Web Content Display (Global)
Practices
Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...Insert summary...
On this page
- Use a variety of assessment activities to assist in detecting anomalies.
- Require parts of the assessment task to be done in the classroom.
- Re-frame drafting as feedback and verification.
- Conduct check-ins to gauge student understanding and confirm authorship.
- Require process documentation at key moments throughout the development of a task.
- Embed peer review and collaboration as part of the assessment response.
- Create a safe space for questions and disclosure.
- Set tasks that incorporate student reflection and analysis of information rather than fact or information gathering.
- Have students complete an academic honesty statement.
- Post hoc discussion with the student.
- Teach students about academic integrity, plagiarism and proper citation.
Use a variety of assessment activities to assist in detecting anomalies.
Different types of tasks allow teachers to observe a student’s typical style, strengths, and challenges.
e.g. course work, group discussions, fieldwork, practical or laboratory activities, research, oral/multimodal presentations, short tests or quizzes.
Require parts of the assessment task to be done in the classroom.
Teachers can verify key thought processes and problem-solving approaches by breaking a task into layers and supervising key layers.
e.g. students complete a structured essay plan in class, including selecting a theme, main argument, key evidence, and interpretation notes.
Re-frame drafting as feedback and verification.
This enables teachers to monitor progress and identify inconsistencies or signs of external assistance early. Splitting the drafting process into a whole or part feedback interview phase allows a side-by-side comparison of the students demonstrated understanding in an oral interview when compared to their written response. Alternatively, when reviewing a draft, compare it to in-class work to check for changes in tone or complexity, use of advanced vocabulary not previously demonstrated, unusual formatting or citation styles.
Conduct check-ins to gauge student understanding and confirm authorship.
e.g. during class, have 5-minute one-on-one chats where students explain their project focus and how they’re approaching the task. Note any discrepancies in understanding or fluency.
Require process documentation at key moments throughout the development of a task.
Have students maintain a journal or logbook that records their steps, or ask students to submit work-in-progress notes such as brainstorming, outlines, and reflections to show their thinking journey.
Embed peer review and collaboration as part of the assessment response.
e.g. have students exchange drafts and provide documented feedback, which can then be used in the verification process where a student adopts aspects of the feedback provided.
Create a safe space for questions and disclosure.
Foster transparency by encouraging students to ask about AI use and disclose their methods without fear of punishment.
e.g. consider a Q&A box in your classroom where students can anonymously submit questions.
Set tasks that incorporate student reflection and analysis of information rather than fact or information gathering.
Where appropriate to the subject outline requirements, shift focus from product to process, rewarding originality, reasoning, and reflection.
e.g. as part of the task, ask for “evidence of original thinking”, “reflection on process”, and “ethical use of tools,” alongside content and structure.
Have students complete an academic honesty statement.
Require students to declare the originality of their work and disclose any use of AI tools.
e.g. Students complete a declaration at the end of each assignment "“I confirm that this work is my own and that I have disclosed any use of outside sources including AI tools”.
Post hoc discussion with the student.
Where concerned about the authenticity of student work, give the student a chance to explain or clarify their response by asking open-ended questions.
e.g: “Can you walk me through how you researched and wrote this?”, “What sources did you use?”
Teach students about academic integrity, plagiarism and proper citation.
Explicitly guide students through the SACE Board’s academic integrity policy. Plagiarism may be unintentional and be the result of poor citation practices. Provide feedback on proper referencing and academic integrity and offer the opportunity to revise and resubmit work.