You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Hi,
I've had an amazing piece of work handed in by a y13 criminology student who I think has not written it themselves. I can't find any plagiarism, but they can't tell me what some of the words they have used mean.
Criminology is not a level English. I have never had a piece of this standard of writing and vocabulary handed in by any student. This students writing is good, but not this good.
Any suggestions for how they have made this? They have denied it's plagiarised, and can't quite verbal explain some of the harder vocabulary and phrasing used.
Thanks for any suggestions!
Extract below
Psychological studies including research by lotfus et al, indicate that factors like the timing of the event, discussion with others, the passage of time and questioning methods in court can influence witness’ memory and testimony. This casts doubt on the validity of eye witness evidence, as memories may lack accuracy, especially over extended periods or in heightened focus on specific details such as ‘weapon focus’. In complex technical cases, the outcome frequently depends on the testimony provided by an expert, be it a medical specialist or a forensic scientist. Essentially, these experts are expected to possess superior knowledge in their respected fields compared to legal professionals or laypeople, like jurors
Chatgpt says:-
The passage you provided does exhibit characteristics consistent with a well-written piece on the topic of eyewitness testimony, the fallibility of memory, and the reliance on expert testimony in legal proceedings. However, it's important to note that the language and structure alone may not definitively indicate whether it was written by ChatGPT or a human. If it has a balanced and informed perspective, cites relevant studies like Loftus et al., and uses appropriate terminology, it could be the work of a knowledgeable human or a well-tuned language model. To further evaluate, one might consider the depth of analysis, coherence of arguments, and the accuracy of the information presented.
Chat gpt
they can’t tell me what some of the words they have used mean.
"So if you can't tell me what it means, how did you know to use it?"
Maybe he just read all the books and cribbed the right bits. Ask him
Wasn’t there a recent clamp down on those websites that will write you an essay, not an AI thing, actual bright people doing it for a fee? Do you think it might be that? <br /><br />
can you Google key paragraphs and see if it hits?
The fact that they can’t explain what they have written is a massive red flag for sure.
they can’t tell me what some of the words they have used mean.
“So if you can’t tell me what it means, how did you know to use it
They claimed they used an online thesaurus.
I was suspicious.
Firstly thats almost certainly Chap GPT. Secondly I presume Turn-it-in or its modern day counterpart has a AI detection tool?
Maybe he just read all the books and cribbed the right bits. Ask him
The writing is better than the textbook!
If they had copied the textbook the language used would be much less flowing
I’m no criminologist but:
but they can’t tell me what some of the words they have used mean.
is pretty good evidence for not having written something.
I stoped short of accusing them of lying. Just short.
Ask him for what he used for research. It could be he read a book and regurgitated it in his own words, thinking he understood but either not really or promptly forgetting.
In addition to that, run it past one of these tools looking for AI written stuff:
Turn-it-in
Too expensive for my school. 😔
Thanks @brucewee !
I've tried 5 ai detectors and none of them would load.
That one reckons 50% chance of being ai written
I tend to look for inconsistencies between sentences/paragraphs/earlier pieces of work. Of the few students I taught who really could make it flow, one went to Oxford and two to Cambridge. It's an unusual skill at that age even amongst the brightest.
If they've used a thesaurus (crap joke: what's another name for a thesausus?) they're just as likely to have chosen the wrong word and their piece will be vertiginous verbose verbiage.
That's a lot better than most of the AI generated copy my colleagues send me for editing.
There are a number of plagiarism rewriters out there now. Just upload a paper and off you go.
Your school will need to have an AI policy soon, but as always the students are one step ahead.
I would say as there are questions about the essay you also need something under controlled conditions to compare.
Is the reference to loftus right? Where / how would they know about that?
They claimed they used an online thesaurus.
The thing is to use a thesaurus you have to know the alternative word you are looking for - so it seems unlikely you don't at least know the gist of the sentence you embellished.
It reads very "ChatGPT" to me. Now what's the point in finding the cheat? Is it to punish them? to stop them doing it again? to praise them if its genuine? to make them realise that they aren't learning like this? etc?
You could turn it into a learning exercise for the whole class where a small number of students have to give "witness evidence" to the audience and see who is believable. Perhaps get a good student with work you know is theres, a poor student with work you belieive is theres and a poor student with work you have provided and this guy. I'd want to be careful that the take home message there was not "look John's a lying ****".
I had a Uni tutor who quickly would spot when someone had copied an answer and would say "John has a good answer to this question, so will come up to the board and talk us through it". A little peer humiliation and a knowing look from him meant nobody handed in stuff they couldn't explain in the future!
Yep, that's definitely lifted.
et al is a pretty common phrase, but quoting references isn't in the stuff most 13 year olds are taught. There's also an interesting 'jump' between sentences 2 nad 3 suggesting google and cut/paste .
What was the question?
My partner has just had an essay in from a student who barely knows what day of the week it is. Really well written, very knowledgeable and using a lot of 'big words'.
What a time to be a teacher! 🙄
Oh, I just googled Loftus - and it seems it probably is a sensible reference (which is better than normal for AI!)... so in that case "John, can you explain what Loftus meant by weapon focus". If he can, even if he used ChatGPT to make the answer he probably has learned the topic so I wouldn't be too hard!
Parental help?
Even when I send emails at work I use the synonym checker to find fancy words that sound better than my own dyslexic writing style.
Perhaps his other half proof read it and decided to change a few things, again I get my other half to do this for me and its always different to how I'd write it.
Jumping to AI nowadays is so common, are you able to just ask? If he is using AI, he's going to need to know you can still be caught.
Thr lotus et al reference is correct and correctly used from class notes and the textbook.
If they were paying attention in class they - should- be able to describe what et al means
It's year 13- aged 18. I'd be impressed if a 13 year old could copy and paste that :-)
Just ask them to explain some of the content of the paper. Targeted questions about some of the key themes etc.
Should be relatively easy to determine whether they understand what has been written and whether they really were the author.
An adult has written that IMO. Whether directly or indirectly via chatgpt or similar I don't know, but that's definitely not a teenager's work. IMVHO of course!
but they can’t tell me what some of the words they have used mean.
is pretty good evidence for not having written something.
I wrote tons of stuff I didn't understand in uni essays! I mastered the craft of essay writing early on so just spent 3 years stitching together bits and bobs, and ended up with a middle of the road 2:1 from a moderately academic uni. But I don't think I really understood or bothered to think about much - a shame in retrospect...
That one reckons 50% chance of being ai written
When I did it it said there was a 51% chance it was entirely written by AI. It then highlighted these sentences as being the suspect ones:
In complex technical cases, the outcome frequently depends on the testimony provided by an expert, be it a medical specialist or a forensic scientist.
Essentially, these experts are expected to possess superior knowledge in their respected fields compared to legal professionals or laypeople, like jurors
Jumping to AI nowadays is so common, are you able to just ask? If he is using AI, he’s going to need to know you can still be caught.
I asked repeatedly if if was their work- they said it was, with a thesaurus, so I could give a bit of leeway for the odd massive word.
I had a Uni tutor who quickly would spot when someone had copied an answer and would say “John has a good answer to this question, so will come up to the board and talk us through it”. A little peer humiliation and a knowing look from him meant nobody handed in stuff they couldn’t explain in the future!
As I was sat reading choice quotes out with the student in class I'm reasonably sure the rest of them got the message the student was busted.
"If this is Your work you should consider writing for a living" "you have said that several times sir"
What a time to be a teacher!
What's the answer? Qualifications more exam based? Or reward for sensible use of AI..?
Just ask them to explain some of the content of the paper. Targeted questions about some of the key themes etc.
They were fine on the themes- as I would expect, they are smart and have had it explained in class.
They used cited, rationales, encompass, parties (as in court room) and unconcious assumptions and couldn't explain them verbally.
I’ve had an amazing piece of work handed in by a y13 criminology student who I think has not written it themselves. I can’t find any plagiarism
Sounds like the perfect crime.
My mistake - if he's 18, and knows his stuff, that's a bit more realistic. How's his oral answering in classes?
Clever googling will get you there
It's a
lotfus et al,
about nothing.
Seriously, if you have run the plagiarism detector over it and found nothing, there's not much more you can do.
Wasn’t there a recent clamp down on those websites that will write you an essay, not an AI thing, actual bright people doing it for a fee? Do you think it might be that?
Yes there was, I thought it was degree not school level.
It is specific to school level criminology. If I could write like that I would not have used that vocabulary for a year 13 qualification.
My mistake – if he’s 18, and knows his stuff, that’s a bit more realistic. How’s his oral answering in classes?
Good, but not with that vocabulary.
Ask him/her to write something in class to compare it with. I bet they poo themselves a little bit!
They claimed they used an online thesaurus.
Hold on, they would have to understand what concept or idea they were trying to communicate in order to use a thesaurus in the first place, in which case they'd have learned the meaning of the word in context at the time, and wouldn't be flummoxed when questioned later...
Blatant use of AI. Was chatting to a teacher friend the other night about this over a beer or 4 and the example he gave matches yours OP - student who constantly churns out average work etc suddenly produces the finest work known to man.
Hmmm. As someone who wrote technical government reports for a living, that quality of writing is pretty rare ime and would typically be the work of a senior or very experienced officer or engineer. Writing style can take many years to develop and while it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that a school pupil possesses the technical knowledge and ability to write a complex and readable piece, it does seem unlikely. I am not overly familiar with chatbot type writing but it does have the flavour of similar pieces written by AI.
Incidentally I had a couple of student trainees who regularly used words incorrectly. I also had relatively mature team members do the same.
That said it is a bit of a word salad, yes it flows along ok but really it's a bit pompous.
At college I once inserted a paragraph in an essay that I lifted from somewhere or other, the tutor spotted it straight away as not mine. At the time I was staggered he could tell. It's pretty obvious if you're familiar with the writing style of someone, but at 18 I knew nothing!
For me, it's not the words as such, it's the sentence structure and grammar. It's just too good 😊
Devil's advocate here but the writing didn't exactly strike me as world-beating and potentially someone may be adept at explaining something in written form and poor at verbally expressing themselves, especially if they're young.
On the other hand, yeah they probably used ChatGPT. I mean if you've no way of ascertaining this, not surprising that's what they've done.
Or reward for sensible use of AI..?
In this case clearly not, "sensible" would be ask the AI to do something, then proof read it for accuracy. If you don't already know the answer then it's not sensible.
In complex technical cases, the outcome frequently depends on the testimony provided by an expert, be it a medical specialist or a forensic scientist.
Essentially, these experts are expected to possess superior knowledge in their respected fields compared to legal professionals or laypeople, like jurors
Well this is not an accurate statement of what an expert witness is in the eyes of a court in E&W. The technical distinction between an expert witness and an ordinary witness is that experts are allowed to give their opinion (in areas within their expertise), ordinary witnesses aren't.
I remember when I was doing my final year project, I went to talk to my professor about it - at the time I knocked on his door he was grading some work from the first years and he showed me one of the submissions. A quick Google and it pulled up the exact paper that the student had cribbed the entire piece from, word for word. The first sentence was a giveaway - students just don't write like that.
I wouldn't fancy trying to be a teacher now with AI tools but that is too fluid a writing style. The words I can give or take but the flow and style of the writing is too good to be an A-level or first year uni student. It reads like it's been through - at the very least - a good sub-editor, if not entirely crafted from grammerly or a full AI writing tool.
That's the sort of piece that gets submitted to subject specialist publications.
[i]then proof read it for accuracy.[/i]
I'd say, rewrite it in your own words
they said it was, with a thesaurus,
Which thesaurus?
Walk me through how you found that word.
Psychological studies including research by lotfus et al, indicate that factors like the timing of the event, discussion with others, the passage of time and questioning methods in court can influence witness’ memory and testimony. This casts doubt on the validity of eye witness evidence, as memories may lack accuracy, especially over extended periods or in heightened focus on specific details such as ‘weapon focus’. In complex technical cases, the outcome frequently depends on the testimony provided by an expert, be it a medical specialist or a forensic scientist. Essentially, these experts are expected to possess superior knowledge in their respected fields compared to legal professionals or laypeople, like jurors
Presumably the difficult words aren't in this extract? And this:
I’ve never studied Criminology but reckon I could explain what that passage meant if asked to.
Is it possible that they've asked a parent for some input? I often help my kids out with school/uni work, but am conscious that anything I tell them will sound very different from what they'd write themselves.
Is it possible that they’ve asked a parent for some input?
I would put that quality of sentence construction beyond all but a few of the parents too. There is something too perfectly cadenced about it.
What’s the answer? Qualifications more exam based? Or reward for sensible use of AI..?
I would imagine they would have to go down the more exam based results - that way the qualification issuing body, be it school or university know it's a true reflection of the students ability.
Speaking as someone who did better at Uni in reports I could write / an edit at leisure compared to exams it does kinda suck though
.. and can’t quite verbal explain some of the harder vocabulary and phrasing used
Are we just glossing over this? I blame the teaching if the kids are going to AI tools to generate their work 😉 (Autocorrect I'm sure).
Talk to them about how impressed you are with their work, tell them you are recommending them for a specially selected group where they'll get to write similar pieces with other talented kids, in exam like conditions of course, see if the blood drains out of their face or not. Or commend them for completing the essay to a higher than usual grade that made you suspicious of the standard but that no tools could prove wrong doing, you'll remain focussed on their tool use in future though (if they don't even get the reference to the original text more fool them).
Grammarly, tutor or parent.
Grammarly would be fine no? Writing doesn't look anything world beating to me.
Chat GPT is not able to knock out an essay on any subject that would fool anyone with expert knowledge, yet. Right now ask it for 1,000 words and it will give you 500 and tell you to do the rest yourself to save on compute cost.
This students writing is good, but not this good.
But their use of apostrophes is spot on. Sorry. I tried to resist. Also plenty of folks on here use words and terms whilst being somewhat hazy as to their meanings.
Though looking at the quoted piece I don't see any difficult vocab, besides maybe "forensic" which gets used incorrectly so much these days its meaning has pretty much drifted to just meaning detailed/accurate/logical.
Would AI have failed to capitalise “loftus” and not punctuated “et al” correctly?
"OK, rewrite that but include a couple of punctuation mistakes"
TBH if it is AI then they're not very good at using it as they should have asked it to be written in the style of a teenager.
Which probably points more to the fact that they have used AI.
No easy answer at the moment as content checkers are prone to getting things wrong.
Seems to me that we're in a transitional phase at the moment and many will sneak through. Answer eventually has to be to work with these systems, have students debate and challenge AI (using journals/books and the "field"), and make better use in-class discussions. Landing spot has to be better equipped students that are able to dissect and solve problems (be these criminology-based or otherwise), critically evaluate AI and other sources and, hopefully(!), use the wealth of tools to come up with new and better insights and solutions.
https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/example-answer-for-question-10-paper-1-a-level-psychology-june-2017-aqa Rookie error not to put the year of the paper in the reference. Looks AI to me, but I learned about the study today.
Surely parents willing to put in a decent level of help will at least make the kid write it in their own words at least. It's too sharp and too well edited to be from an A-level student who has never previously produced work of that caliber.
As for the defence that they used a thesaurus without even understanding the the resulting words and then produced that. Nonsense.
They claimed they used an online thesaurus
Not technically lying as ChatGPT is pretty much a thesaurus? Chapeau I say considering it's a criminal class.
They were fine on the themes- as I would expect, they are smart and have had it explained in class.
OK - so since you are not really marking the English would it be cheating if they said to ChatGPT - write me a paragraph that explains: "Lofus' studies on witness memory, and mentions time and weapon focus, then describes the importance of expert witnesses." Sometimes to get sensible output form AI you are going to need to give it useful input. The knowledge you are hoping your students can demonstrate is the right input!
I've not tried but I assume you can give AI an essay and ask it to improve the English? Is that different from the kid with interested / intelligent / committed parents asking them to go review an essay? or someone with a Tutor who is "over coaching" (a very real issue for coursework I believe)? or if the student is really interested in the topic and ask a friend of a parent for some input? what if the friend was not a criminologist but just provided the english?
Whilst i think its right to highlight the bits they wrote about but don't understand a counterview might be that there is a danger that everyone in your class is now not going to bother putting in the effort in case you accuse them of cheating? Its bad enough in schools with other pupils thinking it is not cool to be smart without the teacher implying the same.
They used cited, rationales, encompass, parties (as in court room) and unconcious assumptions and couldn’t explain them verbally.
Ah now I understand why Borris kept saying there were no parties...
Parental help- maybe. But they didn’t mention it when questioned … Which might harm their defence…
Did you caution them before you started your quasi-judicial process? You could ask them to right an essay on how that could jeopardise their right to a fair hearing and see what they produce!
Defo looks like ChatGPT to me
Have they ever used the phrase 'be it' before? In that context I would have expected most children to say 'such as' (I think!)
AI was my initial thought, although I have zero experience of it.
If you're looking to ascertain whether it's AI or adult written (i.e. not his work) surely you need to look at how it compares to his other work & use of language. I suspect that it will stand out by it's differences.
Whether you can prove it, to the satisfaction of a third party, is something else entirely.
I assume you can give AI an essay and ask it to improve the English? Is that different from the kid with interested / intelligent / committed parents asking them to go review an essay? or someone with a Tutor who is “over coaching” (a very real issue for coursework I believe)?
This is a good and interesting point - AI for reducing inequalities based on parental interest and input. Also a kid using AI is also using their initiative more than one coached by a parent.
I have had similar stuff with marking engineering apprentices work. If you can't prove it then in reality you probably have to let it slide. If as you say the student is failry average then one piece of work with a high grade is not really going to affect his overal grade.
Does it matter in the grand scheme of things, if you have no access to turnitin then you've been open to plagiarism for the entire time, so maybe worth less focus on the specific and more discussion on the generic within your school.
Was the reference provided in the report, or is this a classic case of lifting a reference to a scientific paper without actually referencing it in their report, or as a footnote at least in a smaller report?
Use of a thesaurus is usually what you do when you're plagiarising to try and cheat turnitin, so is he practicing for uni as well 🤣
If you’re looking to ascertain whether it’s AI or adult written (i.e. not his work) surely you need to look at how it compares to his other work & use of language. I suspect that it will stand out by it’s differences.
This is a quantum leap better than the previous work. The previous work was good, not better than the textbook good.
Is that different from the kid with interested / intelligent / committed parents asking them to go review an essay? or someone with a Tutor who is “over coaching”
I'd hope all those people would get them to write the information in their own words.
I’d be giving them bonus marks for using the tools they will be using when they get out in the big bad world.
I suggested several times if that is their writing, they should be considering a job involving writing. They said something along the lines of I hate writing and will not be doing that for a living. Yet wrote the excellent prose above.
Whether you can prove it, to the satisfaction of a third party, is something else entirely
Yep, that's my question. I'm quite sure it's not theirs. I wasn't sure enough to outright accuse them of using ai before running it through the checker Brucewee linked to.
I don't think the checker counts as proof, but it's pretty convincing in conjunction with the previous work.
"
Did you caution them before you started your quasi-judicial process? You could ask them to right an essay on how that could jeopardise their right to a fair hearing and see what they produce!
Applause!
No I did not, it's not going to a court of law!
OK – so since you are not really marking the English would it be cheating if they said to ChatGPT – write me a paragraph that explains: “Lofus’ studies on witness memory, and mentions time and weapon focus, then describes the importance of expert witnesses.”
It is be cheating as they have handed it in as their own work and said they have written it. And said to my face when questioned yes I have written it.
@greyspoke
Free Member
In complex technical cases, the outcome frequently depends on the testimony provided by an expert, be it a medical specialist or a forensic scientist.Essentially, these experts are expected to possess superior knowledge in their respected fields compared to legal professionals or laypeople, like jurors
Well this is not an accurate statement of what an expert witness is in the eyes of a court in E&W. The technical distinction between an expert witness and an ordinary witness is that experts are allowed to give their opinion (in areas within their expertise), ordinary witnesses aren’t
Oh, I should have spotted that in! Too busy wondering about the suddenly awesome writing.
Have you tried putting the essay question into Chat GPT?
It looks un-naturally written. AFAIK ChatGPT will construct prose based on what is plausible, by assigning a weighting to words and where they are used in a sentence. This is why it's good for popular topics, but has a tendency to invent facts or get stuck on very niche subjects.
It reads like it’s been through – at the very least – a good sub-editor, if not entirely crafted from grammerly or a full AI writing tool.
I specifically asked and they said they had not used grammerly. I've not tried grammerly, but I've had to watch a lot of adverts for it.
I got so sick of over quoting and poor referencing in assessments that I binned take- home assessments in one module I taught (Law Masters). Students got a question in advance but could only take into the exam room a list of references they submitted in advance for vetting. It wasn't perfect, but it was fairer overall I think. This was both for essay and problem type questions.
There was still the problem of the dissertation though.
Is this assessed work for a vocational course?
Not having turnitin or equivalent is a PITA. It really annoys me that Pearsons and OFSTED don’t ask what plagerism checker you’re using when they do in inspection or external verification
The only thing that’s not been suggested that I’ve heard of people trying is asking them to read it allowed.
Or ask for earlier edits. If they used word and cloud storage they did be able to show you a pre thesaurus edit
I’ve also been told you can really polish your work by addressing every grammar issue raised by word
Does your employer have a plagerism policy for you to follow?
Maybe time to take things up a level on the questioning...
Is criminology the qualification with the 6 hours of writing under controlled conditions? Just say you expect the same standard in both