Accreditation and Certification Fraud in IT

December 27, 2024

Many people in the academic integrity world are already familiar with contract cheating websites, those that deal in the business of buying and selling exams, bespoke term papers, theses, and exam questions and answers.

But this business isn’t limited to the millions of K-12, high school and post-secondary students. The exam fraud business is alive and well for professional accreditation exams for folks who either want to bypass a formal university degree or to supplement existing credentials.

For example, in the IT industry credentials are often the golden key to new opportunities. Certifications and accreditations (allegedly) validate technical skills, offering (so-called) proof that a candidate has the expertise needed for a professional role. 

Taking into account supply and demand, with job candidates being in high supply and well-paying jobs being in high demand, certification and accreditation fraud is alive and well in the IT industry, as well as other industries. This is a trend employers cannot afford to ignore.

Exposing the Fraud: How Buying and Selling of Certification Exam Questions Works

Certification fraud occurs when individuals falsify credentials, purchase counterfeit certifications, or misuse legitimate certifications obtained by others. But there’s this sneaky grey area that exists when a person actually sits a professional exam themselves, but they’ve prepared by buying the exam questions and/or the answers from an online vendor.

I won’t name specific companies that do this in this post, because I’m not in the habit of advertising for these fraudsters, but I want to show you how they work, so here are some screenshots:

Screenshot #1: Home page

A website screenshot. Black background, with text in white and blue. Some of the text is quoted in the narrative that follows.

At the top of this website, the company claims that 94% of the exam questions that they sold were “almost the same” and that 97% of customers passed the exam using their materials. (Who knows what happened to the other 3%…?) Finally, 98% of customers found the “study guides” effective and helpful.

There’s that phrase that we commonly see on contract cheating websites, “study guide”. For the uninitiated, this is a euphemism for “exam questions”. 

Screenshot #2: Saying it like it is: Not affiliated with any certification provider

A website screenshot. White background with black text.

In this screenshot the company states plainly that they are not affiliated or certified by any certification provider. Reading between the lines, the message is ‘caveat emptor’ or ‘buyer beware’. They are telling you upfront that they are in the business of selling exam questions and make no guarantees about their products.

Screenshot #3: Samples of accreditation exam questions for sale

A website screenshot. White background. Black task bar with light grey text. There are lists of texts written in blue.

Look at all the options: You can buy exam questions for certifications offered by DELL, English language proficiency exams, Citrix, Adobe, and Amazon, and Google just to name a few. 

Screenshot #4: More samples of certification provider exam questions for sale.

A website screenshot. White background. Black task bar with light grey text. There are lists of texts written in blue.

But wait! There’s more! You can buy exam questions for certifications offers by Oracle, IBM, SAP, and others.

Assessment Security

Sites like compromise the assessment security of certification exams that are meant to qualify individuals to do a particular job. If this term is new to you, I recommend Professor Phill Dawson’s book, Defending Assessment Security in a Digital World. For a quick (and free) overview, of Phill’s work, this slide deck from one of his presentations is worth checking out.

Businesses that buy and sell exam certification questions engage in fraudulent practices undermine trust in the certification system and create significant risks for employers.

Consequences for Employers

Hiring someone with counterfeit credentials can have dire consequences. Unqualified employees may lack the technical skills to handle complex tasks, leading to project delays, costly errors, or even security breaches. Beyond the financial impact, fraudulent certifications can erode team morale, as employees with genuine qualifications may feel undervalued when working alongside those who faked their way in.

What Employers and Hiring Managers can Do

Employers, and especially hiring managers and those working in HR, must take proactive steps to safeguard their hiring processes. Some of you may be asking if this kind of practice is actually illegal. I’m not a lawyer, but what I can say is that although contact cheating for students is illegal in countries like Australia, the UK, and Ireland, if you’re not a student, then you might get to live a proverbial grey zone. To the best of my knowledge, it is not actually illegal to buy and sell questions for professional certification exams in most countries of the world.

So, what can employers do? First, trust but verify! Verifying certifications directly with issuing organizations is one step. Many certification bodies offer easy online verification tools to confirm a candidate’s credentials. Additionally, employers should stay informed about recognized accreditation standards and avoid unverified institutions. 

Having said this, verification of credentials and certification won’t help if someone has bought exam questions online and then taken the test themselves. Their results could be ‘verifiable’ in a sense, because there’s an assumption that a person who has passed an exam had the knowledge to do so. But when someone buys their exam questions before sitting the test, it means that they have prepared for an exam and may not necessarily have internalized the knowledge or skills that should match the certification they receive from passing an exam. An exam is one measure of knowledge, but it isn’t the only one. 

Having prospective employees demonstrate their skills and respond to technical questions that could only be answered if the person has the knowledge to back up their documentation can also help. One possibility is to give an interviewee a real-world scenario that could happen at your organization. Ask them how they would go about problem-solving it. If they struggle or stumble, it could be a sign that they lack the necessary skills for the job. (It could also be a sign that they’re just nervous or that interviewing isn’t their strength. So let me also make a plug here for having an inclusive and equitable interviewing process.)

Investing in robust, inclusive, and equitable hiring practices not only protects an organization from the pitfalls of fraud but also helps to create a culture of accountability and excellence. By placing a premium on authentic certifications combined with demonstrable knowledge and skills and inclusive hiring practices, employers signal their commitment to integrity and ensure they are building a team of qualified professionals.

Bottom line: If you’re hiring someone who says they have an IT certification based on taking exams, it’s worth it to find out if they actually have the knowledge and skills to do the job. 

And this is just one example of one site. Rest assured that it is not the only one out there. Exam cheating companies like this one don’t exist in isolation. They’re in the game to make money, and lots of it. 

In an industry where skills and knowledge drive success, vigilance against certification and accreditation fraud is not optional—it is a driver of success.

Future Outlook

Fraud and corruption are alive and well education and industry. There is a growing community of sleuths, scholars, and activists who are ready to sniff out fraud and expose it and naïveté about these matters is quickly going out of fashion. 

There may have been a time when it was acceptable—or even fashionable—to clutch your pearls, proclaim moral outrage, or just refuse to accept that educational and professional fraud are more commonplace than you might have previously thought. GenAI is here to stay, and so are companies whose business is educational, accreditation, scientific, and professional fraud. These companies are profitable because they have customers willing to pay for their goods and services.

Vigilance, sleuthing, and exposing fraud are very much on trend as we move ahead into the new year. And if you’re a hiring manager, taking steps to protect the integrity of your operations is definitely part of the job in 2025 and beyond.

References and Further Reading

Carmichael, J. (2023, June 7). Understanding Fake Degrees and Credential Fraud in Higher Ed. The Evollution: A Modern Campus Illumination. https://evolllution.com/programming/credentials/understanding-fake-degrees-and-credential-fraud-in-higher-ed/

Eaton, S. E., & Carmichael, J. (2022). The Ecosystem of Commercial Academic Fraud. In. Calgary, Canada: University of Calgary. https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/40330

Eaton, S. E., Carmichael, J., & Pethrick, H. (Eds.). (2023). Fake degrees and credential fraud in higher education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21796-8

Related posts

________________________

Share this post: Accreditation and Certification Fraud in IT – https://drsaraheaton.com/2024/12/27/accreditation-and-certification-fraud-in-the-it-world/

This blog has had over 3 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer. 


Inclusive Academic Integrity: A Holistic Approach to Ethical Learning for Everyone

November 15, 2024

Earlier this semester, I accepted a new leadership role in the Werklund School of Education as the Academic Coordinator of the Master of Education (MEd) graduate topic in Inclusive Education. (We are accepting applications the 2025-2026 academic year, in case you’ve been thinking about doing an MEd. It is a fully online four-course topic.)

This got me thinking about academic integrity through an inclusive lens. My interest in the connection between social justice, equity, inclusion, and accessibility goes back a few years. In 2022, I partnered with a Werklund graduate student in educational psychology, Rachel Pagaling, and Dr. Brenda McDermott, Senior Manager, Student Accessibility Services to write up a brief open access report on Academic Integrity Considerations for Accessibility, Equity and Inclusion.

A lot more work has been done in this area since we wrote that report. Professor Mary Davis has been a particular champion of this topic. Her 2022 open access article, Examining and improving inclusive practice in institutional academic integrity policies, procedures, teaching and support, is worth checking out. There is also an entire section of the Second Handbook of Academic Integrity (2024) dedicated to equity, diversity, inclusion, accessibility, and decolonization. 

We know that academic integrity is a cornerstone of both K-12 and higher education. We want to ensure that learning, assessment, and credentials uphold the highest ethical standards. However, as educators, we can — and should — consider how the principles of inclusive education can strengthen and complement our approach to academic integrity.

Inclusive education means ensuring that all students, regardless of their background, abilities, or learning needs, have equitable access to educational opportunities and can meaningfully participate. Thomas and May sum it up nicely when they say that being inclusive means “proactively making higher education accessible, relevant and engaging to all students” (p. 5).  Of course, the same thinking could be extended to K-12 education, too. Applying these inclusive principles to academic integrity means recognizing that diverse learners may express and demonstrate their knowledge in different ways. 

Inclusion is not only about students with physical disabilities, developmental disabilities, or neurodivergence, but rather it is about creating conditions where all students can thrive. Associate Professor Joanna Tai and colleagues have a great article on Assessment for Inclusion that helps us think about how to design equitable and rigorous.

In addition, Dr. Eliana Elkhoury has a great chapter on how to create, An Equitable Approach to Academic Integrity Through Alternative Assessment.

The point here is that by fostering an inclusive academic culture, we empower all students to bring their best selves to school and learn with integrity.

Beyond accessibility and cultural responsiveness, inclusive academic integrity also means actively addressing systemic barriers and implicit biases. If certain groups of students consistently struggle with academic integrity issues, it may reveal deeper inequities that need to be examined and addressed. In other words, we can look at the barriers to success, rather than the limitations of our students, as being the problem. As Juuso Nieminen and I have pointed out, even accommodations policies have an underlying assumption that students who need accommodations are out to cheat the system. 

If you’re interested in reading more about disability justice to inform your thinking, I highly recommend Doron Dorfman’s article on the fear of the disability con and Jay Dolman’s work on academic ableism.

The benefits of this holistic, inclusive approach to academic integrity are numerous. When students feel respected, supported, and able to succeed, they are more engaged and motivated. This, in turn, leads to better learning outcomes. Moreover, graduates who have internalized inclusive academic integrity will be better equipped to uphold ethical standards in their future careers and communities.

As educators, we have a responsibility to nurture academic integrity in ways that are inclusive, accessible, culturally responsive, and empowering for diverse learners. By applying the principles of inclusive education, we can transform academic integrity from a rigid set of rules into a collaborative, values-driven endeavor that brings out the best in our students and ourselves.

References

Davis, M. (2022). Examining and improving inclusive practice in institutional academic integrity policies, procedures, teaching and support. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 18(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-022-00108-x 

Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press. 

Dorfman, D. (2019). Fear of the disability con: Perceptions of fraud and special rights discourse. Law & society review, 53(4), 1051-1091. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12437 

Elkhoury, E. (2024). An Equitable Approach to Academic Integrity Through Alternative Assessment. In S. E. Eaton (Ed.), Second Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 1261-1272). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54144-5_135 

Nieminen, J. H., & Eaton, S. E. (2023). Are assessment accommodations cheating? A critical policy analysis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2259632 

Pagaling, R., Eaton, S. E., & McDermott, B. (2022, April 4). Academic Integrity: Considerations for Accessibility, Equity, and Inclusion. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/114519

Thomas, L., & May, H. (2010). Inclusive learning and teaching in Higher Education. Higher Education Academy. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/inclusive-learning-and-teaching-higher-education

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Bearman, M., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Jorre de St Jorre, T. (Eds.). (2022). Assessment for inclusion: rethinking contemporary strategies in assessment design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2057451 

________________________

Share this post: Inclusive Academic Integrity: A Holistic Approach to Ethical Learning for Everyone – https://drsaraheaton.com/2024/11/12/inclusive-academic-integrity-a-holistic-approach-to-ethical-learning-for-everyone/

This blog has had over 3 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


Future-proofing integrity in the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology: Prioritizing human rights, dignity, and equity

November 13, 2024

Once a year I write an editorial for the International Journal for Educational Integrity. I take a big idea, ground it in literature written by some of the best in the world and then call for ways to improve our field even more. In 2023 I wrote about Postplagiarism and in 2022, I focused on equity, diversity, inclusion, accessibility and decolonization as new priorities for academic integrity. Here is this year’s editorial:

Future-proofing integrity in the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology: prioritizing human rights, dignity, and equity

A screenshot of an article title page. There is black text on a white background with a green banner at the top.
Here is a link to the original: https://edintegrity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s40979-024-00175-2

Abstract

In this article I argue for the prioritisation of human rights when developing and implementing misconduct policies. Existing approaches may be perpetuate inequities, particularly for individuals from marginalised groups. A human-rights-by-design approach, which centres human rights in policy development, revision, and implementation, ensuring that every individual is treated with dignity and respect.

Recommendations for implementing a human-rights approach to misconduct investigations and case management are offered, covering areas such as procedural fairness, privacy, equity, and the right to education. Additional topics covered are the need to limit surveillance technologies, and the need to recognize that not all use of artificial intelligence tools automatically constitutes misconduct. I disentangle

the differences between equity and equality and explain how both are important when considering ethics and integrity. A central argument of this paper is that a human-rights-by-design approach to integrity does not diminish standards but rather strengthens educational systems by cultivating ethical awareness and respect for personhood. I conclude with a call to action with a seven-point plan for institutions to adopt a human-rights-based approach to ethics and integrity. In the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology, insisting on human rights and dignity when we investigate and address misconduct allegations is an ethical imperative that has never been more important.

Keywords Academic misconduct, Academic dishonesty, Plagiarism, Policy, Human rights, Restorative justice, Artificial intelligence, Neurotechnology, Higher education, Education

Commentary

As I reflect on the current state of academic and research integrity, I am struck by a glaring omission in our discussions: the connection between misconduct and human rights. We often treat these as separate entities, failing to recognize the profound impact that misconduct investigations and policies can have on the fundamental rights of individuals. This oversight is particularly concerning in the age of artificial intelligence (AI) and neurotechnology, where the potential for harm is magnified.

Take, for example, the case of a professor in Canada who physically assaulted international students accused of plagiarism. This horrifying example demonstrates how the pursuit of academic integrity can be twisted into a justification for degrading and inhumane treatment, violating the very principles of dignity and respect that should guide our actions. While this is an extreme case, it highlights the need for a fundamental shift in our approach.

In this editorial, I offer a call to action to move beyond simply adhering to legal requirements and embrace a ‘human-rights-by-design’ approach that embeds human rights principles into our policies and practices. This means ensuring procedural fairness throughout investigations, safeguarding the privacy of individuals, and recognizing the right to be presumed innocent until there is proof to the contrary. It also requires us to acknowledge the diverse backgrounds and circumstances of our students and staff, striving for equitable treatment that addresses systemic inequalities and provides the support needed for everyone to succeed.

In the face of rapidly evolving technologies like AI, we must be especially vigilant in upholding human rights. The temptation to rely on unproven AI detection tools or to rush to judgement based on suspicion rather than evidence is strong, but it is a path that leads us away from justice and fairness. We cannot allow fear or expediency to erode our commitment to human dignity.

By centring human rights in our approach to integrity, we can create educational and research environments that are not only ethically sound but also truly just and equitable. This is not about lowering standards; it is about building a culture of integrity that upholds the inherent worth of every individual.

________________________

Share this post: Future-proofing integrity in the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology: Prioritizing human rights, dignity, and equity – https://drsaraheaton.com/2024/11/13/future-proofing-integrity-in-the-age-of-artificial-intelligence-and-neurotechnology-prioritizing-human-rights-dignity-and-equity/
This blog has had over 3 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


Event: The Intersection of Academic Integrity and Inclusion: A Fireside Chat

October 10, 2024

Next week is Academic Integrity Week at the Univeristy of Calgary. This year, I have the honour of moderating a fireside chat with one of my very own Werklund School of Education Doctor of Education (EdD) students, Colleen Fleming. 

Join us for a thought-provoking discussion during Academic Integrity Week 2024!

A poster with text in black, red, and orange. The University of Calgary logo appears at the top. On the right-hand side there is art featuring a woman wearing a headset.

Discover the crucial link between academic integrity and inclusion in higher education with our distinguished speaker, Colleen Fleming, EdD student, Werklund School of Education.

Moderated by Dr. Sarah Elaine Eaton, this conversation will explore:

  • Defining academic integrity in an inclusive context
  • Challenges in maintaining integrity across diverse student populations
  • Practical strategies for educators to promote both integrity and inclusion

Don’t miss this opportunity to gain insights from Colleen’s extensive experience as a K-12 practitioner and her cutting-edge doctoral research. Engage in a live Q&A session and contribute to this important conversation.

A bit about Colleen…

A photograph of a woman with chin-length blonde hair. She is wearing a white top. The background is blue.

Colleen Fleming (she/her/hers) is a K-12 practitioner at a designated special education school in Calgary. She has a keen interest in developing a culture of integrity among learners through the promotion of equity, diversity, and inclusion. As a Doctor of Education student at Werklund, her research involves proactively educating students about academic integrity in preparation for higher education.

Event details

Date: October 16, 2024

Time: 12:00 – 1:00 p.m.

Location: University of Calgary, Taylor Family Digital Library, Gallery Hall

https://events.ucalgary.ca/library/event/481166-academic-integrity-and-inclusion-with-colleen-fleming

This event is free and open to the public. Everyone is welcome!

________________________

Share this post: The Intersection of Academic Integrity and Inclusion: A Fireside Chat – https://drsaraheaton.com/2024/10/10/event-the-intersection-of-academic-integrity-and-inclusion-a-fireside-chat/

This blog has had over 3 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


Ethical Reasons to Avoid Using AI Apps for Student Assessment

September 10, 2024

It’s the start of a new school year here in North America. We are into the second week of classes and already I am hearing from administrators in both K-12 and higher education institutions who are frustrated with educators who have turned to ChatGPT and other publicly-available Gen AI apps to help them assess student learning.

Although customized AI apps designed specifically to assist with the assessment of student learning already exist, many educators do not yet have access to such tools. Instead, I am hearing about educators turning to large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT to help them provide formative or summative assessment of students’ work. There are some good reasons not to avoid using ChatGPT or other LLMs to assess student learning.

I expect that not everyone will agree with these points, please take them with the spirit in which they are intended, which to provide guidance on ethical ways to teach, learn, and assess students’ work.

8 Tips on Why Educators Should Avoid Using AI Apps to Help with Assessment of Student Learning

Intellectual Property

In Canada at least, a student’s work is their intellectual property. Unless you have permission to use it outside of class, then avoid doing so. The bottom line here is that student’s intellectual work is not yours to share to a large-language model (LLM) or any other third party application, with out their knowledge and consent.

Privacy

A student’s personal data, including their name, ID number and other details should never be uploaded to an external app without consent. One reason for this blog post is to respond to stories I am hearing about educators uploading entire student essays or assignments, including the cover page with all the identifying information, to a third-party GenAI app.

Data security

Content uploaded to an AI tool may be added to its database and used to train the tool. Uploading student assignments to GenAI apps for feedback poses several data security risks. These include potential breaches of data storage systems, privacy violations through sharing sensitive student information, and intellectual property concerns. Inadequate access controls or encryption could allow unauthorized access to student work. 

AI model vulnerabilities might enable data extraction, while unintended leakage could occur through the AI app’s responses. If the educator’s account is compromised, it could expose all of the uploaded assignments. The app’s policies may permit third-party data sharing, and long-term data persistence in backups or training sets could extend the risk timeline. Also, there may be legal and regulatory issues around sharing student data, especially for minors, without proper consent.

Bias

AI apps are known to be biased. Feedback generated by an AI app can be biased, unfair, and even racist. To learn more check out this article published in Nature. AI models can perpetuate existing biases present in their training data, which may not represent diverse student populations adequately. Apps might favour certain writing styles (e.g., standard American English), cultural references, or modes of expression, disadvantaging students from different backgrounds. 

Furthermore, the AI’s feedback could be inconsistent across similar submissions or fail to account for individual student progress and needs. Additionally, the app may not fully grasp nuanced or creative approaches, leading to standardized feedback that discourages unique thinking.

Lack of context

An AI app does not know your student like you do. Although GenAI tools can offer quick assessments and feedback, they often lack the nuanced understanding of a student’s unique context, learning style, and emotional or physical well-being. Overreliance on AI-generated feedback might lead to generic responses, diminishing the personal connection and meaningful interaction that educators provide, which are vital for effective learning.

Impersonal

AI apps can provide generic feedback, but as an educator, you can personalize feedback to help the student grow. AI apps can provide generic feedback but may not help to scaffold a student’s learning. Personalized feedback is crucial, as it fosters individual student growth, enhances understanding, and encourages engagement with the material. Tailoring feedback to specific strengths and weaknesses helps students recognize their progress and areas needing improvement. In turn, this helps to build their confidence and motivation. 

Academic Integrity

Educators model ethical behaviour, this includes transparent and fair assessment. If you are using tech tools to assess student learning, it is important to be transparent about it. In this post, I write more about how and why deceptive and covert assessment tactics are unacceptable.

Your Employee Responsibilities

If your job description includes assessing student work , you may be violating your employment contract if you offload assessment to an AI app.

Concluding Thoughts

Unless your employer has explicitly given you permission to use AI apps for assessing student work then, at least for now, consider providing feedback and assessment in the ways expected by your employer. If we do not want students to use AI apps to take shortcuts, then it is up to us as educators to model the behavior we expect from students.

I understand that educators have excessive and exhausting workloads. I appreciate that we have more items on our To Do Lists than is reasonable. I totally get it that we may look for shortcuts and ways to reduce our workload. The reality is that although Gen AI may have the capability to help with certain tasks, not all employers have endorsed their use in same way.

Not all institutions or schools have artificial intelligence policies or guideline, so when in doubt, ask your supervisor if you are not sure about the expectations. Again, there is a parallel here with student conduct. If we expect students to avoid using AI apps unless we make it explicit that it is OK, then the same goes for educators. Avoid using unauthorized tech tools for assessment without the boss knowing about it.

I am not suggesting that Gen AI apps don’t have the capability to assist with AI, but I am suggesting that many educational institutions have not yet approved the use of such apps for use in the workplace. Trust me, when there are Gen AI apps to help with the heaviest aspects of our workload as educators, I’ll be at the front of the line to use them. In the meantime, there’s a balance to be struck between what AI can do and what one’s employer may permit us to use AI for. It’s important to know the difference — and to protect your livelihood.

Related post:

The Use of AI-Detection Tools in the Assessment of Student Work https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2023/05/06/the-use-of-ai-detection-tools-in-the-assessment-of-student-work/

____________________________

Share this post:
Ethical Reasons to Avoid Using AI Apps for Student Assessment – https://drsaraheaton.com/2024/09/10/ethical-reasons-to-avoid-using-ai-apps-for-student-assessment/

This blog has had over 3.6 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, Editor-in-Chief, International Journal for Educational Integrity