A scholarly dialogue: writing scholarship, authorship, academic integrity and the challenges of AI

References

• Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Trans. V. W. McKee. University of Texas Press (Original work published 1978).
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, E. (2010). Foucault’s “what is an author”: Towards a critical discourse of practice as research. In E. Barrett & B. Bolt (Eds.), Practice as research: Approaches to creative arts enquiry (pp. 135–146). I.B. Tauris.
   Google Scholar
• Bartholomae, D. (1986). Inventing the university. Journal of Basic Writing, 5(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.37514/JBW-J.1986.5.1.02
   Google Scholar
• Bjork, C. (2023a). Don’t fret about students using ChatGPT to cheat – AI is a bigger threat to educational equality. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/dont-fret-about-students-using-chatgpt-to-cheat-ai-is-a-bigger-threat-to-educational-equality-202842
   Google Scholar
• Bjork, C. (2023b). ChatGPT threatens language diversity. More needs to be done to protect our differences in the age of AI. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/chatgpt-threatens-language-diversity-more-needs-to-be-done-to-protect-our-differences-in-the-age-of-ai-198878
   Google Scholar
• Brunner, D. D. (1991). Who owns this work? The question of authorship in professional/academic writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 5(4), 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651991005004004
   Google Scholar
• Candy, L., & Edmonds, E. (2018). Practice-based research in the creative arts: Foundations and futures from the front line. Leonardo, 51(1), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1162/LEON_a_01471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chon, Y. V., Shin, D., & Kim, G. E. (2021). Comparing L2 learners’ writing against parallel machine-translated texts: Raters’ assessment, linguistic complexity and errors. System, 96, 102408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosgrove, S. (2009). WRIT101: Ethics of representation for creative writers. Pedagogy, 9(1), 134–141. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2008-021
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, K. (2021). The atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw, K. W. (2017). On intersectionality: Essential writings. The New Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dann, R. (2014). Assessment as learning: Blurring the boundaries of assessment and learning for theory, policy and practice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.898128
   Google Scholar
• Donahue, C. (2008). When copying is not copying. In M. Vicinus & C. Eisner (Eds.), Originality, imitation, and plagiarism: Teaching writing in the digital age (pp. 90–103). University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ducar, C., & Schocket, D. H. (2018). Machine translation and the L2 classroom: Pedagogical solutions for making peace with Google translate. Foreign Language Annals, 51(4), 779–795. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Corwin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. A. (2001). Collaboration and concepts of authorship. PMLA, 116(2), 354–369.
   Google Scholar
• Ede, L. S., & Lunsford, A. A. (2006). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing (Pbk. ed.). Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Emerson, L., & Clerehan, R. (2009). Writing program administration outside the North American context. In D. Strickland & J. Gunner (Eds.), The writing program interrupted (pp. 166–174). Boynton Cook.
   Google Scholar
• Feuer, M., & Wolfe, J. (2023). Planning for difference: Preparing students to create flexible and elaborated team charters that can adapt to support diverse teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 66(1), 78–93. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2022.3228020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gero, K., Long, T., & Chilton, L. B. (2023). Social dynamics of AI support in creative writing. In A. Schmidt, K. Väänänen, T. Goyal, P. O. Kristensson, A. Peters, S. Mueller, … M. L. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–15).
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S. S. (2022). AI generated essays are nothing to worry about. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2022/10/24/ai-generated-essays-are-nothing-worry-about-opinion
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S. S., & Hopkins, H. R. (2022). AI for social justice: New methodological horizons in technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 31(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2021.1955151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groves, M., & Mundt, K. (2021). A ghostwriter in the machine? Attitudes of academic staff towards machine translation use in Internationalised Higher Education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 50(1-11), 100957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100957
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, M. (2023, February 9). ChatGPT is just an automated mansplaining machine. Futurism. https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence-automated-mansplaining-machine
   Google Scholar
• Hawisher, G. E., & Selfe, C. L. (1991). Evolving perspectives on computers and composition studies: Questions for the 1990s. National Council of Teachers of English. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED331088
   Google Scholar
• Hesse, D. D. (2005). 2005 CCCC chair's address: Who owns writing? College Composition and Communication, 57(2), 335–357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jolley, J. R., & Maimone, L. (2022). Thirty years of machine translation in language teaching and learning: A review of the literature. L2 Journal, 14(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.5070/L214151760
   Google Scholar
• Kempen, G. A. (Ed.). (2012). Natural language generation: New results in artificial intelligence, psychology and linguistics (Vol. 135). Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Knowles, A. M. (2022). Human-AI collaborative writing: Sharing the rhetorical task load. In 2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm) (pp. 257–261). https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00053
   Google Scholar
• Lessig, L. (2002). The future of ideas: The fate of the commons in a connected world. Vintage.
   Google Scholar
• Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers (arXiv:2304.02819). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.02819
   Google Scholar
• Liu, D. (2023). ChatGPT is old news: How do we assess in the age of AI writing co-pilots? https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/chatgpt-old-news-how-do-we-assess-age-ai-writing-co-pilots-danny-liu/
   Google Scholar
• Lunsford, A. A., & Lunsford, K. J. (2008). “Mistakes are a fact of life”: A national comparative study. College Composition & Communication, 59(4), 781–806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marler, R. F. (1974). From tale to short story: The emergence of a new genre in the 1850s. American Literature, 46(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.2307/2924690
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Murtisari, E. T., Widiningrum, R., Branata, J., & Susanto, R. D. (2019). Google translate in language learning: Indonesian EFL students’ attitudes. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(3), 978.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmquist, M., Childers, P., Maimon, E., Mullin, J., Rice, R., Russell, A., & Russell, D. R. (2020). Fifty years of WAC: Where have we been? Where are we going. Across the Disciplines, 17(3/4), 5–45. https://doi.org/10.37514/ATD-J.2020.17.3.01
   Google Scholar
• Pilegaard, N. H., & Philipsen, H. (2023). A method off the beaten track: Refining creative writing process through practice-led research. Qualitative Studies, 8(1), 162–193. https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v8i1.136805
   Google Scholar
• Poon, A. (2008). Mining the archive: Historical fiction, counter-modernities, and Suchen Christine Lim’s ‘A Bit of Earth’. The Journal of Commonwealth Literature, 43(3), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021989408095236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenblatt, L. M. (2019). The transactional theory of Reading and writing. In Theoretical models and processes of literacy (7th ed., pp. 451–479). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315110592-28
   Google Scholar
• Silliman, E. R., Bahr, R. H., & Wilkinson, L. C. (2020). Writing across the academic languages: Introduction. Reading and Writing, 33(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09993-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stihler, C. (2023). Better sharing for generative AI. Creative Commons. https://creativecommons.org/2023/02/06/better-sharing-for-generative-ai/
   Google Scholar
• Te Punga Somerville, A. (2022, August 28). Writing while colonised. E-Tangata. https://e-tangata.co.nz/reflections/writing-while-colonised/
   Google Scholar
• Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science: Here are our ground rules for their use. (2023, January 24). Nature, 613. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00191-1
   Google Scholar
• Vee, A. (2022, May 28). Automating writing: How, why, and for whom? Panel: Trust the Machine: Inviting Algorithms into Our Textual Meaning-Making Process. Rhetoric Society of America.
   Google Scholar
• Verhulsdonck, G., Howard, T., & Tham, J. (2021). Investigating the impact of design thinking, content strategy, and artificial intelligence: A “streams” approach for technical communication and user experience. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, Article 00472816211041951. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472816211041951
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vie, S. (2013). A pedagogy of resistance toward plagiarism detection technologies. Computers and Composition, 30(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2013.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Whitehead, S. (2011). Reader as consumer: The magazine short story. Short Fiction in Theory & Practice, 1(1), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1386/fict.1.1.71_1
   Google Scholar
• Xu, J. (2022). Proficiency and the use of machine translation: A case study of four Japanese learners. L2 Journal, 14(1), 77–104. https://doi.org/10.5070/l214151328
   Google Scholar
• Yancey, K. B. (2004). Made not only in words: Composition in a new key. College Composition and Communication, 56(2), 297–328. https://doi.org/10.2307/4140651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziebell, N., & Skeat, J. (2023). How is generative AI being used by university students and academics? Semester 1, 2023. Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne.
   Google Scholar