Students Cheating With Generative AI Reflects A Revenue-Driven Post-Secondary Sector

(MENAFN- The Conversation) The higher education sector continues to grapple with the advent of generative artificial intelligence (genAI), with much of the concern focused on ethical issues around student misconduct .

GenAI models such as ChatGPT offer students untraceable and economic means of churning out answers and term papers on any given subject.

For many instructors, this means traditional forms of course evaluation are now ineffective . The question that faculty and administration across the sector are asking is: how can we effectively assess and evaluate student competence on a given subject?

An equally significant question that needs to be asked - but remains relatively absent in current discussion - is the following: what existing conditions in higher education are shaping the scale and nature of the impact of genAI on learning?

As I argue in a recent article in the Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, widespread use of genAI among students needs to be understood as reflecting economic, structural and learning conditions specific to post-secondary education today.

This is not to justify violations of academic integrity codes. Rather, it is to emphasize that only by considering the realities of their milieu can educators contemplate more critical and engaged learning. It is also to underscore that this problem begs more systemic reforms.

Since the mid-1980s, a political ideology that values the free market and the deregulation of government services has continued to inform federal and provincial levels of government - neoliberalism.

Read more: What exactly is neoliberalism?

In this context of deregulation, higher education has been undergoing what can be described as a“neoliberal turn .” This has happened as successive governments have either initiated or tacitly allowed for consistent funding cuts to public services in the education, health-care and social-service sectors.

In Ontario, while provincial funding made up 78 per cent of university operating revenue in the 1987-88 fiscal year, by 2022 it made up only 24 per cent .

Similar trends have been identified for federal and provincial government funding for higher education across the country , which is in steady decline as revenues from tuition fees continue to make up an increasing share.

The impacts of neoliberal policies have, for higher education, translated into a number of effects :

• The marketization of education as a private investment for individual students, as opposed to a public good, as public investment shrinks;

• A rise in tuition fees and increase in student debt ;

• A restructuring of academic labour where casual and low-paid contract faculty now make up half the academic workforce.

A 2018 Policy Options report notes a correlation between a decrease in public funding and increased class sizes:“In 2005, just under 25 per cent of first-year Ontario university courses had more than 100 students. By 2018, that number was 32 per cent.” Large classes, the report notes, reduce opportunities for more student-faculty contact, and result in a poorer learning experience for the students.

Institutions have shifted as they increasingly adopt the competitive and cost-cutting measures needed to survive amid receding public funding.

Universities are now more“revenue-driven and expenditure-adverse ,” with administrators prioritizing activities that enhance the institution's revenue, such as research work or the securing of grants. Falling by the wayside is the practice of teaching and the education of students.

Read more: With precarious jobs, work identities shift - including for contract academics

A recent report published by Wiley surveyed more than 2,000 undergraduate students at institutions of higher education in North America on the topic of academic integrity in the era of AI.

Of the students surveyed, a majority noted the role of emerging technologies, such as ChatGPT, in making it easier to cheat than before. When asked why more students may turn toward cheating, almost half responded that because education is so expensive, there is an added pressure to pass or attain certain grades.

Thirty six per cent of students said they are more willing to cheat because it is hard to balance going to school with work or family commitments.

Read more: ChatGPT: Student insights are necessary to help universities plan for the future

There are innumerable pressures facing undergraduate students today. Neoliberal cuts to education have drastically increased the cost of education, and many students face significant hardships in making ends meet as wages stagnate while the cost of living rises .

When I ask my students about their employment situation, most are working part-time. Many are working full-time while juggling a full course load and some even take more than a full course load.

When larger numbers of students are batched into lecture halls, there are fewer opportunities for active student-teacher engagement, characterized by dialogue, which is a key ingredient in fostering engaged and critical learning. In this context, should we be surprised if students feel disconnected?

In the same Wiley report , students noted they are more likely to resort to cheating if they do not sense the significance of the course material to either their own lives or to the real world.

These conditions are not isolated, nor are they the flaw of only one educational institution. They reflect broader structural conditions.

The crisis spurred by concerns with student ethics or of the use of genAI to cheat on assigned work must be understood within this larger context, as opposed to being seen as emerging from features specific to genAI.

If provided with the right conditions, genAI - as with other digital learning tools like PowerPoint slides or game-based platforms - can be harnessed in the service of developing more engaged learning practices .

However, doing so will require fundamental transformations to the higher education industry, and to its existing pedagogical commitments.

MENAFN02022025000199003603ID1109158498