Navigating the crossroads of GAI and academic English writing
A Student Perspective in a Time of Transition
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v17i31.147660Nøgleord:
Generative AI, AI, Academic English, Academic English Writing, Content analysis, University, Higher EducationResumé
The study investigates how students perceive, use, and evaluate Generative Artificial Intelligence tools in a BA Academic English Writing course. Tools like ChatGPT, Quillbot, and Grammarly have transformed traditional study aids, enhancing the writing process. The research question is: How do students' perceptions of using Generative AI (GAI) as a tool for academic English writing evolve over the course of an academic writing class immediately after the public launch of the large language model (LLM) ChatGPT? The study considers Warschauer et al.’s three paradoxes arising from using GAI for second language writing: the imitation contradiction, the rich get richer contradiction, and the with or without contradiction. Methodology includes pre- and post-course surveys with qualitative questions to capture students' views before and after using GAI. Content analysis reveals varied opinions, from enthusiasm for GAI's efficiency to concerns about academic dishonesty and creativity hindrance. Students also worry about grading bias and increasing exam difficulty. The study underscores the need for balanced and responsible GAI integration to enhance individual efforts and skills while acknowledging potential benefits and risks.
Downloads
Referencer
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Open University Press.
Johnston, H., Wells, R. F., Shanks, E. M., & others. (2024). Student perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies in higher education. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 20, 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-024-00149-4
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Deakin University Press.
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
Malmström, H., Stöhr, C., & Ou, A. W. (2023). Chatbots and other AI for learning: A survey of use and views among university students in Sweden. (Chalmers Studies in Communication and Learning in Higher Education 2023:1). https://doi.org/10.17196/cls.csclhe/2023/01
Nam, J., & Welding, L. (2023). College students' attitudes toward AI tools in education. BestColleges. https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/college-students-ai-tools-survey/
Warschauer, M., Tseng, W., Yim, S., Webster, T., Jacob, S., Du, Q., & Tate, T. (2023). The affordances and contradictions of AI-generated text for writers of English as a second or foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 62, 101071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101071
Downloads
Publiceret
Versioner
- 14-02-2025 (2)
- 11-02-2025 (1)
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2025 Ida Klitgård

Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel – Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd).
Artikler publiceret i Tidsskriftet for Læring og Medier er licenseret under en Creative Commons Navngivelse-IkkeKommerciel-IngenBearbejdelse 4.0 Unported Licens.
Forfattere bevarer deres ophavsret og giver tidsskriftet ret til første publicering, samtidigt med at værket er omfattet af Creative Commons Attribution-licensen: Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel - Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd). Læs om licensen på http://www.creativecommons.dk/om/.
---
På LOM.dk kan du endvidere finde artikler fra det nu nedlagte Tidsskrift for Universiteternes Efter- og Videreuddannelse (UNEV). Vær opmærksom på, at der gælder særlige regler for UNEV artikler:
Det er forfatterne og evt. andre ophavsret indehavere, der har ophavsretten til artikler udgivet i UNEV regi, og det er en betingelse for adgang til artiklerne, at brugere anerkender og overholder de juridiske retningslinjer forbundet hermed.
- Brugere må downloade og printe én kopi af en hvilken som helst UNEV artikel mhp. private studier eller forskning.
- Det er ikke tilladt at videredistribuere artikler eller anvende disse til indtægtsdækkede aktiviteter eller kommercielle formål.
- Det er tilladt at distribuere URL’en til UNEV artikler.