AI Detector for Teachers and Educators

A fair process

Never rely on a detector score alone. Compare with the student's earlier work, ask about their process, and look at drafts. False positives happen — particularly for English learners and highly formal writers.

Designing AI-resilient assignments

In-class writing, personal reflection, local or recent topics, oral follow-ups and staged drafts all make authentic work easier to recognize.

Talking to a student about a result

Open with curiosity, not accusation: “Walk me through how you wrote this.” Ask about their sources, how they chose their argument and what was hardest to write. Students who wrote their own work can usually discuss it in detail. Look at drafts and revision history together.

Document the conversation and the evidence you considered. If your institution has an academic integrity process, follow it rather than relying on a detector score.

Reducing false positives

Formal academic register, five-paragraph templates, English-language learners and students who rely on grammar tools are all more likely to be misread as AI. Check longer samples where possible, compare with in-class writing, and pay attention to the confidence level and the reasons given for each flagged sentence.

Setting a clear AI policy

Tell students exactly which uses are allowed — for example, brainstorming yes, drafting no — and how to disclose AI help. Clear expectations reduce honest mistakes and make conversations about suspected misuse fairer for everyone.

Understanding the limits

No AI detector is 100% accurate. Results are probabilistic estimates and should never be used as the only evidence that someone used AI. Treat them as one signal alongside drafts, revision history, and a conversation with the writer.