AI and academic integrity: fix the task, not the student

A student hands in an essay that is far better than anything they have written this term. You suspect a chatbot. You have no proof, and you are not sure what you are allowed to do. This happens in most schools now, and the answer is not a better detector. It is a better task, a clear rule and a calmer first conversation.

Detectors guess

AI-detection tools give a score, not evidence. They can flag honest work, particularly writing by students who are still learning English or who write in a very formal style, and they can miss work that has been lightly edited. A score is a reason to look more closely. It is not something to put in front of a student or a parent as proof, and it is not a basis for a mark. If your school uses a detector, treat the result as a nudge to start a conversation.

Test your own assignment first

Before you set a take-home task, run it through a chatbot yourself. Act like a student with twenty minutes and a free account. If the result would earn a decent mark, you have learned something about the task, not about your students.

Tasks that survive this check tend to share a few features:

• Part of the work happens in class, so you see the thinking as it forms.
• Students explain their work aloud for two or three minutes.
• The task draws on something specific: a class discussion, a local example, a source from your own pack.
• Drafts and notes are handed in, not just the final copy.

None of these is free. Each one costs marking time, and some are harder on multilingual learners, students with accommodations and students who freeze when they speak. Choose the one that fits your class, and offer a fair alternative to students who cannot do it. The prompt Test an assignment against AI, then redesign it walks through this and asks for the extra marking time and the equity concerns for each idea.

Say what is allowed, in plain words

Many students are not sure where the line is. One teacher says AI is banned, the next says to use it for brainstorming. A one-page guide per course removes the guessing. A simple version has three tiers: not allowed, allowed if you say so, and encouraged. Give an example of each, and a sentence students can paste into their work to say how they used a tool.

The consequences are the part you should not invent. They come from your school's academic integrity policy, so point to it rather than writing a new rule. If you are not sure it covers AI, ask your vice-principal before term starts, not after the first case. The prompt A one-page AI-use guide for students drafts the guide and leaves the consequences for you to fill in.

Start with questions, not an accusation

If you still have a doubt about a piece of work, ask the student to talk you through it. How did you start? Which sources did you use? Can you explain this paragraph in your own words? Ask what tools they used, including translation and grammar tools, because those can explain a big jump in quality. A student who did the work can usually explain it. A student who did not will often struggle, and you will have learned that without calling anyone a cheat.

Write down the date, what you asked and what they said. If the doubt does not go away, or the student is distressed, bring in your vice-principal and follow your school's process. Do not paste the student's name or work into a chatbot while you plan this. The prompt Prepare a conversation after suspected AI use helps you draft questions without any of that.

Do not hand the marking to AI either

The same tools students use can seem like a shortcut for you. They can draft feedback and they can propose a mark, but they cannot know what you know: how the student worked in class, what progress they have made, what accommodations they have, how the piece was produced. Ask a tool to mark the same invented answer twice and you will often get two different marks. That is a useful thing to show staff. The prompt See for yourself why AI should not do your marking runs that test on an invented answer, with no student work involved.

Where to start this week

1. Pick one take-home task and test it in a chatbot yourself.
2. Change one thing about it so that more of the thinking is visible.
3. Write the one-page AI-use guide for that course, and have your vice-principal read it.
4. Agree with a colleague on what you will do first if you suspect a piece of work.

If your whole staff wants to work through this together, a hands-on session is the quickest way to get everyone on the same page. Our Academy workshops cover assessment, academic integrity and responsible use within your school's policies.