Where was it against the rules and do you have proof beyond the weak assumptions made in the article? Aside from sources that didn't exist, or citing their use of Grammerly (oh shit, I should cite MS word too because it suggested a synonym so my paper would be more 'concise' lol), I'm not seeing much proof. The teachers testimony was largely based on the fact one AI said the other paper had portions of AI generated content, and her feeling like 52 minutes on the final paper isn't enough. I spend way less than 52 minutes on my final drafts because it was largely just copying/pasting shit from my rough drafts and maybe deciding to reword.
At the end of the day though, we are all making some leaps in our judgement. Allowing the use of AI at the school, then getting pissed at some bs being submitted is like allowing students to use calculators then blaming the student for not being able to show their long division.
I totally apologize if I've caused you some distress with my views and words. After reading through the article, I didn't see any rule listed. Could there be one, sure why not, I didn't see it and my attention got pulled away by the teachers 'feeling' being quoted as holding so much weight in what should have been an open/shut case of 'is X prohibited from being used?/Was that communicated properly?/Was it understood?'
If my words offend or frustrate, I truly apologize and I hope you have a wonderful weekend!