Can a uni reliably say someone has used ai to create their work?

[Unissss]

i personally don’t see how tbh

Good one..! Lol

I used AI on a piece of coursework once. It was a really weird assignment - a short essay in a field where there isn't an essay based academic culture. Literally none of the source material for similar situations online ran to more than 200 words. The instructor was also pretty crap in many ways.

So I asked ChatGPT to extend it to the 1500 word count. It was such a bare subject that even GPT didn't manage to get to a thousand, and that was with a lot of repetition.

I tweaked it a bit, submitted a paragraph more, and it worked.

OP how the many academics on this thread are responding is how your tutors will respond. You getting all defensive and accusing people of being judgemental will not be a good look for you in a disciplinary process.

In the interests of openness, I'm not an academic, but senior professional and support staff of over 20 years. So I'm engaged with the processes. I've assisted several people on these boards (some re their kids) before where I could see process hasn't been followed, and been genuinely pleased when issues were resolved. I don't see a problem with the process here, just that the OP is trying to evade the repercussions of her actions, when advised several times how to back up her case.

I'm another who has conducted very many of these investigatory meetings. Your defensiveness, and lack of clarity on process, will be what may well be your downfall, OP.

No I haven’t as it says something completely different to spelling as you can see it doesn’t say a more polished version.

I’ve admitted how I used ai from the off set though?

No I just didn’t know how to do it

Unless I'm going mad, which is possible, the only screenshots you put up were of my post where you asked it for an 'improved' version (I dispute that is is improved but that's a stylistic matter). We have no evidence whatsoever that you didn't ask it for one. You say it offered you one, not that you declined, but we have no evidence for either of those things.

If you type 'how to recover previous PowerPoint drafts' into Google, it tells you. It even gives you a summary from your pal AI at the top 🤣

Own it, OP.

OK, OP. Instead of repeatedly pleading you don't/didn't know how to do something I'm still unclear on, I'd suggest you swot up on the process; contact the student union for help and representation; get your ducks in a row on your version control; and learn how to save your work.
Arguing your 'poor me; I don't know what to do' really isn't helping you. Many of us here are experienced in conducting these investigations, and we are trying to help you, by advising what you need to prepare.

Agree - panels are conducted fairly, and if there is convincing evidence that a writer has not cheated or plagiarised, or taken actions they had been told were not permitted and that they could be expected to know about, then they will be given a clear record. Not all investigations end with a 'guilty' verdict. The evidence and the consistency shown by the writer, and anything relevant to the connections in the piece of work would go a long way towards weighing things up, though.

And it's a lot of work. Prep for the panel, panel, post panel discussion, possible second meeting, deal with Registry if you have to upscale, checking all possible appeal options, potential reassessment, so setting task, marking task etc etc...

It's not something staff do for fun. It's hours of work on one student.

More than they put into the cheating, by a long way.

And people who complain about fees should think about the salary costs for all the hours those people were spending on that......

Except you can’t because you don’t hand anything in physically any more. Only online.

I'd do partly what I did in the 90s, handwrite my notes and structure, then type up for submission. In the 90s, I had also handwritten the final version, obviously. I had one a week and a one to one supervision, so no hiding..... you can't really cheat like that with the Oxbridge system but it's not viable elsewhere.

I had an issue with an OU course, saying it was AI. I then had to send them previous TMAs from yeaaaaars ago to prove it was my writing style. Throughout my career in the military I wrote drafts for senior officers, I just write more formally than informally.

I have given ai essays all kinds of marks, including fails! My experience is a student can usually only use ai to produce the level of work that they are capable of producing themselves, because in order to know how to prompt it to get a higher grade you have to understand what is required at that level.

I don’t work in education but do work in a role in which I see a lot of correspondence and documents, and you can tell the AI stuff a mile away. There are loads of hidden “tells” and very few people even attempt to hide them.

Even those that do try to hide them aren’t perfect. For example, a few months ago we spotted one because right in the middle of the document (which was otherwise a perfect response) the person used an odd American phrase that just isn’t used in the UK in that context. Sadly for them, it was part of a job assessment / interview and they weren’t progressed on that basis; it wasn’t their own work.

although chatgpt loves ( ) and - - etc

Yes, and we’re pretty good at it in my department.

speaking of, did unis used to be able to tell when a person has or if they did buy one of the essays from those essay mill type companies long before the era of chatgpt and grok etc ?

Again you'd have suspicions if it didn't reflect the lectures or reading list and call them in for a 'chat'.

Yup. My previous post.

I also mentioned that the OP should have read through her essay before submission. The retort was that she didn't have time to due to a looming deadline. It seems that she will not accept anyone's suggestions, and is defensive at every turn.

I'm off.

true, i forget that part