Canonical text (the exact bytes fingerprinted)

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2358
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-04T00:02:44.632157Z
status: published
lens: trace
sector: education
headline: ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF USING AI TOOLS IN ACADEMIC WRITING: A CASE STUDY
dek: The integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly altered academic writing practices in higher education, yet its pedagogical implications for pre-service English teachers remain underexplored. This qualitative case study aimed to investigate English Education students' perceptions of utilizing AI tools in academic writing, specifically examining perceived benefits, operational challenges, and academic integrity negotiations. Ten undergraduate students, comprising eight eighth-semester…
gain_title: Ten Indonesian English Education students used AI tools for brainstorming, outlining, and grammatical refinement in their academic writing.
problem_title: The same students ran into fabricated citations and stylistic rigidity from AI tools, and feared losing their independent critical thinking.
trace_subject: AI tools in academic writing among English Education students
gain_reading: Ten Indonesian English Education students used AI tools for brainstorming, outlining, and grammatical refinement in their academic writing.
gain_evidence: students utilized AI tools primarily for brainstorming, outlining, and grammatical refinement
problem_reading: The same students ran into fabricated citations and stylistic rigidity from AI tools, and feared losing their independent critical thinking.
problem_evidence: contending with fabricated citations, stylistic rigidity, and anxieties regarding the erosion of independent critical thinking
quick_read: A small qualitative case study at Institut Pendidikan Indonesia asked ten undergraduates training to be English teachers how they use AI tools when writing academic papers. Participants answered an open-ended online questionnaire, and their responses were coded into themes.

The study matters because these students will soon teach writing themselves, so their habits and attitudes may shape classroom practice. With only ten participants from one institution, the results describe their views rather than showing how AI affects writing quality or learning outcomes.
limitation: The study is a qualitative case study of only ten purposively recruited students at one institution, so findings reflect self-reported perceptions and cannot be generalized.
tag: Dual reading
key_points: The participants were ten undergraduates: eight eighth-semester and two sixth-semester students. | Students mainly used AI for brainstorming, outlining, and grammar refinement. | Reported difficulties included fabricated citations and stylistic rigidity in AI output. | Students worried that AI use could erode their independent critical thinking. | They practiced selective verification and agreed that language-editing help is acceptable but wholesale text generation is not.
rundown: The researchers used purposive recruitment and an asynchronous online open-ended questionnaire. Responses were analyzed with Braun and Clarke's six-phase thematic analysis framework.

On benefits, students described AI as a support for early-stage ideas, essay structure, and grammatical polish. Operational problems included citations that did not exist and writing that felt rigid or formulaic.

On academic integrity, participants described checking AI-supplied references themselves and set a shared ethical line. Linguistic scaffolding was endorsed, while copying generated text wholesale was treated as a violation.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | LANGUAGE : Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra | https://doi.org/10.51878/language.v6i4.16430 | 2026-11-03
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

sha256

3efa575f143a67a2b4e1838c2437cb19dd0ffa2b477b4d81da063511cff3800c

previous

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000