evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

JCQ's AI Use in Assessments (Revision 2, April 2025) — The UK Exam Boards' Joint Rulebook for AI Misuse in Coursework

United Kingdom · London · See the United Kingdom profile · See the London profile

Top 56% 47/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

The Joint Council for Qualifications' April 2025 guidance gives UK teachers and exam centres rules, malpractice examples, authentication steps and AI-detection-tool lists for coursework; Ofqual reports no separate AI misuse count.

Details

Promoter
Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ)
Period
2025 (Revision 2, effective 30 April 2025)
Keywords
assessment, exams, academic integrity, AI misuse, coursework

Description

The Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ), the body representing the main UK awarding organisations, publishes 'AI Use in Assessments: Your role in protecting the integrity of qualifications'. Revision 2 took effect on 30 April 2025 and is aimed at teachers, assessors and exam centres, who are expected to build their AI and malpractice policies around it.
The update followed a survey of centres. It adds real-life candidate malpractice examples involving AI that was not referenced appropriately (Appendix A), information on authenticating private candidate work, a new section on 'AI use and marking' covering both student AI use and assessors' own use of AI tools (Appendix B), and an extended list of AI tools and AI-detection tools. It is paired with a student information sheet, a teacher information sheet and a presentation for senior leaders.
Evidence is descriptive rather than outcome-based. Ofqual's Delivery Report 2025 identifies inappropriate AI use in non-examined assessment as a risk, mainly in subjects with coursework, and records 42 malpractice allegations received for GCSE, AS and A level in summer 2025 (51 in 2024), but publishes no separate count of AI misuse: confirmed cases are reported under plagiarism offences. Awarding organisations use detection software and moderation, and share confirmed sanctions across boards for a consistent sector-wide approach.
Cautions: no published data show whether the guidance reduces AI misuse, and detection tools are an acknowledged weak point. The practice is transferable as a template for a sector-wide, regulator-backed assessment-integrity rulebook, but its effect is not yet evaluated.

Read the full analysis: https://www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/malpractice/artificial-intelligence/

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful