Analyzing student behavior in educational scenarios is crucial for enhancing teaching quality and student engagement. Existing AI-based models often rely on classroom video footage to identify and analyze student behavior. While these video-based methods can partially capture and analyze student actions, they struggle to accurately track each student's actions in physical education classes, which take place in outdoor, open spaces with diverse activities, and are challenging to generalize to the specialized technical movements involved in these settings. Furthermore, current methods typically lack the ability to integrate specialized pedagogical knowledge, limiting their ability to provide in-depth insights into student behavior and offer feedback for optimizing instructional design. To address these limitations, we propose a unified end-to-end framework that leverages human activity recognition technologies based on motion signals, combined with advanced large language models, to conduct more detailed analyses and feedback of student behavior in physical education classes. Our framework begins with the teacher's instructional designs and the motion signals from students during physical education sessions, ultimately generating automated reports with teaching insights and suggestions for improving both learning and class instructions. This solution provides a motion signal-based approach for analyzing student behavior and optimizing instructional design tailored to physical education classes. Experimental results demonstrate that our framework can accurately identify student behaviors and produce meaningful pedagogical insights.

This study seeks to enhance academic integrity by providing tools to detect AI-generated content in student work using advanced technologies. The findings promote transparency and accountability, helping educators maintain ethical standards and supporting the responsible integration of AI in education. A key contribution of this work is the generation of the CyberHumanAI dataset, which has 1000 observations, 500 of which are written by humans and the other 500 produced by ChatGPT. We evaluate various machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) algorithms on the CyberHumanAI dataset comparing human-written and AI-generated content from Large Language Models (LLMs) (i.e., ChatGPT). Results demonstrate that traditional ML algorithms, specifically XGBoost and Random Forest, achieve high performance (83% and 81% accuracies respectively). Results also show that classifying shorter content seems to be more challenging than classifying longer content. Further, using Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) we identify discriminative features influencing the ML model's predictions, where human-written content tends to use a practical language (e.g., use and allow). Meanwhile AI-generated text is characterized by more abstract and formal terms (e.g., realm and employ). Finally, a comparative analysis with GPTZero show that our narrowly focused, simple, and fine-tuned model can outperform generalized systems like GPTZero. The proposed model achieved approximately 77.5% accuracy compared to GPTZero's 48.5% accuracy when tasked to classify Pure AI, Pure Human, and mixed class. GPTZero showed a tendency to classify challenging and small-content cases as either mixed or unrecognized while our proposed model showed a more balanced performance across the three classes. Keywords: LLMs, Digital Technology, Education, Plagiarism, Human AI 1. Introduction Our communication practices are quickly changing due to the emergence of generative AI models.

The rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Gemini has posed new challenges for the academic community. With the help of these models, students can easily complete their assignments and exams, while educators struggle to detect AI-generated content. This has led to a surge in academic misconduct, as students present work generated by LLMs as their own, without putting in the effort required for learning. As AI tools become more advanced and produce increasingly human-like text, detecting such content becomes more challenging. This development has significantly impacted the academic world, where many educators are finding it difficult to adapt their assessment methods to this challenge. This research first demonstrates how LLMs have increased academic dishonesty, and then reviews state-of-the-art solutions for academic plagiarism in detail. A survey of datasets, algorithms, tools, and evasion strategies for plagiarism detection has been conducted, focusing on how LLMs and AI-generated content (AIGC) detection have affected this area. The survey aims to identify the gaps in existing solutions. Lastly, potential long-term solutions are presented to address the issue of academic plagiarism using LLMs based on AI tools and educational approaches in an ever-changing world.

The increase in academic dishonesty cases among college students has raised concern, particularly due to the shift towards online learning caused by the pandemic. We aim to develop and implement a method capable of generating tailored questions for each student. The use of Automatic Question Generation (AQG) is a possible solution. Previous studies have investigated AQG frameworks in education, which include validity, user-defined difficulty, and personalized problem generation. Our new AQG approach produces logical equivalence problems for Discrete Mathematics, which is a core course for year-one computer science students. This approach utilizes a syntactic grammar and a semantic attribute system through top-down parsing and syntax tree transformations. Our experiments show that the difficulty level of questions generated by our AQG approach is similar to the questions presented to students in the textbook [1]. These results confirm the practicality of our AQG approach for automated question generation in education, with the potential to significantly enhance learning experiences.

The rapid adoption of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies in higher education has raised concerns about academic integrity, assessment practices, and student learning. Banning or blocking GenAI tools has proven ineffective, and punitive approaches ignore the potential benefits of these technologies. This paper presents the findings of a pilot study conducted at British University Vietnam (BUV) exploring the implementation of the Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS), a flexible framework for incorporating GenAI into educational assessments. The AIAS consists of five levels, ranging from 'No AI' to 'Full AI', enabling educators to design assessments that focus on areas requiring human input and critical thinking. Following the implementation of the AIAS, the pilot study results indicate a significant reduction in academic misconduct cases related to GenAI, a 5.9% increase in student attainment across the university, and a 33.3% increase in module passing rates. The AIAS facilitated a shift in pedagogical practices, with faculty members incorporating GenAI tools into their modules and students producing innovative multimodal submissions. The findings suggest that the AIAS can support the effective integration of GenAI in HE, promoting academic integrity while leveraging the technology's potential to enhance learning experiences.

The advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as ChatGPT have gained popularity in recent days. The integration of ChatGPT in educational contexts has already created attractions due to a wide range of applications. However, the automatic generation of human-like texts also poses potential risks to academic integrity, especially when faced with writing-intensive language courses. Considering the ongoing debates, this study aims to investigate the academic policies and guidelines established by US universities regarding the use of ChatGPT in teaching and learning. The data sources include academic policies, statements, guidelines as well as relevant resources that were provided by the top 50 universities in the United States, according to U.S. News. Thematic analysis and qualitative analysis were employed in the analysis and showed that most top 50 universities were open but cautious towards the integration of generative AI in teaching and learning and also expressed their concerns on ethical usage, accuracy, and data privacy. Most universities also provided a variety of resources and guidelines, including syllabus templates/samples, workshops and discussions, shared articles, and one-on-one consultations, with focuses on general technical introduction, ethical concerns, pedagogical applications, preventive strategies, data privacy, limitations, and detective tools. The findings will inform future policy-making regarding the integration of ChatGPT in college-level education and influence the provision of supportive resources by universities for the appropriate application of ChatGPT in education.

While ChatGPT may help students to learn to program, it can be misused to do plagiarism, a breach of academic integrity. Students can ask ChatGPT to complete a programming task, generating a solution from other people's work without proper acknowledgment of the source(s). To help address this new kind of plagiarism, we performed a controlled experiment measuring the inappropriate benefits of using ChatGPT in terms of completion time and programming performance. We also reported how to manually identify programs aided with ChatGPT (via student behavior while using ChatGPT) and student perspective of ChatGPT (via a survey). Seventeen students participated in the experiment. They were asked to complete two programming tests. They were divided into two groups per the test: one group should complete the test without help while the other group should complete it with ChatGPT. Our study shows that students with ChatGPT complete programming tests two times faster than those without ChatGPT, though their programming performance is comparable. The generated code is highly efficient and uses complex data structures like lists and dictionaries. Based on the survey results, ChatGPT is recommended to be used as an assistant to complete programming tasks and other general assignments. ChatGPT will be beneficial as a reference as other search engines do. Logical and critical thinking are needed to validate the result presented by ChatGPT.

An academic paper entitled Chatting and Cheating: Ensuring Academic Integrity in the Era of ChatGPT was published this month in an education journal, describing how artificial intelligence (AI) tools "raise a number of challenges and concerns, particularly in relation to academic honesty and plagiarism". What readers – and indeed the peer reviewers who cleared it for publication – did not know was that the paper itself had been written by the controversial AI chatbot ChatGPT. "We wanted to show that ChatGPT is writing at a very high level," said Prof Debby Cotton, director of academic practice at Plymouth Marjon University, who pretended to be the paper's lead author. "This is an arms race," she said. "The technology is improving very fast and it's going to be difficult for universities to outrun it."

Cheating in student assessments and exams has long been challenging for universities worldwide. Students are under increasing pressure to perform well, and some cheat to achieve good grades. This has led to universities implementing strict measures to prevent cheating, but new approaches are required with the advent of new technologies. One such technology that has the potential to help universities eliminate cheating is Chat GPT4. As universities worldwide continue to grapple with the challenge of eliminating cheating on student assessments and exams, the potential of new technologies like Chat GPT4 to help solve the problem is undeniable. However, some argue that such technologies may contribute to the problem by making cheating easier for students.

The digital footprint of who is sitting in front of a computer today may be detected in more ways than one might expect. Beyond just user authentication, this includes, IP address, geolocation, internet service provider, internet cookies, ping time, and ability to complete complex tasks. CAPTCHA, also reCAPTCHA software use a number of these strategies to determine if you are a bot pretending to be a human, or an actual human. These systems have become increasing more sophisticated as the developers of these bots are able to fool CAPTCHA tasks, such as selecting traffic lights in a set of images automatically without the need for a human. In the academic space, this has hardly been an issue.