Turnitin’s AI writing detection tool

Turnitin’s artificial intelligence (AI) writing detection tool is accessible to staff within Turnitin’s similarity report function. The tool works on text produced in English and includes:

• Writing detection indicators (percentages of text predicted to be AI-generated or AI-paraphrased)
• A report (highlighted text in the submission that maps to these percentages)

Turnitin does not make the AI writing detection indicator (percentage) or the report (highlighted text) visible to students.

Using and interpreting results from the AI writing detection tool

The University makes the Turnitin AI writing detection tool available to staff to assist with flagging potential AI misuse. It is critical that staff fully consider the results of the tool in the context of the work and are aware of the tool’s limitations when interpreting and acting on its reports.

Staff should:

• Only focus on work where more than 20% of the text is predicted to be AI-generated or paraphrased
• Use the tool with an entire piece of written work, and not rely on the tools’ sentence-by-sentence determination of sources
• Be mindful of whether the student work being submitted is for an assessment task, or in a discipline that tends to require formulaic expression, as this might increase the likelihood of a false positive
• Consider whether the student’s style of written expression tends to be regular, routine or formulaic as this might increase the likelihood of a false positive.
• Be aware that the detector tool report is not enough on its own to support an allegation of academic misconduct, and a second piece of evidence is required.

How to proceed if you see a high AI detection score

A high AI detection score alone does not constitute grounds for making an allegation of academic misconduct. Staff need to seek further evidence from other sources before reporting a suspected academic misconduct incident.

These sources of evidence could include:

• False references, facts and other types of AI-generated ‘hallucinations’
• A considerable difference in the language used and/or the specific knowledge and ability in the subject area shown in the student’s submitted assessment compared to the student’s previous work in the subject
• The use of language or concepts in the student’s submitted assessment that is not typical of the subject, course or award level
• Inconsistency in the style of presentation shown across in the student’s submitted assessment, potentially indicating that the work has been compiled using multiple ‘authors’
• Inclusion in the student’s submitted assessment of warnings or other caveats typically inserted by AI, particularly the prompt ‘regenerate text’
• Unusual contents in the file metadata.

In gathering further sources of evidence staff are able to speak to students. Guidance (Staff Only) is available to assist staff with discussing academic integrity incidents with students.

Students have been advised that staff may ask to speak with them about how they have completed assessment tasks, and to explain the content of material they have prepared. Staff may ask students to share drafts, notes or other evidence of authorship and discuss with them their understanding of the topics that are covered in the subject and its assessment.

Reporting Academic Integrity Incidents

Your Faculty Academic Integrity Officer (Staff Only) can provide further advice on identifying academic integrity incidents involving AI in your discipline, as well as ensuring that the threshold between suspected academic misconduct and poor academic practice is being interpreted appropriately.

To report an incident, please follow this link (Staff Only).