Exam board cancels AI cheating penalty over flawed process
TL;DR:
- Qualifications Scotland has cancelled a malpractice finding against a Higher English pupil accused of using AI, restoring the portfolio worth 30% of their final grade.
- Interim chief operating officer Catriona Campbell wrote that she “cannot be satisfied that the correct process was followed or that all relevant evidence was appropriately considered”.
- Opposition MSPs are calling for a review of every pupil sanctioned over alleged AI use; the exam board declined to say how many there are.
Scotland’s only exam board has reversed itself in a case that turns not on whether a pupil cheated, but on whether anyone could reasonably have established that they did. The original penalty rested on a marker’s suspicion, AI detection software indicating machine-generated text, and information suggesting a family member had shaped the final submission.
Campbell’s letter to the pupil’s headteacher identifies where that fell down. The Candidate Malpractice Panel did not hold additional examples of the pupil’s writing, despite requesting them, and its notes on the weight given to teachers’ professional judgement were “unclear”. Her role, she wrote, was not to judge the authenticity of the work but to be satisfied the panel reached its decision through a fair and robust process. She could not be. The letter contains no apology.
Five months, and no data
The pupil, who was predicted A grades across all five Highers and had scored As in every Higher English test and prelim, described allegations raised in May and unresolved until mid-July — through the entire exam period. Their folio drew on personal experience of abuse and gambling addiction. “To then have that piece of work flagged as AI was one of the most hurtful parts of the whole experience,” they said. “It felt so insulting because those were my experiences and my words.”
Qualifications Scotland was asked how many pupils face sanctions over AI use, how many appealed and how many appeals succeeded. Officials declined, saying the figures would be released later in the year.
Cross-party pressure
Scottish Conservative spokesperson Meghan Gallacher called it “a damning indictment” and urged education secretary Mairi McAllan to order a review of every sanctioned pupil. Liberal Democrat Duncan Dunlop said reviewing how the panel assesses AI use “would be a sensible step”. Scottish Greens spokesperson Laura Moodie backed investigating misuse while insisting decisions affecting a young person’s future be based on all available evidence.
Looking forward
The detection-reliability problem is now producing demands for redress rather than debate. HEPI research published yesterday found detectors misclassify over 61% of essays by non-native English speakers, and UK universities have so far declined to follow overseas institutions in dropping the tools. A concession that process cannot be verified in one case, from a body that will not say how many cases exist, is an uncomfortable position for any UK institution still treating a detection score as evidence.