Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing

Maria Eleftheriou; Muhammad Ahmer; Daniel Fredrick

doi:10.30935/cedtech/16554

Maria Eleftheriou ¹ ^* , Muhammad Ahmer ², Daniel Fredrick ¹

More Detail

CONT ED TECHNOLOGY, Volume 17, Issue 3, Article No: ep587

https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554

Submitted: 10 November 2024, Published Online: 02 July 2025

OPEN ACCESS 220 Views 117 Downloads

Download Full Text (PDF)

Abstract

Like many student writing centers, the American University of Sharjah Writing Center is seeing a rise in student reliance upon generative AI (GenAI) tools, which are artificial intelligence systems capable of generating human-like text. Peer tutors frequently seek guidance on how to approach student papers involving GenAI tools such as ChatGPT, yet writing centers have offered relatively little direction on this emerging issue. Our study examines the challenges peer tutors encounter when addressing AI use in student writing, as well as the strategies they employ to navigate these issues. A focus group discussion with peer tutors and an analysis of a collaborative document co-developed by the peer tutors provided insights into their experiences. Findings reveal that peer tutors encounter difficulties when students use ChatGPT covertly, struggle with ethical concerns about hiding AI involvement, and report inconsistencies in faculty policies regarding AI use, making it difficult to offer consistent advice to their students. To address these challenges, peer tutors encourage students to disclose their use of AI, explore their motivations for using it, and discuss both the benefits and limitations of AI tools. They emphasize students’ potential, encourage rewriting and revising AI-generated content, promote learning and independence over AI reliance, engage in discussions about ethical considerations, and advise adherence to professors’ guidelines. This research will contribute to developing practical guidelines for responding to AI in writing centers and provide peer tutors with the tools they need to navigate these changes. The study’s findings will also contribute to the evolving dialogue on academic integrity and the role of AI in higher education.

Keywords: generative AI, GenAI, AI, AI tools, writing center pedagogy, ChatGPT in education, academic integrity, AI in student writing

References

Aldossary, A. S., Aljindi, A. A., & Alamri, J. M. (2024). The role of generative AI in education: Perceptions of Saudi students. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(4), Article ep536. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15496
Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
Birks, D., & Clare, J. (2023). Linking artificial intelligence facilitated academic misconduct to existing prevention frameworks. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19, Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00142-3
Bryan, M. D. (2023). Bringing AI to the center: What historical writing center software discourse can teach us about responses to artificial intelligence-based writing tools. In Proceedings of the Computers & Writing Conference (pp. 15–26). https://doi.org/10.37514/PCW-B.2024.2296.2.02
Carino, P. (2003). Power and authority in peer tutoring. In M. A. Pemberton, & J. Kinkead (Eds.), The center will hold: Critical perspectives on writing center scholarship (pp. 96–113). Utah State University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt46nxnq.9
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Chauke, T. A., Mkhize, T. R., Methi, L., & Dlamini, N. (2024). Postgraduate students’ perceptions on the benefits associated with artificial intelligence tools for academic success: The use of the ChatGPT AI tool. Journal of Curriculum Studies Research, 6(1), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcsr.2024.4
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
Corbett, S. J. (2008). Tutoring style, tutoring ethics: The continuing relevance of the directive/nondirective instructional debate. Praxis: A Writing Center Journal, 5(2). https://www.praxisuwc.com/corbett-52
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
Črček, N., & Patekar, J. (2023). Writing with AI: University students’ use of ChatGPT. Journal of Language and Education, 9(4), 128–138. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.17379
Creely, E. (2024). Exploring the role of Generative AI in enhancing language learning: Opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Changes in Education, 1(3), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42022495
Deans, T., Praver, N., & Solod, A. (2023). AI in the writing center: Small steps and scenarios. University of Connecticut. https://dept.writing.wisc.edu/blog/ai-wc/
Dembsey, J. M. (2017). Closing the Grammarly gaps: A study of claims and feedback from an online grammar program. Writing Center Journal, 36(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.7771/2832-9414.1815
Directors of Writing Centers Facebook. (n.d.). Home. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/groups/894182147280549/search/?q=ChatGPT
Essid, J. (2023). Writing centers & the dark warehouse university: Generative AI, three human advantages. Interdisciplinary Journal of Leadership Studies, 2, Article 3.
Freitas, H., Oliveira, M., Jenkins, M., & Popjoy, O. (1998). The focus group: A qualitative research method. ISRC. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2657165
Garcia Castro, R. A., Mayta Cachicatari, N. A., Bartesaghi Aste, W. M., & Llapa Medina, M. P. (2024). Exploration of ChatGPT in basic education: Advantages, disadvantages, and its impact on school tasks. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), Article ep511. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14615
Gill, P., & Baillie, J. (2018). Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: An update for the digital age. British Dental Journal, 225(7), 668–669. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815
Hicks, M. (2024). College writing centers worry AI could replace them. EdSurge. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2024-08-12-college-writing-centers-worry-ai-could-replace-them
Hycner, R. H. (1985). Some guidelines for the phenomenological analysis of interview data. Human Studies, 8, 279–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142995
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., Khan, S., & Khan, I. H. (2023). Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT tool towards ameliorating the education system. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 3, Article 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Introducing focus groups. BMJ, 311(7000), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299
Lindberg, N., & Domingues, A. (2024). 2024 report on AI writing tools’ impacts on writing centers. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383365521
Lingard, L. (2023). Writing with ChatGPT: An illustration of its capacity, limitations & implications for academic writers. Perspectives on Medical Education, 12(1), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1072
Luo, J. (2024). How does GenAI affect trust in teacher-student relationships? Insights from students’ assessment experiences. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(4), 991–1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2024.2341005
Playfoot, D., Quigley, M., & Thomas, A. G. (2024). Hey ChatGPT, give me a title for a paper about degree apathy and student use of AI for assignment writing. The Internet and Higher Education, 62, Article 100950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2024.100950
Rowland, D. R. (2023). Two frameworks to guide discussions around levels of acceptable use of generative AI in student academic research and writing. Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 17(1), 31–69. https://journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/view/915
Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S., & Javed, I. (2024). ChatGPT awareness, acceptance, and adoption in higher education: The role of trust as a cornerstone. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00478-x
Söğüt, S. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in EFL writing: A pedagogical stance of pre-service teachers and teacher trainers. Focus on ELT Journal, 6(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.14744/felt.6.1.5
Stowe, G. (2023). Where are we now with AI in writing centers? CWCAB. https://wlnconnect.org/2023/09/26/september-2023-where-are-we-now-with-ai-in-writing-centers/
Utami, S. P. T., Andayani, W., Winarni, R., & Sumarwati, S. (2023). Utilization of artificial intelligence technology in an academic writing class: How do Indonesian students perceive? Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), Article ep450. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13419
Vetter, M. A., Lucia, B., Jiang, J., & Othman, M. (2024). Towards a framework for local interrogation of AI ethics: A case study on text generators, academic integrity, and composing with ChatGPT. Computers and Composition, 71, Article 102831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102831
Zhang, J., Ozer, H. Z., & Bayazeed, R. (2020). Grammarly vs. face-to-face tutoring at the writing center: ESL student writers’ perceptions. Praxis: A Writing Center Journal, 17(2), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.26153/tsw/8523

Citation

Eleftheriou, M., Ahmer, M., & Fredrick, D. (2025). Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(3), ep587. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554

Eleftheriou, M., Ahmer, M., and Fredrick, D. (2025). Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(3), ep587. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554

Eleftheriou M, Ahmer M, Fredrick D. Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing. CONT ED TECHNOLOGY. 2025;17(3), ep587. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554

Eleftheriou, Maria, Muhammad Ahmer, and Daniel Fredrick. "Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing". Contemporary Educational Technology 2025 17 no. 3 (2025): ep587. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554

Eleftheriou, Maria et al. "Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing". Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 17, no. 3, 2025, ep587. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554

Eleftheriou M, Ahmer M, Fredrick D. Balancing ethics and support: Peer tutors’ experiences with AI tools in student writing. CONT ED TECHNOLOGY. 2025;17(3):ep587. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16554