The emergence of ChatGPT, a high-performance artificial intelligence language model developed by OpenAI, has generated both excitement and concern in academia (Li, 2024). Equipped with advanced natural language processing techniques, ChatGPT is able to generate human-like text that provides coherent and contextually relevant responses to a wide range of queries. This unprecedented capability has raised optimism and concern as it could fundamentally change traditional practices in academia, industry and everyday life (Cambra-Fierro et al., 2024).The basic function of "ask me anything" and "I might have a good answer" is no longer just a concern in many fields. The scientific knowledge disseminated in journals is already struggling with the role that such technology will play. Questions arise about whether it will be, and can be, coauthored (Tang, 2024). Professors who create knowledge immediately face the challenge of assessing students in the presence of such technology. These are practical and legitimate questions.While ChatGPT has many benefits in terms of increased student engagement, collaboration and accessibility outcomes, it also has very serious academic integrity implications: at its core is plagiarism. This paper offers comprehensive strategies on how educators can help mitigate these risks by promoting ethical use and fairness within the academic use of AI tools.ChatGPT was truly disruptive, which should have surprised no one. It can be seen that these technologies are being adopted very quickly from university labs; ChatGPT reached one million users in its first five days and now has over 180 million (Duarte, 2024). This kind of rapid adoption demonstrates a remarkable property of generative AI: that it persists with coherent and contextually relevant text.One of the main problems with AI models like ChatGPT is the range of threats they pose, including black box algorithms, including black box algorithms, discrimination, biases, vulgarity, copyright infringement -plagiarism -and many others, such as the generation of fake text content or fake media (Sloan, Powis & Tan, 2024). Therefore, organisations need disciplined risk management approaches to effectively address these threats. Considering the continuous evolution of artificial intelligence algorithms due to the rapidity of data sources, the review of heterogeneity and variability bias in periodic risk assessments should also be weighed against ethical considerations (Schwartz et al., 2022).The experience was that the resulting text lacked an obvious logical structure, contained speculative information, did not elaborate on critical data, and did not provide original contributions (Giuggioli & Pellegrini 2023). Any article on the topic would be conventional, lack logic and facts, and would not be critically engaging. In addition, ChatGPT references are generally incorrect; titles and authors, as well as other publication details, are misstated. Such inaccuracies require careful double-checking, especially in professional contexts such as journalism and software development.Inaccuracy, poor logical flow, factual inaccuracies, lack of critical analysis and lack of originality of AI-generated content can result from the current state of technology (Yang, 2024). This is based on deep learning models that are trained using very extensive datasets of prior information that may be outdated or of low quality. Although improvements in training models and data quality may improve the performance of AIs, it is not clear that improvements based on technical level necessarily lead to significant gains in innovation (Dwivedi et al., 2023).The recent applications of generative AI in text, film and music production all indicate that these platforms will at best be partners in the innovation process, complementing rather than replacing human intelligence. In the case of complex activities requiring creativity and emotional intelligence, a well-formulated request alone is not sufficient for AI to produce markedly different and original outputs. Human oversight and collaboration remain essential (Liu, 2024). Research, practice, and urgent policy decisions in an era of rapidly evolving AI technologies require researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to critically engage with these changes. Building on the strengths of AI, while being aware of its limitations and making serious efforts to improve them, will foster an environment in which generative AI tools such as ChatGPT are used responsibly and effectively.Integrating ChatGPT into the scientific environment is not without its challenges. The primary concern is the possibility of plagiarism. Students may get used to using ChatGPT to create essays and assignments, which they then submit as their own work. This undermines the educational process and devalues academic credentials. Another challenge is the potential for inequality. Students who have access to ChatGPT can complete assignments in much less time and possibly better, giving them an unfair advantage over students who do not have ChatGPT. This may further increase existing inequalities in educational outcomes. On the other hand, it is difficult to distinguish content created by students from content created by AI. Because ChatGPT generates human-like, coherent text, the difficulty of distinguishing it from the "original" student content makes it difficult for educators to detect AI-assisted plagiarism.While this work focuses on addressing the risks of plagiarism, ChatGPT and other AI tools hold great promise for improving learning outcomes and stimulating creativity. Through adaptive tutoring systems, these tools can improve personalized learning, provide immediate feedback and facilitate deeper interaction with course material. Furthermore, AI-driven creative applications allow students to experiment with problem-solving and critical thinking in new ways, ultimately resulting in a more dynamic and engaging learning...