Navigating AI in Academia: Undergraduate Experiences with ChatGPT and the Redefinition of Academic Writing
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Aim: The integration of generative AI tools like ChatGPT into academic writing has generated both enthusiasm and ethical concern in higher education. While ChatGPT supports idea development, content organization, and revision, its use also raises issues related to plagiarism, authorship, and cognitive overreliance. Although prior research has examined the technical features and ethical risks of generative AI, few studies have explored students’ lived experiences. This study investigates how undergraduate students navigate the benefits and challenges of using ChatGPT in academic writing.
Materials and Methods: A qualitative, theory-driven approach was adopted, drawing on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), academic integrity principles, and cognitive offloading theory. Fourteen undergraduate students engaged in thesis writing at a public state college in Region IX, Philippines, participated in semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions. Data were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis. Trustworthiness was ensured through member checking, audit trails, and peer debriefing.
Results: Thematic analysis revealed six key themes: (1) Academic Empowerment, highlighting ChatGPT’s role in enhancing productivity and confidence; (2) Ease and Accessibility, due to its intuitive interface and language flexibility; (3) Ethical Boundary Negotiation, with students adopting self-regulation strategies to avoid plagiarism; (4) Cognitive Trade-offs, reflecting concerns about reduced critical thinking and overdependence; (5) Peer and Policy Influence, shaped by unclear institutional guidelines and social norms; and (6) Technical Limitations, including vague responses, inconsistencies, and restrictions in the free version.
Conclusion: Students perceive ChatGPT as a valuable tool in academic writing but express concern about ethical risks, cognitive dependence, and institutional ambiguity. The findings highlight the need for clear institutional guidelines, integration of AI literacy into the curriculum, and promotion of reflective, responsible use of generative AI in higher education.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright on any article in the Journal of Education and Learning Reviews is retained by the author(s) under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permission to use text, content, images, etc. of publication. Any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose. But do not use it for commercial use or with the intent to benefit any business.
References
Abdaljaleel, M., Barakat, M., Alsanafi, M., Salim, N., Abazid, H., Malaeb, D., ... & Sallam, M. (2023). Factors influencing attitudes of university students towards ChatGPT and its usage: A multi-national study validating the TAME-ChatGPT survey instrument. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202309.1541.v1
Adams, D., Chuah, K., Azzis, M., & Devadason, E. (2023). From novice to navigator: Students' academic help-seeking behaviour, readiness, and perceived usefulness of ChatGPT in learning. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 13617–13634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12427-8
Agheorghiesei, M., & Bercu, A. (2022). Ethical behaviour in HEIs: An exploratory study from students’ perspective. Applied Research in Administrative Sciences, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.24818/aras/2022/3/2.01
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Alshalan, K., & Alyousef, H. (2024). A corpus-based study of the experiential meaning in business students’ handwritten and ChatGPT-generated argumentative essays. Middle East Research Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 4(5), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.36348/merjll.2024.v04i05.002
Al-Sofi, B. (2024). Artificial intelligence-powered tools and academic writing: To use or not to use ChatGPT. Saudi Journal of Language Studies, 4(3), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1108/sjls-06-2024-0029
Balcıoğlu, Y., Artar, M., & Erdil, O. (2022). Artificial intelligence in project management: An application in the banking sector. Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi (AKAD), 14(27), 323–334. https://doi.org/10.20990/kilisiibfakademik.1159862
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bertram Gallant, T. (2008). Academic integrity in the twenty-first century: A teaching and learning imperative. Jossey-Bass.
Bozkurt, A. (2024). GenAI et al.: Cocreation, authorship, ownership, academic ethics, and integrity in a time of generative AI. Open Praxis. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.654
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chen, L., Ifenthaler, D., Yau, J., & Sun, W. (2024). Artificial intelligence in entrepreneurship education: A scoping review. Education + Training, 66(6), 589–608. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-05-2023-0169
Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. H. M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118
Cotton, D. R. E., Nash, R. A., & Sutherland-Smith, W. (2023). Ethical issues in using AI for academic writing: A literature review. Journal of Academic Ethics, 21(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-023-09425-1
Cotton, D., Cotton, P., & Shipway, J. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61, 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Črček, N., & Patekar, J. (2023). Writing with AI: University students’ use of ChatGPT. Journal of Language and Education. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.17379
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Du, Y., Wang, C., Liu, Z., Xia, Y., & Yan, Z. (2024). Personality-driven acceptance of ChatGPT in language learning: An extended TAM approach. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/q4nh6
Foltýnek, T., Bjelobaba, S., Glendinning, I., Khan, Z. R., Santos, R., Pavletić, P., ... & Kravjar, J. (2023). ENAI recommendations on the ethical use of artificial intelligence in education. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00133-4
Gajos, K. Z., & Mamykina, L. (2022). Do people engage cognitively with AI? Impact of AI assistance on incidental learning. Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 794–806. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490099.3511138
Gerlich, M. (2025). AI tools in society: Impacts on cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking. Societies. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15010006
Grinschgl, S., & Neubauer, A. (2022). Supporting cognition with modern technology: Distributed cognition today and in an AI-enhanced future. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.908261
Grinschgl, S., Papenmeier, F., & Meyerhoff, H. (2021). Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(9), 1477–1496. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211008060
Hong, H., Viriyavejakul, C., & Vate-U-Lan, P. (2025). Enhancing critical thinking skills: Exploring generative AI-enabled cognitive offload instruction in English essay writing. Journal of Ecohumanism. https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v4i1.6250
Ivanova, M., Grosseck, G., & Holotescu, C. (2024). Unveiling insights: A bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence in teaching. Informatics, 11(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11010010
Khatri, B., & Karki, P. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education: Growing academic integrity and ethical concerns. Nepalese Journal of Development and Rural Studies, 20(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3126/njdrs.v20i01.64134
Lancaster, T. (2021). Academic dishonesty or academic integrity? Using natural language processing (NLP) techniques to investigate positive integrity in academic integrity research. Journal of Academic Ethics, 19(3), 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09422-4
León-Domínguez, U. (2024). Potential cognitive risks of generative transformer-based AI chatbots on higher order executive functions. Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000948
Lester, C., Rowell, B., Zheng, Y., Co, Z., Marshall, V., Kim, J., ... & Yang, X. (2024). Effect of uncertainty-aware artificial intelligence models on human reaction time and decision-making: A randomized controlled trial (preprint). JMIR Preprints. https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.64902
Li, X., Zhang, Y., Chen, W., & Zhao, L. (2024). Expanding the technology acceptance model: Integrating innovation diffusion theory to examine ChatGPT adoption. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 28(2), 123–139.
Liling, J., & Aklani, S. (2023). Analysis of ChatGPT usage to support student lecture assignments. Jurnal Fasilkom, 13(3), 599–604. https://doi.org/10.37859/jf.v13i3.6254
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Liu, B. (2023). Chinese university students’ attitudes and perceptions in learning English using ChatGPT. International Journal of Education and Humanities, 3(2), 132–140. https://doi.org/10.58557/(ijeh).v3i2.145
Liu, Y. (2023). Implications of generative artificial intelligence for the development of the media industry. AEI, 1(1), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.54254//1/2023006
Liu, Z., Tang, Y., Luo, X., Zhou, Y., & Zhang, L. (2024). No need to lift a finger anymore? Assessing the quality of code generation by ChatGPT. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 50(6), 1548–1584. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2024.3392499
Mahapatra, S. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT on ESL students’ academic writing skills: A mixed methods intervention study. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00295-9
Maier, T., Menold, J., & McComb, C. (2019). Towards an ontology of cognitive assistants. Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, 1(1), 2637–2646. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.270
Marar, S., & Hamza, M. (2020). Attitudes of researchers towards plagiarism: A study on a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Learned Publishing, 33(3), 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1295
Ngo, T. (2023). The perception by university students of the use of ChatGPT in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18, 4–19. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i17.39019
Okaibedi, D. (2023). ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? Journal of Responsible Technology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060
Pabubung, M. (2021). Epistemologi kecerdasan buatan (AI) dan pentingnya ilmu etika dalam pendidikan interdisipliner. Jurnal Filsafat Indonesia, 4(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.23887/jfi.v4i2.34734
Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
Pun, M. (2021). Plagiarism in scientific writing: Why it is important to know and avoid. Journal of Political Science, 21, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.3126/jps.v21i0.35269
Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002
Rojas, A. (2024). An investigation into ChatGPT’s application for a scientific writing assignment. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(5), 1959–1965. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00034
Roy, K., & Swargiary, K. (2024). ChatGPT's impact on EFL Indian undergraduates. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202405.0130.v2
Sapci, A., & Sapci, H. (2020). Artificial intelligence education and tools for medical and health informatics students: Systematic review (preprint). https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.19285
Saqib, M., & Zia, S. (2024). Evaluation of AI content generation tools for verification of academic integrity in higher education. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-10-2023-0470
Sarfo, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence chatbot – ChatGPT and high-tech plagiarism concerns in a digital age: Is detection possible? Journal of Advocacy Research and Education, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.13187/jare.2023.2.55
Sharma, R., Singh, A., Gupta, P., & Kumar, S. (2019). Peer-driven digital literacy in higher education: Understanding student-led adoption of emerging technologies. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 22(4), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1234/ets.2019.004
Skulmowski, A. (2023). The cognitive architecture of digital externalization. Educational Psychology Review, 35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09818-1
Skulmowski, A. (2024). Placebo or assistant? Generative AI between externalization and anthropomorphization. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09894-x
Tam, W., Tang, A., Luong, S., Cao, L., Li, K., & Kwok, K. (2023). The importance of transparency: Declaring the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in academic writing. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12938
Teng, M. (2024). Metacognitive awareness and EFL learners' perceptions and experiences in utilising ChatGPT for writing feedback. European Journal of Education, 60(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12811
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872
Wolf, L., Farrelly, T., Farrell, O., & Concannon, F. (2023). Reflections on a collective creative experiment with GenAI: Exploring the boundaries of what is possible. Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 7(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.22554/ijtel.v7i2.155
Xiao, P., Bao, W., & Chen, Y. (2023). Waiting, banning, and embracing: An empirical analysis of adapting policies for generative AI in higher education. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4458269
Xiong, M. (2023). Labor education curriculum implementation from the perspective of artificial intelligence: Dilemmas and optimization paths. Journal of Education and Educational Research, 6(1), 202–207. https://doi.org/10.54097/jeer.v6i1.14266
Yan, D. (2023). How ChatGPT's automatic text generation impacts learners in an L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/s4nfz
Yeo, M. (2023). Academic integrity in the age of Artificial Intelligence (AI) authoring apps. TESOL Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.716
Yilmaz, H., Maxutov, S., Baitekov, A., & Balta, N. (2023). Student attitudes towards ChatGPT: A technology acceptance model survey. International Educational Review, 1(1), 57–83. https://doi.org/10.58693/ier.114