Navigating Academic Writing Challenges in Final Year Projects in the Age of Generative AI

Final year projects (FYPs) are an essential element of undergraduate education, requiring students to demonstrate advanced academic writing skills, research competence, and critical thinking. Students need to have proficient academic writing skills to enable them to communicate ideas clearly and construct arguments coherently which are vital to academic success (Hyland, 2019). However, many students face particular challenges in producing high quality academic output. To investigate these issues, this study employs semi-structured interviews designed to explore students’perceptions and experiences with specific writing challenges such as vague problem statements, weak organisation, surface-level literature reviews, limited argumentation and citation errors. The interview questions examine challenges faced by students and coping strategies. By focusing on both problems and solutions, the study captures how students address the demands of academic writing. The findings are categorised into four key themes: the role of Generative AI (GenAI) as a learning and writing aid; difficulties in academic writing and critical thinking; the interplay between efficiency, dependency, and ethical AI utilisation; and the vital role of supervisor guidance. This study contributes to the literature by integrating academic writing challenges with emerging technological practices, highlighting how students combine conventional supports with generative AI (GenAI)- assisted tools. Findings highlight pedagogical approaches and institutional policies aimed at scaffolding students’ writing development in the era of GenAI.

Final year projects, writing, writing strategies, generative AI

1. Abubakar, S., Jeilani, A. & Adan, M. Y. (2025). The role of over-reliance on AI in the negative consequences of student learning: The moderating effects of ethical concerns and institutional policies. Cogent Education. 12. 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2591503. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmad Syafi'i, Munir, A., Anam, S., & Suhartono. (2024). Unleashing the power of supervisory feedback in academic writing: Strategies for timely undergraduate thesis completion. TEFLIN Journal, 35(2), 330–351. https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v35i2/330-351 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Al-Gharabally, M. (2020). Evaluating the academic writing challenges of undergraduate university students. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(4), 103–115. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v10n4p103 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. 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]

5. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Fareed, M., Ashraf, A., & Bilal, M. (2016). ESL learners’ writing skills: Problems, factors and suggestions. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 4, 81–92. https://www.academia.edu/download/55946187/ESLLearnerswritingskills.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc198115885 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Husin, M. S., & Munir, A. (2021). Enhancing critical thinking skills through research-based academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 52, 101004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press. https://drupal-s3fs-prod.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/files/4013/8080/2459/second-language-writing-cambridge-language-education-paperback-frontmatter.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Isack, J. (2021). Chapter three 3.0 Research Methodology 3.1 Introduction. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349505331_CHAPTER_THREE_30_RESEARCH_METHODOLOGY_31_Introduction [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kakisaka, M., et al. (2023). Adapting global research to local contexts: Challenges in undergraduate dissertation writing. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(5), 1120–113. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (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]

13. Lara-Haro, A., et al. (2026). Structuring the results and discussion matrix in undergraduate theses. Journal of Research in Higher Education, 14(2), 45–61. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mohd Noor, M., Turiman, S., Supiah, P.C., Sankaran Nair, S.S.K., Aziz Hussin. A. (2023) Undergraduate Final Year Project Supervision: A Preliminary Study of Supervisee-Supervisor’s Expectations. (2023). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(3). https://www.ijarped.com/index.php/journal/article/view/985 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Negretti, R. (2021). From Clifton to coding: Metacognitive regulation and cognitive challenges in academic writing tasks. Journal of Writing Research, 13(1), 121–157. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2021.13.01.04 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Nikbakht, E., & Miller, L. (2023). The development of ESL students' synthesis writing through reading instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 61, 101029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101274 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know? International Business Review, 29(4), 101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Regent University. (2020). Writing Chapter 1: The introduction and problem statement. Regent University Writing Center. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Singh, M. K. M. (2019). Academic reading and writing challenges among international EFL master’s students in a Malaysian university. Journal of International Students, 9(4), 972–992. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 15. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Zou, D., Huang, Y., & Xie, H. (2023). Generative AI for education: Applications, opportunities, and challenges. Educational Technology & Society, 26(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202310_26(4).0001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Evaluating the Impacts of Mind Mapping Strategy on Developing EFL Students’ Critical Reading Skills
• Significance of Reading Instructions for Language Improvement in Children with Down Syndrome
• Prenasalised Consonants in Liangmai
• Metadiscourse Matters: Definitions, Models, and Advantages for ESL/ EFL Writing
• Blank Minds and Stuck Voices: Understanding and Addressing Cognitive Anxiety in High-Stakes ESL Speaking Tests