Semester : July 2025
Tutorial 1 - Ethical Dilemma in Institutional Information
Assessment :
Management
Learning Outcomes CLO3 - Propose solutions to ethical issues related to
: professionalism in managing information within an
institution.
Program Learning Outcome : PLO11 (Ethics and professionalism)
Level of Competency : A5 (Characterizing)
Objective 1. To assess students’ ability to characterize ethical and
professional behavior in handling information-related
: dilemmas.
2. To encourage ethical decision-making supported by
academic references and institutional policies.
Marks : 30 marks
Case Study: Malaysian Universities Combat AI-Assisted Plagiarism
Background
In response to the growing use of AI tools like ChatGPT in academic work, Malaysian
universities have intensified efforts to detect and prevent AI-generated plagiarism. A June 2023
report by The Star highlights how institutions are adopting advanced plagiarism detection
software, including Turnitin’s AI-writing identification features, to maintain academic integrity
(The Star, 2023). However, challenges remain as educators grapple with distinguishing between
original and machine-generated content.
Key Issues
1. Rise of AI Plagiarism – Students are increasingly submitting assignments written by AI
without proper attribution, raising concerns about the erosion of authentic learning.
2. Detection Challenges – Lecturers report difficulties in identifying AI-generated text,
particularly when students modify outputs to evade detection.
3. Institutional Responses – Universities are implementing AI-detection tools and revising
academic policies, but uneven enforcement and workload pressures hinder consistent
compliance.
Ethical and Practical Implications
The case underscores the tension between technological advancements and academic ethics.
While AI offers educational benefits, its misuse threatens fairness in assessment. Malaysian
institutions must balance stricter oversight with faculty training and policy updates to address
this evolving challenge.
Source:
The Star. (2023, June 12). Local universities step up efforts to curb AI plagiarism.
[Link]
curb-ai-plagiarism
Instructions:
1. Based on a case above, write a structured 1,500–2,000-word essay analyzing a real-world
ethical dilemma in information management. Apply ethical frameworks and propose
solutions grounded in professional codes and academic literature.
2. Report Structure & Instructions
A. Introduction (200–300 words)
Case Selection: Briefly describe the case (e.g., The Star’s 2023 report on Malaysian
universities combating AI plagiarism).
Relevance: Explain its significance to professionalism in information management,
emphasizing:
◦ Academic integrity as a core professional value.
◦ The role of educators/managers in upholding ethical standards.
B. Ethical Issues & Stakeholders (300–400 words)
Ethical Issues: Identify key problems (e.g., student misconduct, lecturer negligence,
institutional accountability).
Stakeholders: Analyze affected parties:
◦ Students (rights vs. responsibilities),
◦ Lecturers (bias/workload pressures),
◦ Universities (reputation, policy enforcement).
C. Ethical Analysis (400–500 words)
Apply two ethical frameworks and professional codes:
Utilitarianism: Does AI use maximize learning benefits or harm academic fairness?
Deontology: Is submitting AI work inherently wrong, regardless of outcomes?
Professional Codes: Reference codes like ACM’s Code of Ethics (honesty) or
Turnitin’s Academic Integrity Guidelines.
D. Support each principle with 1–2 academic sources (e.g., Lancaster, 2023 on AI
plagiarism).
E. Proposed Solutions (400–500 words)
Suggest two actionable solutions:
◦ Mandatory AI-Disclosure Policies:
Require students to declare AI use in submissions.
Justification: Aligns with transparency (ACM Ethics) and reduces ambiguity.
◦ Faculty Training & AI-Detection Tools:
Train lecturers to use tools like Turnitin AI-detection and address bias.
Justification: Balances accountability (AAUP Guidelines) with workload
realities.
Support solutions with evidence (e.g., The Star’s report on detection tools;
studies on policy effectiveness).
F. Conclusion (200–300 words)
Summarize key ethical conflicts and stakeholder impacts.
Reinforce how solutions uphold professionalism.
End with a call to action (e.g., “Universities must adapt policies to AI’s evolving role”).
Report Submission Guidelines:
All student must adhere to the following guidelines when preparing and submitting their reports:
1. Report Length
The report should be approximately 10 pages in length.
2. Content Coverage
The report must comprehensively address all required areas as outlined in the
assignment questions and rubric.
Each section should be structured clearly, providing well-supported arguments,
analysis, and insights.
Ensure that content is relevant, well-researched, and aligned with the assessment
criteria to meet the required competency level.
3. Cover Page
The cover page must include:
a) Assignment Title
b) Course Name & Course Code
c) Lecturer’s Name
d) Full Names & Student IDs
4. Formatting Requirements
Font Style: Times New Roman
Font Size: 12
Line Spacing: 1.5
Paragraph Alignment: Justified
5. Citation & Referencing
APA format for in-text citations and the reference list.
6. Submission Details
Deadline: Week 5 – Sunday, August 16, 2025, before 11:59 PM
Submission Format: Soft copy submission via UROX.
7. Plagiarism Policy
All reports will be checked using Turnitin (plagiarism and AI detection).
You can submit it here: libref@[Link] or kmc@[Link]
Plagiarism must be below 30%, including similarities with journals, websites,
newspapers, magazines, and other students’ work.
AI-generated content detection must be below 40% to ensure originality.
Students must summarize key points or paraphrase while ensuring proper citation of
sources.
Marks will be deducted for exceeding plagiarism or AI detection limits.
8. Language & Presentation
Ensure the report is free of spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors before
submission.
Maintain a professional writing style with clear and logical organization of ideas.
Rubric for Individual Tutorial 1
Total Marks: 30
Assessment Criteria: The assignments will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
Good (Partial
Criteria Excellent (Full Marks) Weak / Not Met Marks
Marks)
Clear, relevant, and engaging Adequate Unclear or
introduction to the case with introduction with missing
Introduction /3
strong connection to some relevance to introduction.
professionalism. the topic.
Identification of Clearly identifies and explains Identifies issue and Issue is vague or
Ethical Issue the dilemma and stakeholders but stakeholders not
/5
stakeholders. lacks clarity or identified.
depth.
Ethical Analysis Excellent application of Some application of Weak or no
ethical principles (e.g., ethical principles, ethical analysis. /5
confidentiality, accountability). but limited in depth.
Proposed Two or more well-developed, One or two Inadequate or no
Solutions realistic, and ethical solutions. solutions proposed solutions
/5
with partial proposed.
justification.
Justification with Strong justification with 2 or Some justification No justification or
Academic more academic sources with 1 academic no academic
/5
Support correctly cited (APA). source or weak support.
citation.
Conclusion Strong summary with Basic summary of No conclusion or
reflection on key lessons the discussion. irrelevant /2
learned. summary.
APA Citations & APA 7th used accurately in- Minor errors in APA No citation or
Referencing text and in reference list. format. incorrect /2
referencing.
Formatting, Well-structured, professional Generally clear, few Disorganized or
Language & tone, free of grammar/spelling language or difficult to read /2
Organization errors. grammar issues. due to errors.
Late submission
Submission Submitted on or before
- without valid /1
Deadline deadline.
reason.
Total Marks: /20