Web Content Display (Global)
FAQs
The following FAQs are provided to support an understanding of AI’s role in learning and assessment.
On this page
- Can students use generative AI in their school-based assessments and investigations?
- How much AI can be used in a submitted task?
- What ways can AI be used in a submitted task?
- How can students acknowledge their use of generative AI?
- How can I use AI in my assessment task design?
- Can students use generative AI tools in their external exams?
- What can teachers do to support integrity of student work?
Can students use generative AI in their school-based assessments and investigations?
The Learning and Assessment Plan specifies which, and to what extent, AI systems are to be used as part of the assessment task. The SACE Board does not specify which ways of accessing knowledge are valid across subjects. We rely on the discipline expertise of educators to teach students how to evaluate the many sources available to them, and which are appropriate for use in their disciplines. We encourage broad research from a number of sources and for students to always view sources critically, as we know their teachers have taught them to.
How much AI can be used in a submitted task?
There is no limitation on the amount of information a student can gather from a generative AI source to use in an assessment task. Teachers should work with students to ensure that they understand the limitations of AI sources, and how the overuse of limited sources can impact the quality of their work.
What ways can AI be used in a submitted task?
There are many appropriate ways that students can use generative AI in their submitted assessment tasks. Students can access generative AI sources to research and inform their assessment, just as they would for a textbook or other traditional information source. As with these traditional sources, students cannot use text from generative AI and present it as their own.
Students may also use generative AI tools to support their assessment development and writing. These tools are increasingly integrated into software used by students, and at times students may be using them without them realising that they are (including predictive writing support provided by many word processors). While the use of these tools is appropriate, students must ensure that the work submitted for assessment is their own. These tools can only be used to support a student’s own writing processes, not to replace them.
For example, it may be appropriate for a student to use an app to provide suggestions that they can consider improving their writing during their drafting process. However, it is not appropriate for students to enter their draft into an app which could change the syntax and structure of the text without the student’s making decisions about phrasing.
Students must not submit work generated by AI as their own work.
How can students acknowledge their use of generative AI?
In all contexts, students must provide an acknowledgement of any generative AI used as a part of their task. It is expected that students will acknowledge any use of AI in a way that is appropriate for the subject and school context. This acknowledgement should declare which tools were used and provide a list of all prompts that were entered to generate any information for the task. This practice is particularly useful for tasks where individual sources are not directly referenced throughout, or where the AI provided broader support of the student work. In some cases, such as image generating AI, providing the output images generated and any reference images entered into the tool, would also be appropriate.
In some cases, it is also appropriate for students to make specific references to AI generated work when used throughout their task, as they would when citing other information sources. In most cases, this would include students providing a reference to work created by generative AI when quoted or paraphrased in their task including: the name of the AI tool used, a link to access this resource (if appropriate) and any prompts that were entered to generate the response.
The SACE Board Guidelines for Referencing [DOC 160KB] have been updated to include some suggestions of how schools and students might choose to reference generative AI.
How can I use AI in my assessment task design?
Educators across schools and tertiary providers have begun to consider how they might utilise AI in task design or their assessments. Secondary schools across South Australia have already begun to consider how they might assess students in light of access to AI tools, and how this technology can be leveraged to support their students to grapple with and understand content. Considering how learning design and pedagogy can be supported with access to AI – as well as questioning the what and the how of student assessment – is emerging as a positive way to navigate the uncertainties that this (and other) new technologies pose. Some emerging suggestions include:
Audio & Transcription tools
- Speech to text for research: Students record interviews, focus groups, or field notes, transcribe with AI, then edit transcripts for accuracy and correct misrecognitions.
- Podcast projects: Use AI to clean audio, transcribe show notes, and chapter markers.
- Accessibility: Students produce captions and transcripts for presentations and reflect on inclusive design decisions.
Image generation, analysis, and critique
- Design & visual communication: Students use AI image tools to prototype logos, posters, scientific diagrams, or architectural forms, then justify composition and iterative choices.
- Historical or scientific visuals: Generate plausible images (e.g., ecosystem models, period dress, cell structures) and critique fidelity to sources; require citations and corrections.
- Bias & ethics: Assign a critique of AI images (e.g., who’s represented, stereotypes, inaccuracies). Students propose mitigation strategies.
Research & knowledge synthesis
- Literature mapping: Students use AI to generate a topic map (key authors, methods, debates), then validate it against databases and annotate gaps.
- Source triage: Task students to produce an annotated bibliography where AI supports summary, but students rate reliability, identify perspective, and cross check claims.
- Synthesis & counter claims: Students generate an AI summary, then write a counter synthesis identifying where AI overgeneralises or hallucinates.
- Quantitative tasks: Students use AI to propose visualisations or statistical approaches, then implement and critique them (e.g., why violin plot over box plot).
Chat Assistants
- AI as a co creator: Students use a chatbot to brainstorm and outline revisions, or to annotate revisions with feedback showing judgment, structure, evidence, and voice.
- Prompt analysis: Students test multiple prompts, compare outputs, and explain why prompt changes matter (audience, tone, domain specificity).
- Student developed chat assistants: Students customise and refine their own AI chatbots, such as custom chatbots with specific knowledge – to serve as a product.
Can students use generative AI tools in their external exams?
No.
The use of ChatGPT and other generative AI tools is not appropriate for use in external exams. The SACE Exam Browser undergoes regular vigorous testing to verify that generative AI tools are blocked in e-exam settings.
Verification and trust of assessment is a shared partnership between students, schools and the SACE Board. Exams are an extension of the trust and verification in established policies and practices. Raising the security settings of the e-exam platform is one method that will support existing academic integrity policies and the active invigilation of examinations.
The SACE Board is re-engaging and collaborating with IT experts in schools to ensure clear communication and best practice across the system. We are also reviewing our e-exam support materials to best prepare schools, invigilators and students for exam day, and how best to respond to anything unexpected or out of their control.
What can teachers do to support integrity of student work?
The integrity of student results is a shared responsibility between teachers and students, SACE Board and schools. As part of this shared responsibility, teachers are best placed to support and guide students in the acceptable support they receive in their learning and assessments, including the use of AI tools. Expectations and parameters should be clearly communicated regarding what forms of assistance are permitted or prohibited in the work submitted for assessment, which can be done through the Learning and Assessment Plan. Teachers are also encouraged to work in partnership with students throughout the learning process to develop shared confidence in the authenticity of student work and establishing trust in whether a submission genuinely reflects the student’s own understanding and effort.