The Second AI Detection Wave: Building Trust and Integrity Within Restrictive Systems

A Teacher's Guide to Proactively Surviving the Next Wave of AI Detection

If you or your institution find value in the pedagogical and instructional explorations at Educating AI, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Your support helps sustain independent research rooted in critical analysis, practical insight, and a commitment to thoughtful innovation.

---

Introduction

Educational institutions across the country are grappling with an unprecedented challenge: how to maintain academic integrity in an era where AI tools make content generation easier and more sophisticated than ever before. Many schools have responded by implementing aggressive detection regimes and surveillance technologies, often with little preparation or consultation with key stakeholders. While concerns about academic integrity are legitimate, rushed implementation of these systems risks eroding the trust that forms the foundation of effective learning communities.

For teachers caught in these systems—particularly in K-12 environments where policy decisions often happen above their pay grade—the challenge becomes navigating these restrictions while maintaining student-centered, trust-oriented approaches to education. This article offers practical guidance for teachers at two levels: what can be done within individual classrooms, and how teachers in positions of relative influence might steer the broader conversation in more productive directions.

---

Part 1: Navigating Detection Systems in Your Classroom

When your school has already invested in AI detection or process monitoring systems, your role becomes not just enforcing policy but helping students understand how to exist within these new constraints. Here are specific approaches to consider:

Demystify the Technology Through Ongoing Transparency

Students often fear what they don't understand. Make detection systems less mysterious by:

• Conducting live demonstrations of how these tools work in a low-stakes environment

• Showing examples of what triggers flags in these systems and explaining why

• Illustrating what normal writing processes look like to these tools

• Highlighting what types of collaboration are permitted versus flagged

• Revisiting these demonstrations throughout the year, not just at the beginning

This ongoing demystification serves multiple purposes. It removes the intimidation factor, helps students understand legitimate boundaries, and demonstrates your commitment to fairness rather than "gotcha" enforcement. Regular conversations about AI tools and detection methods create a culture of transparency rather than surveillance.

---

Clearly Articulate Consequences and Recourse

Students deserve to know both the rules and their rights within the system:

• Create clear, grade-appropriate explanations of what constitutes violations

• Outline the specific consequences for first, second, and third offenses

• Detail the process for appealing flagged work

• Explain how students can protect themselves when falsely flagged

• Provide exemplars of proper citation and attribution when using AI tools as research aids

By addressing these aspects openly, you position yourself as an advocate for student success within constraints rather than simply an enforcer of punitive measures.

---

Design Process-Oriented Assessments

Detection systems struggle most when assessment is designed around visible process rather than evaluating only end products:

• Implement regular checkpoints for major assignments

• Collect and comment on outlines, drafts, and revisions

• Create in-class writing opportunities that develop student voice

• Design assignments requiring personal experiences or perspectives

• Use portfolios that demonstrate development over time

• Define reasonable time expectations for different types of assignments

These approaches not only reduce opportunities for unchecked plagiarism but create multiple data points for understanding a student's authentic voice and abilities.

---

Teach Students Documentation Habits

In an environment where process evidence has significant weight, students need clear guidance on their responsibility to document their own work:

• Teach specific documentation habits as academic skills:

  • Creating and saving multiple draft versions with meaningful names

  • Using commenting features to track their thinking process

  • Keeping research notes with citations that connect to final work

  • Maintaining writing journals or logs for major assignments

• Build documentation into assessment:

  • Include documentation checkpoints in rubrics and grading

  • Award process points for evidence of iterative development

  • Create low-stakes opportunities to practice documentation

  • Allow documentation to serve as counter-evidence when integrity is questioned

The goal is to shift student perception from seeing documentation as busywork to understanding it as essential protection against false accusations and valuable evidence of their intellectual growth.

---

Develop a Culture of Integrity Through Better Teaching

The most effective deterrent to academic dishonesty isn't surveillance—it's creating conditions where students feel capable of succeeding honestly:

• Break large assignments into manageable chunks with clear deadlines

• Balance high-stakes summative assessments with low-stakes formative work

• Offer revision opportunities for significant credit recovery

• Dedicate class time for work completion and provide support

• Coordinate with colleagues to prevent assignment pile-ups

• Design authentic assessments connected to student interests and experiences

• Explain the purpose behind assignments—why this skill matters

When students understand why an assignment matters for their development and feel supported in completing it legitimately, the temptation to circumvent the process diminishes significantly.

---

Part 2: Influencing Institutional Approaches

For teachers with some degree of influence—department chairs, team leaders, committee members, or those with the ear of administration—there are opportunities to guide institutional policies in more productive directions:

Advocate for Multi-Faceted Verification of Suspected Violations

The most problematic aspect of detection systems is when positive flags automatically trigger severe consequences. Push for policies that:

• Treat detection tools as just one indicator requiring additional verification

• Require human judgment in all academic integrity decisions

• Establish multiple evidence requirements before significant penalties

• Consider comparative analysis of student work over time as verification

• Clearly define what constitutes acceptable evidence and valid explanations

• Provide specific examples of legitimate reasons for potential false positives

Emphasize the fact that even 99% accuracy means 1 in 100 students will be falsely accused—an unacceptable margin when educational futures are at stake.

---

Establish Clear Standards for Evidence

One major weakness in many AI detection policies is the ambiguity surrounding what constitutes valid evidence. To create a more equitable system:

• Define specific categories of evidence that will be considered:

  • Timestamps and revision histories showing active writing time

  • Drafts and outlines demonstrating development of ideas

  • In-class writing samples for comparison with submitted work

  • Student explanations of their writing process

• Clarify reasonable accommodations and exceptions:

  • Legitimate copy/paste actions (e.g., from research notes, previous drafts)

  • Variation in writing quality across different genres or subjects

  • Improvement due to extra support or tutoring

• Create transparent evaluation protocols:

  • Require multiple types of evidence before reaching conclusions

  • Document the specific evidence used in each academic integrity decision

  • Establish consistent thresholds across classrooms and departments

  • Allow students to submit counter-evidence in their defense

When evidence standards are clearly articulated, both students and teachers benefit from increased transparency.

---

Champion Growth-Oriented Responses to First Offenses

When policies treat first offenses as learning opportunities rather than career-ending catastrophes, they better align with educational values:

• Advocate for revised work opportunities rather than zeros for first infractions

• Suggest supervised revision sessions in place of purely punitive responses

• Propose tiered consequences that escalate appropriately with repeated violations

• Remind stakeholders that moral development requires space for mistakes and recovery

Frame this approach not as being "soft" on cheating but as being consistent with research on adolescent development and effective behavioral modification.

---

Initiate Conversations About Permissible AI Use

Perhaps the most significant opportunity for policy influence is shifting from a purely restrictive stance to a more nuanced approach that incorporates appropriate AI use:

• Propose pilot programs for using AI as a research and ideation tool

• Suggest developing grade-appropriate guidelines for permissible AI assistance

• Share examples of how AI tools can enhance rather than replace learning

• Frame AI literacy as an essential college and career readiness skill

The reality is that most students will encounter workplaces where AI assistance is not only permitted but expected. Schools that develop thoughtful usage policies now are preparing students better than those maintaining artificial AI-free environments.

---

Make the Case for Investment in Proactive Tools

If administration is willing to invest in detection, make the case that similar resources should go toward tools that facilitate legitimate engagement with AI:

• Research-grade AI platforms with appropriate safeguards

• Classroom management systems designed for transparent AI integration

• Professional development on effective AI-assisted teaching techniques

• Resources for teaching critical evaluation of AI-generated content

This approach positions the school as leading technological integration rather than merely playing defense against it.

---

Conclusion: The Long Game of Integrity

While detection systems may feel like a necessary response to immediate challenges, they represent at best a transitional phase. The long-term solution lies not in increasingly sophisticated surveillance but in reimagining education for an AI-integrated world.

For teachers navigating this transition, the dual focus on classroom practices and institutional influence offers a path forward. By demystifying systems for students while advocating for more nuanced policies, educators can maintain their commitment to integrity while acknowledging the changing technological landscape.

Remember that all educational paradigm shifts—from calculators to internet research to smartphones—initially provoked restrictive responses before finding balanced integration. AI represents a more profound disruption, but the pattern remains consistent. Schools that move thoughtfully from detection to integration will ultimately better serve their students.

The immediate goal isn't to dismantle detection systems overnight—that's rarely within any individual teacher's power. Rather, it's to build within and around these systems practices that maintain trust, promote genuine learning, and prepare students for a world where working effectively with AI will be an essential skill. By doing so, we demonstrate what truly matters in education: not just academic honesty as compliance, but integrity as a lived value that extends beyond school walls.

---

A Balanced AI Policy Framework

As schools move toward more nuanced approaches, consider a framework that balances detection with integration:

Core Principles:

• Academic integrity remains foundational to our educational community

• AI tools represent both challenges and opportunities for learning

• Students deserve clear guidance, support, and due process

• Detection systems are one tool among many for maintaining integrity

Balanced Approach:

• Students must disclose any AI assistance using provided templates

• AI-generated content must be properly attributed following guidelines

• Students may only use AI tools in contexts explicitly permitted by teachers

• Multiple verification methods are used beyond detection software

Permitted AI Uses:

• Brainstorming and ideation (with disclosure)

• Grammar and mechanics checking

• Research assistance (with proper evaluation and citation)

• Specifically designated collaborative assignments

Progressive Integration:

• Develop skills from independent to augmented to collaborative

• Classify assignments as AI-Independent, AI-Attributed, or AI-Integrated

• Create grade-appropriate progressions of AI literacy

• Build assessment around process documentation and verification

This framework offers a pathway from detection to integration, preparing students not just to avoid cheating but to become critical directors of AI tools who understand their capabilities, limitations, and ethical dimensions—skills they will need throughout their academic and professional lives.

Nick Potkalitsky, Ph.D.

---

Check out some of our favorite Substacks:

Mike Kentz’s AI EduPathways: Insights from one of our most insightful, creative, and eloquent AI educators in the business!!!

Terry Underwood’s Learning to Read, Reading to Learn: The most penetrating investigation of the intersections between compositional theory, literacy studies, and AI on the internet!!!

Suzi’s When Life Gives You AI: An cutting-edge exploration of the intersection among computer science, neuroscience, and philosophy

Alejandro Piad Morffis’s The Computerist Journal: Unmatched investigations into coding, machine learning, computational theory, and practical AI applications

Michael Woudenberg’s Polymathic Being: Polymathic wisdom brought to you every Sunday morning with your first cup of coffee

Rob Nelson’s AI Log: Incredibly deep and insightful essay about AI’s impact on higher ed, society, and culture.

Michael Spencer’s AI Supremacy: The most comprehensive and current analysis of AI news and trends, featuring numerous intriguing guest posts

Daniel Bashir’s The Gradient Podcast: The top interviews with leading AI experts, researchers, developers, and linguists.

Daniel Nest’s Why Try AI?: The most amazing updates on AI tools and techniques

Riccardo Vocca’s The Intelligent Friend: An intriguing examination of the diverse ways AI is transforming our lives and the world around us.

Jason Gulya’s The AI Edventure: An important exploration of cutting edge innovations in AI-responsive curriculum and pedagogy.