Scribd
Upload
5 views1 page

Post Script

The paper argues that teachers' judgments should precede AI detectors in evaluating student writing, highlighting the false positive issues associated with these tools. It emphasizes the need for stricter regulations and suggests oral tests to verify student authorship. The author reflects on personal experiences with AI detection tools and acknowledges the need for additional research to strengthen the argument.

Uploaded by

Usman Ansari
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
5 views1 page

Post Script

The paper argues that teachers' judgments should precede AI detectors in evaluating student writing, highlighting the false positive issues associated with these tools. It emphasizes the need for stricter regulations and suggests oral tests to verify student authorship. The author reflects on personal experiences with AI detection tools and acknowledges the need for additional research to strengthen the argument.

Uploaded by

Usman Ansari
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

1.

My primary reader of this paper, which is titled ‘Teachers’ Judgment Should Come

Before AI Detectors in Evaluating Student Writing’, will be everyone. The paper is

addressed to teachers, students and everyone interested in getting to know more about

false positive problem of AI detector tools. It is particularly useful when one is not

sure of whether this can be harmful or not.

2. The audience should also learn about the disadvantages of trusting AI detector tools

and the need to enforce stricter regulations for teachers to start making judgments on

their own. I also stated that teachers should take in class oral tests to make sure

students are the actual authors of their paper/

3. My personal experience is the strongest aspect of my argument. I mentioned personal

experience of using AI detection tools and how incorrect they are. Students are not

able to concentrate on their studies when they know they can just generate the text

from AI. Teacher should act as ‘firewall’ in detecting the real author of students.

4. If I have an opportunity to make amend, I would have incorporated additional peer-

reviewed research studies to support my argument. I would also make the word count

larger and provide pictures and additional data to enable readers to have a better

understanding of the issue.

End comments: yes

You might also like