evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

South African Universities Switch Off Turnitin's AI Detector Over Bias and False-Positive Risks

South Africa · Cape Town · See the South Africa profile · See the Cape Town profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 14% 67/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Facing evidence that AI-text detectors misclassify non-native English writing, South Africa's UCT, Stellenbosch, UFS and Wits disabled Turnitin's AI detector in 2025-26, replacing it with redesigned, process-based assessment instead of automated policing.

61 %
Non-native-English essays misflagged as AI-generated (2023)
97 %
Essays flagged by at least one of seven detectors (2023)
98 %
North-West University's retained detector accuracy claim
South African Universities Switch Off Turnitin's AI Detector Over Bias and False-Positive Risks

Details

Promoter
University of Cape Town
Period
2023-2026 (Stanford study 2023; university decisions Oct 2025 - Jul 2026)
Keywords
higher education, academic integrity, AI-text detection, assessment policy

Context

The University of Cape Town disabled Turnitin's AI-writing detection feature in October 2025, followed by Stellenbosch University at the end of 2025 and the University of the Free State from 1 July 2026, while the University of the Witwatersrand had never enabled the tool.

Activities

The decisions cite a peer-reviewed 2023 Stanford study finding that seven leading AI-text detectors flagged 61% of authentic essays by non-native English speakers as AI-generated (97% flagged by at least one tool), plus concrete failures documented by Rhodes University academics, including a student whose human-written work was 30% flagged, detectors disagreeing on the same essay, and a professor's own assignment questions being flagged as AI-generated.

Results

In place of automated detection, the universities are moving toward oral presentations and defences, reflective journals, iterative drafting with in-class writing components, and explicit teaching about appropriate AI use, reasoning that these process-based approaches catch misuse without punishing students for their writing style.

Conclusions

This is a corrective, harm-avoidance practice rather than a proven learning intervention: no institution reports outcome data showing improved integrity or learning under the new regime, and North-West University's retained detector, with a claimed 98% accuracy and under 1% false positives, shows South African institutions have not reached consensus on the underlying evidence.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Low (< €50k)
Time to results
Short (< 1 year)
Staffing & skills
University of Cape Town Centre for Innovation in Learning and Teaching (Sukaina Walji), Stellenbosch University (Dr Hanelie Adendorff), University of the Free State (Prof Francois Strydom)

Conditions for success

  • Citing a peer-reviewed external study (Stanford 2023) as the evidentiary basis for the policy change
  • Redesigning assessment toward oral presentations, reflective journals and iterative drafting rather than relying on detection software
  • Explicit institutional communication naming the false-positive risk for non-native English speakers

Common failure modes

  • No institution has yet published outcome data showing the new assessment regime improves integrity or learning
  • North-West University's decision to retain its detector shows no national consensus has been reached

Where it fits

Governance type
higher-education institutions
Scale
national
Income level
upper-middle-income

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful