Graduate Instructors Navigating the AI Frontier: The Role of ChatGPT in Higher Education
Open accessAbstract
This research study explores the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in undergraduate assessments, specifically focusing on the ability of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) to identify AI-generated assessments and the performance of ChatGPT, an AI model, in producing high-quality work. The study examines four guiding research questions and hypotheses related to the accuracy of GTA identification, the achievement of AI-generated work compared to student marks, the impact of GTA characteristics on identification accuracy, and the variation in identification and assessment across different subject areas. The study incorporates ten AI-generated assessments across seven classes taught by five GTAs. The findings reveal that ChatGPT consistently excelled the average student in all classes receiving 10 scores of A or higher out of 11 and receiving the top mark in 8 of the ten classes. GTAs accurately identified 50% of the AI-generated assessments, with results suggesting a potential connection between class size and GTA accuracy in identifying AI-generated work. GTAs with prior experience and familiarity with ChatGPT demonstrated higher accuracy in identifying AI-generated assessments. However, further research is needed to explore this comprehensively. This study also reviews the effectiveness of TurnItin's new AI detector, highlighting an accuracy of 92% across the ten assessments. The study highlights the adaptability of ChatGPT across different subject areas and assessment type…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
These policies establish clear governance structures that define acceptable AI use, ensuring that AI tools support learning rather than facilitate misconduct.
“These policies establish clear governance structures that define acceptable AI use, ensuring that AI tools support learning rather than facilitate misconduct [ 54, 57].”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [54]
Improving AI detection tools to accurately identify AI-generated content while reducing false positives and negatives is an approach to maintain academic integrity.
“One approach involves improving AI detec -tion tools to accurately identify AI-generated content while reducing false positives and negatives that may affect aca -demic integrity enforcement [ 31, 54, 57, 66, 91, 106].”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [54]
Cites
ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., et al. (2023) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 · Cited by 7,326 · see citing works
Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 · Cited by 3,087 · see citing works
Chatting and Cheating. Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D., Cotton, P., & Shipway, J. R. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/mrz8h · Cited by 3,079 · see citing works
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4337484 · Cited by 3,004 · see citing works
Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.021 · Cited by 2,628 · see citing works
What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature
Lo, C. K. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13040410 · Cited by 2,024 · see citing works
Chatting about ChatGPT: how may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries?
Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2023) · Library Hi Tech News · doi:10.1108/lhtn-01-2023-0009 · Cited by 1,355 · see citing works
Pavlik, J. V. (2023) · Journalism & Mass Communication Educator · doi:10.1177/10776958221149577 · Cited by 972 · see citing works
ChatGPT User Experience: Implications for Education
Zhai, X. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4312418 · Cited by 935 · see citing works
Engineering Education in the Era of ChatGPT: Promise and Pitfalls of Generative AI for Education
Qadir, J. (2023) · 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon54358.2023.10125121 · Cited by 707 · see citing works
GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers
Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779 · Cited by 673 · see citing works
Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text
Weber-Wulff, D., Anohina-Naumeca, A., Bjelobaba, S., Foltýnek, T., Guerrero-Dib, J., Popoola, O., Šigut, P., & Waddington, L. (2023) · International Journal for Educational Integrity · doi:10.1007/s40979-023-00146-z · Cited by 582 · see citing works
ChatGPT for Education and Research: A Review of Benefits and Risks
Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4378735 · Cited by 386 · see citing works
García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2023) · Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS) · doi:10.14201/eks.31279 · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Suchman, K., Garg, S., & Trindade, A. J. (2023) · American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000002320 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Walters, W. H. (2023) · Open Information Science · doi:10.1515/opis-2022-0158 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Xiao, P., Chen, Y., & Bao, W. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4458269 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Higher education assessment practice in the era of generative AI tools
(2024) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.28 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Ncube, P. D. N., Dzvapatsva, G. P., Matobobo, C., & Ranga, M. M. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00871-w · Cited by 31 · see citing works
The impact of ChatGPT on academic integrity in medical education: a developing nation perspective
Jaleel, A., Aziz, R., Farid, G., & Bashir, M. Z. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1554444 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Parker, L., Carter, C., Karakas, A., Loper, A. J., & Sokkar, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Kansas (US)
- Corresponding author
- Parker, Luke
- Venue
- Computers and Education Open
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-06
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 100166
- ISSN
- 2666-5573 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4392301491
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 30
- FWCI
- 25.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers and Education Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, AI-generated text detection, graduate teaching assistants, undergraduate assessment, artificial intelligence in higher education, class size, academic integrity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
