Artificial Intelligence (AI) and critical thinking

As of early 2025, nope. AI detectors are not particularly accurate. 

What's more, research suggests AI detection software "has high error rates and can lead instructors to falsely accuse students of misconduct" (MIT Sloan) and can be biased against non-native English writers (Stanford HAI).

Select the tabs to see strategies for detecting AI text and images and videos using your own observation skills (not using AI detection tools).

Email send by David Plotkin, June 2025

Recently, I was asked if the College has endorsed a particular Generative Artificial Intelligence detector to check student work.  

CCC has not endorsed an AI detector, and currently we discourage the use of AI detectors. We recognize the commitment faculty bring to upholding rigorous and ethical academic standards. Your concerns are valid and reflect the deep care you have for students and the integrity of your discipline. However, the results of AI detectors are not reliable. They are inconsistent, leading to false positive results that can unfairly penalize students and damage student-instructor trust.  For those who are intent on committing academic dishonesty, they can also be fooled into producing false negatives. Until we can collectively establish an approach that supports both our commitment to academic honesty and our responsibility to minimize unintended harm, we’re asking that these tools not be used to make academic integrity decisions.

As announced, Dr. Katrina Boone is leading a Generative AI Task Force.  We hope to share resources that provide guidelines for faculty in fall term, while we work towards official institution-level and instructional and student policies.