UAE universities could face legal and regulatory action if they deliberately design examinations and assessment methods to make it easier for students to pass. The country’s new higher education violations framework places greater emphasis on academic integrity and the genuine quality of student learning.

Professor Amjad Qandil, director of the UAE Commission for Academic Accreditation, said deliberately designing assessments to ensure students pass is considered a violation under the new regulations, even if such practices were not necessarily treated as offences in the past.

“Deliberately designing assessments in a way that enables students to pass is a very serious violation,” he said during a session on the new Cabinet resolution governing violations and penalties. “Although some may not regard it as an offence, it is considered one under the regulations.”

The remarks were made during a session held by the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research in Abu Dhabi, where officials outlined Cabinet Resolution No. 143 of 2026 concerning violations, penalties and administrative measures involving higher education institutions, technical and vocational training centres, and other educational institutions and centres.

The resolution takes effect on September 12 and establishes a unified framework for addressing violations related to licensing and accreditation, data accuracy, monitoring and evaluation, academic integrity, examination integrity and security, practical training, university advertising and other legal requirements.

Under the framework, penalties will depend on the nature and severity of the violation, as well as whether it is repeated. Fines may reach AED 500,000, while restrictions may also be imposed on an institution’s operations, licences, accreditation and admission of new students, depending on the offence.

In the area of academic integrity, institutions may be found in violation if they fail to establish, properly implement or monitor the policies and systems required to safeguard academic integrity and the credibility of examinations and their results. The regulations also cover breaches of research ethics, misconduct in research and academic publishing, examination cheating, and serious or repeated failures in the supervision and security of in-person and online examinations.

Universities must embrace AI

During the session, Professor Qandil was also asked about the impact of the growing use of artificial intelligence on academic integrity and assessment security.

He stressed that rather than attempting to completely prevent students from using AI, universities should redesign their assessment methods to ensure they can still accurately measure student learning when such tools are widely available.

“The only solution to AI is to embrace it,” Qandil said.

He said universities should move towards assessments that are resilient in the AI era, rather than merely trying to design examinations in which AI is difficult to use. The key issue is no longer simply detecting whether a student has used AI, but ensuring that an assessment genuinely measures what the student has learned.

What could constitute a violation by universities?

Professor Qandil outlined several practices that could be considered violations. These include deliberately designing examinations to make it easier for students to pass, failing to implement appropriate assessment and verification procedures, and making substantial changes to academic programmes approved by the Commission for Academic Accreditation without prior authorisation.

The new regulations also classify as higher education quality violations any changes to an approved programme, qualification or admission standards that negatively affect teaching quality, the credibility of students’ qualifications, equal opportunities or their ability to complete their studies within the specified period.

If substantial changes are made without prior approval from the Ministry of Higher Education, a first violation could result in a warning and the suspension of new admissions to the relevant programme until corrective measures are completed. The institution would also be required to protect the rights of current students and ensure they can continue their studies. Students cannot be charged additional fees for corrective action.

Offering qualifications or academic programmes without the required national accreditation may also constitute a violation. UAE officials stressed that allowing an institution time to rectify its status does not erase the fact that a violation occurred.

Failure to address the cause of a violation, continuing the violation after receiving a warning, or failing to implement prescribed administrative measures and penalties within the specified period may be treated as a repeat offence.

Penalties for repeated violations

Ahmed Al Hammadi, director of the Legal Affairs Department at the UAE Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, said the framework’s primary aim is to prevent violations, encourage institutions to comply with regulations at an early stage and protect students’ rights, rather than merely impose financial penalties.

For academic integrity violations, penalties may become more severe if offences are repeated. Measures may include warnings, suspension of new student admissions until the violation is rectified, rejection of applications to launch new programmes or qualifications, and restrictions on the institution, its owners or those exercising effective control over it.

In the event of a third offence, the ministry may revoke the institution’s licence, institutional accreditation or the accreditation of the relevant academic programme. However, the institution would still be required to protect students and enable them to continue their studies.

Institutions facing serious regulatory action must also safeguard students’ academic records and financial rights and, where required, refund fees collected without legal authorisation.

Institutions may submit a written and substantiated appeal to the ministry within 60 days of being notified of a decision. The ministry then has 60 days to consider the appeal. Filing an appeal does not automatically suspend the decision unless the ministry orders otherwise.

Changing student assessment in the AI era

Abu Dhabi University is among the institutions that have changed their assessment methods in response to the growing use of generative AI.

Hamad Odhabi, Vice Chancellor for Artificial Intelligence at Abu Dhabi University, said the university considered whether it needed a new policy after ChatGPT became widely used in 2022. It ultimately concluded that its existing academic integrity regulations already covered cheating, regardless of whether it involved AI or another method.

The university subsequently developed guidelines for students, faculty and staff and held workshops on the appropriate and inappropriate use of AI, including issues such as plagiarism.

One of the most significant changes has been the redesign of assessments. Instead of traditional assignments in which students independently complete a project and submit only the final product, the university has moved towards staged and interactive assessments.

For example, students may first present their project proposal to an instructor and answer questions, then collect data or build a prototype before presenting their work again at a later stage. University officials said this continuous interaction helps ensure that students are genuinely learning.

Abu Dhabi University has also developed an AI-powered system to review examinations. The system evaluates factors including question quality, the time required to answer them, alignment with course and programme learning objectives, and relevance to labour market needs.

University officials said more than 2,400 examinations have been reviewed through the system since it was launched about a year ago.

The UAE Ministry of Higher Education’s new approach is based on the same principle: universities must be able to demonstrate the genuine quality of what students have learned, rather than merely showing that a predetermined educational process has been followed.