Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41019941›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for educational integrity : IJEI2025

Redefining assessment tasks to promote students' creativity and integrity in the age of generative artificial intelligence.

Martine Peters, Dimitar Angelov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for educational integrity : IJEI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Martine PetersDepartment of Education, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Gatineau, Canada.
Dimitar AngelovCoventry University, Coventry, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The arrival of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has forced lecturers to adjust their assessment practices to ensure that students' work is their own from a creative point of view, and free of plagiarism. This chapter proposes the Academic Integrity and Creativity in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (AICAI) model for the use of authentic assessment as a possible strategy to promote students' creativity and integrity and thereby ensure the ownership of their written work. Lecturers are encouraged to rethink the assignments they design and examine each of the following components with an eye to integrity: their professional characteristics, the objectives for the assignment, the type of assessment that is appropriate for the needs of the student. Others include the cognitive offloading that will be done or not with GenAI, the type of authentic task they wish to propose and its characteristics, and the instructions and criteria that will be given to students. The choices made should engage students, thereby diminishing the temptation to plagiarize. By combining different strands of pedagogical theory and research, the

Indexed as

AssessmentCreativityGenerative Artificial IntelligenceIntegrityPlagiarism

Identifiers

PMID41019941
PMCPMC12466509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.