Journal of Academic Writing

Academic Writing with GenAI

Sandra McGury, Nadja Wulff , Anja Häusler — Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

Academic writing has always posed a challenge to university students, regardless of the language they are writing in (first, second or foreign language) or the amount of digital support they have access to – for example, online dictionaries, thesauruses, or new generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) software such as ChatGPT. With the rise of GenAI as a legitimate digital tool in higher education, it is crucial to identify the professional development needs of teaching faculty in order to ensure quality teaching. Based on factors such as digital literacy, or access to digital tools, these needs might differ in various geographical regions. Within the context of the European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (DigCompEdu), this paper aims to provide a differentiated, international student perspective on the use of GenAI in the academic writing process, identifying professional development needs for faculty. We developed an online questionnaire that was filled out by 192 university students from 15 different countries. In addition to their academic and linguistic backgrounds, the respondents answered questions about their own experiences and competences with the use of GenAI within academic research. Results highlight clear discrepancies between geographic regions, for example, in their self-ranked digital proficiency or in what GenAI tools they use. This, along with further results from the analysis, provides the basis to identify some professional development needs.

A Year of Generative AI

Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The article presents results from a survey about the academic writing practices among the students of the University of Tartu (Estonia). We analyse how the use of generative artificial intelligence has changed between spring 2023 and spring 2024. Our data shows that there has been a small increase in the percentage of students who have used the help of AI while writing: in 2023, 43.9% of the students reported using or having used AI, in 2024 it was 51.6%. AI is most popular among the students of Science and Technology and least popular among the students of Humanities. In 2023, using AI was more common among undergraduates than master’s students, but by 2024 this situation had reversed. Among the activities that students use AI for, gathering ideas is most popular in both years. The biggest change between the two years is that the number of students using AI for summaries and overviews has nearly tripled. The paper discusses the possible reasons for these tendencies, as well as some relevant implications for learning and teaching (academic) writing.

Corpus Integration in L2 Discipline-Specific Writing Courses

Karla Csürös, Claudiu Gherasim, Mădălina Chitez — Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This study evaluates the effectiveness of corpus-based interventions for enhancing writing skills in English L2 and French L2 among Romanian-speaking students. Following established intervention models, the study involved five stages: initial essay writing, corpus tool training, introduction to target language corpora, essay revision using corpora, and a satisfaction survey. Analysis of linguistic data (e.g., frequency lists, n-grams, and error correction rates) and survey responses from 40 participants reveals improvements in writing accuracy and diversity. Specifically, English L2 students demonstrated enhanced lexical accuracy and varied phraseology, while French L2 students improved syntactic precision and contextual use of academic terms. Both groups showed increased grammatical accuracy, especially in prepositions and articles, through corpus consultation. The findings underscore the pedagogical potential of corpora in writing instruction and the necessity of expanding corpus resources for under-resourced languages like French.

Reliability of Large Language Models for Identifying and Classifying Content in Research Articles

Kristin I. Terrill, Elena Cotos — Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

GenAI has demonstrated functionality that seems, uncannily, to parallel reading and writing by identifying/reformulating information from source texts and generating novel content and argumentation. These skills are essential yet challenging for many students tasked with producing literature reviews. This study takes the first steps to investigating the feasibility of a GenAI-facilitated literature review. This investigation starts from the ‘human-in-the-loop’ position that complex processes can be deconstructed and compartmentalized, and that component functions needed for these processes can be delegated to machines while humans contribute to, or control, the overall process. We explore the hypothesis that certain functions of the literature review process, such as information extraction and content classification, might be able to be automated. Prompts modeled on recommended practices for research synthesis were designed to identify and classify particular types of content in research articles. Outputs produced by two GenAI models, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4o, were assessed for reliability with a human coder. Overall, the results posit concerns about the models’ performance on this task, cautioning against direct uses of GenAI output as learning scaffolding for students developing literature review skills.

AI Literacy in the Context of Working with Sources

Tine Wirenfeldt Jensen, Søren Wirenfeldt Jensen — Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This study examines the integration of generative AI (GenAI), such as ChatGPT, into students’ academic writing practices, focusing on its use for finding and working with sources. Using the concept of ‘imagined affordances’ we explore how students perceive and interact with this technology in academic contexts. We tested six student-centric prompting strategies across three fields using ChatGPT 3.5 and 4o, simulating realistic academic writing scenarios. Results show significant variations in the accuracy and usability of generated references across fields, strategies, and model versions. Notably, some strategies based on students’ imagined affordances, though technically unsound, produced useful outputs for academic writing tasks. ChatGPT 4o generally outperformed 3.5, highlighting rapid advancements in GenAI’s potential role in academic writing. These findings reveal a growing gap between institutional guidance on GenAI use in academic writing and students’ potential experiences. We advocate for a nuanced approach to AI literacy in higher education that acknowledges students’ perspectives, fosters open dialogue, destigmatizes experimentation while emphasizing critical evaluation, and raises awareness of how imagined affordances shape GenAI interactions during the writing process. This study contributes to discussions on AI integration in academic writing, offering insights for writing instructors, librarians, and policymakers.

A Case Study in Mindfully Integrating AI Tools into Writing Classes

Gea Dreschler, Abby Gambrel, Jens Branum — Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The proliferation of AI tools for text editing and generation has raised challenging but also interesting questions for writing classes. In this paper, we report on our experiences with an exercise exploring the use of AI in an academic writing class. We first outline our conceptualization of the writing process, breaking down the skills that students need to master the complex task of writing, visualized as a ‘writing pie’. This breakdown allows us to critically assess the capabilities of AI tools against our understanding of writing as a human process. We then share our experiences with an exercise with ChatGPT in an academic writing class, where students evaluate a text with respect to its academic style and suggest improvements. Students then compare their own suggestions to those made by ChatGPT and critically evaluate the output. We include both instructors’ and students’ evaluations to reflect on whether the inclusion of such exercises can aid in achieving the course’s learning outcomes. We share three key takeaways: (1) there is value to having students work with AI; (2) critical evaluation of AI output is key; (3) activities with AI should be evaluated against learning goals.

Reflections on Writing and Generative AI

Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This symposium is an extension of a plenary forum on generative AI (hereafter GenAI) held at the EATAW Conference at Zurich University of Applied Sciences in Winterthur, Switzerland, in June 2023. Since the conference, AI – particularly the large language models (LLMs) shaping GenAI such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT – continue to develop rapidly with extensive integration and usage across disciplines and career sectors with educational and societal impacts.

Given these developments, we recognize the central role that writing instruction has in fostering critical literacies and engaged usage and, at times, non-usage of GenAI. Just as we have adapted our teaching and learning to other technological developments, so too are we now at a time of transition and adaptation. Our initial discussion at EATAW was wide-ranging, intentionally so because (1) there is so much to explore in relation to GenAI, and (2) the EATAW membership is diverse, coming from a range of academic backgrounds. Thus in our original plenary and here in this symposium we have raised issues ranging from specific pedagogical approaches to questions of program and institutional administration, to broader public issues and conversations about the relationship of humans to machines. Here in this written symposium we each raise a different issue related to GenAI and writing with the aim to foster dialogue and discussion about GenAI in writing-related contexts.

Editorial and Production Credits

Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

Guest Editors
Chris M. Anson, North Carolina State University, United States
Kalliopi Benetos, University of Geneva, Switzerland
Ann Devitt, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Christian Rapp, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland

Editors-in-Chief
Lisa Ganobcsik-Williams, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Magnus Gustafsson, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden

Managing Editor (Manuscript Review Process)
Hatice Çelebi, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands

Managing Editor (Production Process)
J. Clark Powers, Ireland

Guest Editorial

Chris M. Anson, Kalliopi Benetos, Ann Devitt, Christian Rapp — Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The guest editors of this special issue of the Journal of Academic Writing present a selection of papers from the 12th Conference of the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing, held at Zurich University of Applied Sciences in Winterthur, Switzerland, on 5–‍7 June, 2023.