You are not deterred and truly repentant, after I warned you in the previous week you still repeat the same actions.

https://steemit.com/hive-167213/@hisgeneral/spghj1#@hisgeneral/spghj1

Although this post is in undetectable mode by AI tools we can easily figure it out, since it does not contain the author's personal insights.

Text analysis of question 1, AI replied:

The likelihood of the provided text being generated by AI is moderate to high for several reasons:

1. Structured and Logical Progression: The text is well-organized, beginning with a general idea (teachers as role models) and progressively delving into specific points like long-term impact, behavioral influence, trust building, character development, and time spent with teachers. This logical progression is characteristic of AI-generated content that prioritizes clarity and completeness.

2. General Language and Concepts: The use of common educational themes such as "character modeling," "trust building," "long-term impact," and "development of character" reflects general knowledge found in AI training datasets. The ideas presented are broadly applicable and do not rely on unique personal anecdotes or specialized research.

3. Repetition of Common Ideas: AI-generated text often reiterates widely accepted notions, such as teachers influencing students' behavior, students spending more time with teachers than parents, and the impact of role models. These are general truths that an AI would synthesize from its training data.

4. Neutral Tone and Lack of Personal Experience: The text uses an impersonal tone, avoiding specific personal examples or unique storytelling. This neutrality is common in AI-generated explanations or essays.

5. Quantitative Data for Emphasis: The use of time-related data (e.g., "10 hours per day" in school) to emphasize teachers' influence is typical of AI trying to substantiate arguments with numerical context.

While the text could have been written by a human, the combination of structured argumentation, reliance on general truths, and absence of unique insights makes it likely to have been generated by AI or written in a similar manner.

Text analysis of question 2, AI answers:

The text reflects a candid acknowledgment of negative teaching behaviors, likely generated by someone reflecting deeply on their teaching style. While it could be written by AI or a human, there are indicators that lean toward it being AI-generated:

1. Structured Analysis: The text clearly identifies and explains multiple negative behaviors, such as yelling, frowning, showing disappointment, and lacking empathy, in a logical sequence. AI often organizes thoughts this way for clarity.

2. Generalization: The examples given, such as yelling or showing disappointment, are commonly discussed challenges in teaching. They reflect general issues rather than unique, deeply personal experiences, which is typical of AI outputs.

3. Neutral and Reflective Tone: The tone remains balanced, with no extreme self-criticism or over-justification, focusing instead on the implications of these behaviors. This neutrality is characteristic of AI attempting to provide a reflective answer.

4. Focus on Impact: The emphasis on how these behaviors "hurt students," "impair learning," and "frustrate academic accomplishment" aligns with AI's tendency to connect actions with their broader consequences, based on widely accepted educational principles.

While the text could come from a teacher reflecting on their habits, its generality and structured reflection make it plausible as AI-generated content or influenced by AI-driven writing.

---

---

@the-gorilla Can you help check his other posts, I'm afraid he won a number of competitions in a dishonorable way.

cc. @steemcurator01, @steemcurator02