Authors : Aratrika Deb; Aatreyee Kar

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/t86c88ke

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/avxy3pe9

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jun849

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : As artificial intelligence becomes woven into global higher education, large language models and automated writing assistants have become essential academic support tools for international students who are non-native English speakers. These tools are often praised for levelling the playing field by lowering language barriers. At the same time, they raise serious questions about equity, identity, and algorithmic justice. This paper reviews recent research to examine the dual role of AI-mediated academic writing. On one side, tools like ChatGPT and Grammarly provide essential support with grammar, syntax, and confidence in English-dominant universities. On the other side, they reinforce hidden hierarchies about what “good” academic writing should look like. The literature points to two compounding threats to equity. First, institutional pressure pushes students toward linguistic homogenization, which strips away regional and cultural nuances in their writing. Second, commercial AI detectors carry structural bias, showing disproportionately high false-positive rates for text written by non-native speakers. By analysing existing scholarship and university policy frameworks, this paper argues that most current guidelines don’t clearly separate illegitimate plagiarism from legitimate language support. The study closes with practical recommendations for higher education governance. The goal is to reform academic integrity policies so that AI integration protects student agency and supports real linguistic equity, rather than punishing the diverse voices of international students.

Keywords : AI in Education, International Students, Linguistic Equity, Academic Writing, Epistemic Hierarchies, AI Detectors, Critical Pedagogy.

References :

1. Alharbi, W. (2023). AI in the foreign language classroom: A pedagogical overview of automated writing assistance tools. Education Research International, 2023, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4253331
2. Al Ali, A. (2026). Different time, different language: Revisiting the bias against non-native speakers in GPT detectors. Proceedings of the EACL Student Research Workshop (ACL Anthology), 277–285. https://aclanthology.org/2026.eacl-srw.20.pdf
3. Arslan, N. (2025). AI and learning experiences of international students studying in the UK: An exploratory case study. Journal of International Students, 1–22.
4. Askari, H. (2025). The seismic shift: Generative AI as an inflection point in contemporary higher education governance. Journal of Educational Policy, 40(2), 112–129.
5. Aziz, B., Zehra, S. L., & Shafiq, M. H. (2026). Over-reliance on ChatGPT and its psychological impact on critical thinking and writing skills among university students. ACADEMIA International Journal for Social Sciences, 5(2), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.63056/academia.5.2.2026.1508
6. Bannister, J., Guan, K., & Han, L. (2025). Re-engineering assessment for an AI-pervasive world: Moving beyond defensive detection. Studies in Higher Education, 50(4), 512–528.
7. 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
8. Black, R. W. (2025). University students describe how they adopt AI for writing and research in a general education course. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, Article 415.
9. Boustane, H., Chroqui, R., & Sabil, A. (2025). The impact of artificial intelligence on academic writing: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Learning Technology, 20(3), 210–228. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2025.149289
10. Bozkurt, A. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in education: Balancing transformative potential with ethical boundaries. Open Praxis, 16(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.16.1.645
11. Carbonel, M., Qu, X., & Suchikova, Y. (2025). Disciplinary divergence in response to generative AI: A comparative analysis of humanities and STEM faculties. Higher Education Research & Development, 44(3), 320–336.
12. Chaka, C. (2024). Detecting the detectors: A critical scoping review of commercial AI text detection tools in higher education. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(2), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2253852
13. Chan, C. K., & Colloton, T. (2024). Navigating the human-AI academic ecosystem: Policy frameworks for student partnerships. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(3), 889–907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10323-0
14. Chan, C. K., & Hu, W. (2023). Students' voices on generative AI tools in higher education: Scaffolding or cheating? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(8), 1095–1112. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2237247
15. Chen, L., Islamov, U., & Ma, X. (2020). Machine learning algorithms for adaptive learning and knowledge management in international classrooms. Computers & Education, 154, Article 103912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103912
16. Cuenca, R., Oliveira, M., & Nguyen, T. (2025). The integrity dilemma: Balancing technological policing models with pedagogical-trust frameworks. Ethics and Education, 20(1), 75–92.
17. Du, Y., & Daniel, S. (2024). Automated translation and text-to-speech services as inclusion accelerators for international postgraduate students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 28(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153231189420
18. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., & Hughes, L. (2023). So what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities and challenges of generative AI. International Journal of Information Management, 71, Article 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
19. Farrelly, T., & Baker, N. (2023). Generative AI as an idea generation companion for English as an additional language scholars. Journal of Academic Writing, 13(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v13i1.905
20. Firat, M. (2023). What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), Article 22. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22
21. Godwin-Jones, R. (2024). Distributed agency in second language learning and teaching through generative AI. Language Learning & Technology, 28(2), 5–30. https://doi.org/10125/73570
22. Lendvai, G. F. (2024). ChatGPT in academic writing: A scientometric analysis of literature published between 2022 and 2023. Scientometrics, 129(5), 2415–2433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04980-6
23. Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 4(7), Article 100779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779
24. Liu, Y., Ju, C., & Wang, L. (2024). Bidirectional and auto-regressive transformer structures in mechanical text translation and polishing. PeerJ Computer Science, 10, Article e1902. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.1902
25. Liu, Y., Kong, W., & Merve, K. (2025). ChatGPT applications in academic writing: A review of potential, limitations, and ethical challenges. Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, 88(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.2024-0269
26. Marzuki, Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization of students’ writing: EFL teachers’ perspective. Cogent Education, 10(2), Article 2236469. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2236469
27. Moffatt, K., Hall, M., & Zhou, P. (2025). The deconstruction and reconstruction of authorship: Evaluating distributed human-AI assemblages in scholarly publishing. Journal of Documentation, 81(2), 201–220.
28. Monib, W. K., Qazi, A., Apong, R. A., Azizan, M. T., De Silva, L., & Yassin, H. (2024). Generative AI and future education: A review, theoretical validation, and authors’ perspective on challenges and solutions. PeerJ Computer Science, 10, Article e2105. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.2105
29. Muñoz Muñoz, B. C., Nassaji, H., & Bello Carrillo, F. I. (2025). ChatGPT-generated versus human direct corrective feedback on L2 writing. System, 126, Article 103359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103805
30. Nguyen, D. M. Q. (2026). The role of ChatGPT in providing written corrective feedback for EFL academic writing: A literature review. International Journal of AI in Language Education, 4(1), 45–62.
31. Patty, J., & Matatula, M. Y. (2026). Are AI detectors fair to EFL learners? A library research on detection bias and academic integrity. J-Shelves of Indragiri (JSI), 8(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.61672/jsi.v8i1.3557
32. Pratama, A. R. (2025). The accuracy-bias trade-offs in AI text detection tools and their impact on fairness in scholarly publication. Research Assessment, 3(1), Article PMC12453642.
33. Slimi, Z. (2026). A systematic critical review of generative AI's impact on authorship, pedagogy, and integrity (2023–2025). Frontiers in Education, 11, Article 1769680. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1769680
34. Urbaite, G. (2025). Artificial intelligence integration in the acquisition of English academic writing. Porta Universorum, 1(4), 88–103.