AI evidence extraction

Guest editorial: AI-assisted academic writing, translation, and literacy for the promotion of human agency in higher education

Muhammad Shaban Rafi, Davy Tsz Kit Ng, Iram Amjad, Winnie Ho Siu Yee · Artificial Intelligence in Education · 2026

AI-generated evidence extraction, verified across multiple analytical personas. Not a substitute for the peer-reviewed original.

9/10

Relevance

Evidence

Citations

0.00

FWCI

This is an AI analysis. Read the peer-reviewed original at the publisher: https://doi.org/10.1108/aiie-12-2026-269

Methodology & findings

Study design

Narrative editorial review synthesizing recent literature and research trends on AI-assisted writing, translation, and literacy in higher education.

Main result

The paper identifies that "highly cited studies are concentrating on GenAI while indicating a thematic shift towards its literacy, academic integrity and ethics in academic research" (Mittal et al., 2026). Key findings emphasize that "pedagogical approaches must move beyond purely technical instruction towards the systematic cultivation of creative and critical thinking" and that "learners should be guided in the effective use of GenAI for critically interrogating its outputs, questioning its assumptions, and reflecting on its influence on cognition and language practices."

Reports effect sizes.

Research paradigm

Interpretivist/Constructivist

Author conclusions

The editorial concludes that "These papers published in this special issue offer rich insights across diverse disciplinary contexts and highlight a range of methodological perspectives that showcase the transformative role of GenAI in academic writing, translation, and literacy in higher education." The authors emphasize that "These initiatives will safeguard intellectual property rights for future writers by preserving their authorship, research originality and data ownership" and recommend that "educators must act as epistemic mediators" who "train learners to understand the applications and limitations of GenAI while valuing the strength of human agency and epistemic independence."

Open questions raised

The editorial identifies gaps including the need for:
clearer delineation of acceptable vs. unacceptable GenAI use in academic settings
development of specialized pedagogy-aware AI systems
training in prompt engineering as an essential 21st-century skill
structured approaches to dialogic engagement with LLMs beyond ad hoc prompting
institutional policies and guidelines for GenAI-assisted writing and translation

Data: not_statedCode: not_statedExtracted from: pdf

Explore related topics

Responsible AI Use Academic Writing Position Paper