Many universities and institutions today say they do not accept AI-generated essays. They warn that any work written with the help of AI will be rejected.
At the same time, these same institutions promote technological advancement and digital innovation. They encourage students to use technology to make learning easier and more efficient.
This raises a big question about what schools really mean when they tell students not to use AI. How can we talk about embracing technology while punishing those who use it responsibly?
If a student uses AI to gather ideas or improve writing, and can confidently defend the work, should that be a problem? Technology is meant to help us work smarter, faster, and better.
So why should using AI be seen as a crime? It feels like the message about innovation and the rules about AI use are not connecting well.
Many lecturers now use AI detectors to check if students have used AI in their writing. However, these detectors are not always reliable or accurate.
Most AI detectors do not truly detect AI authorship. They only look for certain patterns common in formal and well-written texts.
These tools flag essays that have perfect grammar, balanced sentences, and repeated transition phrases. In many cases, they mistake good writing for AI writing.
AI detectors cannot recognise human thought or emotion. They only analyse how the text looks and sounds, not what it means.
This means that even when a student writes an essay entirely by hand, it can still be marked as AI-generated. A well-written, clear, and structured essay may be punished instead of praised.
To avoid this, some students may start adding mistakes just to appear human. But that would make their work look careless and unprofessional.
If we write poorly on purpose, universities and employers may not take us seriously. They will wonder why we are not using tools to make our writing better.
This situation puts students in a trap. If we use AI, we are blamed. If we don’t, we are still blamed for not using technology well.
The real issue is whether educational institutions are ready to accept AI in practical learning. Are teachers ready to allow AI to support, not replace, students’ effort?
At the 11th KNUST Summer School, the CEO of MinoHealth AI Labs, Mr. Darlington Akogo, said that by 2028, AI could reach human-level intelligence. That means AI will soon be able to think and write like people do.
If detectors already confuse human writing for AI, what will happen when AI truly becomes human-like? Are schools prepared for that future?
Many universities still warn students not to use AI for academic or personal writing. This shows that we are still not ready to fully integrate AI into education.
Until schools create clear and fair guidelines, students will remain confused. AI should be seen as a helpful tool, not as a threat.
When used responsibly, AI can improve creativity, strengthen writing, and close learning gaps.
Banning it completely only limits progress and widens the gap between education and technology. What we need are clear rules that guide responsible use of AI in learning.
Only then can education truly benefit from the technology it so often praises.
SOURCE : RAVEMAN NEWS GHANA
