Artificial intelligence (AI) has disrupted assessment in higher education and accelerated a cycle of compounding performances. Institutional policies demand the demonstration of independent authorship, while commercial AI-enabled services allow students to simulate independent thought and writing. This has led to enhanced institutional surveillance, including AI detectors, which are subsequently circumvented using other technologies. AI humanizers, internet-based services that alter AI-generated text to avoid automated or human detection, are a recent symptom of this performative cycle. Little is known about how these services operate, how they appeal to users, and what they imply for educational assessment and integrity. This paper presents an exploratory, systematic investigation of AI humanizer websites, framed through Goffman's sociological account of dramaturgy. Using a systematic search and custom rubric, we cataloged 55 humanizer sites, assessed their performance of identity, and conducted an in-depth multimodal critical discourse analysis of a purposive sample of three sites. Findings show that humanizers are readily available, offer free and premium paid services, and appear to perform similar functions. These include the deletion and discursive absence of misconduct, the framing of AI humanization as a rational and defensible response to surveillance and flawed detection, and appeals to mystification through advanced technology and implied endorsement by universities and corporations. We argue that humanizer services should be viewed as a diagnostic signal: a legible node in a feedback loop of performative assessment. Disrupting this cycle requires structural assessment reform rather than technological solutionism.

翻译：人工智能（AI）已扰乱了高等教育的评估体系，并加速了复杂表演的循环。机构政策要求展示独立作者身份，而商业化的AI服务使学生能够模拟独立思考和写作。这导致机构加强监控，例如使用AI检测工具，而这些工具随后又被其他技术所规避。AI人性化工具——一种通过改写AI生成文本以躲避自动或人工检测的互联网服务——是这一表演性循环的最新症状。目前对其运作方式、如何吸引用户以及对教育评估与学术诚信的影响知之甚少。本文以戈夫曼的戏剧理论为框架，对AI人性化工具网站进行探索性系统研究。通过系统性搜索和自定义评估标准，我们收录了55个人性化工具网站，评估其身份表演，并对三个目的性样本网站进行深度多模态批判性话语分析。研究发现显示，人性化工具易于获取，提供免费和付费高级服务，且功能相似。这些功能包括：删除或回避对不当行为的提及、将AI人性化包装为应对监控与缺陷检测的理性且可辩护的回应，以及通过尖端技术和暗示大学与企业背书来诉求神秘化。我们认为，人性化工具应被视为一种诊断信号：即表演性评估反馈循环中一个可识别的节点。打破这一循环需要结构性评估改革，而非技术解决方案主义。