Latimer Tuition

Navigation

Latimer Tuition

Tutor news

AI coursework rules for tutors: where support becomes malpractice

Ofqual and JCQ have sharpened the message on AI-generated coursework. Private tutors need clear boundaries around coursework, NEA, EPQ-style work and admissions writing.

See the tutor boundary tableCheck AI acknowledgement steps

Editorial

  • Portrait of Robin GibbonsLead authorFounder & CEO·Latimer Tuition
  • Reviewed byHeather LatimerTutor Matching & Customer Service·Latimer Tuition
  • Published
  • Last reviewed

Current answer

The bottom line for tutors

Private tutors can teach the knowledge and skills behind assessed work. They can explain concepts, model research habits, discuss referencing and help a student plan their time. They should not generate, draft, ghostwrite, rewrite, over-edit or hide assessed content so that the final submission no longer represents the student’s own independent work.

“Using AI to generate work you submit as your own is cheating.” — GOV.UK / Ofqual

JCQ’s core rule is the same authenticity principle in assessment language: students must submit work that is their own. JCQ adds that this applies to internal and private candidates within its qualification scope, and that students must be able to show their own knowledge, skills and understanding. The practical test for a tutor is simple: could the student explain how the work was produced, show their own thinking, and sign the authentication declaration truthfully? If not, the support has crossed a line.

This does not mean every possible use of AI is automatically banned in every setting. JCQ says properly referenced AI use may be acceptable in some contexts, but students cannot be credited for work that is not their own. Acknowledgement is a transparency step, not a way to turn AI-written material into the student’s markable work.

Six principles private tutors should keep in mind

These principles turn the official guidance into practical tutoring boundaries without pretending there is a separate JCQ rulebook just for private tutors.

The work must be the student’s own

JCQ says that “students must submit work for assessments which is their own”. Tutors should support the learning, not become the author of the assessed response. Source: JCQ.

AI acknowledgement is not a shortcut to marks

A student may need to acknowledge AI use where it is permitted, but JCQ says students cannot be credited for work that is not their own. The student still has to demonstrate the required knowledge, skills and understanding. Source: JCQ.

AI misuse can be malpractice

JCQ gives examples including copying or paraphrasing AI-generated content, using AI to complete parts of an assessment, failing to acknowledge AI use, poor acknowledgement, and misleading references or bibliographies. Source: JCQ.

Outside help may need to be recorded

JCQ candidate guidance for non-examination assessments says students who receive help or guidance from someone other than their teacher must tell their teacher so the assistance can be recorded. Source: JCQ candidate information for NEA.

AI checks are not a single guaranteed test

JCQ says AI detection tools vary in accuracy and, where used, should form part of a holistic judgement using all available information. Tutors should not promise a student that AI content will or will not be detected. Source: JCQ.

Centres authenticate; tutors do not

Teachers and centres are responsible for authentication under the relevant rules. A tutor can help the student avoid risk, but cannot make a centre accept work as authentic.

Green, amber, red: where tutoring crosses the line

JCQ coursework instructions say parents and carers may provide access to resources and discuss coursework, but they “must not give direct advice on what should or should not be included”. That wording is not a tutor-specific regulation, and the coursework instructions have their own qualification scope, but it is a useful practical boundary for private tuition: support the process and skills, not the assessed content. Source: JCQ coursework instructions.

A practical boundary table for private tutors supporting coursework, NEA, Project work or similar assessed writing.

LevelTutor examplesWhy it mattersSafer move

Safe support

Teach subject knowledge; explain research methods; practise referencing; work through similar but non-assessed examples; help the student plan time; ask broad questions about their argument.

The student still makes the decisions and produces the assessed work.

Keep practice tasks separate from the assessed file and encourage the student to keep notes showing their own development.

Needs care

Read a draft and identify broad issues; discuss possible research areas; use AI as a teaching example; suggest that a student checks whether evidence is missing.

This can become additional assistance if the tutor supplies content, wording, argument structure or source choices that become part of the submission.

Use questions rather than replacement wording. Ask the student to revise independently, and make sure substantial outside help is disclosed to the teacher or centre.

High malpractice risk

Write paragraphs or a first draft; rewrite sentence by sentence; tell the student exactly what to include; generate submission-ready AI text; polish AI-generated material; type or word-process assessed work without acknowledgement.

The final submission may no longer be the student’s own work. JCQ coursework rules also warn against unacknowledged AI use and work word-processed by a third person without acknowledgement.

Stop before submission. Explain the risk, preserve the student’s own draft trail if available, and encourage the student to speak to the teacher or centre before signing anything.

If AI has been used: the acknowledgement checklist

Where AI use is permitted, JCQ says acknowledgement should show the AI source used and the date the content was generated. The student must also keep a copy of the question or instruction entered and the computer-generated content in a non-editable format, and explain briefly how it was used. Source: JCQ AI use in assessments.

This checklist is for disclosure and authenticity. It is not permission to submit AI-written work as the student’s own.

  • Check whether AI use is allowed for this task

    Some assessment contexts may permit limited AI use; others may not. Start with the centre instructions and the relevant qualification rules.

  • Record the AI source and date

    The acknowledgement should name the AI tool or source and show when the content was generated.

  • Keep the input and output evidence

    The student should retain the question or instruction entered into the AI tool and the generated content in a non-editable format, such as a screenshot.

  • Explain how the AI material was used

    The student should briefly explain whether the tool was used for ideas, source discovery, drafting, checking or another purpose.

  • Mark what is not the student’s own work

    If any phrase, part or element came from AI or another source, the student should state where it came from and give detailed references, even when paraphrasing.

  • Verify any source claims

    JCQ warns that AI tools can produce convincing but incorrect information and fake references. A student should not cite an AI-generated source claim without checking it.

  • Tell the teacher about outside help

    For NEA, JCQ candidate guidance says help from someone other than the teacher must be reported to the teacher so it can be recorded.

  • Do not assume acknowledgement protects marks

    Acknowledgement helps transparency, but AI-produced work still cannot be credited as if it were the student’s own independent work.

Before and after authentication: why timing matters

Tutors should treat the authentication declaration as a serious boundary. The earlier a concern is raised, the more room the centre has to handle it before the work is submitted for final assessment.

What tutors should prioritise at each stage of coursework or NEA support.

StageTutor priorityRisk to avoid

Before the assessed task begins

Agree boundaries: you can teach skills, discuss planning and practise on separate examples, but you will not write or rewrite the submission.

Starting with unclear expectations makes it easier for parents or students to ask for help that later becomes unauthorised assistance.

While the student is working

Keep feedback broad and ask the student to make changes themselves. If AI or outside help has already shaped the work, tell the student to raise it with the teacher before final submission.

The tutor’s comments can become the substance of the answer if they supply exact wording, structure or content choices.

Before the student signs the authentication declaration

Ask whether the student can honestly confirm the work is their own and that help or sources have been acknowledged.

If the centre cannot confirm authenticity, JCQ coursework rules say the work should not be accepted for assessment and a mark of zero may be recorded.

After the declaration has been signed

Do not try to quietly repair or conceal the problem. The student needs to follow the centre’s procedure.

JCQ AI guidance says suspected AI misuse after authentication must be reported to the relevant awarding organisation.

What to do in common tutoring scenarios

These examples are written for private tutors. They keep the focus on helping learning without taking ownership of the assessed work.

Recommendation

A student brings AI-written text

Do not polish it into a submission. JCQ’s candidate-facing NEA guidance says, “you cannot copy it and claim it as your own work”. Source: JCQ NEA candidate information. Help the student identify what they understood, what needs checking, and what they should discuss with their teacher before submission.

Recommendation

A parent asks you to ‘just improve the coursework’

Set the boundary immediately. You can explain the mark scheme in general terms, discuss study habits and ask questions, but you should not rewrite the draft or supply the argument for the student.

Recommendation

A student asks for a model paragraph

Use a separate practice topic if a model is genuinely useful. Do not create wording that could be inserted into the assessed piece.

Recommendation

A student wants help with an EPQ or Project qualification

Support project management, research habits and referencing. Avoid choosing the student’s line of argument, writing the report, editing the final product or producing evidence on their behalf.

Recommendation

A private candidate is completing coursework or NEA

Be especially cautious. JCQ notes that authenticity can be harder for private candidates, and centres may need supervised work, portfolios or discussions before accepting assessed work.

Recommendation

A student wants help with a UCAS personal statement

Coach reflection, structure and evidence selection. Do not ghostwrite. UCAS treats large-scale copying from AI as a serious application risk, and applicants declare that the statement has not been copied or provided from another source, including AI software.

A boundary message you can adapt

Suggested wording: setting the boundary before coursework support

When this applies

A parent or student has asked for support with assessed writing, and you need to make clear what help you can and cannot give.

Suggested wording

Thanks for explaining what you need. I can help by teaching the subject knowledge and skills behind the task, discussing planning and research habits, and asking questions that help the student improve their own work. I cannot write, rewrite, generate AI text for, or polish assessed work so that it no longer reflects the student’s own thinking and wording. If AI or outside help has already affected the work, the student should speak to their teacher or centre before submitting it, so any declaration they sign is accurate.

Why this helps

It keeps the relationship supportive while making the assessment boundary clear before the tutor sees a draft.

Key terms tutors should use accurately

Using the right terms helps tutors explain the issue without overstating the rules.

AI use in assessments

Using an AI tool to obtain information, ideas or content that might be used in work produced for a qualification assessment.

AI misuse

Using AI without appropriate acknowledgement, or using AI so the assessment no longer reflects the student’s own independent work.

Coursework

A general term used in JCQ instructions for work required in Project qualifications and internally assessed work in the qualifications covered by those instructions.

Non-examination assessment

Assessed work completed outside a written examination, often with subject-specific controls around supervision, resources and authentication.

Authentication

The process by which the student and centre confirm that the submitted work is the student’s own and has been completed under the required conditions.

Additional assistance

Help beyond general teaching or review. Detailed advice, specific improvements, task-specific writing frames or personal intervention may need to be recorded and reflected in marking.

Malpractice

A failure to follow assessment rules in a way that can compromise assessment integrity, public confidence or a qualification, result or certificate.

Plagiarism

Presenting material from another source, including AI-produced material, as though it were the student’s own.

Private candidate

A candidate entered through a centre without being taught in the same way as the centre’s internal students. JCQ AI guidance says its own-work requirement applies to internal and private candidates.

Personal statement AI use

Using AI for ideas, structure or readability in admissions writing is a separate issue from coursework. The student’s submitted statement must still reflect their own words, experiences and choices.

Official sources used

These are the main sources behind the guidance in this article.

  • GOV.UK / Ofqual: AI and coursework integrity briefing

    Applies to England. Published 9 March 2026.

    Open source

  • JCQ: AI Use in Assessments

    Core guidance on AI misuse, acknowledgement, private candidates and detection tools. Published 30 April 2025.

    Open source

  • JCQ: Instructions for conducting coursework 2025–26

    Stated scope: CCEA GCE unitised AS and A-level qualifications, ELC and Project qualifications. Applicable from 1 September 2025.

    Open source

  • JCQ: Information for candidates — non-examination assessments

    Candidate-facing NEA guidance, including help from others and plagiarism. Effective from 1 September 2025.

    Open source

  • JCQ: Plagiarism in assessments

    Guidance for teachers and assessors on plagiarism and authenticity.

    Open source

  • JCQ: Suspected Malpractice policies and procedures

    Malpractice definitions and procedural context for the current academic year.

    Open source

  • UCAS: AI and ChatGPT with your personal statement

    Admissions-writing guidance for personal statements.

    Open source

Related links

Keep going with closely related guidance from Latimer Tuition.

More tutor news

Related guidance

More guidance from this section

More guidance from this part of the Ed Centre that may help with the same decision, stage or next step.

Related guidance

Exam access arrangements are now a bigger tutoring issue

Ofqual’s 2024–25 England figures show high and rising approvals, especially 25% extra time. Tutors need to explain evidence, normal way of working and private-candidate centre rules without promising an outcome.

Support and clarity

Frequently asked questions

Straight answers to the questions people ask most often.

Is AI-generated coursework cheating?

Yes, when AI-generated work is submitted as the student’s own, or AI use is not properly acknowledged, official guidance treats this as cheating or malpractice. Do not turn that into a blanket statement that all AI use is banned: the assessment context matters, and AI-produced work still cannot be credited as the student’s own independent work.

Can a tutor help with GCSE or A level coursework?

A tutor can teach the underlying knowledge, research habits, referencing, planning and general study skills. A tutor should not write, rewrite, supply task-specific content, tell the student exactly what to include, or make changes that become the student’s assessed work. For subject-specific rules, use the centre instructions and the relevant awarding organisation’s specification.

Can a tutor edit or proofread coursework?

General feedback may be acceptable in some contexts, but heavy editing, detailed corrections, specific improvements or sentence-by-sentence rewriting can become additional assistance. A safer approach is to identify broad issues, ask questions, and let the student make the changes themselves. Where a subject specification or centre instruction is stricter, follow that stricter rule.

How should AI be acknowledged in coursework?

Where AI use is permitted, JCQ says the acknowledgement should identify the AI source and the date content was generated. The student should also keep the question or instruction entered, the generated content in a non-editable format, and a brief explanation of how it was used. This does not mean AI-written content will earn marks.

Does GCSE or A level coursework get checked for AI?

There is not one single guaranteed test in JCQ guidance. Centres and awarding organisations may consider several kinds of evidence, including detection tools, but JCQ says such tools vary in accuracy and should form part of a holistic judgement using all available information.

What should a tutor do if a student brings AI-written text?

Do not polish it into a submission. Explain that the student cannot copy AI text and claim it as their own work. Help them understand the risk, check what they genuinely understand, and encourage them to speak to their teacher or centre before submitting assessed work.

Can a tutor help with an EPQ or Project qualification?

Yes, but the same authenticity principle applies. Tutors can support project management, research methods, referencing and reflection. They should not choose the student’s argument, write the report, produce evidence, or edit the final work so heavily that it no longer reflects the student’s own work.

Can AI be used for a UCAS personal statement?

UCAS says AI may be useful for ideas, structure or readability when used correctly, but generating, copying and submitting all or a large part of a statement from AI as the applicant’s own words could be considered cheating by universities and colleges. Tutors should coach reflection and structure, not ghostwrite.

Sources and references

Sources and references