Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Paradigm Crisis in Academic Writing: Reconstructing Higher Education Assessment Systems
Abstract
systems centered on academic writing. This crisis is essentially a crisis of human cognitive value triggered by the exceeding instrumental
capacity of technology. It not only renders traditional academic integrity boundariesbased on textual originalityineffective but, more profoundly, short-circuits the cognitive function of academic writing as training for critical thinking and a process of knowledge internalization.
Higher education must transcend the binary opposition of defense versus acceptance and proactively initiate a revolution in assessment paradigms. The core of this shift involves moving from product assessment to process assessment, from evaluating isolated textual competence to
cultivating human-AI collaborative intelligence, and ultimately constructing a resilient assessment ecosystem supported by the pillars of metacognitive ability, critical human-AI interaction, and interdisciplinary performance assessment.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
[1] Zhongyi, Z. H. A. N. G., Xinyue, N. I. U., Junyan, S. U. N., Lijuan, Q. I., & Mei, F. A. N. G. (2023). ChatGPT: Opportunities and challenges of large language models for academic publishing. Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodicals, 34(4), 446.
[2] Simsek E, Muller G, Falk K. ChatGPT Dilemma: Effects of Generative AI on Higher Education in Systems Engineering[J]. INCOSE
International Symposium, 2025,35(1):1023-1042.
[3] Bereiter C, Scardamalia M. The psychology of written composition[M]. Routledge, 2013.
[4] Weller, Martin. 25 years of ed tech[M]. Athabasca University Press, 2020.
[5] Dwivedi Y K, Kshetri N, Hughes L, et al. Opinion Paper: "So what if ChatGPT wrote it?" Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2023, 71(c):102642.
[6] Cowan J. Teaching for quality learning at universityBy John Biggs & Catherine Tang[J]. British Journal of Educational Technology,
2012, 43(3):E94-E95.
[7] Ghosh R, Singha J, Gardia A. Formative Assessment Strategies in Social Science Education: A Conceptual Framework forAchieving the
Goals of National Education Policy 2020[J]. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 2025,51(5):395-407.
[8] Li Yan. Research on the Path Exploration, Risk Control, and Ethical Boundaries of AI-Empowered Undergraduate Theses [J]. The Science Education Article Collects, 2026, (01): 10-14.
[9] Chen Yifei. On the Reconstruction of Literary Subjectivity in the Age of Artificial IntelligenceA Study Centered on Human-Machine
Collaborative Writing [J]. Journal of Changzhou University (Social Science Edition), 2026, 27(01): 107-116.
[10] Yurt E, Ku?ci I. Factors influencing critical thinking during AI use among university students: the mediating effects of epistemic laziness
and metacognitive weakness[J]. Current Psychology, 2025,45(1):67-67.
[11] Abdalla R A M. Higher education students' trust and use of ChatGPT: empirical evidence[J]. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 2025, 17(1):81-105.
[12] McIntyre M. Equitable writing classrooms and programs in the shadow of AI[J]. Computers and Composition, 2025,75102908-102908.
[13] Irina R, Denise W, Chris E, et al. Co-creating with Generative AI (GenAI) for curriculum design: learning personas[J]. Ubiquity Proceedings, 2025,12-12.
[14] Wang, C., Chen, X., Hu, Z., Jin, S., & Gu, X. (2025). Deconstructing University Learners' Adoption Intention Towards AIGC Technology: A Mixed-Methods Study Using ChatGPT as an Example. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(1), e13117.
[15] Li, T. (2024, January). Theoretical Construction of AIGC College Student User Information Demand Model. In Proceedings of the
2024 Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area International Conference on Digital Economy and Artificial Intelligence (pp.
716-721).
[16] Acosta G O, Vzquez S R, Cervantes P P, et al. Design of a Pedagogical Strategy for Large Undergraduate Theoretical Classes: Empathy as a Resource for Teaching and the Incorporation of AI as a Didactic Tool[J]. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural
Science,2025,38(6):36-44.
[17] Dimeli M, Kostas A. The Role of ChatGPT in Education: Applications, Challenges: Insights From a Systematic Review[J]. Journal of
Information Technology Education: Research, 2025, 24:002.
[18] Zhang, J. (2021). Reform and innovation of artificial intelligence technology for information service in university physical education.
Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 40(2), 3325-3335.
[19] Xingwei C. Human-Machine Course Evaluation With an ALBERT-Based Position Embedding Feature Enhancement Network[J]. International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM),2025,21(1):1-22.
[20] Cui Yuhang, Li Yubing, Shi Lili, et al. Research on Performance Assessment of College English Writing in the Information Technology
Environment [J]. Chinese Economist, 2025, (02): 193-195.
[21] Petrova N M. Strategies for developing AI competencies in higher education[J]. Frontiers in Education,2026,101683909-1683909.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.70711/neet.v4i3.8968
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
