Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) challenges the relationship between assessed student work and the capabilities that universities claim to certify. This conceptual paper examines assessment validity as a shared governance problem, rather than primarily a matter of misconduct detection or technology procurement. It synthesises recent evidence from the UK Quality Assurance Agency, research on automated essay marking, and scholarship on validity-centred and process-informed assessment. The paper proposes a Cross-Institutional AI Assessment Compact comprising co-designed validity indicators, reciprocal audit mechanisms and student-centred accountability. It argues that institutional partnerships can provide a practical setting in which to test assessment redesign, align expectations and protect disciplinary autonomy while developing comparable standards of assurance. The proposed compact remains a framework for pilot evaluation, not an empirically validated intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nasreen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: