US EditionNTU to Convene Panel with AI Experts to Consider Appeal of Student Accused of Academic Fraud
- In June 2025, NTU penalised three students for AI use, assigning zeros and labelling them for academic fraud amid unclear policies.
- NTU's strict no-AI policy in a course on health and politics led to penalties for students who used AI for research and citation tasks, based on misinterpretations of permitted uses.
- Evidence shows students used AI for background research and citation formatting, with penalties changing from 10-mark deductions to zeros after an appeal panel with AI experts convened on June 26.
- Two students keep zeros and fraud labels, while others remain in limbo, raising concerns about future employment prospects.
- Recent NTU cases highlight the fragile understanding of responsible AI use, with calls from experts like Fong Wei Li and academic journals for clearer policies and grievance processes in higher education.
Insights by Ground AI
Does this summary seem wrong?
12 Articles
12 Articles
All
Left
1
Center
3
Right
2
Panel with AI experts to review appeal of Singapore university student penalised for academic misconduct
SINGAPORE: A panel with artificial intelligence experts convened by the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) will assess the appeal of one of the three university students who were penalised for AI usage in their submitted work.
·Malaysia
Read Full Article
3 lessons from the NTU students accused of using AI tools
Headlines of “Nanyang Technological University (NTU) penalises three students over use of AI tools; they dispute university’s findings” have rocked the student community at large. In case you missed it, here’s a quick summary of what happened: On June 19, 2025, an NTU student took to Reddit to vent their frustrations for being accused of academic fraud for their supposed use of generative AI tools on an essay – a case that two other NTU students…
Coverage Details
Total News Sources12
Leaning Left1Leaning Right2Center3Last UpdatedBias Distribution50% Center
Bias Distribution
- 50% of the sources are Center
50% Center
L 17%
C 50%
R 33%
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
