A widely read book with well-known themes is exactly the kind of assignment topic that invites shortcuts. Students can find summaries, study guides, and AI-generated essays on Murder City in seconds, and many of them are tempted to use those resources. Teachers need a strategy that goes beyond hoping students will behave and instead builds integrity into the design of the assignment.

The first step is a clear policy. Students should know whether AI tools may be used for brainstorming, outlining, grammar checking, or not at all, and what disclosure is expected when they are used. Ambiguity creates problems because students may genuinely not know where the line is, and it leaves teachers without a fair basis for addressing violations.

Assignment design matters even more than policy. Prompts that require students to engage with specific passages, connect the reading to class discussion, or reflect on their own revision process are harder to outsource. A generic prompt about the themes of the book is the easiest to answer with a copied or generated response.

Design Prompts That Reward Original Thinking

Prompts that ask students to take a position on a debatable question and defend it with evidence from particular chapters produce more distinctive responses. Requiring page references or short quotations from assigned sections makes it easy to check whether the student actually read the book. Including a component that references an in-class activity adds another layer of personalization.

• Require specific page citations for evidence drawn from the book.
• Tie prompts to a class discussion or a particular in-class activity.
• Collect planning materials, outlines, and drafts along with the final essay.
• Include a short reflection on how the student's thinking changed during revision.
• Use occasional in-class writing to establish a baseline of each student's voice.

Be Careful With AI Detection Scores

Automated detection tools are not reliable enough to serve as the sole basis for an accusation. False positives occur, and they can fall disproportionately on students whose writing style is more formulaic, including some English learners. A detection score may be a reason to look more closely, but it should never replace a conversation with the student and a review of the evidence.

More reliable indicators include sudden changes in writing quality compared with earlier work, vague references to the book with no page numbers, and details that do not match the text. Comparing a suspicious paper with the student's in-class writing can also be revealing. Documenting these observations gives you a fair and defensible record if a concern needs to be escalated.

Have Constructive Conversations With Students

When a concern arises, begin with a conversation rather than a penalty. Ask the student to explain their argument, describe how they found their evidence, and walk through their drafting process. Students who wrote their own essays can usually do this easily, while those who did not often struggle.

These conversations are also teaching moments. Many students who misuse tools do so out of stress, confusion about expectations, or lack of confidence in their writing. Addressing those underlying causes can prevent repeated problems and strengthen the relationship between teacher and student.

Use Grading Tools Responsibly

Teachers who use AI to assist with grading should hold themselves to the same standards of transparency they expect from students. Let students know how feedback is generated and that a teacher reviews it. This builds trust and models the responsible use of technology.

AI grading tools can also support integrity indirectly by providing fast feedback on drafts, which reduces the pressure that leads students to cut corners. When students receive timely and useful responses to their own writing, they are more likely to see the process as worthwhile. That shift in perspective is often the most effective integrity measure of all.