What to actually say to your professor

The first reply

Aim for four sentences. Acknowledge, deny plainly, name your evidence, request a meeting. Do not explain how detectors work — that comes later, in person, if at all.

In the meeting: lead with process

Open by offering the artefacts, not by disputing the score. 'Here is the version history — you can see it built up across nine sessions over two weeks' does more work than any argument about perplexity.

Then invite the content conversation. Ask them to pick any paragraph and let you explain why it is there. This is the strongest single thing you can do, and it is the one thing that would be impossible if you had pasted the document.

If they ask directly whether you used AI at all

Answer precisely and honestly. If you used a grammar checker, say so and say what for. 'I used Grammarly for comma and spelling corrections. I did not use its rewrite suggestions' is a clear, defensible answer.

Vagueness here is what destroys students. A precise partial admission is credible; a sweeping denial that later turns out to have an exception is not.

Phrases that help

• 'I understand why the score raised a question — can I show you how I wrote it?'
• 'Here is the version history, and here are the sources I read but did not end up using.'
• 'English is my second language, and I have read that this is a known factor in these scores. I would rather show you my drafts than argue about the tool.'
• 'Would you be willing to pick a section and let me talk you through my reasoning?'

Phrases that hurt

• 'That tool is completely unreliable' — you are attacking something the institution chose.
• 'Everyone uses AI anyway' — reads as an admission.
• 'I might have used a little' when you did not — never bargain against yourself.
• 'This is discrimination' — may well be true in substance, but as an opener it ends the collaborative conversation and starts an adversarial one.