UAE Universities Warned: Making It Too Easy For Students To Pass Is A Violation

(MENAFN- Khaleej Times) UAE universities could face regulatory action for deliberately designing assessments to make it easier for students to pass, the country's academic accreditation chief has said, as a new violations framework places greater emphasis on academic integrity and the quality of learning outcomes.

Prof Amjad Qandil, Director of the Commission of Academic Accreditation for Higher Education, said intentionally designing assessments to enable students to pass was a violation under the new regulatory framework, even though it might not traditionally be viewed as one.

Recommended For You

“Assessments that are designed intentionally to pass students or assessment practices that are intentionally designed to pass only students. This is a very important violation that we have,” he said during a panel discussing the new Cabinet resolution on violations and penalties.“Although some do not think it as a violation, but it is a violation.”

Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels.

The comments came during a Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research forum in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday, where officials explained Cabinet Resolution No. 143 of 2026 governing violations, penalties and administrative measures for higher education institutions, technical and vocational education and training institutions, and training centres and institutes.

What to know about the resolution?

The resolution comes into force on September 12 and introduces a unified framework covering violations related to licensing and accreditation, data accuracy, monitoring and evaluation, academic integrity, examination security and integrity, practical training, academic advertising and other regulatory requirements. The resolution applies to higher education institutions and technical and vocational education and training institutions where they breach the Higher Education and Scientific Research Law or regulations issued under it.

The framework uses a graduated approach based on the nature and severity of a violation and whether it is repeated. Penalties and administrative measures can include fines of up to Dh500,000, as well as measures affecting activities, licensing, accreditation and student admissions, depending on the violation and circumstances.

For academic integrity specifically, the resolution defines an institutional breach as a failure by an institution to establish, implement or monitor the policies, procedures and systems needed to ensure academic integrity and the integrity of examination procedures and results. This includes preventing, detecting and addressing breaches of research ethics, research procedures and publication, as well as cheating or breaches of examination systems where these result from serious or repeated shortcomings in monitoring, supervision, examination security or electronic examination systems, or from facilitating or overlooking such conduct.

'No solution but to embrace AI'

Prof Qandil was also asked during the panel to clarify how academic integrity and assessment security should be handled as artificial intelligence becomes increasingly embedded in education. He joked that it was“the last question” he expected to be asked before turning to the issue of AI.

Rather than trying to prevent students from using AI altogether, he said universities need to redesign assessment so that it remains meaningful in an environment where such tools are widely available.“The only solution for AI is to embrace it,” he said, explaining that universities need to move towards what he described as“AI-resilient assessment”, rather than attempting to create assessments that are simply“AI-resistant”. He said the issue was no longer only about detecting whether a student had used AI, but about ensuring that the assessment actually measures learning.

The comments are significant because the new violations framework specifically identifies academic integrity and examination security as areas subject to regulatory oversight, including where shortcomings in examination security or electronic examination systems allow or facilitate breaches. The resolution also links the academic-integrity violation directly to the quality of learning outcomes or the integrity of assessment results.

What can get universities into trouble?

Prof Qandil gave several examples of conduct that could constitute violations beyond simply operating without the required licence or accreditation.

These included assessment practices deliberately designed to enable students to pass, failing to enforce appropriate assessment and verification processes, and delivering a programme that has changed substantially from the version approved and accredited by the Commission of Academic Accreditation without obtaining the required prior approval.

The resolution separately defines a“deviation affecting the quality of higher education” as an actual change or deviation from an approved qualification or programme plan, or from admission standards, that has or is likely to adversely affect teaching and learning quality, students' recognition of their qualification, equal opportunities, or their ability to complete programme requirements within the prescribed timeframe.

Under the violations table, a higher education institution can also be penalised if it makes material changes without the Ministry's prior approval where those changes materially affect the quality of higher education. For a first violation, the measures include a warning, suspension of admission of new students to the affected programme until corrective measures are taken, and a requirement to protect continuing students and ensure continuity of their academic process. The institution cannot charge affected students additional fees for the corrective measures.

He also pointed to cases where institutions may offer qualifications or programmes without the required national accreditation. Officials stressed that a violation remains a violation even if an institution is subsequently given time to rectify its status.

The resolution also states that failure to remedy the causes of a violation, continuing the violation after a warning, or failing to implement a required administrative measure or penalty within the prescribed period can itself be treated as a repetition of the violation. A previous penalty is generally not counted for repetition purposes if one year has passed without the same violation being committed.

Ahmed Al Hammadi, Director of the Legal Affairs Department at the Ministry, said the framework was designed primarily around prevention, early compliance and protecting students rather than simply imposing fines.

Who does the regulation apply to?

The regulation applies to higher education institutions, technical and vocational education and training institutions, and training centres and institutes.

For higher education institutions, Al Hammadi said the areas covered include institutional and programme licensing and accreditation, the accuracy of data and documents, advertising and content, academic integrity, and safety linked to practical training. For training centres and institutes, the framework similarly addresses licensing, activities, training provision, trainers, data, advertising, integrity and safety.

“The goal is early correction and protecting students' rights,” Al Hammadi said during his presentation.

He explained that violations are considered independently, with the response depending on the nature of the violation, the circumstances and whether it has been repeated.

Measures against repeated breaches

The framework provides for warnings and graduated measures rather than automatically moving to the most severe penalty, with the aim of giving institutions an opportunity to correct problems where appropriate.

For the academic-integrity violation, however, the penalties escalate significantly for repeated breaches. The framework provides for measures including warnings, suspension of new student admissions until corrective measures are taken, rejection of applications for new programmes or qualifications, and restrictions on the institution, its owners or those exercising effective control over it. For a third repetition, the Ministry may revoke the institutional licence, institutional accreditation or programmatic accreditation, while requiring measures to protect students and ensure continuity of their education.

The resolution also requires institutions subject to serious regulatory action to protect students' academic records and financial rights, including refunding fees or amounts collected without legal entitlement where applicable.

Institutions can also challenge a decision, with Al Hammadi saying they have the right to submit a written, reasoned grievance to the Ministry within 60 days of becoming aware of the decision.

Under the resolution, the Ministry also has 60 days to decide on a submitted grievance. Filing a grievance does not automatically suspend implementation of the contested decision unless the Ministry decides otherwise.

Universities must change how they assess students

Abu Dhabi University (ADU) has already been adapting its assessment practices in response to the rise of generative AI. Hamad Odhabi, ADU's Vice Chancellor of AI, said the university initially considered whether it needed a new policy after ChatGPT became widely used in 2022.

Instead, it decided its existing academic integrity policy already covered cheating regardless of whether it was carried out using AI or another method.“What we need is awareness,” he said.

ADU subsequently developed guidelines for students, faculty and staff and conducted workshops explaining appropriate and inappropriate uses of AI, including what constitutes plagiarism.

The university also introduced training for faculty on AI-enhanced teaching and learning, looking beyond cheating to areas such as course planning, student engagement, personalised learning and assessment. It also experimented with technology to help identify potential cheating, while acknowledging that AI detection tools are not perfect.

The bigger change, Odhabi said, was to the assessment itself. Traditional assignments in which a student is given a task, completes it independently and submits the final product are increasingly difficult to rely on in an era of generative AI. ADU has therefore moved towards more interactive, staged assessments.

A student working on a project, for example, may first have to present a plan to a faculty member, answer questions about it, then collect data or develop a prototype before returning to present the work.“This engagement between student and faculty helps ensure the student is learning,” Odhabi said.

The university has also developed an AI-based examination moderation system that reviews exams for factors including their quality, the time required to complete them, their alignment with course and programme learning outcomes and their relevance to industry. Odhabi said more than 2,400 examinations had gone through the system since it was launched about a year ago.

The approach reflects the Ministry's wider emphasis on making institutions demonstrate the quality of what students actually learn, rather than simply showing that a prescribed process has been followed.

ALSO READ

UAE universities face a new test: Are their graduates actually getting jobs? UAE universities must have 'teach-out' plans to protect students if they close

MENAFN09092026000049011007ID1111644304