Three Nanyang Technological University (NTU) undergraduates have contested the university’s decision to penalise them with zero marks and academic misconduct records for allegedly using generative AI tools in their coursework.

The students claim the ruling was unjust and that they were denied a fair hearing.

Health Module Students Face Zero Marks Over Citation Errors and AI Accusations

The controversy began in April when three students taking module HA4040/HA3026 (Health, Disease Outbreaks and Politics) came under investigation.

Advertisements  

The course instructor, Assistant Professor Sabrina Luk from the School of Social Sciences, had explicitly prohibited the use of AI tools for written assignments and warned that GenAI use would result in a zero mark. The essay accounted for 45% of the overall course grade.

Student A, a 22-year-old undergraduate, made three citation mistakes and typos in her essay’s bibliography. She also used a citation sorter, an online tool that organises academic references in alphabetical order.

Luk allegedly said that Student A’s usage of the citation sorter was a form of AI use and flagged her errors as being AI-generated.

Student B, aged 21, was accused of two citation-related errors. One error involved what the professor described as a ‘fake statistic’ — a general estimate of Covid-19 cases that Student B claimed was publicly verifiable using data from the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Want to advertise your business on our website, or on The Blue Cat’s video series? Click here!

The second issue involved “false citations” in her bibliography. Student B had voluntarily disclosed using ChatGPT to format the bibliography but maintained she only used AI for formatting and not for writing the essay itself.

A third student said they were unaware that a tool marketed as an “AI-powered essay writing service” even counted as AI use.

Read Also:  Trump Nominated for 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, Says He Should Have Won It Four or Five Times Already

Two of the three students admitted to using generative AI, but only as a research aid, not to write their essays.

After a formal review, all three students received zero marks and were flagged for academic misconduct in early May. The academic fraud label goes on students’ permanent records.

Advertisements  

Student A submitted strong evidence to clear her name, including Google Docs version histories, draft files, and a Draftback screen recording showing her entire writing process. She also emailed multiple higher-ups, including the dean and head of student services, to appeal the decision.

NTU, however, allegedly refused to review the evidence during the disciplinary hearing.

Student A even brought her case to a Meet-the-People session. A volunteer said a letter would be written on her behalf, but no updates have followed since.

Student B tried to appeal. She wrote in her appeal letter that she “does not dispute the fact that [she] was negligent” in overlooking the errors.

She pleaded for reconsideration of the academic fraud label, stating there was “no fabrication, no outsourcing, no attempt to deceive”.

Advertisements  

Professor Allegedly Accused Five Additional Students of Similar AI Violations

On 19 Jun, one of the affected students posted on the subreddit r/SGExams, revealing details of their case. The post went viral and attracted widespread sympathy from netizens.

In a follow-up post on 20 Jun, the student revealed that five other students had allegedly been falsely accused of AI use by the same professor this semester. Two of them reached out to share similar experiences and outcomes.

The students and their peers reportedly paid S$40 each to file an official appeal with NTU’s academic board. Consultations were reportedly scheduled for the week of 23 Jun.

Read Also:  Summary of Traditional Restaurants vs Viral Home-Based F&B Businesses in Singapore

In response to queries, an NTU School of Social Sciences spokesperson said they investigated three students for “non-existent citations in their assignments” in April.

The spokesperson stated that citing non-existent sources constitutes a “serious form of academic misconduct” and that students were given opportunities to present their cases during formal reviews.

Advertisements  

However, Student A and B denied that they cited non-existent sources. They also denied that they were given a fair opportunity to present their cases.

Student A said Luk “shut down [her] attempts during the hearing, saying ‘there’ll be no negotiation’.” Student B claimed that during the Zoom hearing, Luk “literally screamed at [her] and attacked [her] character”. She described it as feeling “like a debate where the prof was trying to push her aversion to AI onto me, rather than discuss the substantial facts of my case”.

NTU’s official guidelines acknowledge the usefulness of generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Bing, and Bard in supporting academic work, but warn of ethical and integrity risks.

The university requires researchers who use AI tools to “use GAI in a responsible and accountable manner, and be transparent on the extent and nature of the involvement of GAI in their work”.

This involves disclosing any use of AI tools in research proposals, manuscripts, or academic work.