Rethinking authorship after generative AI: assessment design, academic integrity, and linguistic evidence in Indonesian higher education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67490/ijled.v1i2.934Keywords:
academic integrity, assessment design, authorship, generative AI, linguistic evidenceAbstract
Background: Generative AI has unsettled conventional authorship in Indonesian higher education by blurring boundaries between legitimate writing support, linguistic development, and academic misconduct. Objective: This study examines how authorship after generative AI is constructed through assessment design, academic integrity governance, and linguistic evidence in Indonesian higher education. Method: Using qualitative corpus-based document analysis, this study analyses 17 publicly accessible policy, pedagogical, contextual, and scholarly documents through coding categories on accountability, assessment orientation, and language-based authorship judgement. Results: Findings show that human-accountability centred authorship dominates corpus documents, indicating that students remain responsible for claims, sources, reasoning, and final submissions even when AI assistance is permitted. Findings also reveal that assessment responses increasingly privilege process-based evidence, pedagogical guidance, oral explanation, prompt documentation, and source verification over detector-only control. Implication: Linguistic evidence is positioned as supportive rather than conclusive, because polished academic English may reflect EFL development, translation, feedback uptake, or AI-mediated revision. Novelty: This study offers a novel assessment-ecology perspective by integrating authorship accountability, integrity design, and contextual linguistic judgement as a defensible framework for evaluating AI-assisted academic writing in multilingual higher education
Downloads
References
[1] A. R. Malik, Y. Pratiwi, K. Andajani, I. W. Numertayasa, S. Suharti, A. Darwis, and M., “Exploring artificial intelligence in academic essay: Higher education student’s perspective,” International Journal of Educational Research Open, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100296.
[2] S. Utami, A. Andayani, R. Winarni, and S. Sumarwati, “Utilization of artificial intelligence technology in an academic writing class: How do Indonesian students perceive?,” Contemporary Educational Technology, 2023, doi: 10.30935/cedtech/13419.
[3] E. Andriyanti, B. Murtafi’ah, H. Zudianto, A. F. Rochma, J. Tuilan, and M. W. Akhyari, “Integrating AI in academic writing: Lecturers and students’ experiences related to benefits and challenges,” Journal of English and Education (JEE), 2025, doi: 10.20885/jee.v11i2.44036.
[4] M. Aminah and A. H. Aly, “University EFL students’ perceptions of generative AI in academic writing: A qualitative case study in Indonesia,” AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 2026, doi: 10.35445/alishlah.v18i1.9461.
[5] B. L. Moorhouse, M. A. Yeo, and Y. Wan, “Generative AI tools and assessment: Guidelines of the world’s top-ranking universities,” Computers and Education Open, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100151.
[6] M. Perkins, L. Furze, J. Roe, J. M. B. U. Vietnam, D. University, and J. C. U. Singapore, “The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A framework for ethical integration of generative AI in educational assessment,” Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 2023, doi: 10.53761/q3azde36.
[7] C. Y. Lye and L. Lim, “Generative artificial intelligence in tertiary education: Assessment redesign principles and considerations,” Education Sciences, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14060569.
[8] Q. Xia, X. Weng, O. Fan, T.-J. Lin, and T. Chiu, “A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 21, pp. 1–22, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z.
[9] K. Bittle and O. El-Gayar, “Generative AI and academic integrity in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda,” Information, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 296, 2025, doi: 10.3390/info16040296.
[10] C. G. Ardito, “Contra generative AI detection in higher education assessments,” ArXiv, abs/2312.05241, 2023, doi: 10.48550/arxiv.2312.05241.
[11] A. Nguyen, Y. Hong, B. Dang, and X. Huang, “Human-AI collaboration patterns in AI-assisted academic writing,” Studies in Higher Education, vol. 49, pp. 847–864, 2024, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2024.2323593.
[12] E. Evangelista, “Ensuring academic integrity in the age of ChatGPT: Rethinking exam design, assessment strategies, and ethical AI policies in higher education,” Contemporary Educational Technology, 2025, doi: 10.30935/cedtech/15775.
[13] I. Pérez-Pérez, M. González-Afonso, Z. Plasencia-Carballo, and D. Pérez-Jorge, “Transparency mechanisms for generative AI use in higher education assessment: A systematic scoping review (2022–2026),” Computers, 2026, doi: 10.3390/computers15020111.
[14] M. Velez and A. Rister, “Beyond academic integrity: Navigating institutional and disciplinary anxieties about AI-assisted authorship in technical and professional communication,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol. 39, pp. 115–132, 2024, doi: 10.1177/10506519241280646.
[15] A. Bozkurt, “GenAI et al.: Cocreation, authorship, ownership, academic ethics and integrity in a time of generative AI,” Open Praxis, 2024, doi: 10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.654.
[16] M. F. Hau, “[AI-reflection] writing with machines? Reconceptualizing student work in the age of AI,” Frontiers in Communication, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2025.1598988.
[17] D. Pereira, “Who is the author?,” A legal and normative view of authorship in generative AI-aided academic works, 2026.
[18] Z. Slimi, “A systematic critical review of generative AI’s impact on authorship, pedagogy, and integrity (2023–2025),” Frontiers in Education, 2026, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2026.1769680.
[19] Y. C. G. Mali, “Indonesian EFL students’ thesis writing in the age of AI: Practices and ethical perspectives,” IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics), 2026, doi: 10.21093/ijeltal.v11i1.2439.
[20] M. Yeo, “Academic integrity in the age of artificial intelligence (AI) authoring apps,” TESOL Journal, 2023, doi: 10.1002/tesj.716.
[21] N. Song, “Higher education crisis: Academic misconduct with generative AI,” Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 2024, doi: 10.1111/1468-5973.12532.
[22] K. Al-Hajaya, “Academic integrity is under fire in the generative AI age: Insights from accounting educators to overcome challenges, threats and ethical concerns,” Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 2025, doi: 10.1108/heswbl-02-2025-0060.
[23] A. Maleki, “Rethinking ethical academic integrity ecosystems in higher education in the age of artificial intelligence,” Discover Artificial Intelligence, vol. 6, 2026, doi: 10.1007/s44163-026-00887-z.
[24] M. Peters and D. Angelov, “Redefining assessment tasks to promote students’ creativity and integrity in the age of generative artificial intelligence,” International Journal for Educational Integrity, vol. 21, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s40979-025-00201-x.
[25] L. Furze, M. Perkins, J. Roe, and J. MacVaugh, “The AI Assessment Scale (AIAS) in action: A pilot implementation of GenAI supported assessment,” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2024, doi: 10.14742/ajet.9434.
[26] F. Amirjalili, M. Neysani, and A. Nikbakht, “Exploring the boundaries of authorship: A comparative analysis of AI-generated text and human academic writing in English literature,” Frontiers in Education, 2024, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1347421.
[27] J. and I. Afandi, “Assessing text comprehension proficiency: Indonesian higher education students vs ChatGPT,” XLinguae, 2024, doi: 10.18355/xl.2024.17.01.04.
[28] Kaharuddin, D. Ahmad, M. Latif, I. Arafah, and R. Suryadi, “Defining the role of artificial intelligence in improving English writing skills among Indonesian students,” Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2024, doi: 10.17507/jltr.1502.25.
[29] S. Wahyuningsih, “How artificial intelligence (AI) supports undergraduate students’ academic writing: Evidence from Indonesia,” Prominent, 2024, doi: 10.24176/pro.v7i2.11444.
[30] B. G. Putri, N. Suryati, F. Ivone, and N. Hayati, “The role of AI in academic writing: Unveiling strategies among EFL students,” Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 2025, doi: 10.22219/celtic.v12i2.42039.
[31] D. Heriyawati and M. Romadhon, ““Can AI be trusted for my thesis?” The voices of Indonesian higher education levels about ChatGPT in automated writing evaluation (AWE),” Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 2025, doi: 10.54855/callej.252614.
[32] S. Yusra and R. Hanifa, “Unveiling Indonesian higher education students’ English academic writing misconduct in the era of technology & AI: Comprehension vs practice,” World Journal of English Language, 2025, doi: 10.5430/wjel.v15n5p220.
[33] J. Andika, M. M. Waly, Y. Yulia, and G. P. A. Reswari, “Scrutinizing English academic writing skills: Indonesian postgraduate students’ challenges and strategies in an AI-empowered era,” Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 2025, doi: 10.33394/jollt.v13i2.12884.
[34] Reuters, “ChatGPT sets record for fastest-growing user base—Analyst note,” Reuters, 2023.
[35] C. G. Ardito, “Generative AI detection in higher education assessments,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, vol. 2025, pp. 11–28, 2024, doi: 10.1002/tl.20624.
[36] M. Perkins and J. Roe, “Academic publisher guidelines on AI usage: A ChatGPT supported thematic analysis,” F1000Research, vol. 12, 2023, doi: 10.12688/f1000research.142411.2.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Achmad Ilham Firmahdi (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License