Two Florida Atlantic University students told the student newspaper they received zero grades after their work was flagged as AI-written, one after a professor applied Turnitin; both grades were raised after the students emailed their professors
The University Press, Florida Atlantic University's student newspaper, reported on 29 September 2026 the accounts of two students who say they were penalised over AI-detection flags. A computer science sophomore submitted a paper 'last year' and received a zero after the professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin; after the student emailed the professor, the grade was improved. The student says that when they ran the paper through a detector, it said the writing was overly human-sounding. A senior sociology major was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero with little communication from the professor; after the student emailed to say no AI was used, the professor waived the penalty and gave a 50. The newspaper describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection and does not name the tool in that case. No professor's or university account of either case is reported.
- AI system
- Turnitin AI-text detector (reported)
- Turnitin
- Occurred
- Event date unknown
- Reported
- 29 September 2026
- Event location
- United States
- What the AI did
- Made a claim about the person
- Reported harm
- Educational Harm
- Whose AI use
- An institution’s AI use
- Setting
- Education
- Evidence
- AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source
- 4 claims: 4 reported. 4 open questions
- People reported harmed
- 2 people
AI system as recorded: Turnitin's AI-writing detection, which the student newspaper says the first student's professor applied to the paper; the tool behind the second student's accusation is not named, and the newspaper describes it as 'a false AI detection'
What Happened
First student. The newspaper reports that a sophomore studying computer science 'submitted a paper last year and received a zero after his professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin.' After the student emailed the teacher, 'he received a better grade.' The student is quoted: 'I ran it through an AI detector [Turnitin] myself to see why it got flagged, and the AI said my writing was overly human-sounding'.
Second student. A senior sociology major 'was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero for the assignment, with little to no communication or resolution from her professor.' After the student emailed to say no AI was used and suggested a revised score, 'her professor waived the penalty and gave her a 50.' The student is quoted as saying they got 'a horrible grade on something that I' did not do, and the newspaper describes the student's 'frustration with receiving a bad grade due to a false AI detection.'
Context in the same article. The newspaper says platforms like Turnitin 'have become standard classroom policy tools for professors'. An associate dean of Undergraduate Studies told the paper they do not use Turnitin and advised students 'to save every scrap of work, like handwritten notes'.
Limits. Single student-newspaper report based on the students' own accounts. The professors are not named or quoted, the Turnitin reports were not published, the dates are not given beyond 'last year' for the first student, and the tool used in the second case is not named.
Reported harm
Two students say they received zero grades after their work was flagged as AI-written, in one case after the professor applied Turnitin. Both say the grades were raised after they emailed their professors, the second only to 50 (students' accounts as reported by the student newspaper).
Outcome
ResolvedBy the students' accounts, the first student received a better grade after emailing the professor, and the second student's zero was changed to a 50 after the professor waived the penalty. No academic-integrity proceeding is reported.
What remains unknown
- When each assignment was submitted: the article says 'last year' for the first student, which may mean calendar 2025 or the previous academic year, and gives no date for the second.
- Which detection tool, if any, was used in the second student's case.
- What the Turnitin report showed and what the professors say happened.
- The first student's final grade.
What the evidence supports
AI involvement: reported. The student newspaper reports that the first student's professor flagged the paper for AI use after applying it to Turnitin, and describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection without naming the tool. The relation recorded is the detector's reported claim about the authorship of each student's work. No detector report was published.
4 claims: 4 reported. What the statuses mean
Reported A computer science sophomore submitted a paper and received a zero after the professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin; after the student emailed the professor, the student received a better grade.
Causal attribution. The newspaper's account, resting on the student's interview. The professor's account and the Turnitin report are not given.
- upressonline.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'a sophomore studying computer science at FAU, submitted a paper last year and received a zero after his professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin'; 'he received a better grade'
Reported That student says they ran the paper through an AI detector themselves and it said the writing was overly human-sounding.
Causal attribution. Student's own statement. The bracketed tool name is the newspaper's insertion.
- upressonline.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'I ran it through an AI detector [Turnitin] myself to see why it got flagged, and the AI said my writing was overly human-sounding'
Reported A senior sociology major was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero with little to no communication from the professor; after the student emailed to say no AI was used, the professor waived the penalty and gave a 50.
Causal attribution. The newspaper's account, resting on the student's interview. The professor's account is not given.
- upressonline.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero for the assignment, with little to no communication or resolution from her professor'; 'her professor waived the penalty and gave her a 50'
Reported The newspaper describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection; the student says they got a horrible grade for something they did not do. The tool is not named.
Causal attribution. The newspaper's characterisation and the student's statement. Whether a detector was used in this case and which one is not stated.
- upressonline.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
'explains her frustration with receiving a bad grade due to a false AI detection'; 'I ended up getting a horrible grade on something that I'
Sources
1 source inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.
- University Press (Florida Atlantic University), 29 September 2026: "Flawed AI detection is breaking trust within particular FAU classrooms"(opens in new tab)
s1 · upressonline.com · News report · English · Inspected · 29 September 2026 · Primary
How the sources were read, and where the events happened
Read in English in full. Student newspaper report based on interviews with the two students and two faculty members. Applies to s1.
Event countries: United States. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: Unknown.
The accounts concern coursework at Florida Atlantic University, whose Boca Raton campus the article pictures; the university is in Florida, United States. The students' countries of residence are not stated.
Reviewed for publication 2026-10-05: Published as two concrete, individually described accounts of students given zero grades after AI-detection flags, reported by their university's student newspaper and attributed to the students. The accounts are uncorroborated, and the students are not named in this record.
People described
Two undergraduate students at Florida Atlantic University: a computer science sophomore and a senior sociology major
People reported harmed in this case
2 people
0 AI participants · 2 other people harmed
Two students whose own accounts the article reports, each given a zero after an AI flag. They did not use the detector, so they are counted among people harmed through institutional use. The article's arithmetic about how many papers could be flagged is a projection and is not counted.
Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.
Tags
Cite this case
Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2026). Two Florida Atlantic University students told the student newspaper they received zero grades after their work was flagged as AI-written, one after a professor applied Turnitin; both grades were raised after the students emailed their professors. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-florida-atlantic-university-students-zero-grades-after-ai-detection-flags
BibTeX
@misc{2026_florida_atlantic_university_students_zero_grades_after_ai_detection_flags,
title = {Two Florida Atlantic University students told the student newspaper they received zero grades after their work was flagged as AI-written, one after a professor applied Turnitin; both grades were raised after the students emailed their professors},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {AI incidents},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-florida-atlantic-university-students-zero-grades-after-ai-detection-flags}
} Related cases
Adelphi accused Orion Newby of AI plagiarism after a detector flagged his paper; a Nassau County judge ordered the finding expunged
Orion Newby, an Adelphi University first-year student with language and auditory processing disabilities, received a zero in November 2024 on a World Civilizations paper after the professor suspected it was AI-generated and the university relied in part on AI-detection software; he was ordered to attend a plagiarism workshop and his appeal was denied, leaving him one finding from suspension or expulsion. Newby — who had written the paper with 15-20 hours of tutor support through the university's own disability program — said the detectors flagged his citations, and two other detectors scored the paper as human. After the family sued, New York State Supreme Court Judge Randy Sue Marber in Nassau County ruled on 28 January 2026 that Adelphi's finding and its denial of his appeal were 'without valid basis and devoid of reason' and ordered his record expunged. The family spent six figures on legal costs.
First-person forum account: a student in an AP Research course says their teacher reported that Turnitin's AI checker found their source annotations '100% AI' and said the checker never gives false accusations; the student says they wrote the work themselves and can show document history
In a public post to r/ApplyingToCollege early on 1 October 2026 (UTC), a student taking the Advanced Placement (AP) Research course writes that their teacher told them that day that their source annotations had been found to be '100% ai' by Turnitin. The student says they did not use AI. They say their document history shows them typing over the course of an hour and that some sentences closely follow notes they wrote for an earlier assignment. They also say they had faced no AI accusation in a research course with the same teacher the year before. By the student's account, the teacher said the matter would be discussed later and that Turnitin's AI checker feedback never ends up being a false accusation. The student says the accusation leaves them upset and unsure how to defend themselves. No grade or disciplinary outcome is reported. The account is uncorroborated, and one commenter doubted it.
Tennessee minors v. xAI: three girls say a man one of them knew used an AI app to make nude images and video of them and other minors, at least 19 in all, and traded them online; they sued xAI, and later also Stability AI, over the tool
Three Tennessee girls, two still minors, sued xAI in the Northern District of California on 16 March 2026 over AI-generated nude images and a video made of them as minors. According to the complaint, on or about 6 December 2025 an anonymous Instagram user sent one of them sexual AI images of herself made from her own photos, including her homecoming and yearbook pictures, and a link to a Discord server created by a person she knew, which held images and videos of at least 18 other minor girls, including the two other plaintiffs, many from her school. Local police arrested the man in late December 2025; the other two plaintiffs learned from investigators in February 2026 that he had made nude images of them, and he is alleged to have traded the files on Telegram and Mega. The plaintiffs describe anxiety, sleeplessness, nightmares, self-isolation and needing academic accommodations. Their first complaint said law enforcement linked the app he used to xAI's Grok technology; the July amended complaint says the app relied on Stability AI's tools and names Stability AI as a defendant. The case is at an early stage and no court has ruled on the allegations.
Student reports receiving a zero after a disputed AI-detector result
In an August 2025 first-person post, a student said they discovered a zero for a summer-course discussion assignment after a checker labelled 85% of the text AI-generated. They denied using AI to write it, reported contacting the professor, and described anger and fear of future accusations. Neither the detector output nor the school’s account was available for verification.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.