Turnitin published a report on student use of AI in written assignments and institutional monitoring of AI in education. The findings show that higher education in the US has a higher proportion of AI-assisted writing than in the UK or Australia.
Almost one in five submissions, or 19.4%, from U.S. higher education students had an AI writing score of 80% or higher. This compares to 9.8% in the UK and 10.2% in Australia, based on an analysis of posts to Turnitin’s AI write detection tool across three countries.
For middle school students, levels were low in all three markets, with AI writing submission scores ranging from 5% to 6% and above 80%.
The numbers are drawn from a large dataset covering higher education institutions in the US, UK and Australia. The sample includes 33 million US claims, 2.1 million UK claims, and 3.1 million Australian claims from October 2025 to April 2026.
classroom control
Along with student data, the report points to changes in who shapes the use of AI on campus. In a survey of 160 webinar participants, 48% said that education and learning institution leaders are primarily responsible for implementing AI-related tools and systems in their institutions.
As a result, educators far outperform IT and technology leaders, cited by 17% of respondents, and cross-functional boards, cited by 16%. This result suggests that teachers and instructors are taking a more direct role in setting rules regarding AI in the classroom.
Turnitin drew broader conclusions from qualitative and quantitative materials collected at more than 60 educational events in the first half of 2026 and analysis of student interactions using its AI writing transparency tool Turnitin Clarity.
In addition to checking completed work, educators are increasingly focusing on seeing how students use AI during the writing process. The report identified transparency, customizable quota settings, and support for different assignment types as three key areas of demand.
This emphasis reflects a broader shift in how institutions approach generative AI. Rather than focusing solely on detection, universities and schools are deciding when to allow AI, how to expose it, and to what extent it should be integrated into education.
Policy pressure is also growing in the United States, with some states introducing rules requiring school districts to adopt formal AI policies or use centrally managed frameworks. These requirements lend weight to discussions already underway regarding accountability, consistency, and responsible use.
director’s request
The report suggests that many educators want more discretion in how they handle AI in individual assignments. This includes the ability to set assignment-specific rules and differentiate between acceptable assistance and full outsourcing of student writing.
For universities, the question is not just whether AI appears in the submitted work, but whether students are using it in ways that align with their learning objectives. This data suggests that there is more concern in higher education, where the incidence of heavy use of AI is significantly higher than levels seen in secondary education.
Turnitin positioned this issue as one of visibility for faculty. Annie Chechitelli, chief product officer at Turnitin, outlined her views in comments accompanying the report.
“Educators I talk to all want the same two things: They want to see how their students are actually using AI, and they want to be able to decide for themselves when AI is and isn’t in their assignments,” said Annie Chechitelli, Turnitin’s chief product officer.
“Our job is to give educators the visibility and flexibility to make calls in their own classrooms,” Checchitelli said.
Turnitin said it serves more than 16,000 customers in 185 countries and territories and has a broad footprint in schools, colleges and universities as institutions rethink their approach to AI in assessment and academic integrity.
