I think this is a question of culture and context. In my organisation we’ve been going through something of a transformation with regards to AI. We’re a non-profit working in healthcare, with never enough time or money, and a clear social mission that often results in a by-any-means-neccesary approach to what we do in all sorts of ways.
Firstly, we established ground rules among my org that
a) what matters is the quality of the material, rather than how it was produced
b) that people will say when something is made with an AI if/when asked
c) people are responsible for what they produce, whether it was by an AI or not. If it’s not good enough, it’s on the staff member.
d) no-one will ever send out a piece of work produced by an AI without human review first. Guided creation is the preferred approach.
These are formal policy.
We have an AI transparency statement on our website, which we link in our business proposals and tenders, that explains in broad terms how we use AI at my org, and when we don’t.
In my organisation, people passing something off as their own work doesn’t really happen, because it’s assumed that people are using AI much of the time. Again, what matters is the output rather than the process, that’s what we judge each other on. When someone comes up with some cool new approach to an AI tool that produces an even higher quality product than before, we share and celebrate it.
The concern about laziness is also culturally driven. The use of AI in our work has resulted in a huge uplift in quality of the written work all across the business. People here aren’t producing the same quality and quantity for less effort. They’re producing higher quantity and quality with the usual effort. It’s been noticeable that all our policies, documents, web posts, leaflets, social media posts, fundraising proposals and so on are all much better than before.
I’m not in higher ed so I don’t know any of the details from within and I do recognise the challenge that AI would represent there. When a student analyses a topic and reflects on it in writing, what matters is the process, not the document. However as a leader within the organisation, writing reports and such, you have different goals to your students. You’re primary aim is the document, not the process. So I personally wouldn’t stop on that account.