Global Universities Face Generative AI Challenges: The Blurred Boundary Between “assistance” and “cheating”

With the widespread application of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in educational scenarios, universities around the world are re-examining teaching design, assessment methods, and academic integrity principles. AI tools such as ChatGPT, Quillbot, and Grammarly have become common assistants for students' daily learning, which also brings up a key question: Is the use of AI "reasonable assistance" or "academic misconduct"? This issue has become the focus of attention in the international education community in the recent controversy caused by Nanyang Technological University (NTU) in Singapore.

In June 2025, three NTU students were given "zero points" for using generative AI tools in course assignments and were found to have violated academic integrity regulations. In particular, a student who only used the "citation sorter" to organize references was also punished in the early stage, raising questions about the ambiguity of the policy.

After the incident was exposed, NTU convened an appeal review panel including artificial intelligence experts to further clarify the boundaries of generative AI use. This case not only triggered widespread discussion locally but also caused a stir in the international higher education circle.

According to Times Higher Education, only 23 of the top 50 universities in the world have issued clear guidelines for the use of generative AI, providing specific regulations for students and teachers. This means that nearly half of the world's top universities have not yet established a clear institutional response, resulting in uncertainty in the compliance judgment of AI use in practice.

There are significant differences in policies among universities in various countries:

• University of Cambridge in the UK: It stipulates that if students use AI to assist in generating content without reporting it, it will constitute academic misconduct. Appropriate uses of generative AI, such as assisting understanding and time management, are recognized, but it is emphasized that formal assessments must be completed by the students themselves.

• Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan: Students are strictly prohibited from using ChatGPT to participate in writing, and all written assignments must be completed independently by the students themselves

• University of Kentucky in the United States: Its Education Development Center calls for the "decriminalization" of AI use, emphasizing the construction of course AI policies through teachers and students. Some courses require students to attach reflections on the use of AI when submitting their work.

• Taylor’s University, Malaysia: Using a collaborative AI management approach, teachers and students jointly develop an “AI Use Agreement” to clarify whether generative AI is allowed for various tasks, whether it is completely prohibited, whether AI is used as a “collaborative tutor” (for example, for conception, writing outlines, and drafting drafts), or whether it can be used flexibly. Students are required to attach an “AI Use Statement” to each assignment, stating the purpose of use (such as improving academic style and language accuracy) and the degree of modification.

Photo Credits: Taylor’s University

Most students said that the reasonable use of AI can help improve efficiency and learning quality, such as speeding up language polishing and assisting in conceiving structures. However, they also generally reflected that the standards for the use of AI in different courses and different teachers vary greatly, and sometimes even within the same university, there is a lack of consistent standards, making it difficult for students to judge which behaviors may violate academic red lines.

Wang Yuan, a student at Taylor's University, said in an interview that her course allows the use of AI collaboration, such as generating outlines, modifying sentences or checking language style, but the use of AI must be clearly stated in the assignment.

"Every time I submit an assignment this semester, I have to submit an 'AI use statement'. Although this is an extra step compared to previous submissions, it makes me know what is allowed and reminds me that I can't copy the results of AI." She said, "Having clear regulations has reduced my anxiety."

With the continuous development and popularization of AI technology, universities around the world are gradually shifting from “avoidance” to “governance” and from “prohibition” to “guidance”. The controversy at Nanyang Technological University reminds the education community that the current challenge is not only the technology itself but also how the system should adapt to changes quickly. In the future, colleges and universities should not only establish a hierarchical and enforceable AI use policy but also strengthen the cultivation of ethical awareness and critical thinking in the curriculum and guide students to use AI as a tool rather than a substitute.