The Department of Authenticity in the Age of Algorithmic Suspicion

SCENE I: THE EMERGENCY TOWN HALL

Subject line:

“URGENT: Preserving Human Essence in the Era of Machine Text.”

Attendance:

• 43 black Zoom rectangles

• 6 people unmuting accidentally

• 1 Vice-Dean speaking from a ring-lit kitchen

The Vice-Dean announces:

“We must defend authentic student voice.”

Chat explodes:

• “Define authentic?”

• “What is voice?”

• “Is Grammarly colonial?”

• “Can authenticity be rubric-aligned?”

No one answers. A task force is formed.

---

SCENE II: THE AUTHENTICITY DETECTION PROTOCOL

New policy:

• All essays must pass through:

  • AI detection software

  • Plagiarism scanner

  • Stylistic anomaly algorithm

  • Emotional sincerity heat map

If flagged, students must:

• Attend a Voice Verification Interview

• Explain how they formed each paragraph

• Reproduce one sentence spontaneously under observation

One student is asked:

“Could you please think that sentence again, but more originally?”

---

SCENE III: THE HYBRID LECTURE

In the physical room:

• 4 students

• 28 empty chairs

• 1 flickering projector

On Zoom:

• 57 participants

• 39 cameras off

• 12 profile photos from 2018

• 1 student whose microphone constantly breathes

The lecturer:

• Speaks to the room

• Speaks to the void

• Speaks to the Chat

• Forgets which dimension she occupies

She asks a question.

In-person students look at laptops.

Online students look at silence.

The silence looks back.

Participation marks are awarded based on “energetic presence.”

---

SCENE IV: THE RETURN OF THE BLUE BOOK

In response to AI:

Administration declares:

“We shall return to handwritten exams.”

Students are issued:

• Blue books

• Ballpoint pens

• Existential dread

One student writes in immaculate cursive:

“This handwriting has been optimised by a generative wrist.”

The invigilator sweats.

---

SCENE V: THE AUTHENTICITY RUBRIC

Criteria include:

• Spontaneity (structured)

• Originality (within guidelines)

• Voice (consistent with prior voice but not suspiciously so)

• Humanity (demonstrated without stylistic deviation)

Grade descriptors:

HD: Authentically authentic

D: Mostly authentic, minor algorithmic aura

C: Potentially human

P: Requires re-humanisation

F: Suspiciously articulate

---

SCENE VI: FACULTY DEVELOPMENT DAY — “HOW TO BE HUMAN”

Workshop 1:

“Distinguishing Students from Software: A Vibes-Based Approach”

Workshop 2:

“Incorporating AI Ethically While Pretending Not To”

Workshop 3:

“Rediscovering the Blackboard as Sacred Technology”

Meanwhile, half the staff quietly use AI to:

• Draft emails

• Generate marking comments

• Rewrite learning outcomes

• Summarise the meeting they are currently in

But this is different.

Because they are authentic.

---

SCENE VII: THE HAUNTED CAMPUS

At night, the hybrid campus flickers:

• Zoom recordings replay themselves.

• Echoes of “You’re on mute” drift through corridors.

• Old lecture theatres hum with ghost Wi-Fi.

In the server room, an algorithm whispers:

“Define authenticity.”

No one responds. The Wi-Fi drops.

---

EPILOGUE: THE GREAT PARADOX

The university demands:

• More humanity

• More innovation

• More surveillance

• More efficiency

• More connection

• More documentation of connection

Students learn to:

• Sound human

• Perform authenticity

• Write unpredictably predictable prose

And somewhere — in the small, unmonitored gap between panic and policy —

someone writes something genuinely strange, alive, and risky.

It is flagged for review.