CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 101Authorship Attribution and ProfilingAcademic integrity and plagiarismArtificial Intelligence in Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

WHO WROTE THIS ESSAY? DETECTING AI-GENERATED WRITING IN SECOND LANGUAGE EDUCATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Alexander, Katarzyna, Savvidou, Christine, Alexander, Chris·2023·Teaching English With Technology
DOI 10.56297/buka4060/xhld5365
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.56297/buka4060/xhld5365

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A recent study comprised a mere six ESL lecturers, highlighting narrow empirical breadth and ongoing needs for broader policy-focused research.

    “A recent study demonstrated this in detailing one such qualitative study comprising a mere six ESL lecturers, highlighting narrow empirical breadth and ongoing needs for broader policy-focused research to inform institutional responses to student work produced via AI [2].”

    From Evaluating the Effectiveness and Ethical Implications of AI Detection Tools in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [2]

  • Much of the research on detection tool research to this point is of limited scope and lacking in institutional breadth.

    “Although an ever-growing volume of literature about AI in education has been generated, much of the research on detection tool research to this point is of limited scope and lacking in institutional breadth [2].”

    From Evaluating the Effectiveness and Ethical Implications of AI Detection Tools in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [2]

  • ESL instructors often judged grammatically accurate and sophisticated writing as AI-generated, revealing a bias against second-language writers and highlighting how current detection systems may unintentionally penalize linguistic diversity.

    “ESL instructors often judged grammatically accurate and sophisticated writing as AI-generated, revealing a bias against second-language writers and highlighting how current detection systems may unintentionally penalize linguistic diversity [2].”

    From Evaluating the Effectiveness and Ethical Implications of AI Detection Tools in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [2]

  • Educators rely on subjective judgments without clear policies, sometimes misinterpreting linguistic sophistication as evidence of AI authorship.

    “Educators rely on subjective judgments without clear policies, sometimes misinterpreting linguistic sophistication as evidence of AI authorship.”

    From Evaluating the Effectiveness and Ethical Implications of AI Detection Tools in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [2]

  • Faculty in ESL contexts often feel uncertain about addressing suspected AI-generated student work, highlighting the lack of comprehensive, AI-specific institutional guidelines.

    “Faculty in ESL contexts often feel uncertain about addressing suspected AI-generated student work, highlighting the lack of comprehensive, AI-specific institutional guidelines [2].”

    From Evaluating the Effectiveness and Ethical Implications of AI Detection Tools in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [2]

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Alexander, K., Savvidou, C., & Alexander, C.
ORCID
Venue
Teaching English With Technology
Publisher
University of Nicosia
Published
2023
Volume
2023
Issue
2
ISSN
1642-1027 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.56297/buka4060/xhld5365
OpenAlex
W4381515751
Cited by
101
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 2
FWCI
8.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Teaching English With Technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
AI-generated text detection, generative AI, second language writing, higher education, academic integrity, plagiarism detection, authorship attribution

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