*This article was first drafted by Co-Pilot and was edited by the Conference Organisers and Conference Manager 10 times (consisting of 382 minutes editing time).*

In October of this year, Mary Immaculate College, University of Limerick, and Technological University of the Shannon, in association with the National Academic Integrity Network (NAIN) and supported by the National Forum’s SATLE fund, hosted the Navigating the New Frontier: Generative AI and Academic Integrity conference. This two-day hybrid conference included 2 keynote addresses, 5 panels consisting of 15 presentations, and a roundtable discussion, attracting speakers from as far as Canada and the United Kingdom. The conference was a remarkable success, attracting 272 registrations (118 in-person and 154 online). The conference brought together scholars, students, educators, and policy makers from across the globe to explore the relationship between Generative AI and Academic Integrity within the Higher Education (HE) sector. It specifically questioned how Generative AI can be used whilst still upholding the values of Academic Integrity.

Opening Address

On day one of the conference, Dr Xianghan (Christine) O’Dea, a Senior Lecturer in Management and Technology Education in the Department of Public Services Management & Organisation at King’s Business School, King’s College London, gave her opening address, entitled “GenAI is Here to Stay. What is the Way Forward for Higher Education Globally?”

In her keynote address, Dr O’Dea explored critical areas for advancing GenAI in higher education, giving particular attention to the importance of AI literacy training and the need for practical solutions. While initially taking a wide angle look at Generative AI in higher education, Dr O’Dea then sought to narrow her focus by offering specific examples that highlighted how Generative AI could be used in a manner that aligns with the principles of Academic Integrity. She also called on higher education to reflect on how industry expectations of students as future employees might inform the design of the use of Generative AI into our programmes.

Notable Highlights

The conference explored a range of topics that brought together educators, policy makers and students from a variety of disciplines, backgrounds and departments within the HE sector. Topics included (but were not limited to):

• The disclosure of AI use in assignments and research
• The managing of risk in the design and redesign of academic assessment
• The development of principles, strategies, frameworks and policies to support the use of Generative AI
• Generative AI literacy
• Generative AI and authentic assessment
• Adopting VR in the classroom and its alignment to curriculum
• The use of AI in physical education, mathematics education and music education
• The co-creation of Academic Integrity Policy in a Generative AI powered HE
• Reimagining the purpose of HE in light of Generative AI

There was a clear resonance between many of the presentations, with presenters stressing the importance of reflecting on how Generative AI might be used responsibly as well as how its use might be reported, so that the contributions of Generative AI are transparent. Several of the presenters offered case study examples, demonstrating how Generative AI might be used within a Teaching and Learning context, or how changes brought about by Generative AI might be managed during policy development.

In addition to the panel discussions, there was a very informative roundtable consisting of student and academic representation. The panellists explored the use of Generative AI from a student perspective. Centrally, the roundtable questioned, “In what context is Generative AI acceptable for staff and students to use in a teaching, learning, assessment and feedback context?” Amongst the many interesting points made by the students on the panel, was their eagerness for Generative AI to become embedded into teaching and learning activities to equip them for the workplace, as well as their hesitancy about the use of Generative AI to grade and provide feedback on assignments. The need for clear institutional policies and guidance on the acceptable use of Generative AI in assessment was highlighted.

Closing Address

At the close of day two, Dr Daniel Schiff, Assistant Professor of Technology Policy at Purdue University and Co-Director of GRAIL, the Governance and Responsible AI Lab, asked us to critically reflect on the ethics of using Generative AI in his thought-provoking keynote address “Dilemmas in the AI-Enabled Classroom: Navigating Pedagogy, Ethics, and Transformation in the Era of AIED.” First providing an overview of the evolution of Generative AI as a technology, Dr Schiff reflected on where ethics and pedagogy intersect, proposing strategies for addressing issues like assessment, equity and integrity, from the perspective of educators, policy makers and students. Dr Schiff’s keynote address concluded by asking us to reflect on the difficult decisions that the HE sector must make when deciding whether or not it is appropriate to use Generative AI in a Higher Education context.

Organiser’s Final Reflection

As organisers, we (Dr Katherine Whitehurst (MIC) and Dr Mary-Claire Kennedy (UL)), and our conference manager (Dr Aoife Chawke (MIC), are immensely proud of the breadth and depth of discussions that took place over the course of the conference. The diverse range of perspectives and expertise represented at the conference underscored the complexities involved when working through the relationship between Generative AI and Academic Integrity. It was heartening to learn about the innovative and pragmatic responses to Generative AI across institutions, as colleagues adapt to an educational landscape which has been reshaped by this technology. The event was designed to be collaborative, where participants could share their experiences, challenges, and innovations when tackling the issue of Generative AI and Academic Integrity.

While it is always a challenge to create an equally immersive experience for in-person and online attendees, the conference strove to create a visually appealing online display and to create equality in engagement for both in-person and online attendees. We were thrilled with the engagement both online and in-person attendees had with this conference. Their questions and involvement helped to move important discussions around the role of Generative AI in HE and in relation to Academic Integrity forward. The positive feedback we received indicated the timely nature of the conference and the real need for the HE sector to reflect and make sense of the changes Generative AIs are bringing to the sector.

Looking Ahead

The insights and ideas generated during the conference will undoubtedly inform future initiatives and research in the realm of AI in education. We look forward to seeing how this area evolves and to being a part of the conversation as it does.

We would like to thank our keynote speakers, panellists, participants, and partners who made this conference possible, including our Conference Chairs (Dr Silvia Benini (UL), Dr Nuala Harding (TUS), Dr Geraldine McDermott (TUS), Dr Jean Reale (MIC), Dr Angélica Rísquez (UL), and Dr Michael Wride (UL)), and conference committee, who dedicated many hours to the development of the conference. We would like to acknowledge the significant contributions of Tom Kinsella (MIC) who designed the online delivery of the conference and to MIC’s LEAD team (Tom Kinsella, Amy Mitchell, Niamh McNamara, Aoife Shanahan and Ciaran Lanigan) who implemented and managed all technical components throughout the conference and the delivery of the streamed content. We would like to thank Tom Kinsella, Amy Mitchell and MIC’s ICT team for the provision of technical equipment for the conference.

We would like to thank Billy Kelly from NAIN, and Laura Flynn and Edel Sheerin from QQI for their support throughout the planning and delivery of the conference.

Finally, we would like to thank the National Forum, whose SATLE funding enable this conference to take place and to be an openly accessible conference.

We want to give congratulations to our conference award winner Dr Fionn McGrath, and runner-up Samantha Xu, whose presentations asked us to stop and reflect on where we are and where we are going?

We look forward to seeing how the discussions and collaborations that began at this conference take shape over the coming year.