• Under ACU’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure, unauthorised use of Artificial Intelligence tools is a form of academic misconduct.
• Any work a student submits for assessment must be their own (except for designated group work). Students should not use generative artificial intelligence tools, or paraphrasing and translation tools, unless it is specifically authorised in the assessment requirements. If their use is permitted, it must be properly acknowledged. If in doubt, students should seek clarification from their Lecturer-in-Charge (LIC).
• The use of such tools in assisting students in their studies (outside of preparing work to be submitted for assessment), may be useful in certain circumstances, such as summarizing notes or giving an overview of an unfamiliar field of study; but students should take care. Such tools often provide inaccurate or completely fabricated information. In addition, they typically do not provide references, and so you cannot acknowledge or check the original source of the information presented.

Apart from the AI detection tool suggesting a high probability that text is AI generated, the following may also indicate unauthorised use of artificial intelligence:

• Not quite answering the question
• Uses more common words/phrasing; bland expression
• Fewer typographical errors
• Correct grammar
• Higher standard of expression than usual for the student
• Repetitive
• Irrelevant information
• The wrong level of detail/obscure details
• Factual errors
• Long-winded
• No references
• References where present are incorrect for the content; or sound plausible but are fabricated
• Quotations: may sound plausible, but be fabricated (even if the cited source is a real source)
• Absence of specific information students were required to include (e.g. key references; reference to in-class discussions)
• Template provided is not used

Download the Turnitin AI Checklist (pdf, 139KB) for more information. 

• You can contact the Academic Integrity team in the CEI for advice and ideas: academic.integrity@acu.edu.au
• You can contact your local AIO
• Other experienced staff in your area may be able to assist e.g.
  • your Head of School or equivalent
  • members of the Learning and Teaching Committee
  • the NLIC or Course Co-ordinator

• Visit the Student Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
• You can also find supporting materials, such as a flow chart here.

• Contact the LIC to briefly explain the situation and provide appropriate evidence
  • e.g., the Turnitin originality report
  • e.g., a written account of potential misconduct witnessed during an in-class test

• If you have decided that the evidence suggests academic misconduct has occurred, you will need to formally lodge the case with the Academic Integrity Team (AIT) in CEI. They will assign an AIO to the case.
• Use SAMMS (Student Academic Misconduct Management System) to lodge a case and attach any supporting documentation (such as a Turnitin Originality report)
• Use the Flow chart of Academic Misconduct Procedures
• The AIO will investigate further; if they agree there is evidence of misconduct, they will launch a full investigation, including communicating with the student(s).

• You can contact the Academic Integrity team in the CEI for advice and ideas: academic.integrity@acu.edu.au
• You can contact your local AIO
• Other experienced staff in your area may be able to assist e.g.
  • your Head of School or equivalent
  • members of the Learning and Teaching Committee
  • the NLIC or Course Co-ordinator

• The AIO is a designated academic staff member who investigates allegations of academic misconduct. AIOs work within their School (or equivalent) and are experts in academic integrity and misconduct matters.

• Penalties vary with the extent of the misconduct, and the experience of the student.
• They include:
  • being required to complete mandatory training
  • a mark reduction in the relevant assessment
  • being required to re-submit or re-sit for a maximum mark or grade no higher than the first attempt
  • being required to undertake additional work for a maximum of a pass in the assessment piece, or in the unit
  • receiving zero for the assessment, or for the unit
  • being excluded from the University for a period of up to two semesters
  • having your enrolment cancelled
  • the revocation of your degree
• Penalties are proportionate to the experience of the student and the impact the misconduct had on the assessment.
• The final three penalties are for extremely serious cases only and can only be applied or recommended by the Faculty Academic Misconduct Committee.

• There are four possible outcomes
  • The matter may be entirely dismissed.
  • In some circumstances there may be a finding of ‘poor academic practice’; this is not a breach. The student would probably be assigned compulsory education.
  • There may be a finding of ‘academic misconduct’. This is a breach. The student will probably have an academic penalty applied, and also may be assigned compulsory education.
  • The final possibility is most serious; the AIO decides a breach has occurred; but that the situation is so serious that they need to refer the case on. The case will then be referred to the Faculty Academic Misconduct Committee.

• If academic misconduct is found to have occurred, the student will have a misconduct record on their student file.

• A finding of ‘poor academic practice’ (PAP) is NOT academic misconduct.
• More experienced students who have no academic misconduct history may receive a PAP instead of facing an allegation of academic misconduct for very minor contraventions.
• Less experienced students may receive a PAP in most circumstances, with only specific serious matters leading to an allegation of academic misconduct. This approach recognises the ongoing learning process for students adjusting to the academic standards of university.
• The finding is recorded for future reference, but it is not a misconduct record.

• If a student is found to have committed ‘poor academic practice’ or ‘academic misconduct’, the AIO may assign them compulsory training, to assist them to avoid misconduct in the future.

• If a student fails to complete mandated training, the AIO may apply additional penalties.

• This committee meets for very serious cases only.
• It consists of the Executive Dean of the relevant Faculty; and at least two other members of staff.
• It will NOT include any person involved in the referral or investigation of the allegation.

• The case is too serious for the AIO to deal with alone.
• The AIO does not have the authority to implement an appropriate penalty