Embedded Files
Most teachers want strategies that stop students using AI to cheat, but truly blocking AI is a moving target. Instead, teachers can design assessments that are much harder for AI to “fake,” and also foster real learning and engagement. Perhaps instead of "AI-Proof" assignments, we need to think about "AI-resistant" assessments and "AI-leveraging" learning.
Let's reframe the conversation.
Let's reframe the conversation.
Instead of only focusing on how to prevent students from using AI, what if we also asked:
What's the real purpose of this assignment?
Why might a student be tempted to cheat?
How can we design assessments that are more engaging, authentic, and valuable?
How can we leverage AI as a tool to actually deepen student understanding?
Tip: Clarify the real purpose and value of each assignment to help students buy in and reduce cheating.
Why Do Students Turn to AI (or Cheat)
Why Do Students Turn to AI (or Cheat)
Understanding the root cause is the first step. "Cheating" is often a symptom of other issues.
⏱️Pressure and Anxiety
⏱️Pressure and Anxiety
Students juggling multiple deadlines, extracurriculars, and high-stakes grades may look for a shortcut, not out of malice, but from desperation.
❓Lack of Perceived Value
❓Lack of Perceived Value
If an assignment feels like "busy work" or its purpose isn't clear, students are less motivated to engage with it authentically.
📈Fear of Failure
📈Fear of Failure
When the penalty for a poor grade is high, students may feel it's safer to get a "correct" answer from AI than risk their own potentially "wrong" answer.
Rethinking Your Assessment Strategy
Rethinking Your Assessment Strategy
Open the following dropdowns to view strategies and examples.
AI-"Resistant" Strategies
AI-"Resistant" Strategies
These strategies make it significantly harder for an AI to generate a complete, high-quality response. They focus on unique, in-the-moment, or process-oriented thinking.
Focus on In-Class Work:
Focus on In-Class Work:
Socratic seminars, timed in-class essays, group presentations, or whiteboard problem-solving. AI can't participate in a live, dynamic discussion.
Use Hyper-Specific & Personal Prompts:
Use Hyper-Specific & Personal Prompts:
Connect assignments to a specific event from that day's class discussion, a local community issue, or a personal reflection. (e.g., "Using the 'Tragedy of the Commons' concept we discussed today, analyze the problem of parking at our school.")
Assess the Process, Not Just the Product:
Assess the Process, Not Just the Product:
Require students to submit process journals, annotated bibliographies, multiple drafts with tracked changes, or a reflection on *how* they arrived at their answer.
Use Novel or Unique Sources:
Use Novel or Unique Sources:
Provide a brand-new case study, a unique dataset, a guest speaker's transcript, or a very recent article that AI models haven't been trained on.
AI-"Leveraging" Strategies
AI-"Leveraging" Strategies
These strategies embrace AI as a tool and ask students to use it, then build upon, critique, or refine its output. This shifts the skill from "answer generation" to "critical thinking and refinement."
Critique the AI:
Critique the AI:
Have students prompt an AI on a complex topic. Their assignment is to submit the AI's response along with their own detailed critique identifying its inaccuracies, biases, or "shallow" analysis.
AI as First Draft:
AI as First Draft:
Allow students to use AI to generate a first draft. Their graded submission must be a heavily revised and annotated version, with comments explaining *why* they changed what they did.
AI as Brainstorming Partner:
AI as Brainstorming Partner:
Ask students to use AI to generate 10 possible solutions to a problem. Their assignment is to select the top 3, justify their choices, and synthesize them into a single, superior solution.
AI as Debate Opponent:
AI as Debate Opponent:
Have students use an AI chatbot to "debate" a topic. They must submit the transcript along with a reflection on the AI's strongest and weakest arguments, and how their own thinking evolved.
Rethinking Assignment Purpose
Rethinking Assignment Purpose
When an assignment can be fully completed by AI, it might be a sign that the assignment itself is assessing a skill that is becoming obsolete. How can we assess deeper, more human-centered skills?
Shift to Authentic Assessments:
Shift to Authentic Assessments:
Design tasks that mirror real-world work. Instead of a 5-paragraph essay on climate change, have students create a public service announcement, write a policy brief for a local official, or design a community action plan.
Focus on Metacognition & Reflection:
Focus on Metacognition & Reflection:
The assignment isn't just the final product, but the *reflection* on it. Ask: "What was the hardest part of this project for you? What strategy did you use to overcome it? What would you do differently next time?"
Emphasize Communication & Performance:
Emphasize Communication & Performance:
Have students *defend* their work. This could be a formal presentation, a Q&A session, a "gallery walk" of projects, or a podcast recording. The value is in *explaining* and *justifying* their thinking.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse