A comprehensive education reform report that’s supposed to guide Newfoundland and Labrador’s schools for the next decade has landed in hot water after researchers discovered at least 15 fabricated citations, sparking serious questions about whether AI was used to write parts of the document.
The 418-page report, which contains 110 recommendations for improving the province’s public schools and universities, was released on August 28 by Memorial University education professors Anne Burke and Karen Goodnough, working alongside Education Minister Bernard Davis.
What should have been a milestone moment for education reform has instead become an embarrassing controversy about academic integrity.
The problems became apparent when researchers took a closer look at the report’s references. One particularly glaring example cites a 2008 National Film Board movie called “Schoolyard Games,” except that film never existed.
The National Film Board confirmed that no one ever made a movie by that title. Even more telling, the exact same fictional citation appears in a University of Victoria style guide as a sample entry designed to show students how to properly format bibliography entries.
Somehow, this made-up example found its way into the official education report as if it were a real source.
AI-Generated Fabrications Uncovered in Education Policy Report
Aaron Tucker, an assistant professor at Memorial University who studies the history of AI in Canada, spent considerable time trying to track down the sources mentioned in the report. Despite searching through the Memorial University library, various academic databases, and even Google, he came up empty-handed for many citations.
“Whether that’s AI, I don’t know, but fabricating sources is a telltale sign of artificial intelligence,” Tucker told CBC Radio-Canada.
Sarah Martin, a political science professor at Memorial, reached similar conclusions after spending days reviewing the document. She found the pattern of nonexistent references particularly concerning, given the report’s intended purpose.
Credits: Techspot
“Around the references I cannot find, I can’t imagine another explanation,” Martin said, expressing dismay that a document meant to shape education policy would contain such fundamental flaws.
The controversy has broader implications beyond just embarrassment. Josh Lepawsky, a Memorial professor and former president of the university’s faculty association, resigned from the report’s advisory board last January, citing concerns about what he called a “deeply flawed process.”
“Errors happen. Made-up citations are a totally different thing where you essentially demolish the trustworthiness of the material,” Lepawsky explained to CBC.
Generative AI’s Ethical Paradox in Academia and Law
The bogus citation issue is symptomatic of escalating worry about generative AI programs such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude. The software is becoming infamous for generating credible though entirely forged references, a phenomenon that has been troublesome in academia as much as in courts of law.
The AI models construct materials that sound credible and that may contain realistic though entirely inaccurate citations, and such mistakes tend to evade peer-review mechanisms.
What makes this situation particularly awkward is that the report itself recommends that the provincial government ensure educators and students learn foundational AI skills, including ethics, data privacy, and responsible technology use. The irony hasn’t been lost on academics who point out that potential AI misuse in creating the report undermines the very reform process it was meant to guide.
AI, research integrity, and the need for oversight
Since media inquiries regarding references began, the chairs of the report would not comment by granting interviews. CBC was emailed by Karen Goodnough that staff are reviewing references, but did not comment further. Requests by Education Minister Bernard Davis to be interviewed were also denied.
The Department of Education and Early Childhood Development has acknowledged the citation problems in a statement. Spokesperson Lynn Robinson said, “We understand that the issues are under review, and that the online report will be updated in the coming days to correct any errors.”
This case is a stark reminder of what is at stake in terms of institutional performance as institutions seek to manage in this fast-changing world of AI technology. While there is considerable value in such tools, this Newfoundland case illustrates how rapidly events can take a wrong turn in the absence of proper checking and oversight processes.
It also brings significant issues about research norms, proper AI use in research articles, and proper fact-checking protocols in this age of artificial intelligence being capable of authoring possible though completely fabricated works.
