Ask a chatbot to write an essay on Antigone and it will produce something competent in seconds. Because the play is so widely taught and discussed online, AI tools know it well. Teachers are now reading essays and wondering how much of the thinking was the student's own.

Detection software is unreliable, and false accusations can seriously harm students. Relying on it alone is risky. A stronger approach is to design assignments and policies that make authentic work the natural choice.

That starts with being clear about what is allowed. Students should know whether AI can be used for brainstorming, for feedback, or not at all.

Here are practical steps for handling AI-generated work on Antigone assignments.

Write a Clear, Specific Policy

Vague statements like "do your own work" leave room for confusion. Spell out which uses are acceptable and which are not, and explain the reasoning. Students are more likely to follow rules they understand.

• State whether AI may be used for brainstorming, outlining, or feedback
• Require students to disclose any AI assistance they used
• Explain how you will respond to suspected violations
• Describe the process students can use to show their own thinking
• Share the policy in writing at the start of the unit

Design Assignments That Are Harder to Outsource

Generic prompts invite generic essays. Tie assignments to class discussions, specific passages you analyzed together, or personal connections that a chatbot cannot know. Include in-class writing and process work like outlines and drafts.

Short conferences, where a student explains their argument aloud, are another effective check. Someone who wrote the essay can usually discuss it comfortably.

Grade the Process, Not Only the Product

When drafts, notes, and revision reflections count toward the grade, authentic engagement is rewarded. A student who has shown their thinking along the way is unlikely to submit a wholly generated paper. It also gives you evidence to review if concerns arise.

Keep the tone supportive. Many students turn to AI out of stress or uncertainty, and a conversation often reveals what they need.

Use AI Deliberately Where It Helps

Banning AI entirely is not realistic, and some uses are educationally sound. Structured feedback tools, used transparently and tied to a rubric, can help students revise their own work rather than replace it. The important distinction is between AI that writes for a student and AI that helps a student improve what they wrote.

A thoughtful policy separates these uses and communicates them clearly. That gives students a fair framework and gives teachers a path to grade with confidence.