Education

UCL law school to make over half of assessments AI-proof to safeguard academic integrity

Saturday, 10 May 2025 12:17AM UTC

University College London’s law school is pioneering a shift towards AI-resistant assessments, aiming to preserve the rigour and trustworthiness of its degrees amid increasing AI capabilities. The move includes curbing AI use in exams, emphasising critical legal skills, and setting clear guidelines for responsible AI integration in student work.

University College London (UCL) is poised to implement significant changes in its law school assessments, moving to ensure that more than half of these evaluations are resistant to artificial intelligence (AI) assistance. This initiative, according to the law school, aims to uphold the integrity and trustworthiness of the degrees it awards, a necessary step in the face of rapidly evolving AI tools which threaten to undermine traditional educational methods.

In a detailed paper published by UCL, academic leaders have stressed the imperative of creating “secure assessments.” This term refers to evaluations that guarantee AI does not substitute for the skills or knowledge being measured—a critical distinction in legal education where competencies like critical thinking and ethical judgment are paramount. The paper articulates that assessments must reflect the core educational mission of the faculty: to offer transformative learning experiences that produce highly skilled, internationally respected graduates.

UCL has already established regulations across all its departments that prevent the use of AI to create or modify content in assessments unless explicitly permitted for educational reasons. The law school’s latest move to actively construct assessments that are resistant to AI is particularly significant, especially as it seeks to revert to pre-pandemic practices where in-person examinations were more prevalent than coursework submitted remotely. This shift comes in response not only to the proliferation of AI tools capable of passing professional competency tests, such as the Watson Glaser test and various contract exams, but also to the increasing sophistication of AI-generated content, which the law school describes as “AI slop”—text considered to lack the depth necessary for genuine academic inquiry.

The approach taken by UCL is reflective of a broader concern within academia regarding the impact of AI technologies. Institutions globally are grappling with how best to integrate AI into their educational frameworks while maintaining standards of rigor and integrity. Schools such as Victoria University of Wellington have recently reintroduced handwritten exams as a direct response to the challenges posed by AI. UCL’s paper underscores that educational institutions must not merely react to the marketing directives of technology firms but should instead assertively guide their own technological integration to fulfil their educational missions.

In the legal sector, the integration of AI is already making waves. The Solicitors Regulation Authority's recent approval of Garfield.Law, an entirely AI-driven law firm, illustrates the judiciary's acceptance of AI’s growing role. Concurrently, judges now receive updated guidance on the use of AI tools, showcasing an active engagement with technology that contrasts with the caution urged in educational settings.

Amid this shifting landscape, UCL is not dismissing the utilitarian benefits that AI tools can offer students. The university has produced a framework outlining when AI can be used responsibly in assessments. This framework includes three categories: assessments where AI tools are entirely prohibited, those where AI can assist but not replace human effort, and scenarios where AI plays a fundamental role. Such guidance is crucial in fostering an environment of accountability and transparency, highlighted by the university’s insistence that students must acknowledge AI contributions to their work transparently.

Further backing this initiative, UCL emphasizes the importance of critical skills—such as the ability to think independently and engage creatively with information—that are crucial in the legal profession. The law school's perspective is that while AI can serve as a resource for research and drafting, it cannot replicate the nuanced and ethical considerations required in legal practice.

As legal educators adapt to the emergent realities of AI, they face the challenge of finding balance. They must prepare students for a future in which legal professionals will undoubtedly leverage AI tools while ensuring that the essence of legal education—fostering rigorous intellectual capabilities—remains intact. With many universities revising their honour codes and academic integrity policies to accommodate these changes, UCL’s proactive measures could serve as a model for other institutions grappling with similar dilemmas.

Reflecting on these trends, the conversation surrounding AI in legal education is evolving, raising vital questions about the competence and readiness of future attorneys to engage in a legal landscape increasingly influenced by technology. As UCL boldly charts a course to maintain the integrity of its assessments, the broader discourse on AI's role in academic practice continues to unfold, demanding careful consideration and strategic foresight.

Reference Map

Paragraphs 1, 2, 5, 6, 7
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 8

Source: Noah Wire Services

More on this

https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/05/leading-law-school-takes-on-ai-slop-with-assessment-overhaul/ - Please view link - unable to able to access data
https://www.legalcheek.com/2025/05/leading-law-school-takes-on-ai-slop-with-assessment-overhaul/ - University College London (UCL) law school has announced plans to make over half of its assessments resistant to artificial intelligence (AI) assistance. This initiative aims to uphold the integrity and trustworthiness of their degrees, ensuring that AI does not replace the skills and knowledge being evaluated. The move is a response to the increasing capabilities of AI tools, which have demonstrated the ability to perform tasks traditionally requiring human input, such as passing professional exams and generating comprehensive essays. UCL emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and creativity, skills that AI cannot replicate, in preparing students for future legal careers.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/feb/can-you-use-ai-exams-and-assessments - UCL has provided guidance on the appropriate use of generative AI (GenAI) in exams and assessments. The university acknowledges the growing prevalence of AI tools and emphasizes the importance of using them responsibly to support learning. Students are permitted to use AI for tasks such as checking grammar and spelling, generating ideas, and revising for assessments, provided they follow assessment instructions and acknowledge AI use appropriately. Unauthorized use of AI, such as presenting AI-generated content as one's own work, is considered academic misconduct. UCL encourages students to critically assess AI outputs and use them ethically.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/generative-ai-hub/using-ai-tools-assessment/ - UCL has developed a three-tiered categorization system to guide the use of AI tools in assessments. The categories are: 1) AI tools cannot be used, 2) AI tools can be used in an assistive role, and 3) AI has an integral role. This framework helps staff and students understand when and how AI can be appropriately integrated into assessments, ensuring academic integrity is maintained. The university also provides guidance on acknowledging AI use and referencing AI-generated content, emphasizing the importance of transparency and ethical practices in academic work.
https://reflect.ucl.ac.uk/digital-assessment/2023/02/27/designing-assessment-for-academic-integrity-and-ai/ - UCL's Digital Assessment team has conducted workshops on designing assessments that promote academic integrity in the context of AI. The workshops address challenges posed by AI content generators, such as ChatGPT, and explore strategies to ensure assessments remain effective and secure. Recommendations include revising essay and written questions, converting generic questions into scenario-based ones, and considering the integration of AI into formative assessments. The goal is to create assessments that are fit for purpose and promote good academic practice, fostering an environment of trust and responsibility with students.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/before-the-bar/do-not-publish-how-ai-is-prompting-law-schools-to-revise-their-honor-codes - The rise of AI tools has prompted law schools to revise their honor codes and policies regarding academic integrity. For instance, the University of California, Berkeley School of Law allows students to use generative AI for research and editing but prohibits its use in composing assignments or during exams. The policy emphasizes that AI-generated content must not be used in ways that would constitute plagiarism if authored by a human. This reflects a broader trend of law schools adapting their policies to address the challenges and opportunities presented by AI technologies.
https://reflect.ucl.ac.uk/digital-assessment/2023/09/13/qaa-conference-redesigning-assessments-for-a-world-with-artificial-intelligence/ - At the QAA Annual Conference 2023, UCL's Digital Assessment team presented on redesigning assessments in the age of artificial intelligence. The session highlighted the need for higher education institutions to adapt assessment methods to the evolving landscape of AI. Discussions focused on the implications of AI for assessment practices, including issues of equity, critical thinking, and academic integrity. The conference underscored the importance of rethinking assessment strategies to ensure they remain effective and fair in an AI-enabled world.

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 9

Notes: The narrative is recent, dated 2025, and discusses contemporary issues related to AI in legal education. The content does not appear to be recycled from older articles.

Quotes check

Score: 8

Notes: There are no direct quotes attributed to specific individuals in the narrative. The absence of direct quotes makes it difficult to verify their originality.

Source reliability

Score: 9

Notes: The narrative originates from Legal Cheek, which is a reputable online source for legal news and information in the UK.

Plausability check

Score: 8

Notes: The claims about UCL's efforts to combat AI-assisted cheating and the broader trends in legal education are plausible and align with current discussions in academia.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary: The narrative discusses recent developments in UCL's law school assessments, focusing on AI resistance, which is a contemporary issue. The absence of direct quotes and the lack of specific evidence to verify all claims slightly reduce the plausibility score, but the overall content is consistent with current academic and technological trends.

UCL
Artificial intelligence
Legal education
Academic integrity
Higher education