shrihacker

In March this year, student use patterns on GradPilot revealed a new fear and anxiety caused by AI. We coined “Flagxiety” to describe it - the fear that your own writing would be falsely flagged as AI-generated. I strongly believe this should be part of a bigger conversation and its encouraging to see journalists and writers exploring how that same anxiety is changing the way people write, well beyond higher education. Thanks, @jenschenberg, for exploring this in your recent Forbes article and linking to our guide.

I enjoyed speaking with @OneJaredNewman from @FastCompany on the growing adoption of AI and AI detectors among students. Students use AI for high-stakes outcomes like admissions, where they get only one chance and little visibility into how their work is evaluated. At GradPilot, we combine AI detection from @pangram with 150+ calibrated rubrics and consistent evaluation. Out of the box AI's cant evaluate student work consistently and we focus on building this tech well, where AI detection also plays a role as an input signal. We don’t rewrite or “humanize” essays, and we don’t build for detector evasion. Helping students productively revise their own work for high stakes outcome is our goal. We also believe higher-ed institutions need to communicate AI policy with clarity for students and parents, and we're doing our bit by maintaining an open-source directory of official higher-ed AI policies that is updated bi-annually fastcompany.com/91598497/pan…

How GradPilot works

Higher ed needs 3 things: 1 Explicit, published AI policy 2 AI detection that's actually accurate 3 Detection used as a signal, not a verdict Quoted on FT's AI in Education special report. We track published AI policies across 170+ universities here: gradpilot.com/ai-policies