Higher Ed Futures

Register 03

Assessment

What still counts as student work. A handful of universities have stopped treating an unsupervised take-home artefact as a valid judgement that this student met a learning outcome.

7 institutions · 3 jurisdictions

The forcing function is national. Australia’s TEQSA moved from educative advice (2023) to a regulatory-led approach from 2026. Detection is explicitly not the strategy. Providers are splitting the portfolio: secure / controlled tasks certify attainment; open tasks develop learning with AI and are no longer allowed to pretend they are AI-free. No US, Singapore, Hong Kong, or mainland China university meets this page’s test on public evidence.

Source: TEQSA, Enacting assessment reform, 24 September 2025

What certifies the award, by institution

Institution What certifies the award What they will not count
Sydney In-person supervised Lane 1, mapped at programme level Take-home as assurance; remote-as-secure long term
Auckland Controlled Lane 1 — the only place AI may be restricted Lane 2 bans; detector verdicts
Melbourne ≥50% of subject marks secure, or Board-approved programmatic assessment Majority-unsupervised subjects (default path)
UNSW Every programme learning outcome has a secure task Outcomes evidenced only by unsupervised work
UNE (Australia) Lane 1 ≥50% of the unit mark; unit outcomes as hurdles Open tasks as assurance; Turnitin AI indicator
Bath Closed = conditions that prevent AI Take-home “no AI” as closed
UTS Secure at course milestones (mosaic) One-task security; incoherent allow/ban patchwork

In this register

  1. University of SydneyAustralia
  2. University of AucklandNew Zealand
  3. University of MelbourneAustralia
  4. UNSW SydneyAustralia
  5. University of New England (Australia)Australia
  6. University of BathUnited Kingdom
  7. University of Technology SydneyAustralia

Australia

University of Sydney

Two lanes, now the Sydney Assessment Framework for all coursework. Lane 1 Secure: in-person supervised assessment of learning, planned mainly at programme level, so the university can judge that the graduate met course outcomes. Lane 2 Open: assessment for learning at unit level; generative AI cannot be banned, restricted, or controlled. Written take-homes, out-of-class quizzes, portfolios, dissertations sit in Open.

Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott (20 March 2026): students may use AI with disclosure in open tasks, but they cannot pass their degree without demonstrating their capabilities in secure assessments. By 2027, online programmes are expected to need in-person secure assessment. All 2025 assessments mapped; redesign running through 2026.

Source: Sydney Assessment Framework

New Zealand

University of Auckland

Two-lane written into Assessment of Courses Procedures (Senate 17 November 2025; Vice-Chancellor 18 November 2025). Distinctive hard rule: AI may be restricted only if the task is controlled (Lane 1). AI may be used without restriction in all other tasks (Lane 2). Using AI in Lane 2 is not misconduct; the student remains the author and is responsible for accuracy.

Courses must name the lane to students. The university does not endorse third-party AI detectors. Mandatory implementation by 2027. Distinctive line elsewhere in Auckland’s AI materials: “AI has no agency.”

Source: Assessment of Courses Procedures

Australia

University of Melbourne

Two principles: either at least 50% of the total mark in a subject is secure assessment, or the degree uses programmatic assessment (Academic Board approval, by exception). Secure means high confidence that this student completed the task — almost always by observation.

Four types currently count: observed exams/tests; interactive oral assessment; performance; observed internship or placement. Cadmus-style asynchronous digital observation is not yet accepted as secure. CIO Michelle Fitzgerald stated the 50% rule publicly on 18 August 2026. Faculties lead staged reform over several years.

Source: Assuring learning at Melbourne

Australia

UNSW Sydney

New Assessment and Progression Policy (Vice-Chancellor; effective 1 June 2026). Secure assessment: identity verification and managed settings (observed classroom, invigilated exams, orals, placements). Each programme and specialisation learning outcome must be assured by at least one secure assessment. Fail the sole secure assessment for that outcome and you fail the course.

Staged: those clauses 1 January 2027; fuller programme-level design 1 January 2028. UNSW also publishes a six-category AI-permission menu for convenors.

Source: Assessment and Progression Policy

Australia

University of New England (Australia)

UNE Assessment Architecture, in force for all units from Trimester 1 2026. Lane 1 Assurance Tasks: secure, summative, identity plus conditions. Lane 2 Learning Tasks: open; AI cannot be restricted or prohibited, and they “do not provide any unit-level or course-level assurance of learning.”

Until a course-level model is approved, every unit must have Lane 1 tasks covering all unit learning outcomes as hurdles, and Lane 1 must carry at least half the unit mark. In February 2026 staff were told to strip AI-ban language from Learning Tasks and disable the Turnitin GenAI indicator.

Source: UNE Assessment Architecture

United Kingdom

University of Bath

Replaced ABC traffic lights with two-lane. Closed: generative AI not permitted and the task is designed to prevent use (invigilated practical, written, or oral). Open: generative AI authorised. Type A coursework is reclassified as open — a take-home cannot be a closed “no AI” task. Using generative AI in the open lane is not itself misconduct.

Two-lane approved July 2025; EQSC replaced ABC from 1 September 2026. Origin is credited to Sydney / APRU. No central census of which lane each task is in.

Source: Bath Teaching Hub, two-lane

Australia

University of Technology Sydney

Mosaic: whole-of-course integrity. Course teams place more secure, often real-time or interactive, assessments at milestones to assure course outcomes; other tasks stay open and developmental. Named in UTS’s Compact 2025–26 with the Australian Government.

Not found as a Senate instrument on the scale of Auckland’s Procedures or UNSW’s Policy.

Source: UTS mosaic, March 2026