Communicating academic integrity policy in the age of generative AI

Purpose This study aims to examine how students and teaching staff perceive and enact academic-integrity policies in Romanian universities under the normative uncertainty created by generative artificial intelligence (AI). Design/methodology/approach Parallel online questionnaires were completed by 786 students and 472 teaching-staff members at four public universities; closed-item analyses were complemented by thematic content analysis of open responses. Findings Teaching staff evaluated integrity infrastructure more positively, while students perceived more examination and AI-assisted cheating. Student reporting was rare; teaching staff reporting intentions followed hierarchical internal channels. Unacknowledged AI use was judged more contextually by students and more categorically by staff. Research limitations/implications Cross-sectional, non-probability samples, self-selection, limited student coverage, non-identical role-adapted measures and the absence of respondent-level institution identifiers restrict generalisation and preclude causal inference. Practical implications The results provide universities with a basis for discipline-specific AI guidance, disclosure rules, proportionate sanctions and credible reporting routes that distinguish learning support from replacement of student reasoning or authorship. Social implications Differences between students and teaching staff regarding cheating, AI-powered essays, and the practices of peer reporting can seriously damage the overall credibility of academic standards and even undermine the value of university degrees altogether. Peer reporting rates remain extremely low, suggesting tolerance to cheating behaviour or reluctance in peer reporting. Having agreed-upon AI usage standards would increase both fairness and accountability. Originality/value By linking policy translation, social norms and responsive regulation, the study offers comparative evidence from students and teaching staff from an under-researched Central and Eastern European setting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Quality Assurance in Education
Published
2026-09-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-06-2026-0231
Primary Topic
Academic integrity and plagiarism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Communicating academic integrity policy in the age of generative AI

Natalia Vasilendiuc, Emilia Șercan
Quality Assurance in Education
Academic integrity and plagiarism
article

Communicating academic integrity policy in the age of generative AI

Natalia Vasilendiuc, Emilia Șercan
article en

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine how students and teaching staff perceive and enact academic-integrity policies in Romanian universities under the normative uncertainty created by generative artificial intelligence (AI). Design/methodology/approach Parallel online questionnaires were completed by 786 students and 472 teaching-staff members at four public universities; closed-item analyses were complemented by thematic content analysis of open responses. Findings Teaching staff evaluated integrity infrastructure more positively, while students perceived more examination and AI-assisted cheating. Student reporting was rare; teaching staff reporting intentions followed hierarchical internal channels. Unacknowledged AI use was judged more contextually by students and more categorically by staff. Research limitations/implications Cross-sectional, non-probability samples, self-selection, limited student coverage, non-identical role-adapted measures and the absence of respondent-level institution identifiers restrict generalisation and preclude causal inference. Practical implications The results provide universities with a basis for discipline-specific AI guidance, disclosure rules, proportionate sanctions and credible reporting routes that distinguish learning support from replacement of student reasoning or authorship. Social implications Differences between students and teaching staff regarding cheating, AI-powered essays, and the practices of peer reporting can seriously damage the overall credibility of academic standards and even undermine the value of university degrees altogether. Peer reporting rates remain extremely low, suggesting tolerance to cheating behaviour or reluctance in peer reporting. Having agreed-upon AI usage standards would increase both fairness and accountability. Originality/value By linking policy translation, social norms and responsive regulation, the study offers comparative evidence from students and teaching staff from an under-researched Central and Eastern European setting.

Quality Assurance in Education
University of Bucharest (RO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Academic integrity and plagiarism
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.