In "The Opposite of cheating: Teaching for integrity in the age of AI," authors Gallant and Rettinger recommend using a variety of strategies to help students be their best selves and resist unauthorized use of AI in their classes. Sydney Brown, assistant director of the Center for Transformative Teaching, shares her thoughts on strategies presented in the book.
This summer I and the other members of the CTT read Tricia Bertram Gallant and David A. Rettinger's "The Opposite of cheating: Teaching for integrity in the age of AI." It’s a great book and one of the points made in the first chapter, why students cheat, is that cheating is human and we all do it in various ways and contexts.
Case in point, earlier this month my family held its annual August celebration and the food was amazing, especially the desserts. Unfortunately, I had some nutritional goals I was trying to hit for some activities that are important to me, and I arrived at the event determined to stick with my program despite the delights on offer, but I didn't. I cheated. It was too easy to reach for a second and then a third, especially after I felt I’d already blown it.
I feel this experience is not entirely unlike what students with the intention of not using chatbots for their assessments might experience. They start with the best of intentions, fully cognizant that their unauthorized uses of AI may undermine learning they value. However, competing demands for their time and interest, the perception that everyone else is doing it, and the ease of AI access erode those intentions, and like the first small brownie led to chocolate chip cookies, having AI explain a concept in a more understandable way slips into using a chatbot to draft a paper.
Gallant and Rettinger say it’s not enough to have a policy. Instead, a variety of approaches is needed to raise the cost of using chatbots in unauthorized ways and help the student “be their best self.”
One approach outlined by Gallant and Rettinger is using “integrity nudges” such as honor or integrity pledges. The idea is to nudge students’ ethical sensitivity and trigger their sense of morality which may lessen the temptation to cheat.
In my own little experience, I think if one family member had said something like, “Hey! How's your preparation going for that race series you were telling me about?” That might have been enough to remind me of my commitment to myself and goals to stay on track because it would have forced me to reflect on who I think I am (the kind of person who sticks to her plan) and the contradictory actions of undermining a week of careful preparation.
However, as the stakes rise, stronger measures may be required. Gallant and Rettinger discuss many strategies for “teaching for integrity” and the conditions under which they may be most effective. Chapters do not need to be read in sequence to make sense although it is helpful to read the first chapter, why students cheat, before moving on to others such as chapter four, designing assessments for integrity, or chapter six, protecting assessment integrity.
The book is available online to one concurrent reader at a time through University Libraries and every instructional designer has a copy. If you’d like to discuss ways to address unauthorized chatbot use in your class, contact an instructional designer assigned to your college.
To hear more about the techniques in this book, consider the following podcasts:
- Teaching in Higher Ed, hosted by Bonnie Stachowiak. Teaching for integrity in the age of AI.
- Designed for Learning, hosted by James Lang. AI, Cheating, and Trusting Students to be Human.
Additionally, the CTT will be hosting the AI Skill Sharing Learning Community again this fall along with six hands-on AI workshops. Learn more and register.
More details at: https://teaching.unl.edu/events-workshops/workshops/