Flagged by an AI detector? Write the appeal in two minutes.
Fill in the details, tick the evidence you have, and get a calm letter for your instructor or academic integrity office. It explains why a detector score is weak evidence on its own and lists what you can show instead. Nothing you type leaves your browser.
Dear [Name of instructor or integrity officer], I am writing about the concern raised that my submission "[Assignment title]" for [Course name and code] was produced with generative AI. I wrote this work myself, and I would like the opportunity to show how. I understand the concern came from Turnitin's AI writing indicator. AI detectors estimate how likely a text is to be machine-generated from the finished text alone. They do not observe how it was written, they produce false positives, and their makers advise against using a score as the sole basis for a misconduct finding. Writing that is formal, carefully edited or produced by someone writing in a second language is particularly prone to being flagged. I can provide the following evidence of my writing process: 1. The document's version history, showing the text being written and revised over several sessions. 2. Earlier drafts, outlines and notes made while I developed the argument. I would like to request a meeting where I can present this evidence and answer any questions. Thank you for your time and for considering this carefully. I want to resolve this fairly and am happy to provide anything else that would help. Sincerely, [Your name]
Edit the letter so it sounds like you, and check your institution's appeal procedure and deadlines. This is a template, not legal advice.
Gather the evidence first.
The letter is only as strong as what you attach. Export your document's version history before anything else; it is easy to lose when a file is copied or downloaded in another format. Collect drafts, outlines and notes, even messy ones. Messy is good: it is what thinking looks like.
Then read why detectors misfire, so you can answer questions without getting defensive. Why AI detectors produce false positives covers the mechanics, and how to prove you wrote something walks through each kind of evidence and how much weight it carries.
About appealing an AI flag.
Should I appeal if a detector flagged my work but I wrote it?
Usually, yes, and promptly. Most institutions have a deadline for responding. A detector score is an estimate made from the finished text; it does not observe how you wrote it, and the companies that make these tools say a score should not be the only basis for a misconduct finding.
What evidence helps the most?
Anything that shows the work being made over time: document version history, earlier drafts, outlines, research notes, and the sources you read. Being able to talk through your argument in person is persuasive too. The strongest single item is a record made while you wrote, such as a Humanums certificate, because it shows typing rhythm, pauses and revisions rather than just the final text.
What tone should the letter take?
Calm and specific. Assume the reader is doing their job and wants to get it right. State that you wrote the work, explain why a detector score is weak evidence on its own, list what you can show, and ask for a concrete next step. Anger reads as weakness in these processes even when it is justified.
Is my information stored?
No. The letter is assembled in your browser from fixed paragraphs. Nothing you type is sent anywhere.
Is this legal advice?
No. It is a template to help you write clearly. If the outcome could affect your enrollment, a visa or a degree, talk to your student union, an academic advisor or a lawyer as well.