Though AI detection tools will not detect whether a student has used generative AI with 100% confidence, they can still be used to detect lower-quality AI generated content and as a first step in flagging potential cases of misuse. Use of generated AI in violation of written course policy is subject to the provisions relating to Academic Dishonesty within USD's Honor Code.
AI detectors are only a single tool in the litany of ways that instructors can discern academic misconduct. There is no substitute for knowing a student, understanding their writing style and background.
AI detection rates vary widely by tool. Although USD faculty only have access to Turnitin’s AI checker, it’s prudent to run the sample through other tools to check their outputs.
It is tempting to rush ahead when you suspect the use of generative AI but all academic misconduct issues (plagiarism, ghostwriting, cheating) must be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the USD Law Honor Code and USD Student Code of Conduct.
In May 2023, a Texas A&M instructor falsely accused an entire class of using ChatGPT to write their essays, putting them at risk of failing. While ultimately no students flunked or were prevented from graduating, the fallout and subsequent scrutiny was irreversible and certainly quite avoidable.
Use one of the tools listed in section II of this guide or view the comprehensive lists offered by Texas Tech and the University of Arizona.
Compare the final paper with the student’s previous work. Consider requiring first drafts if you don’t already require them in your class syllabus. Encourage students to maintain evidence of their notes and outlines. Consider having a folder on Canvas to submit their research documentation.
Since students don’t see the score from an AI detector feel free to share that information with them. Even though the score itself is not an indictment, talk through areas that the detector has flagged. If the writing is formulaic and word choice is repetitive (often a hallmark of AI generated text), make sure that the student understands why this alone detracts from the strength of their argument. For example, “from my experience this feels like AI, and overall it’s making your paper weaker, so whatever it is you’re doing stop doing it.” If the work is substantially different from the student’s previous work, point out the key differences.
Given the fluctuation in AI detector accuracy and lack of guidance about this emerging technology, instructors should consider giving students a chance to redo the work. Under the USD Law Honor Code, an instructor may assign additional work or require that all or part of the course or exercise be redone. If it is absolutely clear the student submitted AI generated text in violation of course policies, that use is subject to the same penalties as other instances of academic honesty at USD including reductions in grade or withdrawal from the course.
Prepare a written record of the investigation and determination and submit it to the Assistant Dean for Law Student Affairs