AI-Driven Academic Submissions: My Approach as a Teacher

In the heart of Germany, at the University of Trier, an educator finds themselves navigating a complex landscape - the intersection of traditional teaching methods and the emerging world of artificial intelligence (AI).

The educator, who prefers to remain anonymous, has encountered several instances where they suspected a student's essay might have been AI-generated. This suspicion, however, was not met with accusations. Instead, the educator reached out to the student via email, initiating a discussion about their research methods without casting any aspersions.

The concern was genuine. The educator was not only worried about rewarding a student for using AI in their work, but also about the evolving policies regarding AI in academia. These policies, still in a state of flux at many institutions, present a challenge in determining what constitutes acceptable use of AI.

The process of investigating suspected AI-generated work is time-consuming, but the educator considers it crucial, given their imperfect understanding of AI writing. If the student does not respond, specific questions about the paper's content are sent, along with a reminder of the university's policy against AI use.

This process serves a dual purpose: protecting both the student and the educator. It ensures that the student is aware of the university's rules and encourages them to produce their own work, while also shielding the educator from potential accusations of bias or misconduct.

It's worth noting that none of the educator's students have been penalized for violating academic standards, but neither have they received credit for work they did not produce. If a student fails to respond to the educator's inquiries, a zero is given for the assignment.

The educator's institution forbids instructors from accusing students of using AI outright. Instead, they are encouraged to use their judgement and, when necessary, turn to available AI detection tools. However, these tools are not infallible. False positives and false negatives have been reported, making the process of detecting AI-generated work a delicate balancing act.

The educator, however, has developed methods for detecting AI writing without relying on technology. These methods, honed through experience, help them navigate the complexities of modern teaching.

In June 2024, the educator sent a class-wide email reminding students about the university's policy against AI use in essays. This reminder serves as a small victory for human writing, a testament to the educator's commitment to upholding academic integrity.

This case study provides a glimpse into the challenges faced by educators in the age of AI. As technology continues to evolve, so too will the strategies used to ensure the integrity of academic work. The educator at the University of Trier stands as a beacon of diligence and determination in this modern dilemma.