Before you start: Always check if and how the use of generative artificial intelligence is permitted in the preparation of your assessment task. Unauthorised use of generative AI or paraphrasing tools can be a form of academic misconduct.
Understand the limits of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technology for assessments.
Develop awareness of potential for biased, fictional, or inaccurate GenAI content.
Access resources to help you critically evaluate information for your assignments.
You are responsible for the accuracy of any information that you submit as part of an assessment. It is important that you develop skills in critiquing online content. Your final submission should be supported by credible academic sources, appropriate for your context.
GenAI can reinforce social biases and amplify systemic inequities.
GenAI tools can reinforce and even exacerbate existing social biases and institutional inequities (Liang et al., 2023). This has the potential to amplify systemic issues in a variety of settings through built-in restrictions, unequal treatment of topics, content filtering, defaulting to stereotypes, and simplistic conclusions that do not consider context (Chan & Colton, 2024; Selwyn, 2024).
GenAI can produce plausible, but inaccurate content.
GenAI can produce convincing, grammatically correct text that may contain factual errors, as it predicts likely word sequences based on training data rather than verifying information. GenAI prioritises generating plausible-sounding content over ensuring factual accuracy (Chan & Colton, 2024; Selwyn, 2024).
GenAI can generate fictional content.
GenAI is prone to hallucinations, confidently producing fabricated content, such as fictional quotes or citations. GenAI can generate false details that fit expected patterns; fails to verify accuracy or cite sources; and lacks transparency in its decision-making process (Marchena Sekli et al., 2024).
GenAI lacks contextual understanding and critical thinking.
GenAI lacks genuine comprehension and critical thinking, relying on pattern prediction rather than analysis or contextualisation. This results in potential misinterpretations, and challenges with complex topics and cultural nuances (Chan & Colton, 2024; Selwyn, 2024). The output from GenAI necessitate human verification and critical assessment for appropriateness and factual correctness.
Critically evaluate GenAI output. Try the CRAAP game (Federation University, 2024). Do you know your CRAAP (Currency, Relevancy, Authority, Accuracy and Purpose)?
Evaluate your sources guided by key critical criteria (University of the Sunshine Coast [UniSC], 2024a).
Visit the UniSC Library guides and try the Researching for your assignment (interactive tutorial) (UniSC, 2024b).
Learn What are credible sources? (UniSC, 2024c).
Student Portal: Using ChatGPT and other AI tools
LinkedIn Learning: Ethics in the Age of Generative AI
LinkedIn Learning: Foundations of Responsible AI
Did you know? UniSC students have access to Microsoft Copilot, enabling students to engage in AI-assisted research, content development, and image creation with enterprise-grade data protection and properly referenced, current information.
Acknowledgement Statement: I acknowledge the use of ClaudeAI, in assisting with summarising my researched writing to make it more concise.
Prompts used: Please make this more concise.
Output Modifications: ClaudeAI produced output at half the length of my original. I reviewed this output and changed some phrasing to ensure the final text was factually consistent with the original and consistent with my writing style.
Chan, C. K. Y., & Colloton, T. (2024). Generative AI in higher education: The ChatGPT effect (1st ed.). Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003459026-3
Federation University. (2024). The C.R.A.A.P. game.
Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 4(7), 100779–100779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779
Marchena Sekli, G., Godo, A., & Carlos Véliz, J. (2024). Generative AI solutions for faculty and students: A review of literature and roadmap for future research. Journal of Information Technology Education, 23(14), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.28945/5304
Selwyn, N. (2024). On the limits of artificial intelligence (AI) in education. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk: Special Issue on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 3–14. http://doi.org/10.23865/ntpk.v10.6062
University of the Sunshine Coast. (2024a, 15 March). Evaluate your sources.
University of the Sunshine Coast. (2024b, 15 March). Library guides.
University of the Sunshine Coast. (2024c, 2 July). What are credible sources?.
