Scholarlink

Background <p>The rapid use of generative AI (GenAI) by students in essay assessments poses unique challenges to academic integrity. With limited research on this topic, questions arise about how UK educators perceive and experience the use of GenAI in traditional essay-type assessments (TETAs). The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of UK healthcare educators regarding TETAS in the Era of GenAI.</p> Methods <p>An exploratory descriptive qualitative design was adopted. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 healthcare academics from disciplines including Radiography, Midwifery, Speech and Language Therapy, and Nursing. With the support of NVIVO version-14, data were analysed using thematic analysis.</p> Results <p>Three themes emerged: (1) Experiences of suspicion cues and verification challenges; (2) Perceptions of appropriate GenAI use in assessments; and (3) Relevance of essay-type assessments in the GenAI era. Participants reported widespread evidence of AI-generated content in student submissions. They also indicated relying largely on intuitive detection methods such as identifying “red flags” including suspicious references, shallow content, unusual language patterns, and fabricated elements, among others. However, their inability to definitively confirm AI use created uncertainty, frustration, and ethical discomfort, undermining trust between faculty and students and threatening academic fairness.</p> Conclusion <p>This exploratory qualitative study reveals that healthcare educators continue to observe what they perceive as irresponsible use of GenAI in essay-based assessments, while facing a complex “detection dilemma.” While participants acknowledged the continued relevance of essays and recognised the potential for GenAI to be used appropriately for limited tasks, they expressed concern that unregulated use may profoundly affect learning, assessment integrity, and professional competence. It is therefore recommended that higher education institutions develop clear strategies to address the irresponsible use of AI in assessment and empower educators to detect AI use in essay-based assessments.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

UK healthcare educators’ experiences and perceptions of essay assessments in the generative AI era

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月22日

查看全文
  • Benard Ohene-Botwe,
  • Cletus Amedu,
  • Mark Ngo

摘要

Background

The rapid use of generative AI (GenAI) by students in essay assessments poses unique challenges to academic integrity. With limited research on this topic, questions arise about how UK educators perceive and experience the use of GenAI in traditional essay-type assessments (TETAs). The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions of UK healthcare educators regarding TETAS in the Era of GenAI.

Methods

An exploratory descriptive qualitative design was adopted. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 healthcare academics from disciplines including Radiography, Midwifery, Speech and Language Therapy, and Nursing. With the support of NVIVO version-14, data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Three themes emerged: (1) Experiences of suspicion cues and verification challenges; (2) Perceptions of appropriate GenAI use in assessments; and (3) Relevance of essay-type assessments in the GenAI era. Participants reported widespread evidence of AI-generated content in student submissions. They also indicated relying largely on intuitive detection methods such as identifying “red flags” including suspicious references, shallow content, unusual language patterns, and fabricated elements, among others. However, their inability to definitively confirm AI use created uncertainty, frustration, and ethical discomfort, undermining trust between faculty and students and threatening academic fairness.

Conclusion

This exploratory qualitative study reveals that healthcare educators continue to observe what they perceive as irresponsible use of GenAI in essay-based assessments, while facing a complex “detection dilemma.” While participants acknowledged the continued relevance of essays and recognised the potential for GenAI to be used appropriately for limited tasks, they expressed concern that unregulated use may profoundly affect learning, assessment integrity, and professional competence. It is therefore recommended that higher education institutions develop clear strategies to address the irresponsible use of AI in assessment and empower educators to detect AI use in essay-based assessments.