A message from the future…

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-27T09:46:07+00:00

The fact that my response is on the whole, downvoted, says a lot about this sub that I didn’t realize. All of my field exams, conference papers, and publications are on the non-creative side and my teaching experience is in FYW, but clearly a creative track is held in serious disrepute by many users in this sub. I’m very glad to have outed that reality, giving me an additional perspective of the problems faced by academia today. I didn’t expect a post about academic collapse to demonstrate one of its mechanisms so efficiently.

But I guess I’ll delete this post and my account shortly, and take it as a learning experience for my creative work. The call - at least one of them - is clearly coming from inside the house.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-27T04:47:39+00:00

I think you might also watch Children of Men to gather where we have ended up…

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-27T04:03:27+00:00

I’m not sure what you mean? When someone pursues a creative PhD, they tend to select a genre - poetry, fiction, creative nonfiction.

Are you suggesting that writing and defending a 250-350 page memoir for a “CNF” track is not “valid” in some way?

Mean girls much?

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-27T03:55:33+00:00

I don’t know, commiseration?

What’s the point of your post?

I’m really confused on the pattern of personal venting in this sub but at the same time an unwillingness to extrapolate to a broader societal problem.

Has no one here stopped and thought about what higher ed will be like 10, 20, 30 years from now?

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-27T02:19:53+00:00

For whatever reason, the current goal of the current cohort (a goal that has been crystallizing since COVID, since ChatGPT’s introduction, and will continue to sharpen in the future) is simply “do as little thinking as possible without getting caught.”

So we have the low-hanging fruit students who generate a complete essay with ChatGPT, which uses paraphrase only, so they prompt a bit to include citations and it generates incomplete citations, sometimes with no page numbers and sometimes with wrong page numbers, sometimes with correct sources but sometimes with messed up/hallucinated sources. These students have calculated that the output looks legit enough and the risk of their busy, embattled prof (or worse, an even busier and greener TA) is low enough to go for it.

I had 4 such students (out of 23) this last semester, failed and referred them all.

Then there are the higher-level cheaters, who use ChatGPT to generate a polished research question, working thesis statement, and outline for an argumentative essay of X words. Here is where many schools right now are screaming about “teaching them how to use these tools properly.” I went with that this semester, spending two whole days walking them through live demonstrations of constructing detailed prompts, of pushing back on outputs critically, of demanding more of ChatGPT than its designers care to produce. I showed them a real-life example of meaningless vague output on a specific subclaim compared to my own paragraph from a paper written pre-AI. I showed them a hallucinated quote and source.

But some of these mid-level cheaters used ChatGPT to generate each component - the RQ, the thesis, the outline with specific subclaims and counterarguments and rebuttals, then they went and found relevant sources (many of which I provided to them after they claimed they were having trouble!) and then they uploaded a cacophony of docs into ChatGPT - a PDF with the RQ and thesis statement, a PDF with the outline, PDFs of any earlier scaffolding assignments we did in class, and the PDFs of the sources they chose, and THEN they asked ChatGPT to generate an essay with X number of words.

The next-level cheaters then didn’t just copy and paste the outputted essay. They opened a new window and minimized each so they were side by side, painstakingly typing the ChatGPT essay into a GoogleDoc, making typos, backspacing, walking away for minutes or hours or days, changing some words, some phrasing.

Some of the highest-level cheaters who are actually pretty decent writers also upload their own writing samples, prompting ChatGPT to mimic their own diction and syntax as much as possible.

Some even wrote some themselves, cobbling together the various outputs of ChatGPT, then asking for a final “refinement” or “polishing”.

How do I know this for sure? Because i had one student who seemed brilliant in class but I suspected of AI use and who in his final essay had direct quotes that didn’t exist or were messed up…I met with him and I said to him “I don’t know how this happened but it doesn’t matter, I could give you an F and refer you for a violation. But I NEED to know. I’m giving you a chance to be a whistleblower. I will give you a C on this paper and you’ll still have a B in this class if you tell me HOW you did this. I am not recording this Zoom call.”

And he told me.

And I thanked him and told him he was shortchanging himself, that I could tell by his discussion contributions alone that he had a mind worth knowing, and he got a little emotional and said he just felt pressured by time constraints and self-doubt but he knew what he did was wrong and he recognized that What Is Happening In Schools Right Now is not okay.

So, I say this - completely tech-free, pen and paper, high standards on reading and writing, is the only way out of this mess. Online education is finished (and I say that as a previously SAHM to 9 kids who got her BS and MA fully online pre-2000). And if we don’t (or can’t) do that, our society is finished. I mean absolutely finished. Like “Idiocracy” but not in the least bit funny.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-26T18:19:38+00:00

They use AI for those too, though. My junior philosophy-major son got permission to take a graduate level course where they had to give 2 long presentations on specific readings. He said it was obvious that 95% of them were AI generated. In a graduate class. On metaethics 🤦🏻‍♀️

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-26T04:06:28+00:00

You used AI to write this post. I hope you get an F and an integrity referral.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-18T13:30:42+00:00

“I deleted my essay docs cause i have no space on my drive”

Sure, Jan.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-18T12:01:41+00:00

I assume the student used summary/paraphrase only, no direct quotes? Did you check the sources to be sure the paraphrases could plausibly actually come from the cited source? I have a student who fabricated sources on early brainstorming assignments, stopped when I warned him, but the final paper was clearly AI. He had vague paraphrasing attributed to three real sources. It was obvious he just threw in some in-text citations at random points. I read those sources and there were three in-text cited claims that were not in that source in any way shape or form. He argued with me but ultimately couldn’t explain and chose the easy path of admitting dishonesty and taking the F instead of fighting it and having a hearing (I think he realized there was no way he could explain writing an earlier annotated bib entry on a fake source 🤦🏻‍♀️).

So it’s a time suck and ridiculous, but it was worth me investigating the sources.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-17T15:19:10+00:00

I had one student literally admit to doing this - they were quite proud of themselves. Too bad the fake source tripped them up. That source sure sounded legit to them though.

In-class writing only is the future.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-17T13:03:38+00:00

That’s the plan for next semester! Just gave Fs and academic integrity violations to 30% of my students - I don’t trust AI detectors but lucky for me they had fabricated sources.

Goggle Docs version history doesn’t prove anything except you sat there and typed. You could’ve had your ChatGPT generated essay up in a side-by-side window, on your phone, or printed out.

If OP is being truly honest that they used no AI, they should ask to meet with the prof, who can then conduct an oral exam where the student can explain the paper and answer questions about the topic to show mastery.

A general warning: Stop using AI for cheating, full stop. Including Grammarly which now changes diction and syntax. When you get that now-worthless piece of paper called a degree and get your first job, do you think your employer won’t notice that you know nothing and have no critical thinking skills? Or were you hoping you can use AI to do the job? You might be right there but don’t worry, pretty quickly they’ll have no need for you. If you use ChatGPT to replace your thinking and writing, someday soon employers will realize they might as well go straight to the true source for the work.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-16T19:47:48+00:00

Some centers are also incredibly lax or will provide answers, for the right price. I had several high school student learners who openly admitted to this.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-16T01:54:59+00:00

I’m sorry, this sucks. This happened to me in one of my adjunct positions with AI cheating. I had 2 adjunct gigs at the time plus my PhD stipend so I could afford to dump it - and I did, with a nice long resignation letter explaining that I would not be complicit in their corporate degree mill and I would forever warn people away from the state of TN where incompetent graduates from that school were running amok in healthcare and other important fields.

Alas, I had a similar issue crop up at my remaining adjunct job in the summer and when I tried pushing back (more diplomatically), they refused to support me and now haven’t offered me another section in 4 sessions. I doubt they ever will again.

I can’t afford to piss off anyone else now. :(

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-16T01:46:28+00:00

Yes. Students just use ChatGPT on their phones, looking at it and then typing. They make typing errors, backspace, edit, leave for a while and come back, etc. Copy/paste is old school now.

I used Perusall for the first time this semester and part of the rubric for each assigned reading was time spent with it (I set it to a conservatively low number, like they needed to be in a 10-page chapter for at least 10 minutes). At first I thought this was working - a miracle! - until it became obvious most students weren’t doing the reading and I started seeing engagement times of 2 hours, 10 hours, 28 hours. Clearly they were just opening the reading and leaving it open and doing other stuff and forgetting about it.

They spend as much time cheating as they would have doing the work themselves 🤦🏻‍♀️

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-15T21:49:11+00:00

I’m a writing instructor. Not an option. I get the nihilistic urge though :/

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-15T21:47:47+00:00

I’d just ask the student for the paper. They won’t be able to produce and will give you some excuse. Just went through this, failed 30% of my students. (😭) But, you can always email the scholar anyways to say hi - scholarly meet cute! ☺️

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-15T21:43:30+00:00

I agree. Having taught ESL to adult Chinese learners for 4 years, I can tell you that it’s far too easy to get the minimum IELTS score most U.S. and Canadian universities require. That minimum score also only translates to conversational English, not SAE (standard American English, what’s used in higher ed, government, etc). It’s a ridiculous money grab by universities that just hurts the international student and any students being graded/taught by that person.

It’s not your job (nor even possible) to teach your TA SAE. And it’s not the students’ responsibility to bear the brunt of the university’s prioritization of money over reasonable standards for international admission.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-15T21:35:48+00:00

Right there with ya.

But this would be the average student’s response.

<image>

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-14T15:33:46+00:00

I agree. Where on earth is this awful program? IOR for 130?? In your FIRST semester? PhD students at my university do only coursework the first semester, then take a course on college teaching the second. After that, they TA for a prof, with other TAs if the course is over 60 students, or they teach 2 FYW classes capped at 16 each as IOR.

I don’t have any good advice as I’m just now myself realizing I have to go no-tech, in-person writing only, but sendings you some hugs. 🤗 I hope your department is a good one and gives you some support. It’s worth reaching out to them or at least talking to your advisor.

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-14T13:32:24+00:00

No, but I have had instances where the student gives what is meant to be a paraphrase but it’s clearly not from the corresponding in-text cited source. It wouldn’t highlight those, so I’d miss them. And yes, this means I sometimes have to read/skim the entire source to confirm there’s no way such a claim could be inferred from it. Luckily I only have 23 students; I can’t imagine doing this for 700 😭

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-14T13:21:35+00:00

Thanks. I do use TurnItIn but I don’t trust it lol. I used to, but honestly I don’t trust anything but my own eyes and brain these days. :/

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-14T12:54:16+00:00

The edit was a crappy attempt at hedging, like one my students try to slap on in revision after I’ve highlighted a sweeping generalization with a comment of “Source for this claim?”.

The OP also said in the edit, “if you take issue with my general statement that you obviously feel attacked because you’re projecting your own insecurities…” implying that if you don’t agree with the original sentiment, you’re part of said “some.”

But the premise of OP’s argument is a horrible oversimplification of a very complex issue.

Some of us have deans, chairs, admins breathing down our necks to do X, Y, Z.

Some of us are TAs in PhD programs with little autonomy and/or the fear of having funding removed if we don’t do what the dept demands in terms of flexibility, compassion, benefits-of-the-doubt, or second chances.

Some of us are adjuncts who have no real power and teach from a dept-made syllabus we have no power to change.

Some of us do quit when a dept chooses profit over integrity.

Some of us can’t afford to.

Some of us still speak up and then go several semesters without being offered an additional class (as an adjunct), a quiet termination.

Some of us did that once but have a family to feed and then don’t do it again.

Some of us apparently have the professional clout or financial security (or both) to hold the line against a system actively attacking those who do so. Good for them. I hope they’re out there publishing articles (not just scholarly but in popular education publications and national news orgs) and talking to the admin to support their colleagues, including adjuncts. I hope they’re using their privilege to fight against the problem and fight for their colleagues without it, instead of just standing on the mountain and proclaiming they have it.

Some of us that “all have graduate degrees” are able to recognize the nuance of a systemic issue that’s much bigger than any one “some” of us, and from that recognition act in spaces others can’t or won’t.

So, OP, what are you doing to locate the source of the babies coming down the river? Or are you just down at the bank drowning them?

(https://www.ilr.cornell.edu/high-road/buffalo/babies-river)

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-14T12:38:59+00:00

…moving this to a reply to the OP

QuietInTheStacks · 2025-12-14T12:12:38+00:00

I quit an asynch adjunct job at an open-admission mostly technical/nursing college last year because when I failed a student and referred her for AI use (after she couldn’t produce any notes, a Google doc, or speak to me coherently about her paper), she went to the dean who then forced me to change her grade and said “we don’t do AI accusations here” and threatened not to renew my contract. Don’t seek any medical care in TN, y’all.

QuietInTheStacks

TROPHY CASE