BETWEEN ASSISTANCE AND CHEATING: ENGLISH LECTURERS’ EVALUATION OF AI-SUPPORTED STUDENT WRITING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37792/1me3xf95Keywords:
AI-assisted writing, academic integrity, lecturer assessment, teacher cognition, Vietnamese higher educationAbstract
The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT has transformed writing practices in higher education and raised important questions regarding authorship, assessment, and academic integrity. Although previous studies have explored the benefits and challenges of AI-assisted writing, limited research has examined how lecturers evaluate student writing that involves AI support. This study investigates how English lecturers conceptualise the boundary between acceptable AI-assisted writing and academic misconduct and explores the factors influencing their assessment and grading decisions in Vietnamese higher education. A qualitative design was employed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty English lecturers from three universities in Hanoi. The interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, with coding and theme development cross-checked by two researchers. The findings indicate that lecturers do not view AI use in student writing as inherently unethical. Rather, they understand AI use along a continuum, distinguishing between AI as a learning support and AI as a substitute for students’ intellectual effort and authorship. Assessment decisions were influenced by perceptions of student agency, transparency in AI use, evidence of learning, ethical considerations, institutional expectations, and professional experience. Rather than relying primarily on AI-detection tools, lecturers emphasised students’ ability to explain, justify, and reflect on their writing processes. The study concludes that assessing AI-supported writing is a pedagogical and interpretative practice rather than a purely technical or rule-based process. The findings highlight the need for context-sensitive assessment frameworks, clearer institutional guidance, and professional development to support lecturers in navigating AI-related assessment challenges.
References
Bin-Nashwan, S. A., Sadallah, M., & Bouteraa, M. (2023). Use of ChatGPT in academia: Academic integrity hangs in the balance. Technology in Society, 75, 102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102370
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903
Borg, S. (2015). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. EdArXiv. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/mrz8h
Finkel-Gates, A. (2025). ChatGPT in academic assessments: Upholding integrity. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (36). https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi36.1491
Fulcher, G. (2012). Assessment literacy for the language classroom. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9(2), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.642041
Lund, B., Mannuru, N. R., Teel, Z. A., Lee, T. H., Ortega, N. J., Simmons, S., & Ward, E. (2025). Student perceptions of AI-assisted writing and academic integrity: Ethical concerns, academic misconduct, and use of generative AI in higher education. AI Educ, 1(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/aieduc1010002
Naznin, K., Al Mahmud, A., Nguyen, M. T., & Chua, C. (2025). ChatGPT integration in higher education for personalised learning, academic writing, and coding tasks: A systematic review. Computers, 14(2), Article 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers14020053
Nguyen, H. N., Nguyen, H. M., & Do, T. P. M. (2025). EFL lecturers’ experiences and perceptions towards using ChatGPT in teaching writing: A case study in Vietnam. International Journal of Education and Practice, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v13i3.4291
Nguyen, Q. D. (2025). Exploring Vietnamese EFL lecturers’ attitudes towards AI integration: Pedagogical adaptations, ethical concerns, and teaching philosophies. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Language Development (ICLD 2025) (pp. 106–115). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15826447
Ramadani, R., & Pitaloka, N. L. (2025). The use of artificial intelligence in writing classes: A qualitative study on the perceptions of lecturers and EFL undergraduate students. Jurnal Sains Student Research, 3(6), 780–796. https://doi.org/10.61722/jssr.v3i6.6849
Scarino, A. (2013). Language assessment literacy as self-awareness: Understanding the role of interpretation in assessment and in teacher learning. Language Testing, 30(3), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213480128
Vo, L., & Huynh, N. (2025). Vietnamese EFL teachers’ perspectives on ChatGPT: A conceptual metaphor analysis. Arab World English Journal, 16(1), 162–178. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol16no1.10
Wang, C., Aguilar, S. J., Bankard, J. S., Bui, E., & Nye, B. (2024). Writing with AI: What college students learned from utilising ChatGPT for a writing assignment. Education Sciences, 14(9), Article 976. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090976
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ninh Nguyen Tuan, Nguyet Pham Thi

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in the Journal of Innovative Technologies in Learning and Education (J-ITLE) are open access and licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Under this license, users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, remix, transform, and build upon the material for any lawful purpose, including commercial use, provided that proper attribution is given to the original author(s) and source.
Proper attribution should include the author name(s), article title, journal name, year of publication, volume and issue, DOI or article URL when available, and an indication if changes were made.
Authors retain copyright of their published articles and grant the journal the right of first publication. Copyright ownership remains with the author(s).
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

