La Trobe University's Professor Therese Keane, a globally distinguished authority in digital education, suggests that exam supervision has become even more complicated with the evolving array of AI-powered wearables now on the market.
Recent reports of contract cheating syndicates deploying hoodies with cameras concealed in the drawstrings, smart glasses that covertly take photographs, and hidden earpieces that can receive information in university exams are a challenge not limited to the tertiary sphere.
More than 1,200 NSW students were caught cheating in last year's HSC exams alone using AI technology. This included students asking AI to complete take-home exams, smuggling smartwatches and wireless earbuds into exam rooms, and hiding phones in calculator cases which were used to take photos of questions – promptly sent to AI for help.
We spoke with Keane about how schools can best respond to the escalating problem.
SD: You’ve said that exam procedures need to keep pace with changing technology in order to prevent student cheating. How has AI intensified the challenge for schools on this front?
TK: AI has made it much easier to produce convincing answers quickly, so schools can no longer rely on exam rules designed only for traditional forms of cheating. The challenge is to protect academic integrity while making sure students know clearly what is allowed.
Schools should come up with rules for AI use, design questions that test students’ reasoning and application, and consider supervised exams, oral follow-ups or evidence of how work was developed.
AI detectors (like Turnitin, for example) should not be treated as proof on their own: decisions need to be based on fair procedures and more than a detector score.
What kinds of devices can now be brought into exams and used as cheating tools?
Common devices include phones, smartwatches, wireless earbuds, programmable calculators and AI-enabled wearables such as smart glasses. They can store information, receive messages or access AI tools.
AI is being handled very differently by school systems across the country, Professor Therese Keane says.
And so how might they be concealed?
Devices can be hidden in ordinary belongings such as clothing, pencil cases or permitted equipment, or disguised as everyday accessories. Some wireless devices are also small enough to be difficult to notice during routine supervision.
For example, earpieces are one example of how ordinary-looking technology can complicate exam supervision.
Some say schools and students have lost trust in the VCE system and in the VCAA after major exam errors that have occurred in the past few years. Does AI stand to worsen this?
AI could deepen existing concerns about trust if students face unclear rules or inconsistent decisions. The response needs to be transparent and fair: students should know what is permitted, suspected breaches should be assessed and there should be a clear way to challenge decisions.
Ultimately, trust depends on reliable exams and consistent treatment.
Does the VCAA have a responsibility when it comes to ensuring cheating does not occur?
Absolutely! The VCAA has an important role in setting clear, consistent rules and providing secure, reliable exam procedures. Schools are responsible for applying those procedures, and students for following them. No system can guarantee that cheating will never occur, but the response must be proportionate, fair and transparent.
You've said that AI can be a powerful study partner for students. How so?
AI can give students immediate, personalised support: it can explain a difficult idea in different ways, generate practice questions and help them identify gaps in their understanding. It can support learning rather than doing the learning for them. The student still needs to think, check and explain their own work.
Do you have any broader concerns about how AI is being used in Australian schools?
My broader concern is that AI is being handled very differently across Australian schools. Some ban it, while others are incorporating it into learning, which can leave students unsure of what’s allowed and create unequal opportunities to build AI literacy.
Schools need clear, evidence-based guidance on when and how to use AI, supported by professional learning for teachers and attention to privacy, bias and equitable access.
