ELL, False Positives & Holistic Review

The simpler sentence structures, predictable vocabulary, and awkward grammatical variations that are common in language acquisition are common triggers for AI detection. This can frequently lead to false positives. It is vital that we are mindful of this fact when we are communicating potential issues with our English Language Learner students. Even if you are convinced that a student couldn’t have written their essay, the way in which international students learn English—and their limited exposure to vocabulary, college application concepts, and essay structures—might yield the same patterns that AI generation creates.

Admissions readers evaluate applications holistically. This process has many benefits, as it considers the whole applicant—beyond grades and test scores—evaluating personal qualities, experiences, and potential to contribute to the college community.

Similarly, with ELL students, colleges are not just looking for technical fluency—they want to see that students can comprehend live lectures and course materials, engage in class discussions and group work, complete academic assignments, and engage socially. Essays provide students with the opportunity to show their fluency and personality in new ways.

With holistic review, ELL students must be aware of the risk of any inconsistency in their application. If their essays demonstrate a marked difference in tone or ability with their fluency test scores, transcripts, or other application components, readers may suspect overreliance on AI or that someone else wrote their essays. We can use a similar holistic approach to our ELL students when addressing AI, taking a look at their writing as a body of work to address inconsistencies. With engaged, ambitious feedback, we can support our ELL writers in crafting essays that are polished, impactful, and reflective of their authentic voice.