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

[Unissss]

i personally don’t see how tbh

I teach at university and have referred work to our team that deals with this (Academic Standards and Integrity). The most obvious and easy to prove cases are technical reports where the work hasn't actually been done and the AI is just hallucinating equipment and data. You don't need an official checker like Turnitin to see that AI was used as it's obviously nonsense. It actually makes me furious that students assume I am too thick not to notice and they expect me to spend more time marking their work than they spend writing it.

Yes. Usually it becomes undeniable when you ask questions about the actual concepts and ideas they've discussed and they cannot answer them. Sometimes that's the point when they admit they did use AI, but if it's obvious they don't understand what they submitted, then the academic misconduct is proven.

And this It actually makes me furious that students assume I am too thick not to notice and they expect me to spend more time marking their work than they spend writing it - one hundred percent!

If I were ever to go back to being a student (unlikely) I think I'd just handwrite my essays (including initial notes and draft version) as I did back in the 1990s. I couldn't bear having to prove my work was my own. It would add a whole new layer of difficulty into the process of writing an essay, feeling you had to avoid language that might sound like AI.

What? No! Part of the grade derives from the student generating ideas for themself. You can't just outsource that part of the assignment. If you do, you don't deserve any credit for it.

It’s very hard when you have a student who is neuro diverse. Ds is AuDHD and writes the longest sentences known to man. It’s always been his way. I’ve read some of his essays and even as a lawyer used to reading long sentences it surprises me. He is also very formal in his speech and uses words I’ve never even come across. I’m just bracing myself for him to be accused at some point.

Fgfgfg · Yesterday 23:48

AI creates a word salad which often sounds impressive but on closer reading says very little; also if you sit in my lectures playing with your phone, don't prepare for seminars and look blank if I ask you a question then produce something worth a 2:1 I'm going to be suspicious.

Sounds like "a word salad which often sounds impressive but on closer reading says very little" is worth a 2:1

If students keep pushing the envelope, through illegal AI use (and other nefarious means) the only alternative left to universities will be back to the system of handwitten final exams. NO ONE really wants that.

There'd be no spell/grammar checker to help you then @Unissss.

I am so glad AI was not around when I was at uni.

I would be so tempted to use it😄I do use AI at work, it is encouraged, and it has saved me so much time with admin work. However, at Uni you need to be doing the work.

Using AI is not criminal offense. The accusations don't need to "stand up in court."

This is about academic honesty. It's about whether a degree you've paid a fortune for is going to hold its value and retain its significance, if someone with no knowledge or competence can acquire a degree just like yours by getting a machine to do all the work for them. At the end of the day, the faculty of a university are the ones who decide whether or not a student is worthy of being awarded a degree. To hand that role over to lawyers would be a very big mistake.

Tragedy of the commons...

AI Overview 😁

"The tragedy of the commons is an economic and social theory where individuals, acting in their own self-interest, overuse a shared resource, ultimately depleting or destroying it for everyone."

it’s difficult and time consuming to prove conclusively. We’re not allowed to use software as it might disadvantage neurodivergent students. The most blindingly obvious is our overseas students with poor English, who the produce flawless (but bland) prose. Our uni (Russell group) rarely bothers. The whole thing is beyond depressing.

If a student wants to sue a university for e.g. suspension for using AI, the university cannot use AI checkers to prove they definitely did use it. This means that if a student threatens to lawyer up, the university will probably back down. More to the point, there was piss-all point to us as a university in spending ££££ on the AI checking software if we could not rely on it in court when push came to shove.

It seems quite clear from this thread that the only solution is to revert to 100 % exam style assessment

As someone who has been accused of using AI ("100% AI generated" was the assessment) I would be delighted with that. It was utterly horrific being accused of something I hadn't done and not knowing how to prove it.

But you could still just copy from an AI output? It wouldn’t prove anything. Plush it would need to be scanned and converted to a format where you could upload it electronically.

In my experience, only in very limited circumstances eg a reference is hallucinated, or they've left part of the conversation or prompts in

That won’t happen. Our student numbers have now grown so large (with a very high percentage of special exam requirements) that most universities couldn’t cope with the logistics. And it would deter international students, who we rely on financially.

Handwritten exams are problematic on grounds on accessibility.

Interesting how these things go in cycles. When I sat for my first degree, in the late 1990s, it was all assessed on seven papers, written in 3 hour exams, over the space of ten days. Your Dissertation was submitted earlier in the year, which you got to do yourself, in your own time. At the time, it was absolutely awful.

There was a move to 'split finals' (across 3rd & 4th year - I'm in Scotland) in the early 2000s, which spread the load. Then, further to a mix of assessments - so essays, exams. presentations, projects, etc. When I undertook my MSc in the mid-2000s (in Australia, not UK), the model was based on this form of assessments. This was to give the best opportunities to all students, as it's recognised that not everyone learns in the same way, or performs best in the same way.

Funny how we're musing moving back towards that 'write all your papers in exam conditions', to avoid this, instead of using a range of assessments which are designed to be very difficult to use AI or essay mills for.

I don't think it's that easy to tell. There are supposed "tells" like the em dash and the other day I saw someone say on LinkedIn that starting a letter of application with "I am writing to express my interest in" is a tell. Oops, I have always started job application letters that way and I saw other people comment the same!

The thing that gives it away for me Is That All the Titles Have Capital Letters Like This Because The AI is US-orientated (oriented).

But other than that - I can't really see how you can tell for sure other than if it gets things plain wrong. Maybe it's different in an academic scenario.

I guess the alternative is employers will realise degrees are no longer worth the paper they are written on as they are no guarantee of a good quality applicant

The solution is an oral exam. I did my Masters in Germany and I had an oral exam which was 1/3 of the mark along with my dissertation which was 2/3. That makes sure students have a decent command of English (or in my case German), too. It might even be more accessible because people find it easier to explain things verbally than they would if they had to write things down.

They're not taking graduates on as it is...

Yes they can. But actually students are encoraged and taught how to use AI for their studies, what they can or can't do etc.

AI is a powerful learning tool that you can use to teach you, to appraise your work, and coach your studies. If you use it as a tool, rather than a way to cheat, you will be far better off and it's just a part of university studying now.

Son doing his masters. Students are all made aware that it will be checked for AI. It's a worry he says as he's approaching the end of a two year course. Hopefully they'll all get through okay.

kids Use laptops in GCSEs and A levels all the time. They have spelling and grammar checks disabled. There would be no need for them to be handwritten