TRANSLATION 2:
First Draft:
Muntasir Dawan
Professor Macagnone
ENG 11000
November 11th 2025
Synthesis Essay
Intended Audience: academic writers, college students, college professors, english teachers.
With the advent of generative AI in recent years becoming more and more advanced, many people would opt to use it in their academic endeavors. Generative AI usage in academic settings has been a controversial topic ever since the release of ChapGPT by OpenAI. Despite obvious abuse of the language model, AI has a place as a tool in the repertoire of students and casual users alike, especially when English writing and articulation is concerned.
In the article, “Generative AI in Academic Writing,” published by the esteemed University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, they present multiple beneficial uses of AI in academic writing, in order to explain the potential of AI as a tool to English students. Specifically they mention seven different uses, ranging from brainstorming a specific prompt given from any one professor. Many students often find themselves lost whilst attempting to do an assignment, especially when the subject matter is foreign to them, which is commonplace in almost every learning institution. To give themselves somewhere to start, students may look towards generative AI to brainstorm different ideas when they find themself in a thought drought. Furthermore, generative AI can assist in non-academic, strictly english concerned situations. The UNC explains that ChatGPT, and other language models can be used to translate large passages in foreign languages into familiar ones, and vice-versa. Whereas other translation tools exist for similar situations, the language models’ superior information database offer a more accurate translation. One caveat important to note is that AI should be used as a tool, a supplement, and not used as a crutch or reliance, as is also stated by UNC in their article.
Many universities, not just UNC, choose to be open about AI use in academic settings, the University of Kansas in their article “Ethical use of AI in writing assignments,” describe many methodical uses of AI in their students’ work, agreeing with many of the pointers the UNC had described. Furthermore, it encourages professors to be more open minded about the use of AI and their AI policies. They suggest professors to have a discussion with their students concerning AI use, creating an environment of trust and transparency, as well as serving as a good method to discuss the ethics of AI itself. Of course, KU admits that not all professors will be easily convinced, or never convinced about the usage of AI, in which case they encourage setting boundaries concerning its use, asking students to keep AI usage to a minimum, or prohibiting it from certain assignments, or actions, such as writing entire drafts. KU also mentions how students could also be instructed on writing a reflection on their AI usage on an assignment, allowing them to understand what benefits AI had given them, or lack thereof. Many professors do not completely understand the implications of AI in their classes, often choosing to prohibit it without understanding the benefit it gives students, without diminishing the quality of their own work. KU compares AI to other widely accepted sources of assistance such as writing centers, the professors own feedback, as well as other AI tools that are not language models such as citation machines, and grammar/spell checks. Finally, KU points out that cheating methods remain unchanged regardless of the advent of AI mentioning many forms of plagiarism, however, they also pose a good question, how much is too much?
Answering this question, John Villasenor, an undergraduate English professor at UCLA with firsthand experience concerning generative AI in his class, writes in his article “AI has rendered traditional writing skills obsolete. Education needs to adapt,” published by Brookings edu, that AI will no doubt become the norm for writing for the vast majority of humanity. Specifically, he states “But the vast majority of students will not choose to lead lives centered on writing. They will write much more sporadically and for more utilitarian purposes. They will write progress reports, meeting summaries, user manuals, business plans, newsletters, letters to city councils, cover letters, and instructions to a neighbor on how to feed the cat when they are away.” Whereas not necessarily being a bad thing, many people will agree that the over reliance on AI will cause a drop in general human articulation, and other relevant writing skills. Villasenor tackles this by using good handwriting as an example quoting H.C Spencer in his book “Spencerian Key to Practical Penmanship,” in which Spencer claims: “ [Good handwriting] Puts into full requisition all the higher powers of the mind. Under this impulse the faculty of perception is called into vigorous exercise, memory is made more tenacious of its treasures, judgment is at work in determining relations, proportions, and distance…” Skills like this are substantial to writing, but considering the book was also published in 1866, it becomes obsolete when considering the modern climate, as well as all the benefits AI can provide, which Villasenor himself agrees with. Similarly to UNC and KU, he admits that AI is prone to making mistakes, opting to call them “hallucinations.” Despite this, Villasenor chooses to look at AI optimistically as well, noting that conventionally good writing has always been inherently elitist, favoring those with rich backgrounds, and time to commit. AI allows almost anybody to flourish their writing skills without having to rely on either of those traits.
To truly prove the effectiveness of AI, in a study conducted by multiple students, Changzhao Wang, Stephen J. Aguilar, Jennifer S. Bankard, Eric Bui, and Benjamin Nye, all hailing from prestigious universities, named “Writing with AI: What College Students Learned from Utilizing ChatGPT for a Writing Assignment,” present real-world statistics by exploring the usages of AI in college setting scenarios. One specific aspect of the study includes the creation of a professional resume. These college students used ChatGPT to assist in many different parts of their resumes, with the majority, 32% mathematically, seeking assistance in the cover letter and personal statement. Furthermore, a staggering statistic of 70% of the students uploaded their resume to ChatGPT in order to manipulate ChatGPT into creating beneficial, yet specific pieces of advice for their resume. Many of the students admit that their usage of ChatGPT was beneficial to the creation of their resume, as illustrated in this when the study declares, “The coding results of Q2 are shown in a bar chart (Figure 4). The majority of the 47 students (68%, n = 32) acknowledge that ChatGPT performed a good job in integrating and connecting personal experiences from their resumes to their application letters…” Whereas the participating students admit that the use of generative AI did assist in the creations of their resumes, they mention that the models they used were not perfect, often either making mistakes, or not making a strong enough case. Ultimately, this uncertainty does more good than harm, as the flaws of AI force students to understand the material they are trying to generate, such that the quality of their work is not affected, solving the problem of diminishing student articulation. Not to mention the ever evolving state of AI which will eventually fix and improve any and all problems these generative language models may have.
Many more studies prove the effectiveness of AI, and many students like myself often turn to AI to assist them with their academic endeavors in the same way a counselor, tutor, or resource would do so. Yet, with all of this popularity, comes controversy, as many people will opt to undermine the benefits of using AI by mentioning it to the decaying state of academics as a whole, in which curriculums are becoming less and less thorough, and students less and less intelligent. This phenomenon, dubbed the reverse Flynn effect, is often attributed with AI, but an article written by Kristen Samuelson and published by Northwestern called “Americans’ IQ scores are lower in some areas, higher in one,” suggests otherwise. This effect can be correlated to many other factors such as worsening health, poor nutrition, media exposures, and decline in test-taking skills. These factors make the use of AI all the more important in the modern era, as it can serve as assistance to those who are in less fortunate circumstances as Villasenor also agrees with in their article. Another issue related to the reverse Flynn effect is the unchanged teaching methods in learning institutions. The Flynn effect itself refers to the increase of global AI from the 19th century to the late 20th century, hence considering the dawdling IQ scores globally being called the reverse of it. Considering that school curriculum models have not been altered significantly ever since the beginning of that Flynn effect is a testament to the obsolescence of them. To combat the reverse effect, school systems should be altered, the usage of AI being the first step toward it, acting as an assisting resource for those who need it.
In fact, a teaching method using a dynamic AI algorithm has already been tested, in a study conducted by Xuezhong Wu published by De Gruyter Brill called “Dynamic evaluation of college English writing ability based on AI technology,” Wu analyzes the most efficient english teaching methods, emphasizing dynamic english evaluation, and gathers data on student experiences. He first conjures an AI generated teaching algorithm after having fed it multiple other teaching methods, which can be seen in figures 1, 2, 3, and 4, next he creates a formula based on teacher evaluation tests, and finally surveys students on their English class pacing and their own understanding of it. He ends the study by mentioning that the ever-dynamic nature of an AI generated english evaluation algorithm allows it to be personalized and in turn, more effective. Not to mention, the effect it has on students, which can be seen when Wu reports that 37.8% of students have increased motivation and enthusiasm concerning the learning of English. The professors themselves may also find themselves wanting as AI acts as an assistant to them, allowing them to personally help each student without stretching themselves too thin.
Multiple institutions, students, and prominent individuals see the potential in AI, despite the controversy with AI in academic writing. It’s to be understood that whereas AI can be abused in such a way that it might downgrade the quality of a student’s learning or work, in the same vein it can be improved to a greater extent. Consider that professors may also be benefitted from the usage of them in many different ways. Ultimately, AI paves the way for a new age of learning, one that is in desperate need to come amidst the declining IQ’s of each new generation, and outdated school curriculums. The first step to such a change is the use of it in academic English environments, where many students struggle the most due to various reasons. It has already been proven to work. All that’s left is to encourage responsible usage of AI within our classrooms.
CITATIONS
(courtesy of an AI citation machine.)
Wu, Xuezhong. “Dynamic Evaluation of College English Writing Ability Based on AI Technology.” De Gruyter Brill, 1 Jan. 2022, www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jisys-2022-0020/html?lang=en.
Samuelson, Kristin. “Americans’ IQ Scores Are Lower in Some Areas, Higher in One.” Northwestern Now, 28 Oct. 2025, news.northwestern.edu/stories/2023/03/americans-iq-scores-are-lower-in-some-areas-higher-in-one
Villasenor, John. “Ai Has Rendered Traditional Writing Skills Obsolete. Education Needs to Adapt.” Brookings, 6 Oct. 2025, www.brookings.edu/articles/ai-has-rendered-traditional-writing-skills-obsolete-education-needs-to-adapt/.
“Ethical Use of AI in Writing Assignments.” Ethical Use of AI in Writing Assignments | Center for Teaching Excellence, cte.ku.edu/ethical-use-ai-writing-assignments. Accessed 12 Nov. 2025.
“Generative AI in Academic Writing – the Writing Center • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.” The Writing Center, writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/generative-ai-in-academic-writing/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2025.
Final Draft:
Muntasir Dawan
Professor Macagnone
ENG 11000
November 11th 2025
Synthesis Essay
Intended Audience: academic writers, college students, college professors, english teachers.
With the advent of generative AI in recent years becoming more and more advanced, many people would opt to use it in their academic endeavors. Generative AI usage in academic settings has been a controversial topic ever since the release of ChapGPT by OpenAI. Despite obvious abuse of the language model, AI should be used as a tool in the repertoire of students and casual users alike, especially when English writing and articulation is concerned.
In the article, “Generative AI in Academic Writing,” published by the esteemed University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, they present multiple beneficial uses of AI in academic writing, in order to explain the potential of AI as a tool to English students. They suggest seven different uses, ranging from brainstorming a specific prompt given from any one professor. One example they write is that ChatGPT, and other language models can be used to translate large passages in foreign languages into familiar ones, and vice-versa. Whereas other translation tools exist for similar situations, the language models’ superior information database offer a more accurate translation. Many students often find themselves lost whilst attempting to do an assignment, especially when the subject matter is foreign to them, which is commonplace in almost every learning institution. To give themselves somewhere to start, students may look towards generative AI to brainstorm different ideas when they find themself in a thought drought. Furthermore, generative AI can assist in non-academic, strictly english concerned situations. One caveat important to note is that AI should be used as a tool, a supplement, and not used as a crutch or reliance, as is also stated by UNC in their article. There is a stark difference between using ChatGPT for summarized bullet points or formatting examples and simply using it to create an introduction and plagiarizing it. You gain nothing from having done that, and it will conflict with the formatting of the rest of your essay unless you use it for the rest of the essay or mimic its writing style, which is creatively constrictive.
Many universities, not just UNC, choose to be open about AI use in academic settings, the Writing Center at the University of Kansas published a piece called “Ethical use of AI in writing assignments,” which describes many methodical uses of AI in their students’ work, agreeing with many of the pointers the UNC had described, such as translating, or summarizing. Furthermore, it encourages professors to be more open minded about the use of AI and their AI policies. They suggest professors to have a discussion with their students concerning AI use, creating an environment of trust and transparency, as well as serving as a good method to discuss the ethics of AI itself. Of course, KU admits that not all professors will be easily convinced, or never convinced about the usage of AI, in which case they encourage setting boundaries concerning its use, asking students to keep AI usage to a minimum, or prohibiting it from certain assignments, or actions, such as writing entire drafts. KU also mentions how students could also be instructed on writing a reflection on their AI usage on an assignment, allowing them to understand what benefits AI had given them, or lack thereof. Many professors do not completely understand the implications of AI in their classes, often choosing to prohibit it without understanding the benefit it gives students without severely affecting their own work. KU compares AI to other widely accepted sources of assistance such as Writing Centers, a professor’s own feedback, as well as other AI tools that are not language models such as citation machines, and grammar/spell checks. Finally, KU points out that cheating methods remain unchanged, such as copying a friend’s work, regardless of the advent of AI, however, they also pose a good question, how much is too much?
Answering this question, John Villasenor, an undergraduate English professor at UCLA with firsthand experience concerning generative AI in his class, writes in his article “AI has rendered traditional writing skills obsolete. Education needs to adapt,” that AI will no doubt become the norm for writing for the vast majority of humanity. Specifically, he states “But the vast majority of students will not choose to lead lives centered on writing. They will write much more sporadically and for more utilitarian purposes. They will write progress reports, meeting summaries, user manuals, business plans, newsletters, letters to city councils, cover letters, and instructions to a neighbor on how to feed the cat when they are away.” Whereas not necessarily being a bad thing, many people will agree that the over reliance on AI will cause a drop in general human articulation, and other relevant writing skills. Villasenor tackles this by using good handwriting as an example quoting H.C Spencer in his book “Spencerian Key to Practical Penmanship,” in which Spencer claims: “ [Good handwriting] Puts into full requisition all the higher powers of the mind. Under this impulse the faculty of perception is called into vigorous exercise, memory is made more tenacious of its treasures, judgment is at work in determining relations, proportions, and distance…” Skills like this are substantial to writing, but considering the book was also published in 1866, it becomes obsolete when considering the modern climate, as well as all the benefits AI can provide, which Villasenor himself agrees with. Similarly to UNC and KU, he admits that AI is prone to making mistakes, opting to call them “hallucinations.” Despite this, Villasenor chooses to look at AI optimistically as well, noting that conventionally good writing has always been inherently elitist, favoring those with rich backgrounds, and time to commit. AI allows almost anybody to flourish their writing skills without having to rely on either of those traits.
Proving the effectiveness of AI, in a study conducted by multiple students, Changzhao Wang and others, all hailing from prestigious universities, named “Writing with AI: What College Students Learned from Utilizing ChatGPT for a Writing Assignment,” present real-world statistics by exploring the usages of AI in college setting scenarios. One specific aspect of the study includes the creation of a professional resume. These college students used ChatGPT to assist in many different parts of their resumes, with the majority, 32% mathematically, seeking assistance in the cover letter and personal statement. Furthermore, a staggering statistic of 70% of the students uploaded their resume to ChatGPT in order to manipulate ChatGPT into creating beneficial, yet specific pieces of advice for their resume. Many of the students admit that their usage of ChatGPT was beneficial to the creation of their resume, as illustrated in this when the study declares, “ The majority of the 47 students (68%, n = 32) acknowledge that ChatGPT performed a good job in integrating and connecting personal experiences from their resumes to their application letters…” Whereas the participating students admit that the use of generative AI did assist in the creations of their resumes, they mention that the models they used were not perfect, often either making mistakes, or not making a strong enough case. Ultimately, this uncertainty does more good than harm, as the flaws of AI force students to understand the material they are trying to generate, such that the quality of their work is not affected, solving the problem of diminishing student articulation. Not to mention the ever evolving state of AI which will eventually fix and improve any and all problems these generative language models may have.
Many more studies prove the effectiveness of AI, and many students like myself often turn to AI to assist them with their academic endeavors in the same way a counselor, tutor, or resource would do so. Yet, with all of this popularity, comes controversy, as many people will opt to undermine the benefits of using AI by mentioning it to the decaying state of academics as a whole, in which curriculums are becoming less and less thorough, and students less and less intelligent. This phenomenon, dubbed the reverse Flynn effect, named after its creator James Robert Flynn, is often attributed with AI, but an article written by Kristen Samuelson and published by Northwestern called “Americans’ IQ scores are lower in some areas, higher in one,” suggests otherwise. This effect can be correlated to many other factors such as worsening health, poor nutrition, media exposures, and decline in test-taking skills. These factors make the use of AI all the more important in the modern era, as it can serve as assistance to those who are in less fortunate circumstances as Villasenor also agrees with in their article. Another issue related to the reverse Flynn effect is the unchanged teaching methods in learning institutions. The Flynn effect itself refers to the increase of global AI from the 19th century to the late 20th century, hence considering the dawdling IQ scores globally being called the reverse of it. Considering that school curriculum models have not been altered significantly ever since the beginning of that Flynn effect is a testament to the obsolescence of them. To combat the reverse effect, school systems should be altered, the usage of AI being the first step toward it, acting as an assisting resource for those who need it.
In fact, a teaching method using a dynamic AI algorithm has already been tested, in a study conducted by Xuezhong Wu published by the Dutch National Library, called “Dynamic evaluation of college English writing ability based on AI technology.” He first conjures an AI generated teaching algorithm after having fed it multiple other teaching methods, next he creates a formula based on teacher evaluation tests, and finally surveys students on their English class pacing and their own understanding of it. He ends the study by mentioning that the ever-dynamic nature of an AI generated english evaluation algorithm allows it to be personalized and in turn, more effective. Not to mention, the effect it has on students, which can be seen when Wu reports that 37.8% of students have increased motivation and enthusiasm concerning the learning of English. The professors themselves may also find themselves wanting as AI acts as an assistant to them, allowing them to personally help each student without stretching themselves too thin.
Multiple institutions, students, and prominent individuals see the potential in AI, despite the controversy with AI in academic writing. It’s to be understood that whereas AI can be abused in such a way that it might downgrade the quality of a student’s learning or work, in the same vein it can be improved to a greater extent. Consider that professors may also be benefitted from the usage of them in many different ways. Ultimately, AI paves the way for a new age of learning, one that is in desperate need to come amidst the declining IQ’s of each new generation, and outdated school curriculums. The first step to such a change is the use of it in academic English environments, where many students struggle the most due to various reasons. It has already been proven to work. All that’s left is to encourage responsible usage of AI within our classrooms.
Works Cited
(Courtesy of an AI citation machine.)
The University of Kansas. “Ethical Use of AI in Writing Assignments.” Cte.ku.edu, July 2024, cte.ku.edu/ethical-use-ai-writing-assignments.
Villasenor, John. “AI Has Rendered Traditional Writing Skills Obsolete. Education Needs to Adapt.” Brookings, 30 May 2025, www.brookings.edu/articles/ai-has-rendered-traditional-writing-skills-obsolete-education-needs-to-adapt/. Accessed 29 November 2025.
“Americans’ IQ Scores Are Lower in Some Areas, Higher in One.” Northwestern.edu, Northwestern Now, 2023, news.northwestern.edu/stories/2023/03/americans-iq-scores-are-lower-in-some-areas-higher-in-one. Accessed 29 November 2025.
“Generative AI in Academic Writing.” The Writing Center • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, July 2023, writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/generative-ai-in-academic-writing/.
Wu, Xuezhong. “Dynamic Evaluation of College English Writing Ability Based on AI Technology.” Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 31, no. 1, 1 Jan. 2022, pp. 298–309, https://doi.org/10.1515/jisys-2022-0020.
