Skip to content
Idaho AI Classroom
All lessons
AI FluencyEvaluation and Critical Thinking9-12.AIF.ECT.5

Catching Hallucinations

9–1050 minutes90 minutes (extend hands-on and discussion)

Standard quoted exactly

Recognize when an AI model produces erroneous outputs (i.e., hallucinations).

Example from the standards. An LLM creates a report that cites a document that doesn't actually exist.

Student-friendly learning targets

  • I can define a hallucination as a confident, wrong, or made-up AI output presented as if it were true.
  • I can catch a fake citation, a wrong Idaho fact, and a mixed half-true paragraph in a printed report.
  • I can follow a verification protocol before I trust AI-generated research in school.

Essential questions

  1. Why does wrong output still sound finished and professional?
  2. How can I tell a real source from a made-up one?
  3. What should I do in the first two minutes after an AI tool hands me a report?

Objectives

  1. Students will recognize hallucinations using the standards example of a report that cites a document that does not exist.
  2. Students will fact-check a two-page fake Idaho report using Chromebooks or a printed source bank.
  3. Students will classify errors as invented citation, wrong local fact, outdated fact, or mixed truth.
  4. Students will apply a three-step verification protocol: isolate the claim, find a trusted source, confirm or reject.
  5. Students will explain why fluency and polite tone are not evidence of truth.

Key vocabulary

Hallucination
When an AI system generates information that is incorrect, misleading, or entirely fabricated, but presents it as if it were true.
Citation
A pointer to a source. A hallucinated citation names a paper, law, or article that cannot be found because it was invented.
Fabrication
A made-up detail, quote, statistic, or document presented as real.
Verification
The process of checking a claim against a trusted source before using it.
Primary source
An original record, such as a statute, a hospital policy page, a fire incident report, or a company press page, not a chatbot's summary.
False confidence
Wording that sounds sure ('studies show,' 'according to') even when the model has no reliable basis.
Source bank
A teacher-provided set of real excerpts students can use to check claims when live search is unavailable.

Teacher background

Hallucination is the error students will meet most often in schoolwork: a fluent paragraph with a citation that does not exist. The standards example is exactly that. Ninth- and tenth-graders do not need a research-methods course to catch it if you give them a dirty report and a way to check. Build the fake report from Idaho bait. Invent a University of Idaho white paper, a St. Luke's statistic, an Idaho Code section with a real-looking number, a wildfire with a plausible Sawtooth name, a Micron press claim, and a wrong county seat. Mix in two true lines so students cannot mark the whole page false. Teach a protocol, not a vibe: isolate the claim, find a trusted source, confirm or reject. Chromebooks can search district-approved sites. If the filter wins, the printed source bank is the lab. Never ask students to paste their own research notes into an unapproved model. The goal is a reflex: no citation, no Idaho fact, no 'study' travels into an essay until a human has checked it. Confidence is a style. Truth is a job.

Materials and prep

Materials

  • Projector for a teacher demo of one fake citation search
  • Printed two-page fake report: 'Idaho Health, Fire, and Industry Brief'
  • Printed source bank (offline fallback): real snippets from public pages, plus a list of known fakes
  • Claim-check table: Claim / Source tried / Real, Fake, or Unsure
  • Optional Chromebooks with access to search or library databases
  • Highlighters and exit tickets

Before class

  • Write the fake report with at least six checkable claims: two true, four false (including one invented document, matching the standards example).
  • Assemble the source bank so a student with no Wi-Fi can still complete the table.
  • Test which sites the school filter allows. Bookmark the Idaho Legislature, a hospital public page, and InciWeb or IDL fire info if reachable.
  • Prepare a teacher search of the fake citation on the projector. Practice showing zero real results without joking students into distrusting all libraries.

Instructional sequence

True, false, or fluent?

5 min
  1. Read three short 'Idaho facts' from the packet. One is true, one is wrong, one cites a paper that does not exist.
  2. Students vote with fingers: 1 true, 2 false, 3 cannot tell yet.
  3. Do not give answers. Tell them the hour is about earning the right to answer.

Fluent is not true

8 min
  1. Define hallucination using the glossary idea: wrong or fabricated, presented as true.
  2. Put the standards example on the board: a report that cites a document that does not exist.
  3. Teach the three-step protocol: isolate, source, confirm or reject. Model it on the fake citation.
  4. Warn about mixed paragraphs: a real hospital name plus a fake statistic is still a hallucination in the number.

Check one citation together

8 min
  1. Project the invented University of Idaho title. Teacher searches (or opens the source bank page that lists it as not found).
  2. Fill row 1 of the claim-check table as a class.
  3. Ask why 'University of Idaho, 2022' felt believable. Name false confidence.

Six-claim table

10 min
  1. Students complete the remaining claims: county seat, Idaho Code, St. Luke's number, wildfire name, Micron sentence, one true recreation fact.
  2. Chromebook path: search approved sources. Paper path: use the source bank only. Both paths must fill Real / Fake / Unsure plus a reason.
  3. No student may mark Unsure on more than two claims without writing what they would try next.

Real-world examples

  • A generated policy brief cites an Idaho Code section that does not exist; a county clerk who pastes it could mislead a contractor.
  • A student paper invents a St. Luke's or Kootenai Health study; the hospital never published it.
  • A wildfire roundup names a 'Sawtooth Complex' on a date when that incident did not exist, which can panic families.
  • A career report quotes a Micron 'press release' with a fake hiring number.
  • A recreation blog post cites a Parks and Recreation rule about campfires that is not the actual restriction in effect.

Hands-on activity

Red-team the brief

14 min
  1. Pairs finish the six-claim table, then write a three-sentence 'editor's note' that a human would attach before the brief could be published.
  2. They star the standards-style error: the citation to a document that does not exist.
  3. Teacher projects one live search if the network is up. If not, pairs use only the printed source bank. The product is the same table.
  4. Swap packets with another pair. The second pair tries to catch a miss.
  5. Class debrief: which fake was most believable, and which check was fastest?

Discussion questions

  1. Why do fake citations often include a university, a year, and a plausible title?
  2. Is an outdated fire restriction a hallucination, sloppiness, or both?
  3. What is the danger of using a chatbot as the only source for a health or legal claim?
  4. How should a trades student treat a generated torque spec that 'sounds right'?
  5. When is Unsure the honest and responsible box to check?

Differentiation

Support

  • Number the claims and provide the source-bank page number beside each.
  • Allow a partner reader. Reduce to four claims if needed.
  • Give a stem: 'I reject this because the source bank shows ___.'

Challenge

  • Find the mixed-truth sentence and split it into a true part and a fake part.
  • Write a replacement paragraph that is fully sourced from the bank.
  • Explain why asking the same model 'are you sure?' is not verification.

Multilingual learners

  • Pre-teach citation, statute, and incident. Allow the editor's note in the stronger language plus an English gist.
  • Pair for search terms. Offer a list of English proper nouns from the report.
  • Clarify that fluent English is the trap, not a proof of correctness.

IEP / 504

  • Large-print report. Let students highlight first, then fill the table.
  • Speech-to-text on a school account is fine; a public chatbot is not.
  • Accept bullet editor's notes. Reduce swapping if social load is high.

Assessment

Formative

  • Warm-up votes compared with later corrected answers.
  • Claim-check tables during circulation.
  • Peer catch during packet swap.

Summative

  • Scored table plus editor's note. Credit for catching the nonexistent document and at least two other errors.
  • Exit ticket: Define hallucination, quote the standards example in your own words, and list the three protocol steps.

Success criteria

  • I found at least one citation that points to nothing real.
  • I did not treat tone or formatting as proof.
  • I used a source other than the chatbot to confirm or reject.
  • I left Unsure only when I also named a next check.

Responsible use, ethics, and privacy

Responsible use

Use the dirty report as a teaching tool, not as a source to copy into other classes. Do not paste the fake brief into a public model and ask it to 'fix the citations,' which can generate new fakes. Verify outside the model.

Ethics

Publishing a hallucinated fire, hospital, or hiring claim can scare families and stain institutions. Catching hallucinations is a civic duty, not only an academic-integrity rule. Unsure is more ethical than a confident guess.

Privacy

FERPA: no student PII in unapproved tools. Do not paste student research with names, health stories, or family details into unapproved tools for 'fact checking.' Use the class report and public sources. School accounts and library databases only.

Reflection

  1. Which fake almost got past me, and what made it look real?
  2. Where will I refuse to use AI as a source in my other classes?
  3. What is my personal two-minute check before I trust a generated citation?

Homework

On paper, write three claims a student might be tempted to take from a chatbot for a history or science paper. For each, name a trusted place to check (textbook, .gov page, library database) and one red flag (too-perfect title, no author, round statistic). Do not generate new text in an unapproved tool.

Closing

Reveal the warmup answers. Students chorus: 'Fluent is not true.' Collect tables. Preview sensory grounding next: some errors happen because the model never smelled smoke or stood in the shop.

Extensions and cross-curricular links

Go further

  • 90-minute block: students write a clean one-page brief using only the source bank, with real citations.
  • Library collaboration: practice database search vs. chatbot search on the same question.
  • Government: verify a generated summary of a public Idaho statute against the actual text.
  • Journalism: compare a hallucinated quote with how a real reporter attributes speech.
English Language Arts
Research writing: every citation must be retrievable. Invented sources fail the assignment.
Science
Lab claims need data, not a generated 'study shows' clause.
Government
Generated law is not law. Check the Idaho Code or the agency page.
Health
Invented clinic statistics can spread fear; verify against the health system or public health district.