Examining the user experience of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing: The perceptions lecturers practices

Examining the user experience of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing: The perceptions lecturers practices | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Examining the user experience of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing: The perceptions lecturers practices Nurul Shofiah, Zulmy Faqihuddin Putera This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3871916/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract In academic writing, AI technology has emerged as an innovative solution capable of enhancing the efficiency and quality of students' writing. This study seeks to explore the perspectives of lecturers, who are increasingly interested in and reliant on AI technology to augment the quality of their academic compositions. Furthermore, this study aims to comprehend lecturer' perceptions regarding using artificial intelligence tools in academic writing and how AI technology impacts learning. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this research encompasses perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude towards usage, intention to use behaviour, and actual usage. The study's respondents consist of 10 instructors from three universities in Malang City, Indonesia. First, the research findings indicate that using artificial intelligence tools yields various advantages for lecturer, including grammar checks, plagiarism detection, sentence improvement suggestions, and analyses of content relevance and structural coherence. Second, Instructors positively welcome using AI technology as a supplementary tool to support the learning and research processes; however, concerns about its potential over-dependence might diminish College student abilities to think creatively and critically. The outcomes of this research are expected to inform the development of future interventions aimed at maximizing the benefits of AI technology in education. academic writing artificial intelligence perceptions of instructors educational interventions 1. Introduction Artificial Intelligence (AI) has brought about a significant revolution in the academic world, particularly in education. The use of AI in education has garnered interest within the scholarly community (Jordan, M.I., Mitchell, 2015; Roll & Wylie, 2016 ). In the context of academic writing, AI technology has become an innovative solution capable of significantly impacting the efficiency and quality of students' writing. However, it is important to emphasize that educational technology is not merely about technology - it encompasses pedagogical, ethical, social, cultural, and economic dimensions of AIEd that require attention (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019 ) In the academic environment, educators, as facilitators of learning and research, play a crucial role in understanding and responding to students' use of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing. Educators' perceptions of the use of AI can influence how the academic learning and assessment processes are carried out. Furthermore, students, as the primary users in the learning and research process, are increasingly interested in and reliant on AI technology to enhance and improve the quality of their academic writing. Using artificial intelligence tools in academic writing provides various advantages for students. Features such as grammar checking, plagiarism detection, sentence improvement suggestions, and content relevance and structural coherence analysis have become easily accessible through AI technology. This has accelerated and simplified the academic writing process, helping students produce better and more accurate papers. However, behind these benefits, educators' perceptions of the use of AI in academic writing are also crucial to understand. What are their views and attitudes towards AI technology supporting independent writing processes and learning? To what extent do they feel assisted and confident with adopting this technology? Research on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) has been evolving recently. Specifically, AI has significantly impacted education(Salas-Pilco et al., 2022 ). Currently, research is also focusing on the implementation of AI technology in education (Salas-Pilco & Yang, 2020 ). Goksel et al. (2019) consider that AI feature technology can contribute to the advancement of several educational processes. A systematic literature review by Zawacki-Richter et al. ( 2019 ) explains that research on AIEd lacks critical reflection on pedagogical implications. More research is needed from educators and instructional designers on integrating AI applications throughout students' life cycles to leverage the significant opportunities they have to create intelligent learning and teaching systems, as well as the educational perspective on the development of this technology. There still needs to be more research on what teachers and students actually desire from AIED systems (Holstein et al., 2019 ) additionally, where AIED interventions target behaviour change (such as 'nudging' individuals toward specific actions). Therefore, investigating educators' perceptions regarding using artificial intelligence tools in education becomes relevant and crucial. From the perspective of educators, understanding their perceptions and viewpoints can provide insights into their readiness and acceptance of AI technology. To what extent do educators embrace this technology to support the learning and research process? The purpose of this research is to explore and understand educators' perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing. The results of this study are expected to provide a comprehensive overview of viewpoints, benefits, challenges, and expectations regarding the use of AI technology in the academic writing process. Investigating users' experiences with AI tools in academic writing is important to comprehend the effectiveness of AI tools in enhancing the writing experience and improving writing outcomes (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019 ). Identifying potential issues and concerns related to the use of AI tools in academic writing (Cruz-Benito et al., 2019 ), such as the potential for AI to replace human feedback. The findings of this research can inform the development of future interventions. 2. Purposes of the Research This Study to explore the perspectives of lecturers who are progressively intrigued by and dependent on AI technology to enhance the quality of their academic compositions and to comprehend lecturers' perceptions concerning the utilization of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing and to assess the influence of AI technology on the learning process. 3. Methodology This study aims to gain insights into educators' and students' perceptions regarding the use of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing. The study was conducted over four months. Our goal is not to evaluate specific AI technologies but to explore areas where AI systems positively contribute to educators and students and where more attention is needed, including viewpoints, benefits, challenges, and expectations regarding using AI technology in the academic writing proces This research adopts the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The theory explains the process of technology acceptance through a model (Fig. 1) composed of five factors: perceive usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU), attitude towards usage (AU), behavioral intention (BI), and actual usage (U), as described in Table 1 . Table 1 Constructs of the TAM Model in describing the perceived experience of lecturers using AIed. Perceived usefulness A person believes that using a technology will enhance his or her performance. Perceived ease of use Perception of the user regarding the effort required to use a new resource. Attitude toward usage Refers to the evaluative influence of lecturers (positive or negative feelings) towards ai usage. Behavioral intention Factors in assessing the intention of lecturers to use Aied. Actual usage Perceived purposes of ai usage in an educational context The respondents of this study were 10 lecturers (4 males and 6 females) from 3 universities in Malang, Indonesia. To construct relevant interview questions, we referred to the works of Davis et al., ( 1989 ), Dale & Viethen ( 2021 ) dan Nazari et al. (2021). y conducting an in-depth review of these sources, we focused on topics and themes that align with our research objectives. This comprehensive literature review aided in formulating our interview protocol. It included specific questions such as "What AI writing tools have you used in your classes?" and "In what ways has this tool influenced your students' writing, particularly concerning content and organization?" This interview guide enabled us to investigate the practical applications and theoretical implications of AI writing tools in the context of teaching. Data Collection Procedure . After designing the interview protocol, we scheduled interviews with each participant at their convenience and availability. Before commencing each interview, we provided participants with an orientation on the research objectives, the interview process, and our strict approach to data protection. We obtained their consent to proceed, ensuring they understood their rights, including the freedom to withdraw from the study at any time. During the interviews, we began with general questions about their experiences using AI in their writing and their views on students using AI in their writing, as well as whether they teach and use AI writing tools, thereby creating a relaxed and conducive environment for discussion. To address potential social desirability bias in the data, we emphasized to the participants that there were no right or wrong answers and encouraged them to be as open and honest as possible. This was done to ensure the reliability and authenticity of the collected responses. Each interview was recorded with the participants' permission, to maintain accuracy in capturing their responses, which is an integral part of reliable transcription and subsequent data analysis. Note-taking during the interviews was also used as a means to highlight key points and document direct observations. Table 2 Demographic Information of Participants Respondent Age Gender Experience in Using AIWT* T1 28 Female 2 years T2 30 Female 1 years T3 33 Female 3 years T4 31 Female ≥ 5 years T5 46 Female ≥ 1 years T6 43 Female ≥ 1years T7 42 Male ≥ 1 years T8 47 Male 1 years T9 28 Male 3 years T10 31 Male 4 years AIWT: AI Writing tools Data Analysis. After conducting the interviews, we meticulously transcribed the recorded dialogues, converting verbal insights into textual data. Each interview was recorded in audio format and subsequently transcribed for analysis purposes. The approach we employed was Reflexive Thematic Analysis (Nowell et al., 2017 ). Upon familiarizing ourselves with the interview data, two primary researchers began developing inductive codes related to interesting statements or phrases found in the data. Both researchers then coded each transcript by highlighting and providing comments on data items using Google Docs. Accuracy during this stage was crucial, as the transcribed data supported our subsequent analysis. All collected data, including interview recordings, transcriptions, and notes, were securely stored, respecting the participants' privacy, and allowing efficient data management for subsequent data analysis and research reporting. Following these practices ensured a comprehensive, ethical, and effective data collection procedure for our study. 3. RESULT 3.1 Instructors' Perspectives on the Experience of Using Artificial Intelligence Writing Tools in Academic Writing Based on the analysis results, it is evident that the 10 surveyed instructors used various AI writing tools in their independent writing practices and teaching. These tools were selected and employed based on their known features and dependable capabilities. To provide a detailed yet concise overview of these AI writing tools, we have organized this data into a clear and informative format Table 3 Types of AI Writing Tools Used by Instructors Initial of Teachers Types of AI Writing Tools Used Purpose of Use T1 Grammarly Used to enhance writing grammar. Quillbot Used for paraphrasing and translation. Chat GPT Used for paraphrasing and improving sentence flow and paragraph coherence. T2 Grammarly Used for checking writing (grammar, spelling, etc.). Chat GPT Used for creating complex academic titles, translation, and text readability. Litmaps, connecting paper, consensus ai Used for searching information sources and references. T3 Consensus ai Used for searching relevant references and aiding initial content understanding. Perplexity.ai Used for searching relevant references and aiding initial content understanding. Grammarly Used for grammar and spelling checks. Word tune Used for teaching paraphrasing skills. T4 Grammarly Used for plagiarism checking and improving English grammar. Copy ai Used to generate creative writing samples as examples of various writing styles. Chat GPT Used for translation. T5 Grammarly Used to correct grammatical errors in writing. Quillbolt Used for paraphrasing sentences. T6 Grammarly Used to identify spelling errors, grammar, and other issues in English text. T7 Grammarly Online tool used to assist in checking English grammar. T8 Grammarly Used to improve English grammar and spelling. T9 Grammarly Used to improve English grammar. Conssus ai Used for searching relevant references and creating summaries of read references. Deep translet Used for translation. Chat GPT Used for searching specific English titles, aiding text comprehension, and sparking writing ideas. T10 Grammarly Used to improve English grammar. Wordtune Used to improve sentence structure and enhance coherence. Chat GPT Used for translation, improving grammar, sentence cohesion, and paragraph coherence. Table 3 reveals significant patterns in how these 10 instructors integrate Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools into their independent writing practices and teaching methodologies. They share a common interest in utilizing a combination of AI tools to enhance their writing skills. Among the respondents, all 10 are proficient in using Grammarly, as the university subscribes to the application to facilitate instructors' academic writing. Instructors are usually required to publish journals nationally and internationally. In terms of language difficulties, this application is highly beneficial, although the validation of professional proofreaders is still preferred. QuillBot, renowned for its paraphrasing prowess, plays an essential role in effectively assisting in plagiarism avoidance. On the other hand, Wordtune is utilized to enhance sentence structure and clarity, making it a crucial tool for teaching English and enhancing students' written expression. A second layer of similarity can be observed with Jenni AI and ChatGPT, employed by three out of four instructors (T1, T2, and T4). Jenni AI, acclaimed for its topic modeling capability, aids in generating ideas. When challenging reference texts are encountered, this application assists in content comprehension and thought organization prior to writing, thus fostering structured writing. Moreover, these tools logically arrange their essays and provide improvement suggestions, making them uniquely suitable for classes focusing on academic writing. Meanwhile, the Perplexity and Consensus AI tools are used to search for relevant references and assist in initial content understanding. Considering the participant demographic information provided in Table 1 and analyzing it against the utilization of AI tools by instructors, a few preliminary observations become evident. Instructors with years of experience in employing AIWT tend to use a broader set of AI tools. This pattern suggests that more experienced instructors in using AIWT may exhibit greater confidence in exploring a variety of AI tools for various educational purposes. Younger instructors in the age range of 28–33 seem to be more technologically adept and therefore have a broader awareness of AIWT types, attempting to use them on their own before integrating them into teaching. Table 4 Understanding of Instructors Regarding the Use of AI in Academic Integrity Perspective Respondent Statement T1 Using AI wisely for academic writing should be considered, but there needs to be policies from instructors when using it in teaching. We need to set usage limits so that students do not become overly reliant on AI. T2 The use of AI is very helpful, but dependence on it might hinder creativity and critical thinking. Thus, the originality of writing should be questioned if AI is used to develop content. There needs to be policies from higher education authorities on how to set usage limits. This has not been discussed yet in higher education institutions. T3 The use of AI is appropriate within its limits. I do not use it to develop entire writings. I use it for language readability, translation, as based on experience, AI chatbots can provide incorrect information like non-existent citations. Moreover, Turnitin can detect it nowadays. T4 Using ChatGPT for entire academic writing clearly violates academic integrity. I use chatbots more for translation, grammar, and alternative reference searching using consensus, while still evaluating their accuracy. T5 Publishers and journal editors allow AI usage for language enhancement, like grammar and translation. However, they prohibit listing AI chatbots as authors. I've read cases where AI usage for writing development is allowed, but transparency is still required. The academic community must be wise and accountable for what is written. T6 Excessive dependency on AI in education can have negative impacts on academics. They need to be wise to prioritize honesty. Despite technological advancements, the academic community still needs to use it for convenience without compromising academic integrity. T7 The academic community needs to prioritize honesty in AI usage for writing. There should be strict evaluation of the generated information. Clear policies are necessary from educational institutions regarding this usage to maintain academic integrity. T8 The use of AI shows less intellectual contribution from authors since they might rely on AI to produce content instead of utilizing their critical thinking skills. Transparency is necessary to maintain academic integrity. It is unethical to rely on AI for entire writing. T9 It is important to always verify the sources of information generated by AI. Technological convenience can have negative impacts, but if used wisely and responsibly, it can enhance quality. T10 To uphold academic integrity while using AI, proper citation and acknowledgment must always be applied to texts generated by AI, and it should not be used to develop entire writing. The table 4indicates that all ten respondents exhibit cautious and responsible use of AI. Respondents T1, T4, and T10 refrain from utilizing ChatGPT for developing entire writings and avoid dependence on AI-generated content. Respondents T3 and T9, when using AI applications, ensure patterns or language irregularities are searched, sources are checked, and AI-generated citations are verified. On the other hand, respondents T6, T7, T8, who tend to use a limited range of diverse AI writing tools, generally express that AI usage indeed aids academic writing, yet academic honesty needs to be prioritized. When instructors and students use AI, honesty, integrity, and transparency are crucial. T2 suggests that AI users need to thoroughly fact-check texts, outcomes, data, code, and references produced by the tool. Excessive reliance on AI can lead to negative consequences for academics. Respondents T1, T5, T6, T7, T8 share similar sentiments that using ChatGPT for writing entire papers is considered unethical. However, employing AI for translation, grammar improvement, etc., is regarded as more ethical. Additionally, they explain that spell checkers, Grammarly, and citation generators are statistically more acceptable than other uses of ChatGPT. These statements underscore that instructors will continue to utilize and harness this technology, but with prudent and careful application, while being accountable for its usage. Table 5 Instructors' Perception of AI Usage in Classroom Learning Respondent Statement T1 I introduce types of AIWT that can enhance the quality of academic assignments, explaining their positive and negative impacts. The development of this technology is not a threat if we can use it appropriately. T2 There is concern about teaching this usage in the class, not wanting students to overly rely on AI, especially AI chatbots like ChatGPT. This usage will affect assignments and evaluations that I... T3 The use of AI tools should be emphasized in a balanced manner, not replacing instructors as educators but providing additional support rather than a crutch. T4 Yes, I use this tool to stimulate writing ideas in coursework assignments. Students often struggle with how to start writing a paper. I monitor this usage in class and how it influences stricter evaluations. I don't want them to become overly dependent on this tool. T5 Yes, I always emphasize to students to better utilize this tool for translating languages, improving grammar, and literature searches. T6 Due to the varying trends in AI usage, I still set boundaries on what needs to be used and not used, and how it affects their assignment assessments. T7 I focus the use of AI for classroom learning on how students can enhance writing quality through readability checks, translations, and reference searches. I discourage students from using AI to develop entire writings. T8 Yes, I use AIWT to assist students in finding literature, but I find it difficult to distinguish between students' own writing and AI-generated content. I have to use Turnitin to check, which takes time and effort if I have multiple classes to teach. T9 The use of this tool can be integrated into writing classes, but students need guidance. The information generated by this tool can be complex and biased. Without guidance, students might use AI-generated information without considering its context. T10 However, no matter the classroom learning, instructors will still be needed. AI is only a tool to assist in enhancing learning. The role of the instructor will determine whether AI applications are beneficial for students and how they should be used. In Table 5 , the instructors' perspectives on AI integration in classroom learning are presented. Respondent T1 introduced AIWT to students and emphasized the need to provide them with proper understanding of its appropriate use to reap positive benefits. In more detailed interviews, T1 also asserted that the use of these tools had a positive influence on enhancing students' vocabulary. He suggested that these tools recommend synonyms or more sophisticated words that students might not have considered, thereby expanding their lexical repertoire and enabling them to express their ideas more precisely and engagingly. However, T9 expressed concern that AI writing tools can sometimes generate overly complex language. While acknowledging the potential of these tools to provide students with a more complex vocabulary, it is feared that students might use these words without fully comprehending their context or connotations, leading to awkward or excessive formal writing. T3 emphasized the need for balance, emphasizing the importance of using these tools as supplementary aids rather than crutches. T2 expressed concerns about students relying on ChatGPT (or other AI) for assignments, as well as the availability of ChatGPT (and other AI) altering the types of assignments given and changing the way student writing is assessed. T10 explained the ability to detect the presence of ChatGPT (or other AI) in student writing. However, in contrast, T8 found it difficult to identify AI-generated writing in student papers. T6 and T7 stressed the importance of discussing with students in their courses about the acceptable use of ChatGPT (or other AI) for their assignments. Furthermore, regarding the AI writing tools used in class, T1, T5, T10, and T6 employed AI writing aids and recommended QuillBot and Wordtune for improving writing, while for assisting students in finding relevant references, Consensus AI, Perplexity AI, and Publish or Perish were suggested. They also consistently reminded students to use these tools responsibly and to be aware of biases, errors, and inconsistencies in their use. Respondent T4 used ChatGPT and believed this tool played a crucial role in enhancing students' creativity by providing suggestions and expanding initial ideas. When students encounter writer's block or face writing obstacles, this tool can propose different angles or perspectives. However, it often doesn't always encourage deep or critical thinking about a topic. Respondent T3, a language instructor, tended to use AIWT for translation, grammar correction, and spelling, reminding students that the overall use of AI content could be detected through Turnitin. Regarding the question "How does this tool affect your students' writing, especially in terms of content and organization?" the findings from T2, T4, T5, T1, T3, T9, and T10 show that the combination of AI tools enriches the learning experience and reveals that this positively impacts students' overall academic performance, including their writing skills. Table 7 Thematic Analysis of Lecturers' Perceptions on AI Usage Based on TAM Constructs Construct Statement Quotes Interpretation Perceived Ease of Use • Using AI technology makes work easier and enhances teaching performance. • AI technology in education improves students' and teachers' productivity in writing. • This tool is user-friendly, especially for tech-savvy educators and students, to enhance writing quality and quantity Work more quickly, job performance, increase productivity, effectiveness, useful Attitude Toward Use • AI writing tools are actually quite easy for you to acquire. There are many user-friendly apps available now • I've noticed a lot of text variations generated by AI popping up on platforms like Instagram and TikTok. It's fascinating how these platforms have become hubs for stuff like that • I found various versions of AI writing tools on YouTube, complete with direct guides on how to use them. That's so practical. Positive: Easy to learn, controllable, clear & understandable, flexible, easy to become skillful, ease to use • Depending on this tool while writing might impact critical thinking abilities as it seeks convenience • Dependency on AIed can lead to reduced reasoning and problem-solving skills. Hence, educators need to monitor its use in students and promote creativity and critical thinking. • Wise use of this tool is needed in teaching, learning, and self-actualization. Negative: decrease in high-level cognitive abilities like creativity, critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving Behavioral Intention to Use • I will utilize AI technology, but we must be prudent in not overusing it and consider how it affects our writing quality • I use technology as an aid, not a substitute for learning. Relying too much on technology can disrupt the development of my critical skills • Even though I'll keep using this tool, social interaction remains key in learning. Continue to use technology in the future. Use technology in teaching needs careful consideration to prevent student dependency, so evaluating AIed usage in teaching should be done meticulously. Actual Usage This tool can stimulate students' creativity and spark ideas for academic writing. Developing content ideas I use this tool more for text readability, like grammar, although I sometimes still need a professional proofreader. Organizing writing For international publication needs, AI technology can help translate writings. Language use Table 7 presents the results of the analysis of instructors' perceptions towards the usage of AI in academic writing using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The analysis comprises four constructs: perceived ease of use, attitude towards usage, intention to use behavior, and actual usage. The elaboration is as follows. Perceived Ease of Use The findings in this section indicate the users' perspective on the ease or difficulty of using AI writing technology (AIWT). Among the ten respondents, they generally believe that using AI can facilitate writing activities and is easy to comprehend. T9 and T10 explained that using these tools could enhance productivity. This indicates that they perceive the tool as intuitive and not requiring significant effort to use. Such easy user experience can potentially drive the technology's acceptance. Meanwhile, T5, T1, and T3 consider AIWT to effectively enhance students' writing skills when integrated into learning. This view suggests that they see the technology as an effective tool to help students improve their writing skills. This also reflects their perception of the positive potential in using this technology as a learning aid. Furthermore, it was found that AIWT usage can enhance productivity, as articulated by T9 and T10. This suggests that they consider the tool a solution that can help them write faster and more efficiently. Overall, these findings reflect that the respondents generally hold a positive perception regarding the ease of use of AIWT in the context of writing. They view it as an accessible tool that is easy to understand, has the potential to enhance writing skills, and can increase productivity. All of these perspectives paint a positive picture of the ease-of-use aspect in the acceptance of AIWT. Attitude towards Usage The analysis results show that the ten instructors exhibit both positive and negative attitudes towards the usage of AI in academic writing. Positive attitudes include the perception that this technology is highly learnable. T1 explains that AIWT is easily accessible, especially with the emergence of various applications that are easy to find and use. Information about AI writing variations is commonly found on Instagram and TikTok, while T3 discovered variations in AIWT on YouTube that directly provided instructions for use. On the other hand, T5 and T7 seem not to be updated on the trend of AIWT application variations. When asked about where they learned about these applications, they mentioned being aware of apps subscribed by their campuses, such as Grammarly and QuillBot. According to them, these applications are easy to use. On the other hand, the identified negative attitudes include concerns about a potential decline in higher-level cognitive abilities such as creativity, critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving. T2, for example, expressed fears of dependency that might affect critical thinking ability. T4, T8, and T10 also expressed concerns about the possibility of excessive reliance on these tools, particularly in educational contexts that integrate AIWT, which might inadvertently lead students to neglect the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills, which are fundamental to effective writing. Behavioural Intention to Use Based on the analysis results from the ten respondents, they have positive behavioural intentions towards future technology usage, in line with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). These behavioural intentions reflect their desire to continue using technology in a learning context. However, there are aspects to consider in the continued use of this technology. TAM is a framework that depicts the factors influencing users' acceptance of technology. In this case, all ten respondents agree to continue using technology in the future, indicating that they find it beneficial and relevant. T3 explains that technology use in education must be considered with caution to ensure that students do not become overly reliant on these tools. Thus, careful and thorough consideration is needed when assessing the usage of AI in education. T6 and T8 similarly emphasize the importance of ensuring that technology remains a tool and support in education, not a substitute for genuine interaction and understanding of concepts. Excessive reliance on technology can diminish students' ability to develop critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and essential social interactions in the learning process. T5 believes that in integrating technology, a careful evaluation of how the technology is used in education is necessary. The technology's effectiveness in enhancing comprehension, students' ability to maintain critical thinking, and the impact on student-teacher interactions need to be considered. Thus, while positive behavioural intentions have been identified among the ten respondents, it is crucial to still consider significant aspects such as avoiding excessive dependency on technology and its potential impact on overall learning quality. Actual Usage First, developing content ideas. Respondents T1, T2, T3, and T4 express views on the potential benefits of AI writing tools to stimulate creativity and idea expansion. These tools can offer various angles or perspectives, helping overcome creative hurdles when struggling with writer's block. Meanwhile, T9 uses these tools in the ideation phase. However, they also voice concerns that the ideas generated by these tools might be generic or impersonal. In their view, while AI tools can assist in certain situations, they may only sometimes encourage deep or critical thinking about a topic. Second, organizing the writing. The ten instructors provide a comprehensive overview of the benefits of AI writing tools in enhancing writing skills. Each instructor offers insights into different aspects of the tool and its impact on the writing process. Respondents T1, T4, T9, and T1 express views that these tools play a role in facilitating clear and logical thought progression. They suggest better expressions and enhanced coherence, leading to improved writing confidence. T6, T7, and T9 emphasize its effectiveness in providing grammar suggestions, enhancing vocabulary usage, and ensuring the continuity of logical arguments. Third, language usage. All ten respondents explain that AI writing tools improve language fluency in writing articles intended for publication in national and international journals. While they (T7, T8, T10) sometimes require professional proofreaders based on suggestions from journal editors and reviewers. 4. Discussion 4 .1 Perceptions of Teachers' Experience Using AIed in Academic Writing Computer-based applications are increasingly becoming an alternative to facilitate academic writing. AI-powered writing tools are now accessible on mobile devices, helping academics improve their writing skills (Nazari et al., 2021). Tools such as Grammarly or ProWritingAid are widely utilized in educational, professional, and daily settings. These tools provide automatic written corrective feedback, a descriptor gaining prominence in emerging research on their usage (Guo et al., 2022 ; Ranalli & Yamashita, 2022 ). Findings indicate a tendency among instructors to employ various types of AI Writing Tools in academic writing, including Grammarly, QuillBot, Wordtune, and ChatGPT. For instance, instructors frequently employ Grammarly to enhance the grammatical structure of articles they prepare for publication in national and international journals, although some still resort to professional proofreaders. Several studies' results indicate improved writing skills following the use of Grammarly (Ghufron, 2019 ; O’Neill & Russell, 2019 ). Reports also suggest an enhancement in lexical diversity resulting from its usage (Dizon & Gayed, 2021). The feature of grammatical error categorization has also proven to be beneficial. Grammarly's algorithm can analyze L2 text and provide targeted feedback, which is helpful because human correctors may struggle to categorize errors. However, according to the findings of a study (Nazari et al., 2021a ), individuals with lower language proficiency might struggle to effectively use Grammarly, as their limited linguistic competence can hinder their comprehensive understanding. Another type of AI Writing Tool used by instructors is ChatGPT. Those with experience using ChatGPT are more likely to agree or strongly agree that AI can be a useful tool for struggling writers than instructors without ChatGPT experience. This disparity may arise from variations in technological comfort; educators more open to technology might be more inclined to try it out themselves and find it easier to embrace its student utilization (Hostetter et al., 2016 ). Conversely, this variance could be attributed to familiarity with programs that grant instructors a better understanding of its capabilities, altering their perception, as demonstrated by (Kim & Kim, 2022 ), who indicate that instructors with experience in specific technology are more receptive to it. The tendencies of teachers' perspectives on using Artificial Intelligence in academic writing are evident from the analysis results, which are summarized in Table 8 Table 8 Findings of Teachers' Experience Using AIWT in Academic Writing Construct Interpretation Perceived Ease of Use Work more quickly, job performance, increase productivity, effectiveness, makes job easier, useful Attitude Towards Usage Positive: Easy to learn, controllable, clear & understandable, flexible, easy to become skillful, ease to use Negative: Decrease in higher-level cognitive abilities such as creativity, critical thinking, reasoning, problem-solving Behavioral Intention to Use Intends to continue using technology in the future. Using technology in education needs to be considered with caution to ensure that students do not become overly reliant on this tool. Hence, assessment of AI usage in education should be done carefully and thoroughly. Actual Usage Developing content ideas, Organizing writing, Academic instruction, Language usage (Note: "AIWT" stands for "AI Writing Tools") In our research, all ten participating instructors acknowledged the positive role of AI writing tools in enhancing academic writing. This finding aligns with Sallam's (2023) research suggesting that AI tools significantly improve L2 writing organization. Gayed et al. (2022) discovered that AI significantly contributes to fostering idea development, thereby aiding students in overcoming creative barriers. This arises because AI systems do not truly understand human language (Y. Huang & Wilson, 2021). The natural language understanding in AWE-based systems is constructed by leveraging statistical analysis, extensive data collection, and machine learning to determine probable text sequences. Due to the parameters embedded within AWE systems, they tend not to value originality or creativity, but rather prioritize language mechanics, often favoring length and syntactic complexity over brevity, clarity, or more intangible and humanistic attributes (Bridgeman & Ramineni, 2017). However, it is also important to note its potential risks. Excessive dependence on AI technology can diminish one's ability for creative and critical thinking, as well as disrupt the capacity for making independent judgments about writing standards (Huang & Tan, 2023 ). Another concern frequently arising in the use of AWE is the effect of writing for machines on understanding the fundamental nature of writing (Grimes & Warschauer, 2010 ).. Writing does not occur in a vacuum but is fundamentally a social practice; we write for specific purposes and specific readers. In utilizing AWE, there's a risk of conveying an impression to academics that writing is an academic exercise, rather than a lifelong skill or a crucial component in language learning (Link et al., 2022 ; Saricaoglu, 2019 ). Furthermore, new concerns have emerged that academic dishonesty is now more easily facilitated among the academic community due to technological aids such as AI text generators. Academic integrity, adherence to ethical principles in academic work, has always been an institutional priority, emphasizing honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility (Ventayen, 2023 ). This includes avoiding plagiarism, cheating, fabrication, and enabling academic dishonesty. Research integrity pertains to the honesty and reliability of the research process. It is crucial to maintain the credibility and value of educational institutions and the work produced by the academic community (Sutherland-Smith, 2008 ). Certain AI applications can raise new ethical and legal questions, such as those related to responsibility or potentially biased decision-making. The ethics of artificial intelligence, in general, have garnered much attention from researchers (e.g., Nguyen et al., 2023 ; Floridi, 2019 ; Jobin et al., 2019 ). The use of AI holds significant promise in enhancing language processing and NLP-based applications in academic writing. However, it also raises concerns about integrity and regulations that need to be (Zaremba & Demir, 2023 ). The utilization of AI is not inherently a threat to academic integrity. Nevertheless, its use in generating articles claimed as original works requires revision. Violations of academic integrity are considered when an AI chatbot is employed to develop entire compositions (Walker, 2022 ). The use of AI in education must be exercised responsibly, with clear guidelines and protocols to ensure the maintenance of academic integrity (Graham, 2022 ). Hence, a balanced use of AI writing tools could involve assigning various writing tasks, partially utilizing the system and partially not. If possible, the target audience should extend beyond AI systems to encompass both educators and students. AI-powered writing aids should not "divert instructors and students from the communicative purpose of writing." This necessitates integrating the use of these tools "into a broader writing program that emphasizes authentic communication" (Grimes & Warschauer, 2010 ). Reidenberg & Schaub ( 2018 ), along with other researchers, have proposed the need for transparency (Schelenz et al., 2020 ) and accountability (Porayska-Pomsta & Rajendran, 2019 ) in the use of AI in education. then, (Holmes, 2019 ) highlights the significance of conducting responsible research on AI in education, emphasizing the importance of ethical considerations. 4.2 Teachers' Perspectives on Using AI in Classroom Instruction Teachers' perceptions of AI systems vary based on their pedagogical beliefs, teaching experience, prior experience with educational technology, and the effectiveness and specific technological needs—all of which can influence their willingness to adopt new educational technology (Kim & Kim, 2022 ). Several studies investigating teachers' perceptions of AI reveal that they generally expect AI to (a) provide more effective teaching and learning processes through digital learning materials and multimodal human-computer interactions (Jia et al., 2020 ) and (b) address various learning difficulties experienced by each student, catering to their needs even in large class sizes (Holmes et al., 2019 ). Moreover, research has indicated the anticipation that AI will significantly reduce teachers' administrative workload by taking over repetitive and straightforward tasks (Qin et al., 2020 ). However, despite decades of professional development regarding the integration of educational technology, many instructors still view the use of AI technology in the classroom with negativity and reluctance to adopt it (Kaban & Ergul, 2020 ). They prefer sticking to the same teaching materials and methodologies as before, rejecting anything that could potentially bring negative impacts (Tallvid, 2016 ). Furthermore, anxiety stemming from the adoption of new technology can act as a hindrance to educators' efforts to introduce technology in the learning environment (Hébert et al., 2021 ). We found that instructors hold remarkably similar views on the ethics of various technology uses and how much they sacrifice learning (Hostetter et al., 2016 ). Instructors consider spell-checking to be more ethical and less detrimental to learning compared to students, while students perceive copying and pasting information from Google as less harmful to learning compared to instructors. Despite these subtle differences, instructors view common technology uses such as spell-checkers, Grammarly, and citation generators as ethically acceptable and less disruptive to learning than copying and pasting information from Google. Because organizing ideas is a crucial component, students often struggle to build coherence and logical progression in their texts (Bowen & Thomas, 2020 ). Here, AI writing tools can provide instant feedback and suggestions for reorganizing sentences and paragraphs, assisting students in improving the structure of their writing (Chang et al., 2021 ). However, participants' greatest reluctance to using AI in writing arises when AI generates text for students, whether it's entire papers or portions of them, regardless of whether it's based on the students' own ideas. Integrating AI into Classroom Learning: Perspectives and Challenges In this context, educators need to learn how to use technology and successfully integrate it into their curricula. Moreover, to be open to integrating advanced technology into the learning process, teachers need to comprehend the significance of educational technology and the benefits it can yield in learning. A growing trend among instructors to blend AI tools to enrich the learning experience indicates positive outcomes—AI usage positively impacts overall student academic performance, including their writing skills. However, instructors remain concerned that overreliance on AI systems might endanger students' ability to learn independently, solve problems creatively, and think critically (Wogu et al., 2018 ). Excessive dependency emphasizes the importance of these tools being aids rather than substitutes for comprehensive language learning (Wogu et al., 2018 ) Excessive dependency emphasizes the importance of these tools being aids rather than substitutes for comprehensive language learning (Widiati et al., 2023 ). Popenici & Kerr ( 2017 ) investigated the impact of AI systems on learning and teaching, revealing potential conflicts between students and instructors, such as privacy issues, shifts in power dynamics, and excessive control. Therefore, before the successful implementation of AI support systems in classroom learning and evaluating their effectiveness, respondents explain that educators must first utilize this technology independently to fully understand how it can support learning, particularly in writing tasks. Students also need to be empowered to take responsibility for their own learning through the use of platforms they choose. Identifying their own strengths and areas for improvement, while instructors can allocate time and resources for one-on-one problem-solving interventions, rather than blanket deliveries. 5. Conclusion The emergence of AI capable of producing human-understandable text is not the first technological innovation that threatens academia, nor will it be the last. AI technology in education holds the potential to revolutionize traditional teaching practices, promote personalized learning experiences, and foster the development of soft skills. This research has unveiled various essential aspects of users' experiences with artificial intelligence tools in academic writing and instructors' perceptions of their usage practices. Several tools like Grammarly, Quillbot, Wordtune, and ChatGPT have been widely used in educational and professional environments. Instructors employ AI to enhance grammar and writing in their articles, which has enhanced writing abilities and lexical diversity. However, several risks need to be considered. AI's capabilities can disrupt individual creativity and critical thinking while increasing the risk of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. Overreliance can also convey that writing is merely an academic exercise rather than a lifelong skill. Hence, educators and students should responsibly employ AI technology, considering ethical and academic integrity concerns. The use of AI in classroom instruction also faces challenges and varying perceptions. Some instructors view AI as a tool that can enhance learning and reduce administrative burdens, while others hesitate to use it due to concerns and discomfort with new technology. Integrating AI technology into curricula must be done carefully and accompanied by understanding of its benefits in learning. Students must also be empowered to take responsibility for their learning and not overly rely on technology. Furthermore, transparency, accountability, and ethical considerations are crucial in using AI in education. AI support systems should be considered aids and not replace comprehensive language learning. Instructors should gain more experience using AI technology to integrate it effectively into classroom instruction. The limitations of this study are constrained by the number of respondents from three institutions, which may limit the generalizability of the results to a broader context. Instructors' experiences with artificial intelligence tools can significantly vary, potentially affecting their perceptions and usage practices. Nevertheless, this study offers valuable initial insights into how artificial intelligence tools are adopted and perceived by instructors in the context of academic writing. Further research is anticipated to conduct more in-depth studies to more accurately measure the effectiveness of artificial intelligence tools in enhancing the quality of academic writing. Experimental research involving larger control groups can provide deeper insights into the impact of such tools on academic performance, such as how the use of AIWT affects the creativity and critical thinking abilities of both instructors and students in academic writing. Future research can also focus on how the ethical and effective use of AIWT can be applied in academic evaluation without compromising academic integrity. Additionally, further studies could compare various platforms and applications to assess their strengths and weaknesses, aiding the development of tools that better meet the needs of instructors and students. Declarations Disclosure statement The authors declares that there is no potential conflict of interest to report. Funding The authors received no financial support for the research and the creation of this article. Author Contribution Nurul Shofiah (NS) and Zulmy Faqihuddin (ZF) jointly contributed to the conception, design, and execution of the research project. NS and ZF were actively involved in the data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Both authors equally participated in drafting and revising the manuscript.NS specifically took the lead in conducting literature reviews, formulating research questions, analyses, and organizing the overall structure of the manuscript. ZF played a significant role in data visualization, and ensuring the methodological rigor of the study.All figures and visual elements (e.g., tables ) were prepared by ZF, who also oversaw their integration into the manuscript. NS critically reviewed and revised the figures for clarity and coherence. Both authors actively participated in the final manuscript review and approval process. The manuscript has been read and approved by both authors for submission to Springer. Acknowledgements We express our sincere gratitude to all the participants of this study for generously dedicating their time and willingly sharing their experiences. Their invaluable contributions significantly aided in our comprehension of this topic and facilitated the derivation of meaningful conclusions. References Bowen, N. E. J. A., & Thomas, N. (2020). Manipulating texture and cohesion in academic writing: A keystroke logging study. Journal of Second Language Writing , 50 , 100773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100773 . Chang, T. S., Li, Y., Huang, H. W., & Whitfield, B. (2021). Exploring EFL Students’ writing performance and their acceptance of ai-based automated writing feedback. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series , 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459043.3459065 . Cruz-Benito, J., Sánchez-Prieto, J. C., Therón, R., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2019). Measuring Students’ acceptance to AI-Driven assessment in elearning: Proposing a First TAM-Based Research Model. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) , 11590 LNCS , 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21814-0_2 . Dale, R., & Viethen, J. (2021). The automated writing assistance landscape in 2021. Natural Language Engineering , 27 (4), 511–518. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324921000164 . Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science , 35 (8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 . Floridi, L. (2019). Translating Principles into practices of digital ethics: Five risks of being unethical. Philosophy and Technology , 32 (2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13347-019-00354-X/METRICS . Ghufron, M. (2019). Exploring an Automated feedback program ‘grammarly’ and teacher corrective feedback in EFL writing assessment: Modern vs. traditional assessment. Traditional Assessment [Paper Presentation]. The 3rd English Language and Literature International Conference . https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.27-4-2019.2285308 . Goksel, N., & Age, A. B. H. (2019). of R. on L. in the, & undefined. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Current insights and future perspectives. Handbook of Research on Learning in the Age of Transhumanism , https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch014 . Graham, F. (2022). Daily briefing: Will ChatGPT kill the essay assignment? Nature . https://doi.org/10.1038/D41586-022-04437-2 . Grimes, D., & Warschauer, M. (2010). Utility in a fallible tool: A multi-site case study of automated writing evaluation. Journal of Technology Learning and Assessment , 8 (6), 1–43. Guo, Q., Feng, R., & Hua, Y. (2022). How effectively can EFL students use automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) in research writing? In Computer Assisted Language Learning (Vol. 35, Issue 9, pp. 2312–2331). https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1879161 . Hébert, C., Jenson, J., & Terzopoulos, T. (2021). Access to technology is the major challenge: Teacher perspectives on barriers to DGBL in K-12 classrooms. E-Learning and Digital Media , 18 (3), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753021995315 . Holmes, W. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Education. In Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies . Center for Curriculum Redesign. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60013-0_107-1 . Holstein, K., McLaren, B. M., & Aleven, V. (2019). Designing for complementarity: Teacher and student needs for orchestration support in AI-enhanced classrooms. In S. Isotani, E. Millán, A. Ogan, P. Hastings, B. McLaren, & R. Luckin (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics): Vol. 11625 LNAI (pp. 157–171). Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23204-7_14 . Hostetter, A. B., Call, N., Frazier, G., James, T., Linnertz, C., Nestle, E., & Tucci, M. (2016). Student and Faculty Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Student Writing [pre-print] . 1–23. Huang, J., & Tan, M. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: writing better scientific review articles. American Journal of Cancer Research , 13 (4), 1148–1154. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence 2019 , 1:9 (9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2 . 1 . Jordan, M. I., & Mitchell, T. (2015). Machine learning: trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science , 349 , 255–260. Kaban, A. L., & Ergul, I. B. (2020). Teachers’ attitudes towards the use of tablets in six efl classrooms. In P. Eva (Ed.), Examining the Roles of Teachers and Students in Mastering New Technologies (pp. 284–298). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-2104-5.ch015 . Kim, N. J., & Kim, M. K. (2022). Teacher’s perceptions of using an artificial intelligence-based educational tool for scientific writing. Frontiers in Education , 7 . https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.755914 . Link, S., Mehrzad, M., & Rahimi, M. (2022). Impact of automated writing evaluation on teacher feedback, student revision, and writing improvement. In Computer Assisted Language Learning (Vol. 35, Issue 4). Computer Assisted Language Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1743323 . Nazari, N., Shabbir, M. S., & Setiawan, R. (2021a). Application of Artificial Intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: randomized controlled trial. Heliyon , 7 (5), 7014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014 . Nazari, N., Shabbir, M. S., & Setiawan, R. (2021b). Application of artificial intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: randomized controlled trial. Heliyon , 7 (5), e07014. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2021.E07014 . Nguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Nguyen, B. P. T. (2023). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and Information Technologies , 28 (4), 4221–4241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w . Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 16 (1), 1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847 . O’Neill, R., & Russell, A. M. T. (2019). Grammarly: Help or hindrance? Academic Learning Advisors’ perceptions of an online grammar checker. Journal of Academic Language & Learning , 13 (1), A88–A107. https://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/view/591 . Popenici, S. A., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning , 12 (1), 22. Porayska-Pomsta, K., & Rajendran, G. (2019). Accountability in human and artificial intelligence decision-making as the basis for diversity and educational inclusion . 39–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8161-4_3 . Qin, F., Li, K., & Yan, J. (2020). Understanding user trust in artificial intelligence-based educational systems: Evidence from China. British Journal of Educational Technology , 51 (5), 1693–1710. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12994 . Ranalli, J., & Yamashita, T. (2022). Automated written corrective feedback: Error-correction performance and timing of delivery. Language Learning & Technology , 26 (1), 1–25. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/73465 . Reidenberg, J. R., & Schaub, F. (2018). Achieving big data privacy in education. 16 (3), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878518805308 . Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 26 (2), 582–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3 . Salas-Pilco, S. Z., Xiao, K., & Hu, X. (2022). artificial intelligence and learning analytics in teacher Education: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences 2022, Vol. 12, Page 569 , 12 (8), 569. https://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI12080569 . Salas-Pilco, S. Z., & Yang, Y. (2020). Learning analytics initiatives in Latin America: Implications for educational researchers, practitioners and decision makers. British Journal of Educational Technology , 51 (4), 875–891. https://doi.org/10.1111/BJET.12952 . Saricaoglu, A. (2019). The impact of automated feedback on L2 learners’ written causal explanations. ReCALL , 31 (2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401800006X . Schelenz, L., Segal, A., & K. G.-A., A. C. M. (2020). P. of the 28th, & undefined. (2020). Best practices for transparency in machine generated personalization. \28th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation , 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3386392.3397593 . Sutherland-Smith, W. (2008). Plagiarism, the Internet and student learning: improving academic integrity . Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Plagiarism-the-Internet-and-Student-Learning-Improving-Academic-Integrity/Sutherland-Smith/p/book/9780415432931 . Tallvid, M. (2016). Understanding teachers’ reluctance to the pedagogical use of ICT in the 1:1 classroom. Education and Information Technologies , 21 (3), 503–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9335-7 . Ventayen, R. J. M. (2023). OpenAI ChatGPT generated results: similarity index of artificial intelligence-based contents. SSRN Electronic Journal . https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.4332664 . Walker, C. S. (2022). AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — should academics worry? Nature . https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7 . Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization of students ’ writing: EFL teachers ’ perspective T Cogent Education , 10 (2). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2236469 . Wogu, I. A. P., Misra, S., Olu-Owolabi, E. F., Assibong, P. A., Udoh, O. D., Ogiri, S. O., & Damasevicius, R. (2018). Artificial intelligence, artificial teachers and the fate of learners in the 21st century education sector: Implications for theory and practice. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics , 119 (16), 2245–2259. Zaremba, A., & Demir, E. (2023). ChatGPT: Unlocking the future of NLP in finance. SSRN Electronic Journal . https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.4323643 . Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education , 16 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-019-0171-0 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3871916","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":269354970,"identity":"a3772fb8-015f-41e6-9e85-6a39618071e8","order_by":0,"name":"Nurul Shofiah","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nurul","middleName":"","lastName":"Shofiah","suffix":""},{"id":269354971,"identity":"e24ca81d-af0c-4e11-8ade-4d822b6d9f91","order_by":1,"name":"Zulmy Faqihuddin Putera","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"State Polytechnic of Malang","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zulmy","middleName":"Faqihuddin","lastName":"Putera","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-01-17 05:15:42","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3871916/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3871916/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50589141,"identity":"e859bdd6-123d-4db6-9e88-189c4c7b8ed8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-03 02:59:25","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":444367,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3871916/v1/f5c33a6a-2a3c-40da-8364-d875e1012226.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Examining the user experience of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing: The perceptions lecturers practices","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eArtificial Intelligence (AI) has brought about a significant revolution in the academic world, particularly in education. The use of AI in education has garnered interest within the scholarly community (Jordan, M.I., Mitchell, 2015; Roll \u0026amp; Wylie, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). In the context of academic writing, AI technology has become an innovative solution capable of significantly impacting the efficiency and quality of students' writing. However, it is important to emphasize that educational technology is not merely about technology - it encompasses pedagogical, ethical, social, cultural, and economic dimensions of AIEd that require attention (Zawacki-Richter et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the academic environment, educators, as facilitators of learning and research, play a crucial role in understanding and responding to students' use of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing. Educators' perceptions of the use of AI can influence how the academic learning and assessment processes are carried out. Furthermore, students, as the primary users in the learning and research process, are increasingly interested in and reliant on AI technology to enhance and improve the quality of their academic writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing artificial intelligence tools in academic writing provides various advantages for students. Features such as grammar checking, plagiarism detection, sentence improvement suggestions, and content relevance and structural coherence analysis have become easily accessible through AI technology. This has accelerated and simplified the academic writing process, helping students produce better and more accurate papers. However, behind these benefits, educators' perceptions of the use of AI in academic writing are also crucial to understand. What are their views and attitudes towards AI technology supporting independent writing processes and learning? To what extent do they feel assisted and confident with adopting this technology?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) has been evolving recently. Specifically, AI has significantly impacted education(Salas-Pilco et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Currently, research is also focusing on the implementation of AI technology in education (Salas-Pilco \u0026amp; Yang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Goksel et al. (2019) consider that AI feature technology can contribute to the advancement of several educational processes. A systematic literature review by Zawacki-Richter et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) explains that research on AIEd lacks critical reflection on pedagogical implications. More research is needed from educators and instructional designers on integrating AI applications throughout students' life cycles to leverage the significant opportunities they have to create intelligent learning and teaching systems, as well as the educational perspective on the development of this technology. There still needs to be more research on what teachers and students actually desire from AIED systems (Holstein et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) additionally, where AIED interventions target behaviour change (such as 'nudging' individuals toward specific actions).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, investigating educators' perceptions regarding using artificial intelligence tools in education becomes relevant and crucial. From the perspective of educators, understanding their perceptions and viewpoints can provide insights into their readiness and acceptance of AI technology. To what extent do educators embrace this technology to support the learning and research process? The purpose of this research is to explore and understand educators' perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing. The results of this study are expected to provide a comprehensive overview of viewpoints, benefits, challenges, and expectations regarding the use of AI technology in the academic writing process. Investigating users' experiences with AI tools in academic writing is important to comprehend the effectiveness of AI tools in enhancing the writing experience and improving writing outcomes (Zawacki-Richter et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Identifying potential issues and concerns related to the use of AI tools in academic writing (Cruz-Benito et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), such as the potential for AI to replace human feedback. The findings of this research can inform the development of future interventions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Purposes of the Research","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis Study to explore the perspectives of lecturers who are progressively intrigued by and dependent on AI technology to enhance the quality of their academic compositions and to comprehend lecturers' perceptions concerning the utilization of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing and to assess the influence of AI technology on the learning process.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study aims to gain insights into educators' and students' perceptions regarding the use of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing. The study was conducted over four months. Our goal is not to evaluate specific AI technologies but to explore areas where AI systems positively contribute to educators and students and where more attention is needed, including viewpoints, benefits, challenges, and expectations regarding using AI technology in the academic writing proces\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research adopts the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The theory explains the process of technology acceptance through a model (Fig.\u0026nbsp;1) composed of five factors: perceive usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU), attitude towards usage (AU), behavioral intention (BI), and actual usage (U), as described in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eConstructs of the TAM Model in describing the perceived experience of lecturers using AIed.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived usefulness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA person believes that using a technology will enhance his or her performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived ease of use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerception of the user regarding the effort required to use a new resource.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude toward usage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRefers to the evaluative influence of lecturers (positive or negative feelings) towards ai usage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioral intention\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactors in assessing the intention of lecturers to use Aied.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eActual usage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived purposes of ai usage in an educational context\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe respondents of this study were 10 lecturers (4 males and 6 females) from 3 universities in Malang, Indonesia. To construct relevant interview questions, we referred to the works of Davis et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1989\u003c/span\u003e), Dale \u0026amp; Viethen (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) dan Nazari et al. (2021). y conducting an in-depth review of these sources, we focused on topics and themes that align with our research objectives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis comprehensive literature review aided in formulating our interview protocol. It included specific questions such as \"What AI writing tools have you used in your classes?\" and \"In what ways has this tool influenced your students' writing, particularly concerning content and organization?\" This interview guide enabled us to investigate the practical applications and theoretical implications of AI writing tools in the context of teaching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eData Collection Procedure\u003c/b\u003e. After designing the interview protocol, we scheduled interviews with each participant at their convenience and availability. Before commencing each interview, we provided participants with an orientation on the research objectives, the interview process, and our strict approach to data protection. We obtained their consent to proceed, ensuring they understood their rights, including the freedom to withdraw from the study at any time. During the interviews, we began with general questions about their experiences using AI in their writing and their views on students using AI in their writing, as well as whether they teach and use AI writing tools, thereby creating a relaxed and conducive environment for discussion.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo address potential social desirability bias in the data, we emphasized to the participants that there were no right or wrong answers and encouraged them to be as open and honest as possible. This was done to ensure the reliability and authenticity of the collected responses. Each interview was recorded with the participants' permission, to maintain accuracy in capturing their responses, which is an integral part of reliable transcription and subsequent data analysis. Note-taking during the interviews was also used as a means to highlight key points and document direct observations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDemographic Information of Participants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondent\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExperience in Using AIWT*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;5 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;1 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge; 1years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;1 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003eAIWT: AI Writing tools\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eData Analysis.\u003c/b\u003e After conducting the interviews, we meticulously transcribed the recorded dialogues, converting verbal insights into textual data. Each interview was recorded in audio format and subsequently transcribed for analysis purposes. The approach we employed was Reflexive Thematic Analysis (Nowell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Upon familiarizing ourselves with the interview data, two primary researchers began developing inductive codes related to interesting statements or phrases found in the data. Both researchers then coded each transcript by highlighting and providing comments on data items using Google Docs. Accuracy during this stage was crucial, as the transcribed data supported our subsequent analysis. All collected data, including interview recordings, transcriptions, and notes, were securely stored, respecting the participants' privacy, and allowing efficient data management for subsequent data analysis and research reporting. Following these practices ensured a comprehensive, ethical, and effective data collection procedure for our study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. RESULT","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Instructors' Perspectives on the Experience of Using Artificial Intelligence Writing Tools in Academic Writing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the analysis results, it is evident that the 10 surveyed instructors used various AI writing tools in their independent writing practices and teaching. These tools were selected and employed based on their known features and dependable capabilities. To provide a detailed yet concise overview of these AI writing tools, we have organized this data into a clear and informative format\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTypes of AI Writing Tools Used by Instructors\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInitial of Teachers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTypes of AI Writing Tools Used\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePurpose of Use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to enhance writing grammar.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuillbot\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for paraphrasing and translation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChat GPT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for paraphrasing and improving sentence flow and paragraph coherence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for checking writing (grammar, spelling, etc.).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChat GPT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for creating complex academic titles, translation, and text readability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLitmaps, connecting paper, consensus ai\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for searching information sources and references.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsensus ai\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for searching relevant references and aiding initial content understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerplexity.ai\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for searching relevant references and aiding initial content understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for grammar and spelling checks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWord tune\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for teaching paraphrasing skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for plagiarism checking and improving English grammar.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCopy ai\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to generate creative writing samples as examples of various writing styles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChat GPT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for translation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to correct grammatical errors in writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuillbolt\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for paraphrasing sentences.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to identify spelling errors, grammar, and other issues in English text.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOnline tool used to assist in checking English grammar.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to improve English grammar and spelling.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to improve English grammar.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConssus ai\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for searching relevant references and creating summaries of read references.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeep translet\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for translation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChat GPT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for searching specific English titles, aiding text comprehension, and sparking writing ideas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrammarly\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to improve English grammar.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWordtune\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed to improve sentence structure and enhance coherence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChat GPT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsed for translation, improving grammar, sentence cohesion, and paragraph coherence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e reveals significant patterns in how these 10 instructors integrate Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools into their independent writing practices and teaching methodologies. They share a common interest in utilizing a combination of AI tools to enhance their writing skills. Among the respondents, all 10 are proficient in using Grammarly, as the university subscribes to the application to facilitate instructors' academic writing. Instructors are usually required to publish journals nationally and internationally. In terms of language difficulties, this application is highly beneficial, although the validation of professional proofreaders is still preferred.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuillBot, renowned for its paraphrasing prowess, plays an essential role in effectively assisting in plagiarism avoidance. On the other hand, Wordtune is utilized to enhance sentence structure and clarity, making it a crucial tool for teaching English and enhancing students' written expression. A second layer of similarity can be observed with Jenni AI and ChatGPT, employed by three out of four instructors (T1, T2, and T4). Jenni AI, acclaimed for its topic modeling capability, aids in generating ideas. When challenging reference texts are encountered, this application assists in content comprehension and thought organization prior to writing, thus fostering structured writing. Moreover, these tools logically arrange their essays and provide improvement suggestions, making them uniquely suitable for classes focusing on academic writing. Meanwhile, the Perplexity and Consensus AI tools are used to search for relevant references and assist in initial content understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsidering the participant demographic information provided in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e and analyzing it against the utilization of AI tools by instructors, a few preliminary observations become evident. Instructors with years of experience in employing AIWT tend to use a broader set of AI tools. This pattern suggests that more experienced instructors in using AIWT may exhibit greater confidence in exploring a variety of AI tools for various educational purposes. Younger instructors in the age range of 28\u0026ndash;33 seem to be more technologically adept and therefore have a broader awareness of AIWT types, attempting to use them on their own before integrating them into teaching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding of Instructors Regarding the Use of AI in Academic Integrity Perspective\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondent\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing AI wisely for academic writing should be considered, but there needs to be policies from instructors when using it in teaching. We need to set usage limits so that students do not become overly reliant on AI.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI is very helpful, but dependence on it might hinder creativity and critical thinking. Thus, the originality of writing should be questioned if AI is used to develop content. There needs to be policies from higher education authorities on how to set usage limits. This has not been discussed yet in higher education institutions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI is appropriate within its limits. I do not use it to develop entire writings. I use it for language readability, translation, as based on experience, AI chatbots can provide incorrect information like non-existent citations. Moreover, Turnitin can detect it nowadays.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUsing ChatGPT for entire academic writing clearly violates academic integrity. I use chatbots more for translation, grammar, and alternative reference searching using consensus, while still evaluating their accuracy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublishers and journal editors allow AI usage for language enhancement, like grammar and translation. However, they prohibit listing AI chatbots as authors. I've read cases where AI usage for writing development is allowed, but transparency is still required. The academic community must be wise and accountable for what is written.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExcessive dependency on AI in education can have negative impacts on academics. They need to be wise to prioritize honesty. Despite technological advancements, the academic community still needs to use it for convenience without compromising academic integrity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe academic community needs to prioritize honesty in AI usage for writing. There should be strict evaluation of the generated information. Clear policies are necessary from educational institutions regarding this usage to maintain academic integrity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI shows less intellectual contribution from authors since they might rely on AI to produce content instead of utilizing their critical thinking skills. Transparency is necessary to maintain academic integrity. It is unethical to rely on AI for entire writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is important to always verify the sources of information generated by AI. Technological convenience can have negative impacts, but if used wisely and responsibly, it can enhance quality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo uphold academic integrity while using AI, proper citation and acknowledgment must always be applied to texts generated by AI, and it should not be used to develop entire writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe table 4indicates that all ten respondents exhibit cautious and responsible use of AI. Respondents T1, T4, and T10 refrain from utilizing ChatGPT for developing entire writings and avoid dependence on AI-generated content. Respondents T3 and T9, when using AI applications, ensure patterns or language irregularities are searched, sources are checked, and AI-generated citations are verified. On the other hand, respondents T6, T7, T8, who tend to use a limited range of diverse AI writing tools, generally express that AI usage indeed aids academic writing, yet academic honesty needs to be prioritized. When instructors and students use AI, honesty, integrity, and transparency are crucial. T2 suggests that AI users need to thoroughly fact-check texts, outcomes, data, code, and references produced by the tool. Excessive reliance on AI can lead to negative consequences for academics. Respondents T1, T5, T6, T7, T8 share similar sentiments that using ChatGPT for writing entire papers is considered unethical. However, employing AI for translation, grammar improvement, etc., is regarded as more ethical. Additionally, they explain that spell checkers, Grammarly, and citation generators are statistically more acceptable than other uses of ChatGPT. These statements underscore that instructors will continue to utilize and harness this technology, but with prudent and careful application, while being accountable for its usage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstructors' Perception of AI Usage in Classroom Learning\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondent\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI introduce types of AIWT that can enhance the quality of academic assignments, explaining their positive and negative impacts. The development of this technology is not a threat if we can use it appropriately.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere is concern about teaching this usage in the class, not wanting students to overly rely on AI, especially AI chatbots like ChatGPT. This usage will affect assignments and evaluations that I...\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI tools should be emphasized in a balanced manner, not replacing instructors as educators but providing additional support rather than a crutch.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes, I use this tool to stimulate writing ideas in coursework assignments. Students often struggle with how to start writing a paper. I monitor this usage in class and how it influences stricter evaluations. I don't want them to become overly dependent on this tool.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes, I always emphasize to students to better utilize this tool for translating languages, improving grammar, and literature searches.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDue to the varying trends in AI usage, I still set boundaries on what needs to be used and not used, and how it affects their assignment assessments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI focus the use of AI for classroom learning on how students can enhance writing quality through readability checks, translations, and reference searches. I discourage students from using AI to develop entire writings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes, I use AIWT to assist students in finding literature, but I find it difficult to distinguish between students' own writing and AI-generated content. I have to use Turnitin to check, which takes time and effort if I have multiple classes to teach.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of this tool can be integrated into writing classes, but students need guidance. The information generated by this tool can be complex and biased. Without guidance, students might use AI-generated information without considering its context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, no matter the classroom learning, instructors will still be needed. AI is only a tool to assist in enhancing learning. The role of the instructor will determine whether AI applications are beneficial for students and how they should be used.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, the instructors' perspectives on AI integration in classroom learning are presented. Respondent T1 introduced AIWT to students and emphasized the need to provide them with proper understanding of its appropriate use to reap positive benefits. In more detailed interviews, T1 also asserted that the use of these tools had a positive influence on enhancing students' vocabulary. He suggested that these tools recommend synonyms or more sophisticated words that students might not have considered, thereby expanding their lexical repertoire and enabling them to express their ideas more precisely and engagingly. However, T9 expressed concern that AI writing tools can sometimes generate overly complex language. While acknowledging the potential of these tools to provide students with a more complex vocabulary, it is feared that students might use these words without fully comprehending their context or connotations, leading to awkward or excessive formal writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eT3 emphasized the need for balance, emphasizing the importance of using these tools as supplementary aids rather than crutches. T2 expressed concerns about students relying on ChatGPT (or other AI) for assignments, as well as the availability of ChatGPT (and other AI) altering the types of assignments given and changing the way student writing is assessed. T10 explained the ability to detect the presence of ChatGPT (or other AI) in student writing. However, in contrast, T8 found it difficult to identify AI-generated writing in student papers. T6 and T7 stressed the importance of discussing with students in their courses about the acceptable use of ChatGPT (or other AI) for their assignments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, regarding the AI writing tools used in class, T1, T5, T10, and T6 employed AI writing aids and recommended QuillBot and Wordtune for improving writing, while for assisting students in finding relevant references, Consensus AI, Perplexity AI, and Publish or Perish were suggested. They also consistently reminded students to use these tools responsibly and to be aware of biases, errors, and inconsistencies in their use. Respondent T4 used ChatGPT and believed this tool played a crucial role in enhancing students' creativity by providing suggestions and expanding initial ideas. When students encounter writer's block or face writing obstacles, this tool can propose different angles or perspectives. However, it often doesn't always encourage deep or critical thinking about a topic. Respondent T3, a language instructor, tended to use AIWT for translation, grammar correction, and spelling, reminding students that the overall use of AI content could be detected through Turnitin.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the question \"How does this tool affect your students' writing, especially in terms of content and organization?\" the findings from T2, T4, T5, T1, T3, T9, and T10 show that the combination of AI tools enriches the learning experience and reveals that this positively impacts students' overall academic performance, including their writing skills.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eThematic Analysis of Lecturers' Perceptions on AI Usage Based on TAM Constructs\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConstruct\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatement Quotes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterpretation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Ease of Use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Using AI technology makes work easier and enhances teaching performance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; AI technology in education improves students' and teachers' productivity in writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; This tool is user-friendly, especially for tech-savvy educators and students, to enhance writing quality and quantity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWork more quickly, job performance, increase productivity, effectiveness, useful\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude Toward Use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; AI writing tools are actually quite easy for you to acquire. There are many user-friendly apps available now\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; I've noticed a lot of text variations generated by AI popping up on platforms like Instagram and TikTok. It's fascinating how these platforms have become hubs for stuff like that\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; I found various versions of AI writing tools on YouTube, complete with direct guides on how to use them. That's so practical.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive: Easy to learn, controllable, clear \u0026amp; understandable, flexible, easy to become skillful, ease to use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Depending on this tool while writing might impact critical thinking abilities as it seeks convenience\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Dependency on AIed can lead to reduced reasoning and problem-solving skills. Hence, educators need to monitor its use in students and promote creativity and critical thinking.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Wise use of this tool is needed in teaching, learning, and self-actualization.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNegative: decrease in high-level cognitive abilities like creativity, critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioral Intention to Use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; I will utilize AI technology, but we must be prudent in not overusing it and consider how it affects our writing quality\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; I use technology as an aid, not a substitute for learning. Relying too much on technology can disrupt the development of my critical skills\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Even though I'll keep using this tool, social interaction remains key in learning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eContinue to use technology in the future. Use technology in teaching needs careful consideration to prevent student dependency, so evaluating AIed usage in teaching should be done meticulously.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eActual Usage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis tool can stimulate students' creativity and spark ideas for academic writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeveloping content ideas\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI use this tool more for text readability, like grammar, although I sometimes still need a professional proofreader.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganizing writing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor international publication needs, AI technology can help translate writings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e presents the results of the analysis of instructors' perceptions towards the usage of AI in academic writing using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The analysis comprises four constructs: perceived ease of use, attitude towards usage, intention to use behavior, and actual usage. The elaboration is as follows.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003ePerceived Ease of Use\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings in this section indicate the users' perspective on the ease or difficulty of using AI writing technology (AIWT). Among the ten respondents, they generally believe that using AI can facilitate writing activities and is easy to comprehend. T9 and T10 explained that using these tools could enhance productivity. This indicates that they perceive the tool as intuitive and not requiring significant effort to use. Such easy user experience can potentially drive the technology's acceptance. Meanwhile, T5, T1, and T3 consider AIWT to effectively enhance students' writing skills when integrated into learning. This view suggests that they see the technology as an effective tool to help students improve their writing skills. This also reflects their perception of the positive potential in using this technology as a learning aid. Furthermore, it was found that AIWT usage can enhance productivity, as articulated by T9 and T10. This suggests that they consider the tool a solution that can help them write faster and more efficiently. Overall, these findings reflect that the respondents generally hold a positive perception regarding the ease of use of AIWT in the context of writing. They view it as an accessible tool that is easy to understand, has the potential to enhance writing skills, and can increase productivity. All of these perspectives paint a positive picture of the ease-of-use aspect in the acceptance of AIWT.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eAttitude towards Usage\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe analysis results show that the ten instructors exhibit both positive and negative attitudes towards the usage of AI in academic writing. Positive attitudes include the perception that this technology is highly learnable. T1 explains that AIWT is easily accessible, especially with the emergence of various applications that are easy to find and use. Information about AI writing variations is commonly found on Instagram and TikTok, while T3 discovered variations in AIWT on YouTube that directly provided instructions for use. On the other hand, T5 and T7 seem not to be updated on the trend of AIWT application variations. When asked about where they learned about these applications, they mentioned being aware of apps subscribed by their campuses, such as Grammarly and QuillBot. According to them, these applications are easy to use. On the other hand, the identified negative attitudes include concerns about a potential decline in higher-level cognitive abilities such as creativity, critical thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving. T2, for example, expressed fears of dependency that might affect critical thinking ability. T4, T8, and T10 also expressed concerns about the possibility of excessive reliance on these tools, particularly in educational contexts that integrate AIWT, which might inadvertently lead students to neglect the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills, which are fundamental to effective writing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eBehavioural Intention to Use\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the analysis results from the ten respondents, they have positive behavioural intentions towards future technology usage, in line with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). These behavioural intentions reflect their desire to continue using technology in a learning context. However, there are aspects to consider in the continued use of this technology. TAM is a framework that depicts the factors influencing users' acceptance of technology. In this case, all ten respondents agree to continue using technology in the future, indicating that they find it beneficial and relevant. T3 explains that technology use in education must be considered with caution to ensure that students do not become overly reliant on these tools. Thus, careful and thorough consideration is needed when assessing the usage of AI in education. T6 and T8 similarly emphasize the importance of ensuring that technology remains a tool and support in education, not a substitute for genuine interaction and understanding of concepts. Excessive reliance on technology can diminish students' ability to develop critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and essential social interactions in the learning process. T5 believes that in integrating technology, a careful evaluation of how the technology is used in education is necessary. The technology's effectiveness in enhancing comprehension, students' ability to maintain critical thinking, and the impact on student-teacher interactions need to be considered. Thus, while positive behavioural intentions have been identified among the ten respondents, it is crucial to still consider significant aspects such as avoiding excessive dependency on technology and its potential impact on overall learning quality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eActual Usage\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, developing content ideas. Respondents T1, T2, T3, and T4 express views on the potential benefits of AI writing tools to stimulate creativity and idea expansion. These tools can offer various angles or perspectives, helping overcome creative hurdles when struggling with writer's block. Meanwhile, T9 uses these tools in the ideation phase. However, they also voice concerns that the ideas generated by these tools might be generic or impersonal. In their view, while AI tools can assist in certain situations, they may only sometimes encourage deep or critical thinking about a topic. Second, organizing the writing. The ten instructors provide a comprehensive overview of the benefits of AI writing tools in enhancing writing skills. Each instructor offers insights into different aspects of the tool and its impact on the writing process. Respondents T1, T4, T9, and T1 express views that these tools play a role in facilitating clear and logical thought progression. They suggest better expressions and enhanced coherence, leading to improved writing confidence. T6, T7, and T9 emphasize its effectiveness in providing grammar suggestions, enhancing vocabulary usage, and ensuring the continuity of logical arguments. Third, language usage. All ten respondents explain that AI writing tools improve language fluency in writing articles intended for publication in national and international journals. While they (T7, T8, T10) sometimes require professional proofreaders based on suggestions from journal editors and reviewers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4\u003cb\u003e.1 Perceptions of Teachers' Experience Using AIed in Academic Writing\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eComputer-based applications are increasingly becoming an alternative to facilitate academic writing. AI-powered writing tools are now accessible on mobile devices, helping academics improve their writing skills (Nazari et al., 2021). Tools such as Grammarly or ProWritingAid are widely utilized in educational, professional, and daily settings. These tools provide automatic written corrective feedback, a descriptor gaining prominence in emerging research on their usage (Guo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Ranalli \u0026amp; Yamashita, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFindings indicate a tendency among instructors to employ various types of AI Writing Tools in academic writing, including Grammarly, QuillBot, Wordtune, and ChatGPT. For instance, instructors frequently employ Grammarly to enhance the grammatical structure of articles they prepare for publication in national and international journals, although some still resort to professional proofreaders. Several studies' results indicate improved writing skills following the use of Grammarly (Ghufron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; O\u0026rsquo;Neill \u0026amp; Russell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Reports also suggest an enhancement in lexical diversity resulting from its usage (Dizon \u0026amp; Gayed, 2021). The feature of grammatical error categorization has also proven to be beneficial. Grammarly's algorithm can analyze L2 text and provide targeted feedback, which is helpful because human correctors may struggle to categorize errors. However, according to the findings of a study (Nazari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e), individuals with lower language proficiency might struggle to effectively use Grammarly, as their limited linguistic competence can hinder their comprehensive understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother type of AI Writing Tool used by instructors is ChatGPT. Those with experience using ChatGPT are more likely to agree or strongly agree that AI can be a useful tool for struggling writers than instructors without ChatGPT experience. This disparity may arise from variations in technological comfort; educators more open to technology might be more inclined to try it out themselves and find it easier to embrace its student utilization (Hostetter et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Conversely, this variance could be attributed to familiarity with programs that grant instructors a better understanding of its capabilities, altering their perception, as demonstrated by (Kim \u0026amp; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), who indicate that instructors with experience in specific technology are more receptive to it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe tendencies of teachers' perspectives on using Artificial Intelligence in academic writing are evident from the analysis results, which are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFindings of Teachers' Experience Using AIWT in Academic Writing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConstruct\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterpretation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerceived Ease of Use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWork more quickly, job performance, increase productivity, effectiveness, makes job easier, useful\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAttitude Towards Usage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive: Easy to learn, controllable, clear \u0026amp; understandable, flexible, easy to become skillful, ease to use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNegative: Decrease in higher-level cognitive abilities such as creativity, critical thinking, reasoning, problem-solving\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBehavioral Intention to Use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntends to continue using technology in the future. Using technology in education needs to be considered with caution to ensure that students do not become overly reliant on this tool. Hence, assessment of AI usage in education should be done carefully and thoroughly.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eActual Usage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeveloping content ideas, Organizing writing, Academic instruction, Language usage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e(Note: \"AIWT\" stands for \"AI Writing Tools\")\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn our research, all ten participating instructors acknowledged the positive role of AI writing tools in enhancing academic writing. This finding aligns with Sallam's (2023) research suggesting that AI tools significantly improve L2 writing organization. Gayed et al. (2022) discovered that AI significantly contributes to fostering idea development, thereby aiding students in overcoming creative barriers. This arises because AI systems do not truly understand human language (Y. Huang \u0026amp; Wilson, 2021). The natural language understanding in AWE-based systems is constructed by leveraging statistical analysis, extensive data collection, and machine learning to determine probable text sequences. Due to the parameters embedded within AWE systems, they tend not to value originality or creativity, but rather prioritize language mechanics, often favoring length and syntactic complexity over brevity, clarity, or more intangible and humanistic attributes (Bridgeman \u0026amp; Ramineni, 2017).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, it is also important to note its potential risks. Excessive dependence on AI technology can diminish one's ability for creative and critical thinking, as well as disrupt the capacity for making independent judgments about writing standards (Huang \u0026amp; Tan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Another concern frequently arising in the use of AWE is the effect of writing for machines on understanding the fundamental nature of writing (Grimes \u0026amp; Warschauer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).. Writing does not occur in a vacuum but is fundamentally a social practice; we write for specific purposes and specific readers. In utilizing AWE, there's a risk of conveying an impression to academics that writing is an academic exercise, rather than a lifelong skill or a crucial component in language learning (Link et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Saricaoglu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, new concerns have emerged that academic dishonesty is now more easily facilitated among the academic community due to technological aids such as AI text generators. Academic integrity, adherence to ethical principles in academic work, has always been an institutional priority, emphasizing honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility (Ventayen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This includes avoiding plagiarism, cheating, fabrication, and enabling academic dishonesty. Research integrity pertains to the honesty and reliability of the research process. It is crucial to maintain the credibility and value of educational institutions and the work produced by the academic community (Sutherland-Smith, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Certain AI applications can raise new ethical and legal questions, such as those related to responsibility or potentially biased decision-making. The ethics of artificial intelligence, in general, have garnered much attention from researchers (e.g., Nguyen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Floridi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Jobin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI holds significant promise in enhancing language processing and NLP-based applications in academic writing. However, it also raises concerns about integrity and regulations that need to be (Zaremba \u0026amp; Demir, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The utilization of AI is not inherently a threat to academic integrity. Nevertheless, its use in generating articles claimed as original works requires revision. Violations of academic integrity are considered when an AI chatbot is employed to develop entire compositions (Walker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The use of AI in education must be exercised responsibly, with clear guidelines and protocols to ensure the maintenance of academic integrity (Graham, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHence, a balanced use of AI writing tools could involve assigning various writing tasks, partially utilizing the system and partially not. If possible, the target audience should extend beyond AI systems to encompass both educators and students. AI-powered writing aids should not \"divert instructors and students from the communicative purpose of writing.\" This necessitates integrating the use of these tools \"into a broader writing program that emphasizes authentic communication\" (Grimes \u0026amp; Warschauer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReidenberg \u0026amp; Schaub (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), along with other researchers, have proposed the need for transparency (Schelenz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and accountability (Porayska-Pomsta \u0026amp; Rajendran, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) in the use of AI in education. then, (Holmes, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) highlights the significance of conducting responsible research on AI in education, emphasizing the importance of ethical considerations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Teachers' Perspectives on Using AI in Classroom Instruction\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeachers' perceptions of AI systems vary based on their pedagogical beliefs, teaching experience, prior experience with educational technology, and the effectiveness and specific technological needs\u0026mdash;all of which can influence their willingness to adopt new educational technology (Kim \u0026amp; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Several studies investigating teachers' perceptions of AI reveal that they generally expect AI to (a) provide more effective teaching and learning processes through digital learning materials and multimodal human-computer interactions (Jia et al., 2020 ) and (b) address various learning difficulties experienced by each student, catering to their needs even in large class sizes (Holmes et al., 2019 ). Moreover, research has indicated the anticipation that AI will significantly reduce teachers' administrative workload by taking over repetitive and straightforward tasks (Qin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, despite decades of professional development regarding the integration of educational technology, many instructors still view the use of AI technology in the classroom with negativity and reluctance to adopt it (Kaban \u0026amp; Ergul, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). They prefer sticking to the same teaching materials and methodologies as before, rejecting anything that could potentially bring negative impacts (Tallvid, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, anxiety stemming from the adoption of new technology can act as a hindrance to educators' efforts to introduce technology in the learning environment (H\u0026eacute;bert et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe found that instructors hold remarkably similar views on the ethics of various technology uses and how much they sacrifice learning (Hostetter et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Instructors consider spell-checking to be more ethical and less detrimental to learning compared to students, while students perceive copying and pasting information from Google as less harmful to learning compared to instructors. Despite these subtle differences, instructors view common technology uses such as spell-checkers, Grammarly, and citation generators as ethically acceptable and less disruptive to learning than copying and pasting information from Google. Because organizing ideas is a crucial component, students often struggle to build coherence and logical progression in their texts (Bowen \u0026amp; Thomas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Here, AI writing tools can provide instant feedback and suggestions for reorganizing sentences and paragraphs, assisting students in improving the structure of their writing (Chang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). However, participants' greatest reluctance to using AI in writing arises when AI generates text for students, whether it's entire papers or portions of them, regardless of whether it's based on the students' own ideas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eIntegrating AI into Classroom Learning: Perspectives and Challenges\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this context, educators need to learn how to use technology and successfully integrate it into their curricula. Moreover, to be open to integrating advanced technology into the learning process, teachers need to comprehend the significance of educational technology and the benefits it can yield in learning. A growing trend among instructors to blend AI tools to enrich the learning experience indicates positive outcomes\u0026mdash;AI usage positively impacts overall student academic performance, including their writing skills. However, instructors remain concerned that overreliance on AI systems might endanger students' ability to learn independently, solve problems creatively, and think critically (Wogu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Excessive dependency emphasizes the importance of these tools being aids rather than substitutes for comprehensive language learning (Wogu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) Excessive dependency emphasizes the importance of these tools being aids rather than substitutes for comprehensive language learning (Widiati et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Popenici \u0026amp; Kerr (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) investigated the impact of AI systems on learning and teaching, revealing potential conflicts between students and instructors, such as privacy issues, shifts in power dynamics, and excessive control.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, before the successful implementation of AI support systems in classroom learning and evaluating their effectiveness, respondents explain that educators must first utilize this technology independently to fully understand how it can support learning, particularly in writing tasks. Students also need to be empowered to take responsibility for their own learning through the use of platforms they choose. Identifying their own strengths and areas for improvement, while instructors can allocate time and resources for one-on-one problem-solving interventions, rather than blanket deliveries.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe emergence of AI capable of producing human-understandable text is not the first technological innovation that threatens academia, nor will it be the last. AI technology in education holds the potential to revolutionize traditional teaching practices, promote personalized learning experiences, and foster the development of soft skills. This research has unveiled various essential aspects of users' experiences with artificial intelligence tools in academic writing and instructors' perceptions of their usage practices. Several tools like Grammarly, Quillbot, Wordtune, and ChatGPT have been widely used in educational and professional environments. Instructors employ AI to enhance grammar and writing in their articles, which has enhanced writing abilities and lexical diversity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, several risks need to be considered. AI's capabilities can disrupt individual creativity and critical thinking while increasing the risk of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. Overreliance can also convey that writing is merely an academic exercise rather than a lifelong skill. Hence, educators and students should responsibly employ AI technology, considering ethical and academic integrity concerns. The use of AI in classroom instruction also faces challenges and varying perceptions. Some instructors view AI as a tool that can enhance learning and reduce administrative burdens, while others hesitate to use it due to concerns and discomfort with new technology. Integrating AI technology into curricula must be done carefully and accompanied by understanding of its benefits in learning. Students must also be empowered to take responsibility for their learning and not overly rely on technology.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, transparency, accountability, and ethical considerations are crucial in using AI in education. AI support systems should be considered aids and not replace comprehensive language learning. Instructors should gain more experience using AI technology to integrate it effectively into classroom instruction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe limitations of this study are constrained by the number of respondents from three institutions, which may limit the generalizability of the results to a broader context. Instructors' experiences with artificial intelligence tools can significantly vary, potentially affecting their perceptions and usage practices. Nevertheless, this study offers valuable initial insights into how artificial intelligence tools are adopted and perceived by instructors in the context of academic writing. Further research is anticipated to conduct more in-depth studies to more accurately measure the effectiveness of artificial intelligence tools in enhancing the quality of academic writing. Experimental research involving larger control groups can provide deeper insights into the impact of such tools on academic performance, such as how the use of AIWT affects the creativity and critical thinking abilities of both instructors and students in academic writing. Future research can also focus on how the ethical and effective use of AIWT can be applied in academic evaluation without compromising academic integrity. Additionally, further studies could compare various platforms and applications to assess their strengths and weaknesses, aiding the development of tools that better meet the needs of instructors and students.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDisclosure statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declares that there is no potential conflict of interest to report.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors received no financial support for the research and the creation of this article.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eNurul Shofiah (NS) and Zulmy Faqihuddin (ZF) jointly contributed to the conception, design, and execution of the research project. NS and ZF were actively involved in the data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Both authors equally participated in drafting and revising the manuscript.NS specifically took the lead in conducting literature reviews, formulating research questions, analyses, and organizing the overall structure of the manuscript. ZF played a significant role in data visualization, and ensuring the methodological rigor of the study.All figures and visual elements (e.g., tables ) were prepared by ZF, who also oversaw their integration into the manuscript. NS critically reviewed and revised the figures for clarity and coherence. Both authors actively participated in the final manuscript review and approval process. The manuscript has been read and approved by both authors for submission to Springer.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe express our sincere gratitude to all the participants of this study for generously dedicating their time and willingly sharing their experiences. Their invaluable contributions significantly aided in our comprehension of this topic and facilitated the derivation of meaningful conclusions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBowen, N. E. J. A., \u0026amp; Thomas, N. (2020). Manipulating texture and cohesion in academic writing: A keystroke logging study. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Second Language Writing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e50\u003c/em\u003e, 100773. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100773\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChang, T. S., Li, Y., Huang, H. W., \u0026amp; Whitfield, B. (2021). Exploring EFL Students\u0026rsquo; writing performance and their acceptance of ai-based automated writing feedback. \u003cem\u003eACM International Conference Proceeding Series\u003c/em\u003e, 31\u0026ndash;35. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1145/3459043.3459065\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCruz-Benito, J., S\u0026aacute;nchez-Prieto, J. C., Ther\u0026oacute;n, R., \u0026amp; Garc\u0026iacute;a-Pe\u0026ntilde;alvo, F. J. (2019). Measuring Students\u0026rsquo; acceptance to AI-Driven assessment in elearning: Proposing a First TAM-Based Research Model. \u003cem\u003eLecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11590 LNCS\u003c/em\u003e, 15\u0026ndash;25. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21814-0_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDale, R., \u0026amp; Viethen, J. (2021). The automated writing assistance landscape in 2021. \u003cem\u003eNatural Language Engineering\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e27\u003c/em\u003e(4), 511\u0026ndash;518. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324921000164\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., \u0026amp; Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. \u003cem\u003eManagement Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e35\u003c/em\u003e(8), 982\u0026ndash;1003. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFloridi, L. (2019). Translating Principles into practices of digital ethics: Five risks of being unethical. \u003cem\u003ePhilosophy and Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(2), 185\u0026ndash;193. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/S13347-019-00354-X/METRICS\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGhufron, M. (2019). Exploring an Automated feedback program \u0026lsquo;grammarly\u0026rsquo; and teacher corrective feedback in EFL writing assessment: Modern vs. traditional assessment. \u003cem\u003eTraditional Assessment [Paper Presentation]. The 3rd English Language and Literature International Conference\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4108/eai.27-4-2019.2285308\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoksel, N., \u0026amp; Age, A. B. H. (2019). of R. on L. in the, \u0026amp; undefined. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Current insights and future perspectives. \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Research on Learning in the Age of Transhumanism\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch014\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGraham, F. (2022). Daily briefing: Will ChatGPT kill the essay assignment? \u003cem\u003eNature\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/D41586-022-04437-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrimes, D., \u0026amp; Warschauer, M. (2010). Utility in a fallible tool: A multi-site case study of automated writing evaluation. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Technology Learning and Assessment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1\u0026ndash;43.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuo, Q., Feng, R., \u0026amp; Hua, Y. (2022). How effectively can EFL students use automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) in research writing? In \u003cem\u003eComputer Assisted Language Learning\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 35, Issue 9, pp. 2312\u0026ndash;2331). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1879161\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eH\u0026eacute;bert, C., Jenson, J., \u0026amp; Terzopoulos, T. (2021). Access to technology is the major challenge: Teacher perspectives on barriers to DGBL in K-12 classrooms. \u003cem\u003eE-Learning and Digital Media\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(3), 307\u0026ndash;324. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/2042753021995315\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolmes, W. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Education. In \u003cem\u003eEncyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies\u003c/em\u003e. Center for Curriculum Redesign. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60013-0_107-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolstein, K., McLaren, B. M., \u0026amp; Aleven, V. (2019). Designing for complementarity: Teacher and student needs for orchestration support in AI-enhanced classrooms. In S. Isotani, E. Mill\u0026aacute;n, A. Ogan, P. Hastings, B. McLaren, \u0026amp; R. Luckin (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eLecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics): Vol. 11625 LNAI\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 157\u0026ndash;171). Springer International Publishing AG. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23204-7_14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHostetter, A. B., Call, N., Frazier, G., James, T., Linnertz, C., Nestle, E., \u0026amp; Tucci, M. (2016). \u003cem\u003eStudent and Faculty Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Student Writing [pre-print]\u003c/em\u003e. 1\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuang, J., \u0026amp; Tan, M. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: writing better scientific review articles. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Cancer Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(4), 1148\u0026ndash;1154.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJobin, A., Ienca, M., \u0026amp; Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. \u003cem\u003eNature Machine Intelligence 2019\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1:9\u003c/em\u003e(9), 389\u0026ndash;399. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJordan, M. I., \u0026amp; Mitchell, T. (2015). Machine learning: trends, perspectives, and prospects. \u003cem\u003eScience\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e349\u003c/em\u003e, 255\u0026ndash;260.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKaban, A. L., \u0026amp; Ergul, I. B. (2020). Teachers\u0026rsquo; attitudes towards the use of tablets in six efl classrooms. In P. Eva (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eExamining the Roles of Teachers and Students in Mastering New Technologies\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 284\u0026ndash;298). IGI Global. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-2104-5.ch015\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim, N. J., \u0026amp; Kim, M. K. (2022). Teacher\u0026rsquo;s perceptions of using an artificial intelligence-based educational tool for scientific writing. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.755914\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLink, S., Mehrzad, M., \u0026amp; Rahimi, M. (2022). Impact of automated writing evaluation on teacher feedback, student revision, and writing improvement. In \u003cem\u003eComputer Assisted Language Learning\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 35, Issue 4). Computer Assisted Language Learning. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1743323\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNazari, N., Shabbir, M. S., \u0026amp; Setiawan, R. (2021a). Application of Artificial Intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: randomized controlled trial. \u003cem\u003eHeliyon\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(5), 7014. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNazari, N., Shabbir, M. S., \u0026amp; Setiawan, R. (2021b). Application of artificial intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: randomized controlled trial. \u003cem\u003eHeliyon\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(5), e07014. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2021.E07014\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., \u0026amp; Nguyen, B. P. T. (2023). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. \u003cem\u003eEducation and Information Technologies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(4), 4221\u0026ndash;4241. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., \u0026amp; Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1609406917733847. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Neill, R., \u0026amp; Russell, A. M. T. (2019). Grammarly: Help or hindrance? Academic Learning Advisors\u0026rsquo; perceptions of an online grammar checker. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Academic Language \u0026amp; Learning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(1), A88\u0026ndash;A107. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/view/591\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePopenici, S. A., \u0026amp; Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. \u003cem\u003eResearch and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(1), 22.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePorayska-Pomsta, K., \u0026amp; Rajendran, G. (2019). \u003cem\u003eAccountability in human and artificial intelligence decision-making as the basis for diversity and educational inclusion\u003c/em\u003e. 39\u0026ndash;59. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8161-4_3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQin, F., Li, K., \u0026amp; Yan, J. (2020). Understanding user trust in artificial intelligence-based educational systems: Evidence from China. \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Educational Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1693\u0026ndash;1710. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12994\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRanalli, J., \u0026amp; Yamashita, T. (2022). Automated written corrective feedback: Error-correction performance and timing of delivery. \u003cem\u003eLanguage Learning \u0026amp; Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;25. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://hdl.handle.net/10125/73465\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReidenberg, J. R., \u0026amp; Schaub, F. (2018). Achieving big data privacy in education. \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(3), 263\u0026ndash;279. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1477878518805308\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoll, I., \u0026amp; Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(2), 582\u0026ndash;599. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSalas-Pilco, S. Z., Xiao, K., \u0026amp; Hu, X. (2022). artificial intelligence and learning analytics in teacher Education: A Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eEducation Sciences 2022, Vol. 12, Page 569\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(8), 569. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI12080569\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSalas-Pilco, S. Z., \u0026amp; Yang, Y. (2020). Learning analytics initiatives in Latin America: Implications for educational researchers, practitioners and decision makers. \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Educational Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e(4), 875\u0026ndash;891. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/BJET.12952\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaricaoglu, A. (2019). The impact of automated feedback on L2 learners\u0026rsquo; written causal explanations. \u003cem\u003eReCALL\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e31\u003c/em\u003e(2), 189\u0026ndash;203. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401800006X\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchelenz, L., Segal, A., \u0026amp; K. G.-A., A. C. M. (2020). P. of the 28th, \u0026amp; undefined. (2020). Best practices for transparency in machine generated personalization. \u003cem\u003e\\28th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation\u003c/em\u003e, 23\u0026ndash;28. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1145/3386392.3397593\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSutherland-Smith, W. (2008). \u003cem\u003ePlagiarism, the Internet and student learning: improving academic integrity\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.routledge.com/Plagiarism-the-Internet-and-Student-Learning-Improving-Academic-Integrity/Sutherland-Smith/p/book/9780415432931\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTallvid, M. (2016). Understanding teachers\u0026rsquo; reluctance to the pedagogical use of ICT in the 1:1 classroom. \u003cem\u003eEducation and Information Technologies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(3), 503\u0026ndash;519. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9335-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVentayen, R. J. M. (2023). OpenAI ChatGPT generated results: similarity index of artificial intelligence-based contents. \u003cem\u003eSSRN Electronic Journal\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.4332664\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalker, C. S. (2022). AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays \u0026mdash; should academics worry? \u003cem\u003eNature\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWidiati, U., Rusdin, D., \u0026amp; Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization of students \u0026rsquo; writing: EFL teachers \u0026rsquo; perspective T \u003cem\u003eCogent Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(2). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2236469\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWogu, I. A. P., Misra, S., Olu-Owolabi, E. F., Assibong, P. A., Udoh, O. D., Ogiri, S. O., \u0026amp; Damasevicius, R. (2018). Artificial intelligence, artificial teachers and the fate of learners in the 21st century education sector: Implications for theory and practice. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e119\u003c/em\u003e(16), 2245\u0026ndash;2259.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZaremba, A., \u0026amp; Demir, E. (2023). ChatGPT: Unlocking the future of NLP in finance. \u003cem\u003eSSRN Electronic Journal\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.4323643\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZawacki-Richter, O., Mar\u0026iacute;n, V. I., Bond, M., \u0026amp; Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education \u0026ndash; where are the educators? \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-019-0171-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"academic writing, artificial intelligence, perceptions of instructors, educational interventions","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3871916/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3871916/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIn academic writing, AI technology has emerged as an innovative solution capable of enhancing the efficiency and quality of students' writing. This study seeks to explore the perspectives of lecturers, who are increasingly interested in and reliant on AI technology to augment the quality of their academic compositions. Furthermore, this study aims to comprehend lecturer' perceptions regarding using artificial intelligence tools in academic writing and how AI technology impacts learning. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this research encompasses perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude towards usage, intention to use behaviour, and actual usage. The study's respondents consist of 10 instructors from three universities in Malang City, Indonesia. First, the research findings indicate that using artificial intelligence tools yields various advantages for lecturer, including grammar checks, plagiarism detection, sentence improvement suggestions, and analyses of content relevance and structural coherence. Second, Instructors positively welcome using AI technology as a supplementary tool to support the learning and research processes; however, concerns about its potential over-dependence might diminish College student abilities to think creatively and critically. The outcomes of this research are expected to inform the development of future interventions aimed at maximizing the benefits of AI technology in education.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Examining the user experience of artificial intelligence tools in academic writing: The perceptions lecturers practices","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-01-30 11:24:45","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3871916/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"3ff8bef4-d33d-4a5a-9bcd-870a31d14801","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 30th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-02-03T02:51:19+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-01-30 11:24:45","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3871916","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3871916","identity":"rs-3871916","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}