Two studies, opposite ends of the academy, same shape. Undergraduate A grades up thirteen points without matching learning gains. Federal grant proposals with heavier AI involvement funded more often at NIH, and measurably less distinctive.

Nobody in the grant study cheated. Using a model to draft a proposal is normal and often encouraged. The distinctiveness still dropped.

Which means the thing to change is not the policy. It is what the rubric rewards.

Today's question, and it takes one sentence to answer:

What is the one thing on your rubric that a student could only write if they had actually been in your room this term?

Full argument here: the post. The twenty minute working session: The Distinctiveness Criterion.