Between Assistance and Obstacle: AI Ethics in Indonesian EFL Undergraduate Students' Thesis Writing

Dika Agustri, Eko Suhartoyo, Henny Rahmawati

Abstract


The growing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in academic writing has extended into

thesis preparation among Indonesian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) undergraduate students. Although AI can support grammar improvement, paraphrasing, idea organization, and access to information, its use also raises concerns about plagiarism, originality, misinformation, critical thinking, and academic responsibility. This study investigated students' perceptions of the ethical dimensions of AI-assisted thesis writing, how they balance its benefits and ethical challenges, and how institutional policies and supervisor attitudes shape their practices. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed. Quantitative data were collected from 62 English Language Education students in their seventh and ninth semesters using a 23- item questionnaire and were analyzed descriptively with SPSS. Four students were purposively selected for semi-structured interviews to explain the quantitative findings, and the qualitative data were examined through reflexive thematic analysis. The results showed that ethical awareness received the highest mean score (M = 3.88, SD = 0.59), followed by attitude (M =

3.86, SD = 0.60), purpose of use (M = 3.48, SD = 0.68), and confidence (M = 2.99, SD = 0.44). Interview findings showed that students attempted to keep ownership of their ideas, used AI mainly for language support, checked and rewrote AI-generated content, and regarded personal responsibility as essential. However, all interview participants reported the absence of clear written institutional guidance on AI use, causing students to depend on personal judgment and supervisors' attitudes. The study concludes that AI can function as both assistance and obstacle in thesis writing; responsible use depends on students' ethical awareness, critical evaluation, and clearer institutional and supervisory guidance.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Alkharusi, H. (2022). A descriptive analysis and interpretation of data from Likert scales in educational and psychological research. Indian Journal of Psychology and Education,

(2), 13-16.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Butarbutar, R., & Vallejo, R. (2025). Factors influencing AI-assisted thesis writing in university: A pull-push-mooring theory narrative inquiry study. Data and Metadata, 4, Article 203. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2025203

Cotton, D., Cotton, P., & Shipway, J. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International,

, 228-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Dabis, A., & Csáki, C. (2024). AI and ethics: Investigating the first policy responses of higher education institutions to the challenge of generative AI. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, Article 3526. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03526-z

Dai, Y., Lai, S., Lim, C., & Liu, A. (2023). ChatGPT and its impact on research supervision: Insights from Australian postgraduate research students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8843

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6 Pt 2), 2134-2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Heriyawati, D. F., & Romadhon, M. G. E. (2025). Can AI be trusted for my thesis? The voices of Indonesian higher education levels about ChatGPT in automated writing evaluation (AWE). Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 26(1), 58-75. https://doi.org/10.54855/callej.252614

McDonald, N., Johri, A., Ali, A., & Collier, A. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Evidence from an analysis of institutional policies and guidelines. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 3, Article 100121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100121

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42, 533-544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post- pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(2), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07

Werdiningsih, I., Marzuki, M., & Rusdin, D. (2024). Balancing AI and authenticity: EFL

students' experiences with ChatGPT in academic writing. Cogent Arts & Humanities,

(1), Article 2392388. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2392388

Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments,

(1), Article 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.