Classic works like Tvrdica are heavily summarized online, which makes them vulnerable to copied or machine-generated essays. A student can generate a plausible analysis of Harpagon in seconds, even without having read the play. Teachers often respond with blanket bans that are difficult to enforce and leave students confused about what is allowed. A clear, specific AI policy is a better foundation for both integrity and learning.

A good policy begins by explaining the purpose of the assignment, because students are more likely to follow rules that make sense. If the goal is to practice forming an original interpretation of the casket scene, then having a chatbot write the analysis defeats that goal. Explain this plainly and give examples of uses that are acceptable, such as asking for a vocabulary definition, and uses that are not, such as generating a thesis. Specific examples remove ambiguity.

Ambiguity is the main source of problems, since students often genuinely do not know where the line is. Is it acceptable to ask an AI tool to check grammar after writing a draft? May they use it to brainstorm possible topics? State your rules for each stage of the writing process, and tell students what to do if they are unsure. Inviting questions makes honesty easier.

Designing Assignments That Resist Shortcuts

The best protection is an assignment that is difficult to outsource. Tie prompts to class discussion, require references to specific scenes you analyzed together, or ask for an in-class annotation of a short passage before the essay is written. Process-based requirements, such as submitting an outline and a rough draft, also make it harder to submit a finished product that has no history. These designs encourage authentic work without relying on detection alone.

• Explain the purpose of the assignment and why original thinking matters
• List specific permitted and prohibited uses of AI tools
• Require outlines, drafts, or annotations as part of the process
• Tie prompts to class discussion and particular scenes
• Provide a clear procedure for students who are unsure

Handling Suspected Misuse

If you suspect a student has misused AI or copied from a study guide, begin with a conversation rather than an accusation. Ask them to explain their argument and discuss a passage from Tvrdica in their own words. A student who wrote the essay can usually do this easily, while one who did not often cannot. This approach is fairer than relying on detection software, which can produce false positives.

Document your concerns and follow your school's established procedures. Be careful not to treat stylistic polish alone as evidence, since strong writers and students who received help from tutors may produce clean prose. Focus on whether the work reflects the student's own understanding of the text. A consistent, transparent process protects both the student and the teacher.

Teaching Responsible Use

Students will encounter AI tools throughout their lives, so teaching responsible use is part of preparing them. Discuss the limitations of AI summaries of Tvrdica, including factual errors and generic analysis. Have students critique an AI-generated paragraph about Harpagon and identify what is missing, such as specific evidence or a real argument. This builds critical thinking while making clear why original work is valuable.

Teachers can also model responsible use by being open about how they use technology in their own work. For example, explaining that an AI tool helps generate first-pass feedback that the teacher reviews shows how tools can support rather than replace judgment. This transparency builds trust and sets a standard for ethical use. Students are more likely to respect the boundaries when they see them applied consistently.