Vol. 8 (2024): Publicación continua
A) Teoría, filosofía, historia e investigación sobre la investigación

Writing under suspicion: Towards an institutional policy of academic integrity in the training of educational researchers

Evangelina Cervantes Holguín
Universidad Autónoma de Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, México
Bio
Portada-v8i0

Published 2024-12-31

Keywords

  • Academic culture,
  • academic writing,
  • ethics,
  • regulations,
  • new technologies
  • Cultura académica,
  • escritura académica,
  • ética,
  • normatividad,
  • nuevas tecnologías

How to Cite

Cervantes Holguín, E. (2024). Writing under suspicion: Towards an institutional policy of academic integrity in the training of educational researchers. RECIE. Revista Electrónica Científica De Investigación Educativa, 8, e2370. https://doi.org/10.33010/recie.v8i0.2370

Abstract

In postgraduate studies, writing is a common practice, despite this, students present different difficulties. In response, over the last decade, AI-giarism has emerged, consisting of the use of content generated by artificial intelligence to present it as one’s own. This action has challenged higher education institutions and their teachers to adapt to technological evolution, particularly given the ambiguity of its benefits. Thus, this study aims to generate guidelines for the construction of a flexible regulatory framework for the ethical use of artificial intelligence in postgraduate education to guarantee academic honesty and institutional integrity. This work is assigned to hermeneutical research with the purpose to review a set of articles and documents on the use of artificial intelligence in postgraduate academic writing. From the analysis, it is concluded that the arrival of this tool challenges the capacity of teachers and institutions, demanding them to rethink teaching and regulatory frameworks in the face of new forms of academic fraud. For teachers, its use can mean a pause to reflect on the relevance of ordinary forms of assessment of academic quality in the students’ work, the purposes and requirements of the assigned tasks and their role in promoting academic integrity; meanwhile for institutions an opportunity to design proactive and flexible measures to educate university communities in their ethical use.

References

  1. Al-Abdullatif, A. M., y Alsubaie, M. A. (2024). ChatGPT in learning: Assessing students’ use intentions through the lens of perceived value and the influence of AI literacy. Behavioral Sciences, 14(9), 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090845
  2. Badke, W. (2023). AI challenges to information literacy. Computers in Libraries, 43(3), 41-42. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382077229_AI_Challenges_to_Information_Literacy#fullTextFileContent
  3. Braun, V., y Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/0.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  4. Castillo-González, W. (2023). The importance of human supervision in the use of ChatGPT as a support tool in scientific writing. Metaverse Basic and Applied Research, 2, 29. https://doi.org/10.56294/mr202329
  5. Cervantes, E., y Rojas, B. A. (2020). Experiencias docentes en torno a la formación investigativa en un posgrado del norte de México. Atenas, 3(51), 69-83. https://atenas.umcc.cu/index.php/atenas/article/view/255
  6. Chan, C. K. (2023a). Is AI changing the rules of academic misconduct? An in-depth look at students’ perceptions of ‘AI-giarism’. arXiv, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.03358
  7. Chan, C. K. (2023b). A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(38), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3
  8. 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, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
  9. Chan, C. K., y Lee, K. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learning Environments, 10, 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3
  10. Chan, C. K., y Zhou, W. (2023). An expectancy value theory (EVT) based instrument for measuring student perceptions of generative AI. Smart Learning Environments, 10, 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00284-4
  11. Contreras, E. X., López, O., y Zalapa, E. E. (2023). Escribir en la universidad. Propuestas educativas desde la perspectiva de los estudiantes. RECIE. Revista Electrónica Científica de Investigación Educativa, 7, e1755. https://doi.org/10.33010/recie.v7i0.1755
  12. Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., y 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
  13. Coutinho, A., Leite, S. F., Foltýnek, T., C., F. R., Fernandes, F. G., Vasconcelos, S. M., y Mainardes, J. (2023). Entrevista com lideranças na promoção da ética em pesquisa e da integridade acadêmica e científica. Práxis Educativa, 18, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.5212/PraxEduc.v.18.22915.087
  14. Gallent-Torres, C., y Comas-Forgas, R. (2024). La llama de Prometeo. IA e integridad académica. Cuadernos de Pedagogía, (549), 97-102. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378156380
  15. Gutiérrez, J. D. (2023). Lineamientos para el uso de inteligencia artificial en contextos universitarios. GIGAPP Estudios Working Papers, 10(267-272), 416-434. https://www.gigapp.org/ewp/index.php/GIGAPP-EWP/article/view/331
  16. Hopcan, S., Türkmen, G., y Polat, E. (2024). Exploring the artificial intelligence anxiety and machine learning attitudes of teacher candidates. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 7281-7301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639023120869
  17. Ibero [Universidad Iberoamericana Ciudad de México] (2023, sep. 13). Lineamientos para el uso de inteligencia artificial. https://ibero.mx/sites/all/themes/ibero/descargables/corpus/co610.pdf
  18. McAdoo, T. (2024, feb. 23). How to cite ChatGPT. APA Style. https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/how-to-cite-chatgpt
  19. Mieles, M. D., Tonon, G., y Alvarado, S. V. (2012). Investigación cualitativa. El análisis temático para el tratamiento de la información desde el enfoque de la fenomenología social. Universitas Humanística, (74), 195-225. https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/univhumanistica/article/view/3648
  20. Navarro-Dolmestch, R. (2024). Descripción de los riesgos y desafíos para la integridad académica de aplicaciones generativas de inteligencia artificial. Derecho PUCP, (91), 231-270. https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202302.007
  21. Rosignoli, S. (2023). Inteligencia artificial generativa y la formación de formadores. Aportes desde la perspectiva de la tecnología educativa. Question, 3(76), e857. https://doi.org/10.24215/16696581e857
  22. Salas, E. F., y Amador, M. G. (2023). Usos de ChatGPT® para la revisión de textos académicos: algunas consideraciones. Innovaciones Educativas, (25 esp.), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.22458/ie.v25iEspecial.4936
  23. Shanto, S. S., Ahmed, Z., y Jony, A. I. (2023). PAIGE: A generative AI-based framework for promoting assignment integrity in higher education. STEM Education, 3(4), 288-305. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2023018
  24. Sun, Q. (2024). Exploring human-generative AI interaction in L2 learners’ source use practices: Issues, trials, and critical reflections. Journal of Academic Writing, 14(1), 24-42. https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v14i1.1055
  25. UAM [Universidad Autónoma de Madrid] (2023). Guía básica sobre el uso de la inteligencia artificial para docentes y estudiantes. https://www.uam.es/uam/media/doc/1606941290988/guia-visual-iagen.pdf
  26. UdG [Universidad de Guadalajara] (2023). Orientaciones y definiciones sobre el uso de la inteligencia artificial generativa en los procesos académicos. Guía práctica. https://www.udgvirtual.udg.mx/sites/default/files/adjuntos/guia_ia_udg.pdf
  27. UNAM [Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México] (2023). Recomendaciones para el uso de la inteligencia artificial generativa en la docencia. https://iagenedu.unam.mx/docs/recomendaciones_uso_iagen_docencia_unam_2023.pdf
  28. UNESCO [Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura] (2021). Inteligencia artificial y educación. Guía para las personas a cargo de formular políticas. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379376
  29. UNESCO (2024). Guía para el uso de IA generativa en educación e investigación. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000389227.locale=es
  30. Universidad SEK (2023). Instructivo que regula el plagio y la vulneración de los derechos de autor cometidos por miembros de la comunidad académica estudiantil. Vicerrectoría Académica. https://usek.cl/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/INSTRUCTIVO-QUE-REGULA-EL-PLAGIO-Y-LA-VULNERACION-DE-DERECHOS-DE-AUTOR.pdf
  31. USIL [Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola] (2023). Lineamientos para uso de la inteligencia artificial (IA). USIL. https://usil.edu.pe/sites/default/files/2023-10/LINEAMIENTOS%20PARA%20USO%20DE%20LA%20INTELIGENCIA%20ARTIFICIAL.pdf
  32. Yépez-Reyes, V., y Cruz-Silva, J. (2024). Inteligencia artificial en la transcripción de entrevistas. Contratexto, (41), 183-202. https://doi.org/10.26439/contratexto2024.n41.6750