DEAR Hub - Guestbook

QIze Yang

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 14:52:52 +0800

I haven't attend the lecture today, but from what I saw, lots of previous posts are generated by AI, and their points are all reasonable, detailed and precise. For me without AI I can raise only very few points to discuss. I think what I could do is just confess "I can't live without AI" and try to make everything look better.

Yufei SHEN

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 13:32:33 +0800

1. Case
A graduating senior student was overwhelmed by the dual pressures of job hunting and thesis writing. Facing extreme anxiety and a tight deadline, the student encountered a commercial ghostwriting agency online that promised a "professional, original, and 100% confidential" thesis for a high fee. The student paid for it and submitted the ghostwritten thesis.

2. Ethical issues

Violation of Educational Equity: When a student uses financial privilege to bypass the rigorous research process, it creates an unfair advantage over peers who invest genuine time and effort. This deeply undermines the principle of meritocracy in education.

Damage to Institutional Integrity: If academic degrees can essentially be purchased, the credentials issued by universities lose their social value and credibility, leading to a systemic breakdown of trust between academia and society.

3. How to prevent

Reinforce Management: Students must be required to submit milestone updates (e.g., literature review, methodology, first draft) into an institutional portal. A thesis cannot be cleared for defense without a verified, step-by-step history of mentorship and progress.

Establish Diversify Assessments System: Institutions should strengthen academic writing centers and mental health support to alleviate graduation anxiety, teaching students that navigating academic struggle honestly is a vital part of education.

Wai Chau CHAN

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:14:37 +0800

Case I want to raise:
A student uses generative AI not just to polish language, but to restructure their argument and reorganise their ideas. The final essay reads clearly and logically, but the thinking process — the struggle to find the right words and connections — has been replaced by the AI. The student believes this is acceptable because the original research was done by them.

What ethical issue does this involve?
I think this goes beyond simple dishonesty. Writing is not only a way to communicate ideas — it is also a way to develop them. When AI rewrites not just the surface language but also the logical structure of an argument, the student misses an important part of the learning process. In a way, they are presenting a thinking ability that is not truly theirs. This creates an unfair situation for other students and also raises a deeper question: who is the real author of the work?

What actions would be appropriate?
Rather than punishing students immediately, I think the first step should be a conversation. The instructor can ask the student to explain their thinking process and walk through their key arguments verbally. This makes it clear whether the student genuinely understands their own work. If the AI involvement was significant and undisclosed, a resubmission with a written reflection on how AI was used would be a fair response.

How can we prevent this in the future?
One useful approach is to design tasks that require students to show their thinking process — not just the final product. For example, instructors could ask for drafts, outlines, or short recorded explanations of key arguments. In my own research, I have found that the process of working through difficult ideas — even messily — is often where real understanding is built. If we skip that process, we may produce polished work but lose the actual learning behind it.

Chen Xi

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:14:00 +0800

Case: I have seen a case where a student directly submitted AI-generated content as their own work.

I think it is academic integrity because the work may not truly reflect his own understanding and effort. While AI can be a useful learning tool, students should use it responsibly and follow the course guidelines. In this situation, it would be more appropriate to acknowledge the use of AI and ensure that the final work includes the student's own ideas and critical thinking. To prevent similar issues, universities and instructors should provide clear guidance on acceptable AI use. Students should also understand that AI is a support tool rather than a replacement for learning.

Zhiyu JING

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:13:51 +0800

1. Ethical & integrity issue

This behaviour counts as undisclosed AI use, a violation of academic integrity. It is a form of partial plagiarism: the student hides AI assistance, misrepresents all writing as their original work, and breaks assessment rules about transparent source acknowledgment.

2. Appropriate actions

I would talk privately with the student first to hear their reasoning, then explain the AI citation rules clearly. I let them resubmit the essay with full AI disclosure and deduct a small mark for non-compliance, instead of giving an immediate fail.

3. Prevention methods

Teachers should deliver clear guidelines on citing AI tools at the start of courses. We can also add AI acknowledgment sections to all assignment rubrics, and hold short workshops to teach proper transparent AI usage.

My Response

The ethical issue here is undisclosed AI writing assistance, a serious academic integrity violation. The student failed to declare AI rewrote their essay, misleading teachers that all ideas and language were their original work, which equals incomplete plagiarism against course assessment policies.

My proper response would be a one-on-one conversation with the student to understand their confusion about AI rules. I will require them to rewrite and resubmit the essay with clear AI tool citations, with a moderate mark deduction as a warning.

To avoid similar cases later, instructors need to distribute explicit AI citation rules at course launch. We can also add AI disclosure columns to analytic rubrics and host brief training sessions for students on transparent academic AI use.

Chen Franky

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:13:20 +0800

Case A:

Unacknowledged AI rewriting generally crosses the line into academic dishonesty. While using AI as a basic grammar checker is acceptable, letting it completely restructure and rewrite prose masks the student's true writing ability and voice.
However, in some others situation, such as using AI to provides some ideas, rather than the whole paper, it will be the good types using of AI tools in the study and research. It can help students find somethings they may not consider about. And, befor they use, they need to make sure AI provides right conclutions.

guo xiaofang

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:12:13 +0800

I observed a case where a student used AI to rewrite an essay without proper acknowledgment. The ethical issue involves plagiarism and academic dishonesty, as the student passed off AI-generated work as their own, violating principles of intellectual integrity.

Appropriate actions would involve reporting the incident to the academic department while adhering to due process. The student should be required to resubmit the assignment and educated on the unacceptable nature of this practice.

To prevent future issues, universities must establish clear policies regarding generative AI tools. Teachers should also focus on assessing critical thinking through in-class assignments, making it harder for students to rely solely on external technologies.

Ao XIE

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:12:02 +0800

For the student case:

The core ethical issue here is academic dishonesty and a lack of transparency. By using AI to rewrite the essay without acknowledgment, the student misrepresents machine-generated structural refinement and phrasing as their own authentic work, violating the principle of intellectual integrity.

An appropriate immediate action would be for the instructor to hold a private, developmental discussion with the student. Instead of jumping straight to severe punitive measures, the instructor should clarify the boundary between using AI as a tool versus plagiarism, requiring a resubmission that includes proper disclosure of the tools used.

To prevent this in the future, institutions must establish explicit, assignment-level guidelines on permissible Generative AI usage. Furthermore, educators should integrate process-based assessments—such as requiring rough drafts, peer reviews, or brief oral reflections—making uncredited AI intervention both difficult to utilize and easy to identify.

Haoxin CHEN

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:12:02 +0800

AI is a good tool to help us solve the problem in writing，coding，analysing and so on. But now most of us rely on using them without thinking of the words it written. Especially, I meet some students using AI to analyse data while some results are wrong and being not mentioned in the data. So we should be careful when using these tools by checking.

Yinjie LIANG

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:11:51 +0800

A student copied a full assignment written by another learner from public online forums and submitted it as his own work without citing the original author.

Ethical issue: This behaviour violates online copyright rules and constitutes digital plagiarism. It fails to show the student’s own research and critical thinking. Learners must credit all online sources they reference. Teachers can ask students to submit research notes alongside final work to reduce copy-and-paste misconduct.

Ruojing Liu

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:11:48 +0800

One ethical dilemma I have observed is a student using AI tools to rewrite an essay without acknowledging the assistance. This raises concerns about academic integrity, authorship, and fairness. While AI can be a useful learning tool, submitting AI-generated or AI-revised work as entirely one’s own may misrepresent the student’s actual understanding and effort.

In this situation, the appropriate action would be to follow the institution’s policy, discuss the issue with the student, and encourage transparency about AI use. Rather than banning AI completely, educators should provide clear guidelines on acceptable and unacceptable uses.

To prevent similar issues in the future, universities should offer AI literacy training, clarify academic integrity expectations, and design assessments that emphasize critical thinking, reflection, and original analysis.

Kathy Wong

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:11:02 +0800

Case: Student rewrote full essay with AI but omitted disclosure

I observed a peer rely entirely on generative AI to restructure their coursework without stating tool usage.

1. Ethical issue at stake: The problem is not AI itself, but concealed reliance. Undeclared AI misrepresents independent analysis, breaching academic honesty; universities do not ban AI, yet lack of transparency distorts fair assessment of personal learning outcomes.

2. Appropriate actions: Have an open conversation to clarify AI as a legitimate learning aid. Guide them to add an AI usage appendix to their paper and voluntarily inform the tutor, rather than penalising them outright.

3. Future prevention: Design guided AI integration tasks in tutorials, standardise AI citation templates for all submissions, and frame AI as a research assistant instead of a forbidden shortcut to shift students’ mindsets.

ZHAO Zhan

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:10:31 +0800

There might be a dilemma that, student use AI tools without review it. AI may have hallucination.

I think for this case: teacher should know some tools to detect the hallucination, and student should review what AI produced as double-check.

Kaihan Huang

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:10:21 +0800

I choose the case that a student used AI to rewrite most of an essay but did not mention it. The main issue is academic honesty. Although AI can help improve grammar and sentence structure, submitting AI-generated work as personal writing may give an unfair impression of the student's real ability.

I think the student should be asked to explain how AI was used and revise the essay in their own words. The teacher should not only punish the student, but also explain why acknowledgement is important. In the future, teachers could provide clear rules about acceptable AI use, such as using it for brainstorming or grammar checking but not for writing the whole assignment. Students could also include a short statement describing how they used AI. This would encourage responsible use and reduce similar problems.

RUNCHEN XIA

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:09:48 +0800

The core issue is a breach of academic integrity. When a student uses AI to rewrite an essay without acknowledgment, it constitutes plagiarism and deception. It misrepresents the student's actual writing proficiency and critical thinking skills, undermining the trust between students and educators.

The teacher should address this privately with the student, explaining why unacknowledged AI assistance is unacceptable. Rather than implementing severe punitive measures immediately, the student should be allowed to rewrite the essay honestly, fostering a learning opportunity rather than a purely disciplinary one.

To prevent this, institutions must establish explicit guidelines detailing acceptable versus unacceptable AI assistance. Additionally, educators should design assessments that emphasize the writing process, requiring students to submit initial drafts and reflections alongside their final work.

Jize YANG

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:09:44 +0800

One ethical issue I have observed is students using generative AI to rewrite assignments without acknowledging it. The main problem is not simply the use of AI itself, but the lack of transparency. If the final work is presented as entirely the student’s own writing, it may misrepresent the student’s actual ability and violate academic integrity. An appropriate action would be to clarify whether AI use is allowed in that task, and if so, how it should be acknowledged. Teachers should also explain the difference between using AI as a learning support and using it to replace one’s own thinking. To prevent similar issues, courses could provide clear AI-use guidelines, examples of acceptable acknowledgement, and assessment designs that require personal reflection, process evidence, or in-class components. This would help students use technology responsibly while maintaining fairness.

Cheuk Kiu LEE

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:09:08 +0800

Case 1; A student used AI to rewrite an essay but didn't acknowledge it.

Ethical issue: The essay rewrote by AI could not show the student's writing skills (e.g. Grammar and arrangement of paragraphs in a logical way). The student should acknowledge the usage of AI and keep the original writing for teacher's reference. Simular issue could be prevented by asking students to finish the writing in class without using any electronic device (just like the old way).

huiru QIAO

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:08:57 +0800

A student rewrote his whole essay with AI and hid this use from the lecturer

This is academic integrity violation. The student failed to disclose AI assistance, which counts as undeclared academic aid, misleading the assessor about his own independent writing ability. It breaks honesty rules and undermines fair evaluation for all classes. Talk privately with the student to clarify rules of AI citation. Ask him to resubmit the work with full AI usage declaration and assign a formative writing task to practice independent composition. Record this incident for academic integrity file as a warning.

Prevention: Teachers should deliver clear guidelines on citing AI tools at the start of each course, share sample acknowledged AI writing, and hold short workshops to help students distinguish legitimate AI support from hidden cheating.

Liu Yitong

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:08:31 +0800

Under the case that student used AI to rewrite an essay but did not acknowledge it, I personaly do not experience it, either being the TA or myself, but I saw my classmates been through this. They either do not know that use AI for polishing also will cause this issue or they don't care. The ethical issue involved is integrity, being not honest of using tools. The appropriate action for students would be declare which part used the AI and how the AI is used. If necessary, providing the chat history is also preferred. For the teacher, I think the appropriate way is notifying the student about this issue and ask them for the declaration including hand in the chat history. We could prevent this issue by notifying the students about in which level using AI is acceptable in the first class, make announcement, writing this in syllabus and also include this in the homework description.

Yitong.

kejian wu

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:07:52 +0800

According to the official Elsevierpolicy ("Declaration of Generative AI in the writing process"), along with the author guidelines from Springer Nature and Wiley, top academic publishers generally permit the use of generative AI tools to improve the language, grammar, and readability of a manuscript. However, all three publishers strictly mandate a "Mandatory Disclosure"—explicitly stating that AI cannot be credited as an author and that any substantial rewriting or text generation must be transparently disclosed at the time of submission (typically in a dedicated AI declaration statement or acknowledgments). By concealing the AI's assistance, the student misleads the instructor regarding the writing process and violates the fundamental principle upheld by these publishers: that human authors bear sole and ultimate responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the content. To address and prevent this, the instructor should guide the student to adhere to these publishing standards by requiring a formal disclosure detailing the specific tool used and the extent of the rewriting(like this: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01069-0 ), while embedding a standardized "AI Disclosure Template"(modeled after Elsevier and Wiley guidelines) into future assignment rubrics to ensure process-oriented compliance.

Yuxiao Wang

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:07:31 +0800

Case selected: A student used AI‑powered text‑rewriting tools to polish their whole essay without stating this usage

1. Ethical‑integrity issue
This behaviour counts as academic integrity misconduct. The student hides external AI assistance, which misrepresents their own writing work and breaks honest academic rules. It is a form of undisclosed auxiliary work equivalent to incomplete attribution.

2. Appropriate action
I would talk privately with the student first, explain the rule of acknowledging AI‑assisted content, ask them to add clear citations for AI‑rewritten parts, and revise the assignment properly rather than giving immediate harsh punishment.

3. Future‑preventive measure
Teachers can announce AI‑usage rules at the start of courses, require transparency statements on all written assignments, and hold short workshops to teach students correct AI‑citation standards.

yang jiajia

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:07:00 +0800

A dilemma I have observed in learning is when a student uses AI to rewrite an essay but does not acknowledge it. The main ethical issue is academic integrity, because the final work may no longer fully represent the student’s own thinking, language, or effort. Using AI is not necessarily wrong, but hiding its use can be unfair to other students and misleading to the teacher. An appropriate action would be for the student to explain how AI was used, revise the work in their own words, and follow the course policy. The teacher should also respond fairly by discussing expectations rather than only punishing the student. To prevent similar issues, teachers should clearly explain acceptable AI use, give examples of proper acknowledgement, and design tasks that require personal reflection, drafts, or process evidence.

Kunpeng Yue

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:05:34 +0800

Case: A student used AI to rewrite an essay but didn't acknowledge it.

Reflection:

I once encountered a similar situation. It raised a clear ethical issue of academic dishonesty, specifically the misuse of AI tools. The student violated the principle of transparency by not disclosing their use of technology.

The most appropriate action was not to punish immediately, but to have a private, empathetic conversation.

To prevent this in the future, we can establish clear classroom policies on AI use at the start of the term. We can also focus on process-based assessments, such as requiring students to keep revision histories, rather than just grading final products. Educating students on digital citizenship is key to ensuring technology enhances learning ethically.

Yan Ling

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:13:14 +0800

What ethical or integrity issue it involved?

This behavior constitutes fraud, as students are falsely claiming to have completed the writing process themselves.

What actions or decisions would be appropriate?

I believe disciplinary measures should be determined based on the severity of the offense. If a significant amount of the paper has been rewritten by AI, the student should at least be given a failing grade for the course; if only a portion of the paper has been rewritten by AI, the student may be given the opportunity to rewrite it themselves. How could similar issues be prevented in future?

Break the essay down into separate assignments for students to submit—such as the introduction and literature review—to ensure that the process of completing the assignment is demonstrated to the instructor.

Ruixue Yang

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:10:31 +0800

I don’t think using AI should be treated as such a huge issue. When calculators came out, did we call accountants cheaters for not using an abacus anymore? It's just going to become second nature anyway.

Fengyihan Wu

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:10:20 +0800

A student does the core research themselves but has the AI rewrite their messy draft into a highly polished, academic essay. They submit it without acknowledging the AI, believing it is not plagiarism because the original ideas were theirs. The hidden use of AI for rewriting misrepresents a student's actual communication skills, creates an unfair playing field for peers, and blurs the line of true authorship by injecting AI-generated phrasing and logic into the student's work.

Crystal Wanting Huang

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:09:45 +0800

The second case involves respect, consent, privacy, and academic integrity issues. Student's work is a part of their intellectual effort and personal learning process. Also, students hold the intellectual property of their own work. Therefore, it is necessary for teachers to ask for permission before they share student work. Sharing work publicly without consent can destroy the student's trust in the teacher and institution, even if the teacher had a good intention, like showing good work.For an appropriate action, the teacher should realize the mistake, apologize to the student, and delete the work if the student feels uncomfortable. The teacher must also ask permission before any future use and explain how they will show the work, like anonymously or with their name. To prevent these issues from happening again, teachers should make clear consent procedures. For example, they can ask students in advance if their work can be shared, explain the purpose and audience, and let students choose to opt out without any negative results.

Jionglue HUANG

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:09:30 +0800

When I worked as a teaching assistant last semester, I noticed that many students used generative AI to complete their assignments without clearly acknowledging it. The main integrity issue is not simply the use of AI itself, but the lack of transparency about how it was used. In this situation, I think the appropriate response would be to clarify the course policy, remind students of academic integrity expectations, and ask them to disclose their use of AI rather than immediately punish them. To prevent similar issues in the future, teachers could provide clearer guidelines, such as what kinds of AI use are acceptable, how students should cite or acknowledge AI assistance, and which parts of the work must reflect their own thinking.

Jionglue HUANG

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:09:30 +0800

Yue XING

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:09:14 +0800

Q1:

A student may use AI to brainstorn or use AI tools to advance their literature reading and reviewing. Shall the student declare AI use among such case?

Answer:

The answer is quite complicated but I do think the AI declarement is quite vital

Sheng WANG

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:09:04 +0800

Dilemma: AI tools are useful but the tools for checking the rate of AI-generation are not so well-structured and detective enough.

Ethical issues lie in that once a certain teacher/univeristy decided to let students to submit their own GenAI usage declaration, the AI-detecting tools may fail to detect the authentic rate. However, the students may not use AI like that more. If the teachers use the results from AI-detceting tools as the standards, then the students may get low marks. At the same time, AI-detecting tools are also based on AI. How can anybody trust the results.

Actions: Students and teachers should trust each other. Multiple detection tools can be used together to lower machine error, and appeal systems should be open for students falsely flagged. Most importantly, redesign assessments into in-class writing and oral defenses that test real personal understanding, lessening dependence on unreliable AI detectors and encouraging honest GenAI disclosure from students.

Peter MEI

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:07:15 +0800

I observed that nowadays some AI-generated content may be used in class presentations and discussions. In other words, some students may read from the texts generated by their AI tools. This phenomenon may violate the principles of fairness or honesty. To prevent this issue, an innovative class design could be adopted to keep students from relying on their AI tools in a friendly way, such as giving them pen and paper to draft. I believe that with self-discipline and proper regulation, AI could benefit the teaching and learning experience in the university.

Luna Li

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:06:49 +0800

Case: A student’s final essay was far more polished than prior drafts, and their account suggested heavy AI rewriting without disclosure. The core issue is misrepresentation and a breach of our transparency policy on tool use. The appropriate action would be meeting the student to understand their process, document the discussion, and require a resubmission that discloses AI use, includes sources, and adds a short reflection on how AI shaped the work. To prevent repeats, I’d publish a clear AI policy with examples, require process artifacts (outline, drafts, prompts), add brief vivas, and design contextualized tasks that demand personal analysis and evidence of thinking.

Angela Lee

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:06:01 +0800

Dilemma: A student used AI to rewrite an essay but didn't acknowledge it.

The main ethical issue is academic integrity. Although the student wrote the original ideas, using AI to rewrite the essay without acknowledgement may violate institutional policies on transparency and authorship. Readers and instructors could be misled about how the final text was produced.

An appropriate response would be to review the institution’s guidelines on AI use, discuss the matter with the student, and determine whether disclosure was required. If policies were breached, proportionate academic consequences should be considered.

To prevent similar issues, institutions should provide clear AI-use policies, require disclosure statements, educate students about responsible AI use, and promote discussions about academic honesty and authorship.

Wang Xinyi

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:05:11 +0800

Case: A student utilizes generative AI discovery tools to locate and summarize literature but fails to disclose this assistance because they only cite the final primary sources.

Q1: The fundamental issue concerns epistemic transparency and academic accountability. While citing primary literature satisfies traditional referencing mechanics, concealing algorithmic mediation misrepresents the cognitive lineage of the research process. Furthermore, unverified reliance on AI summaries constitutes academic negligence, as it risks perpetuating algorithmic biases or hallucinations.

Q2: Scholars must submit a formal AI declaration alongside their work, explicitly delineating how automated tools scaffolded the heuristic (discovery) phase versus the actual manuscript composition.

Q3: Higher education institutions should implement standardized, process-oriented disclosure protocols. Instructors must proactively teach AI verification strategies, reframing algorithmic utility as a methodological step requiring overt accountability rather than a shortcut to be concealed.

Moying Wang

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:05:04 +0800

While utilizing Gen-AI to refine academic writing is increasingly permissible, explicit disclosure remains paramount. This standard of transparency is already a norm in contemporary publishing, where authors frequently include footnotes acknowledging tools like Grammarly for syntactic and proofreading assistance. For me, the integration of AI is entirely acceptable, provided its specific utility is openly declared. However, the ethical boundary hinges on the degree of intervention: leveraging AI for surface-level grammatical refinement is legitimate, but outsourcing the core conceptualization—thereby eclipsing the author's independent cognitive framework—fundamentally undermines academic integrity.

Mathias Akugizibwe

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:03:30 +0800

Caught a student (guid president) cheating in exam. I made the student write a statement and witnesses too and i forwarded the case to senate for disciplinary action.

This and similar cases can be prevented by encouraging the university to intensively disseminate academic integrity policy to students so that awareness is created.

Zhenxiang ZHU

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:02:51 +0800

Some students may avoid declaring their use of GenAI due to concerns about grade deductions, even if they have actually used it. So, in my opinion, if GenAI is encouraged, teachers should publicly support its use and explain why it is integral to academic learning. More importantly, the teachers should also make it clear that they will not deduct grades solely for using GenAI. Then, I guess students will feel more comfortable about the declaration.

Yigong Zhang

Tue, 16 Jun 2026 12:02:00 +0800

A studen write an essay with mild assistance from AI, yet teachers report a high AI detection rate. How to tell whether students are truly reliant on AI?

Joanna Liu

Tue, 26 May 2026 10:19:33 +0800

anyone here tried ScholarAI for research assignments?? just found it and it pulls actual peer-reviewed papers which is SO much better than random googling. saved me ages on my lit review this week. only thing I'm not sure about should I be citing ScholarAI itself or just the original papers it finds me? genuinely confused about the ethics of this

Emily Zhang

Tue, 12 May 2026 14:08:45 +0800

Has anyone tried MagicSchool for lesson planning yet? A colleague recommended it last week and I've been playing around with it, honestly pretty impressed so far! Generated a whole differentiated lesson plan in about 3 minutes; saves so much prep time. But I do wonder are we becoming too dependent on AI for teaching? Where do we draw the line between using it as a helper vs just letting it do all the creative thinking for us? Curious what others think!

Emma Tsoi

Tue, 05 May 2026 11:30:00 +0800

okay so I just discovered NotebookLM and I genuinely cannot believe I've been surviving uni without it... I uploaded all my lecture slides and it literally generated a podcast-style summary I could listen to on my commute!! anyone else using this for revision or am I late to the party lol. also wondering, is it actually okay to use for assignments or does it count as AI assistance we need to declare?

Anna cohen

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 13:23:11 +0800

Gemini is now officially available in HK last month Have any of you tried it? Curious whether it's actually useful for teaching — like for lesson planning, generating examples, or giving feedback on student work. And on the student side, do you think it helps with studying or is it just another shortcut tool they'll misuse?

Emma Tsoi

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:39:55 +0800

Hey all! With so many AI tools out there now, wondering what are the best ones for students in 2026? Whether it’s for note-taking, research, writing or just studying in general — what would you actually recommend? Drop your suggestions below, would love to build a list together!

Joanna Liu

Sun, 05 Apr 2026 14:20:00 +0800

I've been thinking... has anyone actually set clear rules before letting students use AI tools for essays or creative writing? I tried it recently and the results were super mixed — a few students used it really thoughtfully, but others just handed in AI-generated stuff with barely any of their own voice in it.

Jiaxiang Xu

Tue, 10 Mar 2026 14:38:51 +0800

In one of my classes, I noticed that a student used AI to rewrite a large part of an essay without acknowledging it. The main issue here is academic integrity, because the submitted work did not fully reflect the student’s own thinking and writing process. I think the most appropriate response would be for the teacher to talk with the student first, clarify the course policy, and give the student a chance to explain. If AI tools are allowed only for limited support, the student should revise the work and properly disclose how AI was used. To prevent similar problems, teachers should provide clear guidelines about acceptable AI use and explain the difference between language support and replacing original work.

Zhang Chaowei

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:21:55 +0800

In my view, there's a meaningful distinction between augmentation and replacement. Using AI to refine, polish, or restructure work you've already created—or to help articulate ideas that exist but need clearer expression—feels ethically and practically sound. This is collaboration: the human provides the substance, the AI provides the scalpel. However, outsourcing the generative act itself—asking AI to produce original creative work from a blank prompt—creates a dangerous dependency. Over time, this erodes the very faculties we seek to enhance: critical thinking, stylistic voice, and the discomfort of wrestling with half-formed ideas that eventually crystallize into insight. The risk isn't just skill atrophy; it's a gradual outsourcing of judgment itself. When we habitually defer to algorithmic fluency, we lose tolerance for the friction that produces genuine originality. The boundary, then, isn't technical but developmental: tools that accelerate existing capacity strengthen us; tools that substitute for capacity eventually diminish us.

Yui Man Chan

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:08:09 +0800

A real dilemma that I have experienced in teaching: a student used AI to write an assay in English course without acknowledgement.

This involve academic dishonesty as the whole assay is written by AI but not by the student. I think that AI tools should remain supportive rather than dominant. For example, use AI for brainstorming the idea and grammar checking in the final stage. Moreover, the student should acknowledgement the use of AI tools.

In order to prevent this situation, I think teachers should emphasize the importance of academic integrity, especially the use of AI tools. Also, the use of AI checking tools for scanning students' work.

Juan Wang

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:05:14 +0800

I choose case 1. Firstly, the student did not indicate that the paper was modified by AI. The core issue lies in "academic misconduct", as the behavior lacks transparency and undermines academic integrity and fair assessment. The appropriate course of action is: 1. To proactively admit the mistake to the teacher; 2. And seek remediation. To prevent recurrence, the student should take the initiative to understand and abide by the regulations on AI usage, and develop the habit of proper citation; educators, on the other hand, need to establish clear policies and enhance AI literacy education.

jinchun xu

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 13:03:59 +0800

Case: A student used AI to rewrite an essay but didn’t acknowledge it.

This case about the ethical issue of plagiarism and academic integrity，this student AI-generated content as their work research without proper citation。

Here some ppropriate actions :

First，document the incident thoroughly，includ keep a clear record of the evidence ，the AI detection report, the original and rewritten essays，then have a private conversation with the student to understand their motivation and educate them how to proper in AI using，finally，depending on the severity, following the university's official academic integrity offer targeted support and resources。