UNIVGA Group
Pre-registration

Modern Construction Site, Nzeng-Ayong. | bureau@univga.org | (+241) 77283418

Monitoring & analyses

How to frame AI at the university without cheating?

Generative AI is shaking up courses and assignments. A simple method to frame it without weakening learning. Imagine a university teacher preparing a didactics course. She uses AI to find examples, rephrase an instruction, and save two hours in her week. In class, her students then ask her: "Are we allowed to use it..."

Imagine a university teacher preparing a didactics course. She uses AI (artificial intelligence) to find examples, rephrase an instruction, and save two hours in her week. In class, her students then ask her: "Are we allowed to use it for the assignment?" No one has the same answer.

At another institution, management wants to modernize assessments with digital tools. The idea seems appealing, but one question blocks everything: what student data will be collected, stored, or reused? The issue is no longer just about allowing or prohibiting. It needs to be framed.

Recent articles

Offshore: Oxy and Valaris awarded, HSE AI must remain human

MOL solar and battery branch, the cost remains to be proven

Sustainable wood: AFi promotes traceability towards proof

What is it, concretely?

Generative AI refers to tools capable of producing text, plans, exercises, or answers based on a written request. ChatGPT or Copilot are well-known examples. In pedagogy, these tools can help a teacher prepare materials, vary instructions, create a practical case, or propose remediation paths. The mechanism remains simple from the user's side: a request is made, the tool responds, then the human checks, adapts, and decides. The key point is there. If the tool replaces the student's effort or the teacher's judgment, the evaluation loses its meaning. Well-framed, AI can remain a useful assistant without becoming the pilot of the course.

Concrete case: what to do and what not to do

Questions to Ask Before Acting

  • Is the use of AI allowed, prohibited, or framed in this specific course?
  • Must the student declare when they used it, and for which part of the work?
  • Does the requested tool collect a name, address, copy, or learning traces?
  • Does the assessment still measure the student's real understanding?
  • Is there an alternative for students who refuse or cannot use the tool?
  • Do the instructions distinguish between brainstorming, language correction, planning, and complete writing?
  • Does the institution have a common policy, or does each teacher improvise alone?

UNIVGA Viewpoint

Sources

  1. Privacy Impact Assessments for GenerativeAI Instructional Use, UBC
  2. AI in Higher Education: Saving Instructor Time While Preserving Student Learning, Colorado State University
  3. A.I. In Teaching and Learning, UBC
  4. How UBC Faculty Are Using Generative AI, UBC
  5. Missions, APDPVP Gabon
  6. Faculty Perceptions of Generative AI, UBC

To go further

Related Articles.

The United Kingdom warns about hidden AI, audit risk

The British NCSC warns about undeclared AI in companies. A key issue for auditing, compliance, data, and governance.

Read the article

Copyright: Washington supports OpenAI, open risk

Washington supports OpenAI against the New York Times on AI training. For African lawyers, liability remains to be organized.

Read the article

Google brings YouTube closer to messaging: opportunity and risk

On August 27, 2026, Google announced it is testing YouTube ads that open a conversation with a brand. Useful for selling, to...

Read the article
UNIVGA Group
Logo
Shopping cart