UAE universities and higher education institutions are set to face tighter regulatory scrutiny over academic standards, assessment practices and the use of artificial intelligence as a new national violations framework comes into force.
Under the new rules, institutions could face regulatory action if they deliberately structure assessments in a way that makes it easier for students to pass, officials have said. The framework places a stronger emphasis on whether universities are genuinely delivering quality learning outcomes rather than simply meeting administrative requirements.
The changes come as universities across the UAE are also rethinking how students should be assessed in an era when generative artificial intelligence tools are increasingly accessible.
Prof Amjad Qandil, Director of the Commission of Academic Accreditation for Higher Education, said deliberately creating assessments designed to ensure students pass would constitute a violation under the new regulatory framework.
His comments were made during a Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research forum in Abu Dhabi, where officials outlined the implications of Cabinet Resolution No. 143 of 2026.
New UAE higher education violations framework
The resolution takes effect on September 12, 2026, establishing a unified system for dealing with violations involving higher education institutions, technical and vocational education and training institutions, and training centres and institutes.
The framework covers several areas, including:
- Institutional and programme licensing
- Academic accreditation
- Accuracy of institutional data and documents
- Academic integrity
- Examination security
- Research ethics
- Practical training
- Advertising and promotional material
- Monitoring and evaluation
- Student protection and regulatory compliance
Rather than applying the same punishment to every institution, the framework adopts a graduated approach. The response can depend on the seriousness of the breach, the circumstances surrounding it and whether the institution has previously committed the same violation.
Penalties and administrative measures can include warnings, restrictions on admissions, changes affecting programmes or accreditation and fines of up to Dh500,000 in applicable cases.
Universities cannot lower assessment standards simply to improve pass rates
One of the most notable aspects of the new rules is the focus on assessment quality.
Officials have made clear that universities cannot intentionally design examinations or other forms of assessment simply to produce higher pass rates if doing so undermines the purpose of evaluating student learning.
The issue is significant because pass rates alone do not demonstrate whether students have acquired the knowledge and skills expected from a qualification.
The new framework therefore places institutional responsibility on universities to establish and monitor systems that protect academic integrity and ensure examination results accurately reflect student performance.
Serious or repeated failures in supervision, examination security, electronic examination systems or the handling of academic misconduct can also trigger regulatory action.
AI is changing how universities assess students
Artificial intelligence emerged as another major issue during the Abu Dhabi forum.
Rather than attempting to eliminate AI from education, Prof Qandil argued that universities need to adapt to its widespread availability.
The challenge, he suggested, is no longer simply determining whether a student has used an AI tool. Universities increasingly need to design assessments that demonstrate whether the student understands the work and can explain how it was produced.
This means moving towards what officials describe as AI-resilient assessment.
The distinction is important. An assessment designed to be “AI-resistant” attempts to prevent students from using artificial intelligence. An AI-resilient assessment, by contrast, is structured so that meaningful evidence of learning remains available even when students have access to AI tools.
That could mean greater use of presentations, discussions, practical assignments, project stages and direct interaction between students and faculty members.
Abu Dhabi University is already changing assessment methods
Abu Dhabi University has been experimenting with new approaches as generative AI becomes more common among students.
Hamad Odhabi, the university’s Vice Chancellor of AI, said the institution initially considered whether it needed to create a separate policy following the rapid rise of ChatGPT.
The university ultimately determined that its existing academic integrity rules already applied to cheating regardless of the technology involved.
The emphasis subsequently shifted towards awareness and responsible use.
The university developed guidance for students, faculty and staff and introduced workshops explaining acceptable and unacceptable applications of AI, including issues surrounding plagiarism.
Faculty members have also received training on using AI in teaching, course design, personalised learning, student engagement and assessment.
More interactive assessments could become the norm
One of the biggest changes is the move away from assignments that can be completed entirely outside the classroom with little direct interaction between students and instructors.
Under a more interactive model, a student might first present a project proposal to a faculty member. They could then be required to explain their approach, collect evidence, develop a prototype or complete another stage of the work before presenting the final outcome.
Such stages provide instructors with more opportunities to establish whether students understand their own work.
They also make it more difficult for a student to simply submit an AI-generated final product without demonstrating knowledge of the subject.
For universities, the approach could represent a broader shift in how academic performance is measured.
AI detection alone is not enough
The growing use of artificial intelligence has also exposed limitations in relying solely on AI detection software.
Universities can use technology to identify potentially problematic submissions, but detection systems are not considered infallible.
That makes the design of assessments increasingly important.
If an examination or assignment directly measures reasoning, application, communication and subject knowledge, institutions have more evidence to determine whether genuine learning has taken place.
Abu Dhabi University has also developed an AI-supported examination moderation system. The platform reviews assessments against factors such as quality, expected completion time, alignment with learning outcomes and relevance to industry.
According to the university, more than 2,400 examinations had passed through the system since its launch roughly a year earlier.
Programme changes could also lead to penalties
The new regulatory framework goes beyond examinations.
Universities could also face action if they substantially change an approved programme without securing the necessary approval.
A significant departure from an accredited qualification or programme plan can become a regulatory concern when it affects teaching quality, student rights, recognition of qualifications, equal opportunities or students’ ability to complete their studies within the expected period.
For a first violation involving material unauthorised changes, measures can include a warning and suspension of new admissions to the affected programme until corrective action is completed.
Institutions may also be required to protect students already enrolled and ensure their academic progression continues.
Students should not be charged additional fees for corrective measures resulting from such institutional violations.
Unaccredited programmes remain a serious concern
The framework also addresses institutions that offer qualifications or programmes without the required national accreditation.
Officials stressed that an institution cannot assume a breach disappears simply because it is later given an opportunity to correct its status.
The regulatory system is designed to encourage early compliance while ensuring that institutions remain accountable for breaches that have already occurred.
Failure to correct a violation after receiving a warning can itself have consequences. Continuing a violation or failing to implement an administrative measure within the required timeframe may also be treated as a repeated breach.
A previous penalty generally will not count towards repetition if a full year has passed without the same violation being committed.
Repeated violations could threaten accreditation
The consequences become more serious when breaches are repeated.
Depending on the nature of the violation, authorities can move from warnings to measures such as suspending new admissions, rejecting applications for new programmes or qualifications and imposing restrictions on institutions or individuals exercising effective control.
For a third repetition, the framework allows for potentially severe action, including revocation of institutional or programme accreditation in applicable circumstances.
At the same time, authorities are required to consider students who could be affected by regulatory action.
Institutions facing serious measures must take steps to protect academic records, educational continuity and financial rights. Where applicable, this can include refunding fees collected without legal entitlement.
Universities have a right to challenge decisions
The framework also provides institutions with a mechanism to challenge regulatory decisions.
An affected institution can submit a written and reasoned grievance to the Ministry within 60 days of becoming aware of the decision.
The Ministry has up to 60 days to consider the grievance.
However, filing a grievance does not automatically suspend the implementation of the original decision unless the Ministry determines otherwise.
Protecting students is at the centre of the new framework
Ahmed Al Hammadi, Director of the Legal Affairs Department at the Ministry, said the purpose of the system is not simply to impose financial penalties.
Instead, the framework is intended to encourage early correction, improve compliance and protect students’ rights.
For higher education institutions, this means greater accountability across licensing, accreditation, advertising, academic integrity, data accuracy and practical training.
Training centres and technical and vocational institutions will also come under the framework, with requirements covering licensing, training activities, trainers, advertising, integrity and safety.
What the new rules mean for UAE students
For students, the changes could have an impact well beyond examination halls.
The emphasis on approved programmes and learning outcomes is designed to ensure that students receive the education promised when they enrol.
That is particularly important when institutional changes, accreditation problems or regulatory action could otherwise disrupt a student’s qualification.
The new approach also signals that universities will increasingly be expected to demonstrate what students actually learn rather than relying solely on formal procedures or examination results.
Artificial intelligence is accelerating that shift.
As tools capable of producing essays, coding assignments, research summaries and other academic material become more sophisticated, universities will need assessment methods that test understanding, reasoning and practical ability.
The future of AI in UAE higher education
The UAE’s emerging approach suggests that universities are unlikely to treat artificial intelligence solely as a threat to academic integrity.
Instead, AI is increasingly being viewed as a technology that institutions must understand, regulate and incorporate responsibly.
That could mean students are taught how to use AI ethically while being held accountable for the accuracy and originality of their work.
For educators, it could mean redesigning courses and examinations around skills that cannot easily be demonstrated through a generated answer alone.
And for regulators, the priority will remain ensuring that qualifications awarded by UAE institutions represent genuine academic achievement.
As the new violations framework takes effect, universities will therefore face a dual challenge: maintaining rigorous academic standards while adapting to a rapidly changing technological environment.
The message from regulators is clear. Improving student outcomes cannot mean lowering the bar, and tackling AI cannot simply mean banning it. The emphasis is increasingly on making assessment meaningful, transparent and capable of proving that learning has actually taken place.
