Every English teacher has read the essay. The sentences are clean, the structure is tidy, and the claims are about satire, absurdity, and the bureaucracy of war. Yet nothing in it suggests the student actually read Catch-22, because there is not a single detail that could not come from a study guide.

That kind of essay might come from a student who leaned on online summaries, borrowed language from a study site, or used an AI writing tool to generate a draft. It is hard to know which, and accusations are risky. Detection software is unreliable enough that many schools warn against treating its output as proof.

A more productive question is what the essay demonstrates. If a paper does not show evidence of close reading, it does not meet the standard, regardless of where it came from. Grading for specificity handles many problems without requiring you to guess at intent.

The sections below outline what to look for and how to respond in ways that are fair and educational.

What Generic Essays Have in Common

Generic essays tend to make broad claims and support them with vague references to events. They mention Yossarian, the military, and the absurdity of the rules, but rarely quote or cite a particular scene. The analysis floats above the text instead of grounding itself in it.

• Claims that could apply to almost any war novel
• Evidence described in general terms with no quotation or scene detail
• Polished language with little sign of a personal reading
• Errors in small details, such as the wrong character in a scene
• Conclusions that restate the introduction in fancier words

Design Assignments That Reward Real Reading

You can make generic essays less effective by adjusting the task. Ask students to analyze a specific passage you choose, connect it to an in-class discussion, or incorporate a detail that only someone who read carefully would notice. Short in-class writing samples also give you a baseline for a student's voice.

Include a process component, such as a planning sheet or an annotated passage, as part of the grade. Students who did the reading can produce these easily. It also builds habits that make the final essay stronger for everyone.

Responding Without Accusing

If an essay seems off, start with a conversation instead of a verdict. Ask the student to talk through their argument, explain a quotation, or describe how they chose their evidence. A student who wrote the paper can usually do this easily, and the conversation itself tells you a lot.

Grade the essay against the rubric as written. If it lacks specific evidence and original analysis, it scores low on those criteria, and the feedback explains why. That approach is consistent, defensible, and focused on learning.

Grading for Depth at Scale

Checking specificity across a whole set of essays is tedious but important. GraideMind can score against criteria that reward passage-level evidence and flag essays where analysis stays general, which gives you a starting point for closer review. The tool does not decide whether a student cheated, and it should not, but it helps you see which essays lack depth.

Pair that with clear course policies about AI use and open conversations with students about why the reading matters. Students who understand what you are looking for are more likely to give it to you.