Artificial intelligence in teaching and assessment - what to consider!

Who can I ask?

The AI task force works with the challenges that artificial intelligence present in teaching. Contact us if you have any questions or you wish to discuss AI in studies: kunstig-intelligens@sv.uio.no.

EILIN offers a course for teachers and examiners 28 March, 12pm-2pm, Zoom

What applies for Spring 2023

The form of examination cannot be changed for spring 2023. You can however make adaptations in how you formulate the exam question.

What applies for Fall 2023

The deadline for planning teaching and assessment is 23 March. After this date it is not possible to make changes beyond adjustments in teaching materials, the wording of assignments etc.

LINK are arranging the workshop Snakk om: KI: hvilke læringsaktiviteter kan bidra til nødvendig kompetanse?  where you can get support to develop teaching and forms of evaluation. See also LINK's resource AI and implications for education. 

Planning courses (Autumn 2023)

The course as a whole

• Specify on the course page whether and to what extent the use of AI is permitted:
  • Can AI be used in meaningful work?
  • Should the course's learning goals be updated?
  • Can you use AI in developing your course?
• Check that use of AI does not breach privacy and data protection rules (GDPR)

Selecting a form of assessment

• Forms of integrated assessment, where the student's progress is closely followed:
  • folder evaluation
  • semester assignment
• Assessment face-to-face with the student
  • Individual oral exam
  • Oral exam in groups
• Examination without aids
  • preferably shorter than 4 hours
  • Preferably scheduled outside of the busiest period (13 November – 21 December)

Making exam questions and examiner guides

• The exam shall be based on the learning goals and test the students on what you expect them to have learned.
• Communicate with the students
  • See the information sent to students on the use of AI in exams. Students are recommended not to use chat robots in their work and are encouraged to develop their own ideas and critical thinking
• Test the functionality of the AI. Put previous or planned exam questions to the AI and become familiar with how the AI handles the assignments.
  • See how the AI can handle parts of exam questions and how it can integrate the parts in a composite answer.
  • Ask the AI to reformulate the question to make it more difficult for chabots (AI) to answer.
• Questions demanding reflection. Make exam questions that require students to think critically and reflect on the topic. Chatbots are currently better at tasks that are lower on Blooms taxonomy (remember, understand) rather than those that are higher (apply, analyze, evaluate, create).
• Examples. Encourage students to use examples from their own lives and current situations in discussing theoretical principles.
• Talk to colleagues. Set up a panel for assessing possible cases of cheating
• Make examiner guides more explicit. The faculty has written a suggestion for an attachment to examiner guidelines (Word document)

Assessing exams

Various tools are available on the internet for assessing the likelihood of a text being generated by an AI. These tools cannot be used to check whether a student's work is wholly or partially generated by an AI. This is due to the university not having a data processing agreement with these tools, which is in conflict with GDPR.

Methods for telling human work from AI-generated text:

• Become familiar with how a chatrobot, for example ChatGPT, responds to and answers questions.
• Here are some suggestions that ChatGPT itself recommends you to use:
  • Unnatural language. Unnatural sentence structure and unusual use of words can be a sign of an AI-generated text. Chatbots do not have the same linguistic intuition as people and often lack variation and creativity in language use.
  • Repetitive language. AI models often generate text that repeats itself and lacks variation.
  • Nuance and detail. AI tools can produce text that generalizes information and doesn't not allow for nuances in language. They can also be poor at giving detailed answers to questions. Chatbots do not have personal opinions.
  • Grammatical errors. Look for unusual use of words or grammatical errors.
  • Lack of contextualisation. AI-generated text can lack continuity or context. Texts can appear vague or unclear.
• Also read the Complete Guide to Detect AI Chatbot Plagiarism - Geekflare

Is the use of AI in home exams and submitted work cheating?

• The rules for cheating and the use of sources are valid both for exams and other compulsory submissions, and invite the same sanctions and requirement of proof.
• It is prohibited to generate an exam answer using an AI either in part or in whole even where the course description stipulates that all learning aids are permitted. Submitted work shall be the student's own work.
• If an exam question explicitly allows for the use of AI, the exact extent of the use of AI permitted shall be explained in the exam question.
• The normal routines for suspicion of cheating are valid. Contact the study advisor immediately when you suspect cheating

Guidelines at SV Faculty

• The faculty does not advise changing evaluation form to examinations because of AI and the possibility of cheating. Cheating has always been possible in ways that we cannot uncover, and this is a calculated risk in using forms of evaluation where all learning aids are permitted.
• The choice of evaluation is an academic and pedagogical assessment for the course convener.
• The faculty has formulated the following to be used on course pages:
  • All learning aids are permitted, but it is prohibited to generate an exam answer using an AI such as ChatGPT or similar either in part or in whole.
• The faculty has written a suggestion for an attachment to examiner guidelines on the use of AI in exams. The document will be revised as necessary.
• ISS has published an information page for students