Ethical Awareness of ChatGPT use in Academic Writing: Integrity Concerns, Policy Support, and Assessment Trust among Tertiary Students

Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT are rapidly entering students’ academic writing practices, yet institutions continue to face uncertainty about academic integrity, disclosure expectations, and fairness in assessment. This study reports a focused analysis of tertiary students’ ethical awareness regarding AI-assisted academic writing. A cross-sectional online survey was administered to 41 tertiary students with prior experience using AI tools. Three closed-ended indicators captured (i) concern about academic integrity, (ii) support for institutional AI-use guidelines, and (iii) acceptability of AI-supported grading. An open-ended prompt elicited perceived ethical risks and recommendations for responsible use. Descriptive statistics and inductive thematic analysis were applied. Results show very high integrity concern (92.7% somewhat/very concerned) and strong endorsement for institutional guidelines (75.6% agree/strongly agree). For AI-supported grading, most respondents preferred a hybrid approach combining AI and human evaluation (56.1%), while 19.5% believed AI could assess fairly. Qualitative responses triangulated these patterns, emphasising plagiarism/originality risks, overreliance, and distrust of fully automated evaluation. The findings support the need for explicit university policies and ethics-oriented AI literacy that strengthens students’ judgement and responsible decision-making in AI-assisted writing.

generative AI; ChatGPT; academic integrity; ethical awareness; assessment ethics; higher education

1. 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. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102370 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Evangelista, E. D. L. (2025). Ensuring academic integrity in the age of ChatGPT: Rethinking exam design, assessment strategies, and ethical AI policies in higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(1), ep559. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15775 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. International Baccalaureate Organization. (n.d.). Statement from the IB about ChatGPT and artificial intelligence in assessment and education. International Baccalaureate®. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from https://www.ibo.org/news/news-about-the-ib/statement-from-the-ib-about-chatgpt-and-artificial-intelligence-in-assessment-and-education/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Jolly, J. (2023, January 31). ChatGPT raises misinformation concern. USA Today. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. https://www.usatoday.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Moosmosis, S. R., Moosmosis, M., Moosmosis, B. J., Moosmosis, W., Moosmosis, C. S., Moosmosis, L. B., & Moosmosis, D. S. K. (2022, December 21). Ethics of using ChatGPT OpenAI in writing essays for students. Moosmosis. https://moosmosis.org/2022/12/20/ethics-of-using-chatgpt-openai-in-writing-essays-for-students/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., & Krusche, S. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science, 379(6630), 313. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11, 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study