! As it turns out, there are people that write much in the same manner as an Ai does. For example, students that had to learn English formally overseas will not write with the sort of nuance that a native speaker would. This formalized form of writing presents in the same way as Ai writing does. Our GAiIT team has seen students almost quit out of their programs due to instructors accusing them of using Ai without the discussion first. Every single time (in three such occasions) the student was born in another country and learned English formally.