DC accused of using AI

[Castlecould]

Hi all

My DC recently received an email from their tutor saying that the marker of an essay they had submitted had flagged up possible AI use.
DC attended a meeting about this armed with screenshots of their Word document history/search history etc as they absolutely did not use AI for assisting in this essay and were quite upset about this email.
On questioning DC on their research methods, DC mentioned that on a large journal/document they would use the Cntr F function to find the relevant section to read. The university have said that using the Find function is classed as AI and she would have to receive the consequences. DC was stunned and thought that they must have misunderstood as they thought that there was no issue in using this function, but the Uni were adamant this is classed as AI.
DC will obviously meet with the library team to confirm and receive further guidance on best practice for research, but just wanted a second opinion if this sounds correct as it seems very odd to me? I was a mature student at the same university only a few years ago and certainly used the find function on any research for my essays. Happy to accept if we are wrong though, just wasn’t explained to either of us.
TIA

Control f is not AI. Just keep repeating it.

That is batshit. Ctrl F is not AI. It has been a function for absolutely yonks. Ask to see their AI policy

That’s not AI but it doesn’t mean it’s not included in their policies. Ask them for the policies they are referring to.

No, the use of a find function is not AI, if it’s just the standard search functionality that has been around for years before AI, using CTRL F as you described. Whoever has said that it’s AI is wrong or mistaken and I would be very firm in pushing back against that.

Which university?

I’m a uni lecturer and have just done loads of academic integrity interviews relating to AI. It sounds very odd to me - ask specifically where this is highlighted in the regs as not being allowed. It’s not AI by my definition. Note that you may not get the full story from DC and there could be other issues.

This doesn't make sense. What exactly prompted the meeting as using a search function on a different document for research wouldn't show up any markers on your child's document submitted.

Was this an initial meeting with their tutor or a formal plagiarism hearing? What has your child received in writing / print about the decision and this point about control+F which is not an approach my employer takes in their AI policy. Ask more questions as this doesn't seem right.

I'm sorry, OP, but I don't think that your daughter is telling you the whole story.

As @GanninHyem said, how would your daughter using CTRL+F show up in the essay?

Has your daughter been given a breakdown of what the marker's suspicions are? In other words, what about the essay led to the marker believing your daughter used AI.
Did your daughter sign an AI declaration of any kind?
Has reference been made to the AI policy? Has your daughter seen the AI policy?

AI is a massive issue in universities. We can spot AI-generated work a mile off but we can't prove it. Even if your daughter did use AI, its very unlikely she'll get in trouble for it if its a standard essay-type piece of work.

That is just a standard search function and I have never heard of any policy prohibiting this in my life.

She should speak to her student union (they do have a student representation role, they don’t just run bars)

That's why the daughter needs to ask to see the policy, maybe the university in question has a very specific reason for not allowing it but as PPs have said how would anyone pick it

I suspect there is more to this story

Doesn’t add up at all.

There’s zero difference between reading/skimming an article to find the bit you want to reference and using Ctrl+F to jump to the section.

I think you’re not hearing the full story here…

That’s weird. That can’t possibly be written into their AI policy. Ask to see it. Is there any way you don’t have the full story? Have you seen this in writing?

There is a thread on the academic common room board where university staff are explaining that even if they suspect they can't prove and therefore no consequences are actually possible. You might want to have a read of it and see if any of it is relevant to your DC's defence.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/academics_corner/5461861-anyone-have-any-recommended-tools-to-use-to-detect-ai-generated-student-essays

That’s not AI. It’s a keyboard shortcut that uses a text-based algorithm that predates AI.

Thank you all got the replies which confirmed what we thought.
To be clear, the marker brought up possible AI use which prompted the meeting. No immediate explanation was given as to why the marker brought this up. Instead she was quizzed on her knowledge/ research methods. As soon as she mentioned using the CTRL F find function they exclaimed that this will be the reason the marker flagged AI. DD was obviously very confused at this point and again tried to stress that no AI was used and she could provide all the time stamps, earlier versions, search history etc but they just kept saying that CNTL F was AI???!!
I genuinely do not think DD is holding anything back here as I was in the next room when she had the meeting and saw her immediate reaction ( really wish I had joined the meeting now, but we were both certain with the wad of proof she had that the matter would be quickly dropped ) I’m going to meet her and go through absolutely everything just in case there is anything we have missed and we will contact the uni following this. Thanks again.

Speaking as a software developer, there is no way that the use of CTRL F could be flagged up in a file as nothing is stored in a file when you use that shortcut. It is also absolutely not an AI function, it pre-dates AI by decades, and is a very simple bit of functionality.

I would first want them to establish where in all their policies it states that CTRL F is not to be used and is considered to be AI and therefore not acceptable. I don’t believe for a second that they have anything like that in their policies. Whoever your DD had this meeting with seems to not know much about IT.

You were right not to join the meeting. Your daughter is an adult and not at school anymore.

I think there are wires crossed here. I am a uni lecturer. It sounds to me like the inquirer was probing research methods to see if DC had read the cited texts. In being told that the quotes were accessed by control f, suspicion arises that the article had not been read but just cherry picked in a semi automatic fashion. Not good research practice.

How can two buttons you press on keyboards that have been in existence for decades, that perform a function that has also been in use for decades, be deemed anything whatsoever to do with AI?!

They sound utterly cretinous. What kind of Uni employs people that flipping thick?

If a disciplinary meeting, OPs DD should have had someone with her. It would be unusual for that to be her parent, more appropriate would be a union rep.

If a disciplinary meeting, OPs DD should have had someone with her. It would be unusual for that to be her parent, more appropriate would be a union rep.

I agree with this. Not at all uncommon for students to cite sources that they haven’t read fully, or at all.