AI in RTOs: Safeguarding Compliance & Assessment Integrity
AI in RTOs: Safeguarding Compliance & Assessment Integrity
Introduction:
AI in VET is here. Discover how RTOs can manage AI use, prevent academic cheating, and stay compliant with a clear policy approach.
The Midnight-Mare Every RTO Manager Knows
It’s late, you’re scanning through assessments, and suddenly one jumps out. The tone is flawless, the structure too perfect, and the work feels unlike anything that learner has ever submitted.
Your stomach sinks. Is this real competence, or is AI masquerading as achievement?
This is the new midnight-mare facing RTO managers across the country. Artificial Intelligence isn’t just a looming threat - it’s already inside the assessment process. And while AI can be a powerful support tool, unmanaged use threatens the very foundation of competency-based training and risks drawing unwanted attention from ASQA.
The good news? With the right framework, you can turn the midnight-mare into a manageable challenge - one where authenticity is protected, learners are supported, and compliance stays intact.
What ASQA Really Wants
Let’s clear the air: ASQA isn’t out to ban AI. They care about one thing - authentic, valid, and reliable evidence of competence.
Their Regulatory Risk Priorities for 2024-25 highlight academic cheating as one of the sector’s biggest threats. But AI is just the latest in a long line of risks - plagiarism, contract cheating, falsified workplace reports. The expectation hasn’t changed:
1. Principles of Assessment
Fairness: learners understand the process and can challenge decisions.
Flexibility: drawing from a range of assessment methods and using those that are appropriate to the context.
Validity: evidence must genuinely demonstrate required skills and knowledge.
Reliability: assessor decisions are consistent across contexts.
2. Rules of Evidence
Validity: evidence relates directly to the competency being assessed.
Sufficiency: enough evidence is collected to confirm competence.
Authenticity: evidence is the learner’s own work.
Currency: evidence reflects current skills and knowledge.
If your systems can uphold both the Principles of Assessment and the Rules of Evidence, you’re not just compliant; you’re future-ready.
The Evolving Cheating Landscape
ASQA has flagged a worrying trend: contract cheating services aren’t just targeting learners anymore. Some now market themselves to providers, even offering to mark assessments. Combine that with free AI tools, and the temptation for learners to take shortcuts has never been greater.
The risks aren’t just academic:
Learners using contract cheating services may be exposed to blackmail or identity theft.
Graduates without genuine skills can put industries - and the public - at risk.
Providers complicit in or blind to cheating risk penalties, sanctions, or deregistration.
This isn’t a storm to wait out. It’s a shift to manage proactively.
The AI Use Policy: Clear Rules, No Grey Areas
Banning AI outright doesn’t work. Learners will use it anyway; the difference is whether they use it responsibly or recklessly.
The smarter approach is to set explicit boundaries: define what’s acceptable, what’s conditional, and what’s completely off-limits.
Acceptable Use (low risk): Grammar checks, translation, and idea brainstorming. Helpful tools that don’t replace competence.
Conditional Use (disclosure required): Structuring ideas, generating examples, or testing explanations; but only if the learner shows their own understanding.
Prohibited Use (academic misconduct): Submitting AI-written assessments, fabricating workplace evidence, or outsourcing tasks. These breach assessment integrity and compliance obligations.
With a clear AI use policy in place, learners know the rules, assessors know what to check for, and RTOs can protect authenticity without stifling innovation.
Building AI-Resistant Assessments
If AI can spit out a generic essay, stop asking for generic essays. RTOs that thrive in the AI era redesign assessments to make misuse irrelevant.
Here’s how:
Portfolios of Evidence: Require draft notes, reflections, and multiple evidence points. AI can’t fake a learning journey.
Show Your Working: Ask learners to explain reasoning, justify decisions, or reflect on alternatives.
Live Demonstrations: Quick oral questioning or practical demonstrations confirm authenticity.
Workplace Context: Ask learners to apply concepts to their actual job or industry. AI can’t replicate personal, specific experiences.
The Authentication Toolkit for Assessors
Spotting AI misuse doesn’t require advanced tech. Assessors already have the instincts - they just need a framework.
Style Scan: Does this match previous submissions?
Knowledge Probe: Can they explain the key concept in their own words?
Metadata Check: Does the file history raise red flags?
Conversation: A five-minute chat about their process can confirm authenticity.
AI detection software can support this process, but it shouldn’t drive it. False positives are high, and nothing replaces assessor judgement.
The Bottom Line
AI doesn’t spell the end of assessment integrity - but unmanaged AI use could.
The RTOs that succeed will be those that:
Establish clear AI use policies that set boundaries learners understand.
Redesign assessments to capture authentic evidence.
Equip assessors with practical authentication tools.
Validate relentlessly and document everything.
Authenticity is the fuel of VET. If your assessments can prove learners really earned their competence, you won’t just satisfy ASQA - you’ll protect the integrity of Australia’s entire training system.
Action Step for RTO Managers:
Review your assessment policies today. Do they clearly set out your AI “policy rules”? Can your assessors confidently detect authenticity? If not, now’s the time to upgrade your system.
