In academic writing, it is crucial to develop and express one’s own perspective. Based on Table 2: The Human-AI Writing Continuum, I believe that the appropriate use of AI in research writing should fall within Level 2 to Level 3. This means AI should be primarily used as a grammar checker or for providing simple feedback on areas for improvement. Relying too heavily on AI-generated content may compromise originality and critical thinking, which are essential in academic work.

​

During class, I observed Ariel and Diana’s demonstration of AI-assisted writing. At first glance, their AI-generated outline appeared well-structured and complete. However, after engaging in a brainstorming session with my group members, we identified several logical inconsistencies within the outline. This experience reinforced my belief that while AI can be a valuable tool in the writing process, its outputs should not be accepted without critical evaluation. AI-generated content may seem polished and coherent on the surface, but deeper scrutiny often reveals flaws that require human judgment and revision.

​

As AI technology continues to evolve, it is inevitable that more research papers will incorporate AI-generated elements. While this can enhance efficiency and accessibility, it also raises ethical concerns. The responsible use of AI in academic writing should emphasize transparency and integrity. I strongly believe that institutions and academic publishers should mandate AI usage disclosure, similar to citation requirements in APA format. Researchers should be required to provide evidence of AI involvement, ensuring that its role in the writing process is clearly documented and universally acknowledged.

​

In conclusion, AI can serve as a powerful assistant in academic writing if used ethically and transparently. However, over-reliance on AI may undermine the development of essential research and writing skills. Therefore, it is necessary to establish clear guidelines on AI usage in academia, ensuring that it serves as a supplementary tool rather than a replacement for human intellect and originality.

 

Furthermore, the way I wrote my reflection aligns with what I mentioned—I first put down all my ideas, and ChatGPT only helped organize and refine them into complete sentences, rather than generating its own opinions.