Pilot quantitative application produced indicative 100-point academic integrity indicator reports for two institutions with sector comparisons¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2028: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Small-scale quantitative application enabled testing of the reporting metric, with indicative results for two institutions each with sector comparisons scaled onto a 100-point metric. → Hamish Coates 2025

Evidence¶

Hamish Coates 2025¶

Hamish Coates, Gwilym Croucher, Angel Calderon. (2025). Governing Academic Integrity: Ensuring the Authenticity of Higher Thinking in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Academic Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09639-7

q2 · i? · design · r2

Quantitative data collected during the expert consultation and from subsequent small-scale application by early case study institutions and further sample universities. The article states this information "was not designed to be representative or generalisable either educationally or statistically" but enabled testing of the reporting metric.

"Indicative results are shown in Fig. 1 for just two institutions, each with sector comparisons. Results are scaled onto a 100-point metric, drawing from the framework and items articulated in Table 1."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Universities disabling AI detection cite false-positive risk at scale, and detector influence persists in individual grading, journal screening, and institutions without policy revision — related