going to the OG post, take the grade drop and let it be tbh.
4 Likes
The standard of proof needed is low-if the honor council members believe he cheated, consequences will result.
3 Likes
They do it all the time with plagiarism and accusation that another student did the work.
It really depends on what the results of the use of such a tool are. if the assorted GPT detecting tools provide a score of something like âpossibleâ or âthe is a likelihoodâ, the college may be hesitant. However, if the tools says âhighly likelyâ, thatâs another story.
Of course, it also depends on how strict this particular college is in regards to cheating and plagiarism. Some colleges can be very strict, and will sanction a student based on weak evidence, or even the mere suspicion, while others will ignore blatant plagiarism.
It also depends on whether the people in charge of discipline actually have any understanding of ChatGPT. Many do not, and will base decisions on a very faulty understanding of how the bot works and what the capabilities of the bot actually are. People tend to overestimate and underestimate the capabilities of these bots, and this can affect how they assume that use of the bot can be detected.
If a person believes that ChatGPT can produce the perfect essay, citations and all, they can potentially accuse the student of using a ChatGPT because the studentâs essay was âtoo goodâ, even though ChatGPT would not write like that. Alternatively, somebody who underestimates the capabilities of ChatGPT could dismiss the accusation, because they feel that there is âpersonalityâ in the essay.
That doesnât mean that the college wonât use it.
True, but that would be very difficult to detect, and even more difficult to prove. A student who knows about ChatGPTâs weaknesses would be able to edit put most of the tell-tale signs of AI-generated text. If this were the accusatio, a hearing would be worthwhile. Even if it were the truth, the professor would come across as having a personal vendetta against the student:
Professor: âHe used ChatGPT!â,
Honor Council: âbut ChatGPT doesnât do citations wellâ
Pr.: âThe student added the citationsâ
HC: âBut it doesnât read like aAI-generated textâ
Pr: âThe student edited out those partsâ
HC: âSo what are you basing your accusation on?â
Pr: âI know/feel that the student used CharGPT!â
Itâs like the old joke:
Whatâs red, hangs on the wall, and whistles? A Herring.
But a herring isnât red!
You can paint it red.
But a herring doesnât hang on the wall!
You can hang it on the wall.
But a herring doesnât whistle!
So it doesnât whistle, two out of three isnât good enough for you?
@Tomtom22 The first thing that your son needs to do is to ask for the accusations, and see what the basis of these accusations are. If he did indeed use ChatGPT, and the evidence is strong, he should take the grade reductions. If he did not and/or the evidence is weak, he should go to the hearings. If they âconvictâ him, based on weak evidence, especially if he did not use ChatGPT, and there are serious sanctions, that is when you start thinking about a lawyer.
4 Likes
I have my grave doubts about the accuracy of AI checkers. Just yesterday, I ran a some text through a recommended AI detector, and it came back definitely that the text was almost assuredly AI authored. That was ALMOST enough for me.
Thankfully, I ran it through it other recommended AI detectors, and ALL of them came back and said it was likely of human origin.
There was nothing riding on this, as it was more of an experiment. However, with your son, there is a lot riding on it.
I was on the Honor Council at my university years ago, and we basically had a student adviser panel. These were other students who helped students through the Honor Council process and hearing. Does your sonâs school have something like this? Also, can he see the evidence against him now, as opposed to at the hearing?
But even before that, I would suggest, as others have stated, asking your son exactly what happened. Did he or didnât he? You can explain that the penalty can be exacerbated if a student doesnât tell the truth during the proceedings, so that it is imperative that he tells the truth. In basically every hearing I participated in, the student either admitted guilt or strenuously denied guilt and was vindicated. But at least at my school, the consequences could be more severe if the student denied guilt even in the face of incontrovertible evidence.
I wouldnât get a lawyer just yet. But you are right to take this very seriously.
4 Likes
Echoing and expanding an earlier comment from @thumper1: any school Iâve seen with a well-formed Honor Council or equivalent has a well-documented process for students to understand the accusations and processes and have some sort of support navigating the situation (through a student ombudsman, a staff member, etc.). Your student will benefit greatly by availing himself of these resources before attorneys are involved.
We are at the very early stages of understanding how Generative AI tools like ChatGPT will impact academia, including and especially the honest creation of original work. The Honor Council is no doubt wrapping their heads around this, and your son is finding himself part of it. I hope it all goes well.
2 Likes
Wow. Iâm really sorry for your child. He is innocent until proven guilty. They should have had proof before he was hassled with this.
1 Like
This is not an article 3 court. I am certain the issue would not have been raised without evidence. The professor does not benefit from this; it costs the school time and money
3 Likes
OP, I looked into how this could be done successfully for a bit and asked around with people who know more than me about tech tools.
I wonder if college technology departments are equipped to evaluate a computer for evidence of prior drafts, usage, internet traffic, app downloads, etc. They should be able to do this as well as to determine if any of these were overwritten or deleted. Since your student is at college and his college probably has a technology department, he could ask them to vet his computer and submit their findings as evidence that he did not cheat.
Otherwise, he should take the reduced grade and be grateful thatâs the only penalty. Then, he should visit the tech department and ask them to help him remove the apps from his devices so heâs not tempted use them again.
1 Like
Wait, Iâm p sure OPâs child is in high school - not college.
1 Like
Professors and honor councils usually indicate college, but you might be right
1 Like
I find AI-generated work pretty easy to detect for many of the reasons cited above (polished but generic, no citations, not tailored to the question or course materials). But I donât accuse a student of turning in Chat GPT-generated work until Iâve run it through three or four detectors and get consistent results. I never use just one. Iâve given out a handful of zeroes for using AI-generated responses this semester, and not a single student has protested the grade.
I do tell students that the best protection they have against a false plagiarism accusation (and I include using AI as plagiarism) is their own notes, revisions, and thought work. If they can show me this material so I can see their work-in-progress, then I am very likely to reverse the plagiarism accusation (unless I can prove it without a doubt â but this is only possible with actual plagiarism, when I have the original source in hand). Never has a student challenged a plagiarism accusation in this way. Not once. Iâve gotten a few weak protests, but in those cases, I was able to show the text those students had copied. As I said above, ChatGPT is new, but Iâve not yet gotten a single protest when Iâve given zeroes for AI-generated work.
All of this is to say that your sonâs best defense is to (a) run his own work through several generators to see if there are inconsistent results, (b) show his preparatory work for the assignment, and/or (c) show other written assignments to demonstrate that this is, in fact, his writing style.
If his writing style is similar to AI-generated work, then he would be wise to run his writing through detectors in the future and revise if necessary to make sure his prose is less likely to be identified as AI.
4 Likes
What high school refers to the teachers as âprofessorsâ?
AlsoâŠthe parent says this:
Our son loves the school, and chose it above many other options
That usually doesnât reflect high schools either.
Hoping @Tomtom22 comes back to clarify.
4 Likes
Thanks all, for the feedback and guidance. Appreciate it very much. Too worried to offer more details at this time, but will come back when this is resolved. Thanks
What I will consider is that if honor code violation goes into records. In that case, does it impacts applications to med school , law school or any masters? May be folks here can chime in
1 Like
can you share which AI detectors you used?
@WayOutWestMom how will an honor code violation in undergrad school affect applications to medical school?
1 Like
As I understand it, serious honor code violations almost always go into the studentâs record (minor ones may be remedied and removed from the record).
It sure does for grad schools (and presumably professional schools as well).
I did admissions for a grad school. We did not ask about honor code violations.
1 Like
Wouldnât an admission officer or a professor who is looking at the application ask about the violation if itâs in the record? In most such cases, itâll likely result in an automatic rejection unless the violation is well, and convincingly, explained by the applicant.
I donât recall if the question of honor code violation or other infractions in college is specifically asked on an application to all grad schools (grad school applications are school-specific), but Iâd suppose most do. I believe such questions (regarding infractions while in high school) are even on the common/coalition apps for college admissions.
Common app dropped the criminal history question in 2019-20, and then dropped the high school disciplinary violation question (which is where honor code violations were reported) the following year. Some schools do ask those questions within their specific question sections.
1 Like