INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHANGES IN EDUCATION
Research Article
Aug 15, 2026 257 75

Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School

Katie Burke 1,
Alison Bedford 1 * ,
Rian Roux 2,
Emily Scott 3,
Jasmine Thomas 4,
Tracy Chamlin 1
1 School of Education, University of Southern Queensland, Australia2 UniSQ College, University of Southern Queensland, Australia3 The Glennie School, Australia4 ICT Governance and Partnerships, University of Southern Queensland, Australia* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(4), 2026, 493-503, https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912
Online publication date: Nov 21, 2025
Publication date: Aug 15, 2026
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The widespread free access to generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has radically shifted the educational landscape. Schools find themselves largely unprepared to navigate this new terrain: both in understanding how to harness the potential of GenAI for educational enhancement and developing strategies to ensure student integrity in demonstrating authentic learning outcomes. This study reports on a design-based research collaboration between a regional Australian university and a secondary school to address these challenges through policy and practice innovation. The aim was to both promote and maintain academic integrity, alongside considering how GenAI might be harnessed for educational benefit and lifelong learning. Over six months, researchers and educators worked collaboratively to analyze school staff needs using a whole-school survey and focus groups, followed by co-design of policy and pedagogical responses, which were iteratively tested and refined. Key findings revealed that staff required clear guidance on acceptable GenAI use, consistent policy enforcement, and professional learning. The project has resulted in the development of policy, procedure, and support resources that have been released as an Open Education Resource. The findings offer practical insights for schools navigating GenAI integration and contribute to broader discussions on educational change, assessment validity, and ethical technology use.

KEYWORDS

academic integrity generative artificial intelligence design-based research policy

CITATION (APA)

Burke, K., Bedford, A., Roux, R., Scott, E., Thomas, J., & Chamlin, T. (2026). Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School. International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(4), 493-503. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912
Harvard
Burke, K., Bedford, A., Roux, R., Scott, E., Thomas, J., and Chamlin, T. (2026). Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School. International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(4), pp. 493-503. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912
Vancouver
Burke K, Bedford A, Roux R, Scott E, Thomas J, Chamlin T. Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2026;3(4):493-503. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912
AMA
Burke K, Bedford A, Roux R, Scott E, Thomas J, Chamlin T. Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2026;3(4), 493-503. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912
Chicago
Burke, Katie, Alison Bedford, Rian Roux, Emily Scott, Jasmine Thomas, and Tracy Chamlin. "Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School". International Journal of Changes in Education 2026 3 no. 4 (2026): 493-503. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912
MLA
Burke, Katie et al. "Designing School Policy and Practice for Academic Integrity in the Age of GenAI: A Design-Based Research Project in a Regional School". International Journal of Changes in Education, vol. 3, no. 4, 2026, pp. 493-503. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52026912

REFERENCES

  1. Jarrah, A. M., Wardat, Y., & Fidalgo, P. (2023). Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say? Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13572
  2. Microsoft Support. (2023). Welcome to Copilot in Word. Retrieved from: https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/office/welcome-to-copilot-in-word-2135e85f-a467-463b-b2f0-c51a46d625d1
  3. International Center for Academic Integrity. (2025). The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity. Retrieved from: https://web.archive.org/web/20250124171221/https://academicintegrity.org/images/pdfs/20019_ICAI-Fundamental-Values_R12.pdf
  4. Barnhardt, B. (2016). The “epidemic” of cheating depends on its definition: A critique of inferring the moral quality of “cheating in any form”. Ethics & Behavior, 26(4), 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2015.1026595
  5. Bearman, M., Tai, J., Dawson, P., Boud, D., & Ajjawi, R. (2024). Developing evaluative judgement for a time of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(6), 893–905. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2335321
  6. Momen, A., Ebrahimi, M., & Hassan, A. M. (2022). Importance and implications of theory of Bloom’s Taxonomy in different fields of education. In M. A. Al-Sharafi, M. Al-Emran, M. N. Al-Kabi, & K. Shaalan (Eds.), ICETIS 2022: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems: Vol 573. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Intelligent Systems, 515–525. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20429-6_47
  7. Lodge, J., Henderson, M., Slade, C., & Deneen, C. (2023). Adapting assessment for/despite generative artificial intelligence: A national guidance framework. In Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education 2023. https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2023.554
  8. Bertram Gallant, T. (2017). Academic integrity as a teaching & learning issue: From theory to practice. Theory into Practice, 56(2), 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1308173
  9. Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Dollinger, M., & Boud, D. (2024). Validity matters more than cheating. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(7), 1005–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2386662
  10. Ball, S., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 625–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601565
  11. Duffy, C. (2023). Public school bans on AI tolls like Chat-GPT raise fears private school kids are gaining an unfair edge and widening the digital divide. Retrieved from: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-26/artificial-intelligence-chatgpt-classrooms-schools/102356926
  12. Perkins, M., Furze, L., Roe, J., & MacVaugh, J. (2024). The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A framework for ethical integration of generative AI in educational assessment. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(6), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.53761/q3azde36
  13. Wall, V. (2023). My HistoryBuddy and I: Reflections of an early adopter of AI for teaching history. Teaching History, 57(3), 35–38. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.323121633805888
  14. Mondal, S., Das, S., & Vrana, V. G. (2023). How to bell the cat? A theoretical review of generative artificial intelligence towards digital disruption in all walks of life. Technologies, 11(2), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies11020044
  15. Mintrop, R. (2020). Design-based school improvement: A practical guide for education leaders. Harvard Education Press.
  16. Campanella, M., & Penuel, W. R. (2021). Design-based research in educational settings: Motivations, crosscutting features and considerations for design. In A. Pelligrino, E. Howell, & Z. A. Philippakos (Eds.), Design-based research in education: Theory and applications (pp. 3–22).
  17. Kelly, A., Lesh, R. A., & Baek, J. Y. (2008). Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics learning and teaching. Routledge.
  18. Reeves, T. C. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. van. den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenny, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52–66). Routledge.
  19. Johnstone, M. L. (2017). Depth interviews and focus groups. In K. Jubacki, & S. Rundle-Thiele (Eds.), Formative research in social marketing, (pp. 67–87). Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1829-9_5
  20. Madrigal, L. (2012). Statistics for anthropology (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022699.002
  21. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage
  22. University of Southern Queensland & The Glennie School. (2024). A teacher’s guide to academic integrity & GenAI. Retrieved from: https://integrity.unisq.edu.au/
  23. Aad, S. S., & Hardey, M. (2025). After Generative AI: Preparing Faculty to Transform Education, Learning, and Pedagogy. Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781835499467
  24. Bano, S., & Mehdi, S. A. (2025). Systematic review: Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) in learning in elementary and secondary schools. Pakistan Social Sciences Review, 8(4), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.35484/pssr.2024(8-IV)16
  25. Liu, X., & Zhong, B. (2025). What to consider before incorporating generative AI into schools. AI & Society, 40, 1121–1123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-01872-9

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.