View in EDS

The Two-Lane Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions: Why an All-or-None Approach to Generative AI, Integrity, and Assessment Is Insupportable

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Two-Lane Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions: Why an All-or-None Approach to Generative AI, Integrity, and Assessment Is Insupportable
Language: English
Authors: Guy J. Curtis (ORCID 0000-0002-4174-6955)
Source: Higher Education Research and Development. 2025 44(8):2151-2158.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 8
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Technology Uses in Education, Integrity, Higher Education, Educational Assessment, Cheating, Academic Achievement
DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2025.2476516
ISSN: 0729-4360
1469-8366
Abstract: A 'two-lane' (All-or-None) approach to the use of generative artificial intelligence (genAI) is the idea that there should be two categories of assessments in higher education--Lane 1/None: where the use of genAI is prohibited, and Lane 2/All: where "any" use of genAI is permitted. This idea has been thoughtfully detailed and continues to be debated. Although this idea is generally well-intentioned, in this comment piece I argue that, if implemented, it will promote an impoverished approach to education and educational assessment. One argument often invoked in favour of an All-or-None approach is that genAI use may sometimes be undetectable. Contract cheating (e.g., students outsourcing assessments to ghostwriters) is sometimes undetectable, yet an argument that there should be an All-or-None approach permitting contract cheating in some assessments is clearly absurd. An All-or-None approach to genAI and assessment is also absurd. A middle lane, where genAI use in assessments is allowed with some limitations, is essential.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1503562
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1503562
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Two-Lane Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions: Why an All-or-None Approach to Generative AI, Integrity, and Assessment Is Insupportable
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Guy+J%2E+Curtis%22">Guy J. Curtis</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4174-6955">0000-0002-4174-6955</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Higher+Education+Research+and+Development%22"><i>Higher Education Research and Development</i></searchLink>. 2025 44(8):2151-2158.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 8
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Artificial+Intelligence%22">Artificial Intelligence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technology+Uses+in+Education%22">Technology Uses in Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Integrity%22">Integrity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Assessment%22">Educational Assessment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cheating%22">Cheating</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/07294360.2025.2476516
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0729-4360<br />1469-8366
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: A 'two-lane' (All-or-None) approach to the use of generative artificial intelligence (genAI) is the idea that there should be two categories of assessments in higher education--Lane 1/None: where the use of genAI is prohibited, and Lane 2/All: where "any" use of genAI is permitted. This idea has been thoughtfully detailed and continues to be debated. Although this idea is generally well-intentioned, in this comment piece I argue that, if implemented, it will promote an impoverished approach to education and educational assessment. One argument often invoked in favour of an All-or-None approach is that genAI use may sometimes be undetectable. Contract cheating (e.g., students outsourcing assessments to ghostwriters) is sometimes undetectable, yet an argument that there should be an All-or-None approach permitting contract cheating in some assessments is clearly absurd. An All-or-None approach to genAI and assessment is also absurd. A middle lane, where genAI use in assessments is allowed with some limitations, is essential.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1503562
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1503562
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/07294360.2025.2476516
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 8
        StartPage: 2151
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Artificial Intelligence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Technology Uses in Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Integrity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cheating
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Two-Lane Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions: Why an All-or-None Approach to Generative AI, Integrity, and Assessment Is Insupportable
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Guy J. Curtis
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0729-4360
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1469-8366
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 44
            – Type: issue
              Value: 8
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Higher Education Research and Development
              Type: main
ResultId 1