Judge Upholds School's Decision to Punish Student for AI-Generated Homework

Parents Sue School for Punishing Their Son for Copy-Pasting AI Homework, Get Rude Wakeup Call

A boy attending Hingham High School in Massachusetts got caught red-handed copying and pasting answers generated by an AI chatbot into his homework assignment, earning him a failing grade and a stint in detention. (Mercifully, he was allowed to redo the parts he cheated on.) His mom and dad, though, decided that this was some sort of cosmic injustice. Rather than use this as an opportunity to teach their kid about the wrongs of plagiarism, the parents -- Dale and Jennifer Harris -- fearful of their son's college prospects, threatened to sue the school. The couple probably expected the school's administrators to cave to the fear of litigation -- but they didn't. The case has gone to court, and unfortunately for the boy's overbearing parents, isn't exactly going their way, Ars Technica reports. As part of their lawsuit, the Harris family filed a motion demanding that the judge issue an injunction to the school that would force it to remove the incident from their son's disciplinary record, and to give the boy, only identified by his initials RNH in the court documents, a better grade. Because, as Jennifer argued, "they basically punished him for a rule that doesn't exist," she told WCVB last month. The judge presiding over the case, Paul Levenson at the Massachusetts District Court, didn't see it that way. On Monday, he issued an order that shot down their motion for an injunction. "On the facts, there is nothing in the preliminary factual record to suggest that HHS officials were hasty in concluding that RNH had cheated," Levenson wrote in the order, as quoted by Ars. According to the court order, the kiddo submitted a script for a school project that lifted entire passages of texts generated by an AI tool provided by the popular grammar checker Grammarly. He was caught after the AI detector Turnitin -- itself not without issues -- flagged his work, leading his history teacher to look through it more carefully. Among other damning clues, she found that the text cited nonexistent sources -- a common form of AI hallucinations. RNH didn't say that he used Grammarly or any other AI tool when he turned in his work. What's striking is that the parents don't deny that their kid used a large language model, though they maintain he simply used it for research instead of straight up cribbing its work. Instead, they argue -- rather speciously -- that the school's student handbook didn't explicitly forbid the use of AI, per WCVB. While technically true, the handbook does forbid unauthorized uses of technology in general, according to Ars. Firing back, the school also said that every student was given a copy of its AI policy, which does explicitly proscribe the use of AI tools for most types of school work and examinations. It sounds like a pretty open and shut case, but the lawsuit is still ongoing. As Ars notes, however, the fact that Levenson shot down the injunction is a sign that he thinks the defendants have the stronger case.

Judge Rules in Favor of School That Gave Student a Bad Grade for Using AI

Parents of a Massachusetts high schooler had sued the district in order to get their son's grade raised. A federal judge has ruled that a Massachusetts school was likely within its rights to discipline a student who used generative artificial intelligence to complete an assignment. Jennifer and Dale Harris, the student's parents, sued the town of Hingham's school committee earlier this year, arguing that the high school's policies prohibiting academic dishonesty did not explicitly say that students couldn't use AI. They asked the federal district court to issue a preliminary injunction that would remove the detention their son received from his academic record and to raise his grade in the A.P. History class where he cheated from a C-plus to a B. "There is nothing in the preliminary factual record to suggest that [Hingham High School] officials were hasty in concluding that [the Harris's son] had cheated," Judge Paul Levenson wrote in an order denying the family's request for a preliminary injunction against the district. "Nor were the consequences Defendants imposed so heavy-handed as to exceed Defendants' considerable discretion in such matters." Another student who partnered with the plaintiffs' son on the project and was also disciplined for cheating did not sue the school district. Levenson wrote that the evidence shows the students didn't simply use AI to formulate research topics or identify potential sources. "Instead, it seems they indiscriminately copied and pasted text that had been generated by Grammarly.com." The copied text included citations for non-existent books -- which appears to be one of the things AI is best at generating -- including a book supposedly written by the author Jane Doe. In their lawsuit, the Harrises said that Hingham school officials pursued a "pervasive, destructive and merciless path of threats, intimidation and coercion to impact and derail [our son's] future and his exemplary record." The discipline he received harmed his chances of getting into elite colleges like Stanford University, they alleged. But Levenson said "there is no dispute" that the school officials gave Harrises ample opportunity to express their opinions prior to the lawsuit and that the family hadn't shown any misconduct by school authorities. Rather than failing to make school policies on AI clear, Levenson wrote, the Hingham High School A.P. English Language teacher gave a lesson on academic integrity and expectations for the use of AI during the first week of a class that the Harris's son was enrolled in. She also sent students a document that instructed them not to use AI without permission or to copy and paste blocks of text into assignments. While their request for a preliminary injunction was denied and Levenson doesn't appear particularly convinced by their arguments, the Harris's lawsuit against the Hingham school committee remains alive.

School did nothing wrong when it punished student for using AI, court rules

A federal court yesterday ruled against parents who sued a Massachusetts school district for punishing their son who used an artificial intelligence tool to complete an assignment. Dale and Jennifer Harris sued Hingham High School officials and the School Committee and sought a preliminary injunction requiring the school to change their son's grade and expunge the incident from his disciplinary record before he needs to submit college applications. The parents argued that there was no rule against using AI in the student handbook, but school officials said the student violated multiple policies. The Harris' motion for an injunction was rejected in an order issued yesterday from US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. US Magistrate Judge Paul Levenson found that school officials "have the better of the argument on both the facts and the law." "On the facts, there is nothing in the preliminary factual record to suggest that HHS officials were hasty in concluding that RNH [the Harris' son, referred to by his initials] had cheated," Levenson wrote. "Nor were the consequences Defendants imposed so heavy-handed as to exceed Defendants' considerable discretion in such matters." "On the evidence currently before the Court, I detect no wrongdoing by Defendants," Levenson also wrote. The incident occurred in December 2023 when RNH was a junior. The school determined that RNH and another student "had cheated on an AP US History project by attempting to pass off, as their own work, material that they had taken from a generative artificial intelligence ('AI') application," Levenson wrote. "Although students were permitted to use AI to brainstorm topics and identify sources, in this instance the students had indiscriminately copied and pasted text from the AI application, including citations to nonexistent books (i.e., AI hallucinations)."

Massachusetts Student's Punishment for AI Use Can Stand, US Judge Rules

BOSTON (Reuters) - A federal judge has rejected a bid by the parents of a Massachusetts high school senior to force his school to expunge his disciplinary record and raise his history class grade after officials accused him of using an artificial intelligence program to cheat on a class assignment. U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Levenson in Boston on Wednesday ruled that officials at Hingham High School reasonably concluded that the use of the AI tool by Jennifer and Dale Harris' son to complete a class project violated academic integrity rules. The judge as a result declined to issue an order at a preliminary stage in the litigation that would force the school to expunge their son's disciplinary record and raise his AP U.S. History grade from a C-plus to a B. Levenson said the emergence of generative AI "may present some nuanced challenges for educators." But he said the school's plagiarism policy was adequate to alert students they could not copy text from another source and pass it off as their own. Gareth Norris, a lawyer for the school, called the ruling "factually accurate and legally sound." The parents' attorney did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday. The parents sued after school officials concluded in December 2023 that during their son's junior year, he cheated on an AP U.S. History assignment by copying and pasting text generated by an online AI tool, including citations to nonexistent books, without attribution. As punishment, the student had to attend a Saturday detention and was rejected from the school's National Honor Society, though he was later allowed to reapply and gained admission. His parents argued the school violated his due process rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Constitution by not adequately informing him about how its academic honesty standards apply to the use of AI. Their son testified that he had been confused about the rules regarding the use of AI, which students were allowed to use to generate ideas and identify sources. Levenson said the evidence showed the teen and his class partner did not simply use AI to help formulate research topics but "indiscriminately" copied text produced by an AI tool Grammarly and did not even review the "sources" it provided them. (Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Bill Berkrot)

Massachusetts student's punishment for AI use can stand, US judge rules

BOSTON (Reuters) - A federal judge has rejected a bid by the parents of a Massachusetts high school senior to force his school to expunge his disciplinary record and raise his history class grade after officials accused him of using an artificial intelligence program to cheat on a class assignment. U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Levenson in Boston on Wednesday ruled that officials at Hingham High School reasonably concluded that the use of the AI tool by Jennifer and Dale Harris' son to complete a class project violated academic integrity rules. The judge as a result declined to issue an order at a preliminary stage in the litigation that would force the school to expunge their son's disciplinary record and raise his AP U.S. History grade from a C-plus to a B. Levenson said the emergence of generative AI "may present some nuanced challenges for educators." But he said the school's plagiarism policy was adequate to alert students they could not copy text from another source and pass it off as their own. Gareth Norris, a lawyer for the school, called the ruling "factually accurate and legally sound." The parents' attorney did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday. The parents sued after school officials concluded in December 2023 that during their son's junior year, he cheated on an AP U.S. History assignment by copying and pasting text generated by an online AI tool, including citations to nonexistent books, without attribution. As punishment, the student had to attend a Saturday detention and was rejected from the school's National Honor Society, though he was later allowed to reapply and gained admission. His parents argued the school violated his due process rights under the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Constitution by not adequately informing him about how its academic honesty standards apply to the use of AI. Their son testified that he had been confused about the rules regarding the use of AI, which students were allowed to use to generate ideas and identify sources. Levenson said the evidence showed the teen and his class partner did not simply use AI to help formulate research topics but "indiscriminately" copied text produced by an AI tool Grammarly and did not even review the "sources" it provided them. (Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Bill Berkrot)