• What ethical codes or arguments apply?​

• What policies might help prevent similar cases?​

• What other information would be helpful?​

  
  

Feel free to be anonymous or leave your name with/without your institution. You can change the suggested name after you type your first comment.

• What type of misconduct occurred?

• Was the student evaluated fairly?

• Is banning AI effective for an online, open book, exam?​

Feel free to be anonymous or leave your name with/without your institution. You can change the suggested name after you type your first comment.

• Answer was unusually long​

• Writing uses structured text (i.e., headings and bullet points)​

• Used two phrases commonly used by LLMs: 'in summary’(twice) and 'in conclusion’ (once) ​

• Noticeably identical or very similar text, when compared to ChatGPT​

• Content that is non-standard for health economics (i.e., not in any of the papers on our prelim exam reading list), but does appear in the ChatGPT output​

• Feels "voiceless" and does not read similarly to known examples of writing by this student.​

• 8-hour, open book, preliminary exam taken online.​

• “AI was explicitly prohibited”​

• Student’s answer was compared against 2 older writing samples, one of which was 2-years old.

• The student is not a native English speaker​.

• The student uses AI outside of exams for writing help as well as other tasks.

• On this campus, 188 students committed scholastic dishonesty due to AI use (FY24), half of the campus’ total cases.​