When we talk about AI, most of us think of this one, loudest tool. However, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Let’s imagine that this popular chatbot is an ordinary calculator. Meanwhile, our students now have access to the entire technology laboratory. It is worth knowing what is in it to understand what we are dealing with.

In the student’s “digital backpack” we will find, for example, tools for paraphrasing. They act like steroids for synonyms – they can take a paragraph copied from Wikipedia and rewrite it in five different ways in two seconds, so that no traditional plagiarism program will detect it. There are also intelligent research assistants who do not provide a list of links to a question like Google, but search hundreds of sources and immediately write a ready-made, coherent answer. It’s like having a personal researcher working at the speed of light.

Understanding this landscape is crucial. We are not fighting with one program, but with a new way of accessing knowledge and creating content. It is not our task to prohibit the use of these tools, because it is impossible. Our job is to teach you how to use them wisely. In my full guide for teachers, I discuss dozens of such platforms in detail, but this awareness alone allows us to move on to the most important thing – how to respond to all this wisely.

Our school action plan: How to approach AI and plagiarism wisely?

An effective response is not a single spurt, but a thoughtful, calm plan. Instead of chaotically looking for solutions, I suggest basing our actions on three solid pillars: conversation, smart tasks and our teaching intuition.

Pillar One: Let’s Start with a Conversation – Our Classroom Rules of the Game

Before we start checking anything and suspecting anyone, we just have to talk about it. Openly and honestly. It is the foundation without which all other activities do not make sense. Students often don’t see the use of AI as a scam, but as a clever use of available resources. Our role is to show them where the limit lies.

Instead of scaring with regulations, let’s create a simple “AI Integrity Contract” together with students. Let’s set clear rules in it. For example:

• YES, YOU CAN: Use AI to look for essay ideas (brainstorm), to check grammar and spelling in your own text, to find the definition of a difficult concept, or to translate a single word.
  
  
• NO, YOU MUST NOT: Generate entire sentences and paragraphs that we paste into our work, have AI write the entire paper from A to Z, use paraphrasing tools to hide that the text is copied.

The most important thing is to talk about “why”. Let’s explain that the purpose of the essay in Polish is not to provide a perfect text, but to train the mind – learning to argue, express one’s own thoughts and emotions. The goal of a chemistry project is not to report itself, but to understand the process and learn how to draw conclusions. When a student understands that by cheating AI, they are actually deceiving themselves and depriving themselves of the opportunity to develop, their motivation to dishonest will drop significantly. This builds a culture of trust, not an atmosphere of suspicion.

Pillar Two: Let’s Be Smarter Than a Machine – Tasks That AI Won’t Be Able to Handle

This is our superpower. The best way to plagiarize AI is to assign jobs that AI simply can’t do well. It requires a bit of creativity from us, but the results are astonishing. Instead of commands that can be answered on the Internet, let’s focus on tasks that require personal involvement.

Let’s look at some examples of transformations:

Polish language: Instead of “Write a characterization of Izabela Łęcka”, let’s try: “Imagine that you are Izabela Łęcka’s attorney. Prepare a closing argument in her defense in which, based on quotes from ‘The Doll’, you will convince the jury that she was a victim of her time, not just an empty parlor doll.”

History: Instead of “Describe the causes and effects of geographical discoveries,” let’s give the task: “Create a logbook of a young sailor from the crew of Columbus. In it, describe not only the events, but also his emotions, fears, hopes, and how his view of the world changed when he first saw the New Land.”

Biology: Instead of “Explain the process of mitosis”, let’s tell the students: “Create a short, funny animation or comic for a fifth grader that explains what mitosis is about in a simple and creative way. The most important thing is your ingenuity in translating difficult concepts.”

The key is anything that requires personal reflection, combining knowledge from the lessons with your own experiences, creativity and showing the thought process. Let’s introduce the obligation to submit sketches, mind maps or short presentations of work progress to the assessment. Let the final text be only the culmination of the creative process visible to us. Then the work becomes authentic and “unforgeable”.

Pillar Three: Teacher’s Intuition – How to Check When We Have Doubts

OK, and what if we still have suspicions? There are various AI detection tools on the market, but let’s be very careful with them. None of them are perfect. They can make a mistake and accuse a student who simply writes well of cheating, or miss a text that has been cleverly edited. We should never base our judgment or consequences solely on the outcome of such a program.

Our best tool is ourselves – our knowledge of students and our pedagogical intuition. What to pay attention to?

Sudden change of style: Does the work sound completely different from what the student has written so far?

Strange, impersonal vocabulary: Is the text full of formal, complex phrases that sound unnatural in the teenager’s mouth (e.g., “concluding”, “in this analysis”, “this aspect requires an in-depth recapitulation”)?

Suspiciously Ideal Sources: Are there books or articles in the bibliography that look professional, but when you type them into Google, it turns out that they don’t exist? AI loves to make up sources!

Lack of your own “voice”: When reading a text, do we feel that it is empty? Does it lack a personal opinion, emotions, some interesting, original thought?

If our doubts are serious, the best solution is a calm, non-accusatory conversation. Invite a student and ask, “Your work is really interesting. Tell me more about this passage because I find it particularly interesting” or “Which part of writing has been the most difficult for you and why?” A student who has written a thesis himself will be happy to talk about it. The one who generated it will not be able to answer the simplest questions about the content. This is the best and fairest test.

The AI revolution is not another problem added to our already difficult work. It’s a chance to rediscover the meaning of what we do. We cease to be guardians of knowledge and controllers, and we become guides. Mentors who teach young people how to navigate a complicated world, how to distinguish truth from falsehood, and how to use powerful tools wisely and ethically. We teach them what no machine can teach them: critical thinking, creativity and being a good person. And this is the most beautiful part of our mission.

Do you feel like you need more ready-made ideas and tools?

I know that a teacher’s time is valuable. That’s why in my comprehensive guide “Artificial Intelligence for Schools and Teachers” , I’ve collected dozens of ready-to-use lesson scenarios, inspiring homework ideas for various subjects, and “AI contract” templates that you can implement in your classroom or school. It is a real treasure trove of practical knowledge that will help you feel confident and competent in this new educational reality.

Teacher Toolkit: How to Tell if a Paper Was Written by AI?

In the previous section, we discussed the importance of talking and designing tasks wisely. But there comes a moment when the work is already on our desk, and the inner voice whispers that something is wrong. What then? Before we reach for any technological solutions, we should first trust our experience and use a set of proven, pedagogical methods.

Let’s treat it not as an investigation in which we look for the guilty, but as a diagnostic process. Our goal is not to catch the student, but to understand whether the learning process has actually occurred. Below you will find a practical step-by-step guide to help you assess the authenticity of the work.

Step 1: Text Analysis – What do the words themselves say?

At the very beginning, let’s focus only on the text that we have in front of our eyes. Often we will find many tips at this stage. Let’s look for characteristic signals that act as red flags.

Signal A: A sudden, unnatural “improvement” in style.
This is the most obvious and common sign. Each of us knows our students – we know who has the lightness of the pen and who struggles with every comma. If a student who has been writing simple, sometimes clumsy sentences so far suddenly returns a text written in a complex, academic language, this is the first and strongest reason for increased attention. It’s not that the student couldn’t make progress, but that the qualitative leap is too abrupt and inexplicable.

Signal B: “Empty” professionalism and lack of one’s own voice.
Works written by AI are often characterized by a specific “smoothness”. They are grammatically perfect, logically consistent, but… heartless. They lack the spark that a text written by a human has – personal reflection, an unexpected metaphor, a bit of chaos or even typical stylistic errors. Text from AI is often an elegant but empty package. Let’s pay attention to phrases such as: “This analysis explores in depth the multifaceted nature of the problem…” – they sound wise, but rarely does a student formulate thoughts in this way.

Signal C: Inconsistencies and fabricated facts (so-called AI hallucinations).
This is a weak point of artificial intelligence. Language models are masters at imitating form, but they often get lost in facts. It’s a powerful weapon for us. Let’s check one or two specific pieces of information contained in the paper – date, name, quote. And above all – let’s check the bibliography. AI tends to generate non-existent books and articles that look extremely believable. Typing the title of a supposed publication into an internet search engine is often the fastest and final test.

Step 2: Contextual Analysis – What does the student and their story say?

Now that we have analyzed the text itself, let’s look at it in a broader context. Let’s compare it with what we know about the student and his previous work.

Signal D: Comparison with previous works.
It is worth keeping in the archive (even a digital one) one or two previous written works of each student – even short answers from a quiz. Comparing the style, vocabulary and way of building sentences with the current work will give us an extremely clear picture. Are we seeing a natural evolution or a revolutionary leap? This will give us a solid basis for further steps.

Signal E: Mismatch with the command.
This is a very subtle but important tip. Often, the tasks we give to students contain a personal or creative element (e.g. “Relate the attitude of the hero to a familiar problem of the modern world”). The AI will do a great job with the general analysis of the protagonist, but in the personal part it will generate a very general, generic text that does not betray any authentic reflection. If the work perfectly describes the theory, but completely ignores this personal or creative aspect of the command, it is an alarm signal.

Step 3: Interview – Best Teacher Verification Tool

If after the first two steps our doubts have not disappeared, but have even intensified, it is time for the most important and fairest test – a conversation with the student. However, we should remember to approach it not as a prosecutor, but as a mentor who is interesting about the subject.

Let’s invite the student for a short conversation under the pretext of wanting to ask about his work. The atmosphere should be calm and safe. Here are some questions that can work wonders:

Question about the process: “Your work is very well written. I’m curious to see what your creative process looked like. Where did you start? What sources did you use the most?” – a student who worked independently will easily talk about his steps and challenges.

Question about the content: Let’s choose one interestingly worded paragraph and ask: “This passage is really interesting. Can you tell me about it in your own words? What exactly did you mean here?” – this question verifies whether the student understands the text he allegedly wrote.

Vocabulary question: Let’s point to one of these “overly professional” words and ask freely, “You used the word ‘paradigm’ here. Great choice! How do you understand them in this context?”

Question about difficulties: “What was the most difficult thing for you while writing this thesis? What did you have to think about the longest?” – every authentic creative work is associated with a challenge. The answer “nothing, it went smoothly” is very unlikely.

During this conversation, let’s observe not only the answers, but also the body language. A student who is the author of his work will talk about it with confidence, and maybe even with passion. The one who generated it will hesitate, respond with generalities and avoid eye contact, because deep down he knows that he is not able to defend “his” text.