The Impact of AI on University Students’ Academic Assertiveness: The Case of Academic Writing

Backup copy. This page is kept by the LLCIS Research Laboratory as a backup of Confluence Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies. The official version of record is published on the journal’s platform, hosted and indexed by IMIST-CNRST: https://journals.imist.ma/index.php/confluence/article/view/5026.

  • Nafiaa BouananiFaculty of Humanities, Abdelmalek Essaadi University, Tetouan, Morocco / LLCIS Research Laboratory
PDF (backup copy)Official version on IMISTDOI
Journal
Confluence Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies (e-ISSN 3085-5411)
Issue
Vol. 1 No. 1 (2025)
Section
Articles
Pages
185-207
Published
10 July 2025
DOI
https://doi.org/10.34874/PRSM.cjms-vol1iss1.5026
License
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Copyright (c) 2025 Nafiaa Bouanani

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) tools on Moroccan university students’ academic assertiveness within the context of academic writing. Drawing on the theoretical framework of cognitive and emotional assertiveness, as well as behavioral autonomy in academic tasks, this research examines how AI tools (grammar checkers and sophisticated writing assistants (HemingwayEditor, ProWritingAid, WordLift, AIWriter, CopyScape, WorldTune, Smodin, QuillBot)) affect students’ capacity for independent thought, argumentation, and the expression of their academic voice. Academic assertiveness is operationalized across three dimensions: cognitive assertiveness (confidence in generating original arguments), emotional assertiveness (confidence in presenting ideas despite potential critique), and behavioral assertiveness (engagement in the writing process without undue reliance on external aids). The study adopts a correlational quantitative design, using a structured questionnaire that measures both the frequency and type of AI tool usage along with academic assertiveness self-reported inventories across the cognitive and emotional dimensions and a writing rubric for behavioural dimension. The results of the multivariate multiple regression analysis revealed that AI tool usage significantly predicted writing confidence (β = 0.42, p < 0.01), indicating that more frequent use of AI tools was associated with higher levels of confidence in academic writing. However, the degree of dependence on AI for idea generation negatively predicted academic independence (β = -0.28, p < 0.05), suggesting that over-reliance on AI may reduce students’ ability to engage independently with writing tasks. The findings suggest that moderate use of AI tools tends to foster cognitive and emotional assertiveness by alleviating the mechanical burdens of writing and boosting students’ confidence. However, excessive reliance on AI, particularly for content generation or structural organization, undermines behavioral assertiveness, leading to restricted academic independence and critical engagement.

Keywords

Academic assertivenessCritical thinkingDispositionArtificial Intelligence (AI)Academic writingHigher education

Works Cited (39)
  1. Agbor, C., et al. “AIgiarism and Academic Integrity: Risks of Machine-Mediated Plagiarism in Higher Education.” Journal of Academic Ethics, vol. 22, no. 1, 2024, pp. 45–59.
  2. Aljuaid, Hind. “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Tools on Academic Writing Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review.” Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on ChatGPT, Apr. 2024, pp. 26–55, https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/.
  3. Antonovsky, Aaron. “The Salutogenic Model as a Theory to Guide Health Promotion.” Health Promotion International, vol. 11, no. 1, 1996, pp. 11–18, https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/11.1.11.
  4. Barnett, Ronald, and Kelly Coate. Engaging the Curriculum in Higher Education. SRHE and Open University Press, 2005.
  5. Baykasoğlu, Adil, et al. “AI-Based Assessment Development in Higher Education.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 43, no. 7, 2018, pp. 1126–1140, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1434120.
  6. Belenky, Mary Field, et al. Women’s Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. Basic Books, 1986.
  7. Bisen, Sachin, et al. “Artificial Intelligence-Based Writing Assistants: Implications for Academic Writing and Language Learning.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 18, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00294-6.
  8. Çağataylı, E., and Çelebi, N. “Predicting Academic Success with Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education.” Computers & Education, vol. 185, 2022, 104527, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104527.
  9. Chen, X., et al. “Benefits and Challenges of AI for Higher Education Instructors and Students.” Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, 2020, 100002, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100002
  10. Crompton, H., et al. “Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: Opportunities and Challenges.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 17, no. 1, 2020, pp. 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8.
  11. Dever, D., Smith, J., and Brown, L. “Personalized Prompt Feedback Using AI in University Settings.” Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, vol. 17, no. 5, 2020, pp. 77–89.
  12. Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi Report) (Research Report). Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. ERIC Document No. ED 315 423.
  13. Facione, P. A. Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessment, 2015.
  14. Ford, M., and Forman, E. A. “Redefining Disciplinary Learning in Classroom Contexts.” Review of Research in Education, vol. 30, no. 1, 2006, pp. 1–32, https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X030001001.
  15. Floridi, L., and Chiriatti, M. “GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences.” Minds and Machines, vol. 30, 2020, pp. 681–694, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1.
  16. Gerlich, R. N. “The Impact of Technology on Critical Thinking Skills.” Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 12, no. 4, 2016, pp. 55–67.
  17. Gerlich, R. N. “The Integration of AI in Higher Education: Implications for Critical Thinking and Academic Integrity.” Journal of Higher Education Policy, vol. 36, no. 2, 2025, pp. 215–229.
  18. Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. 2nd ed., Harvard University Press, 1993.
  19. Holmes, W., and Tuomi, I. “Artificial Intelligence in Education: Risks and Opportunities.” Educational Research Review, vol. 37, 2022, 100462,
  20. Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., and Chen, N. S. “Trends in Artificial Intelligence Research and Applications in Education.” Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, 2020, 100002, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100002
  21. Hyland, Ken. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Continuum, 2005.
  22. Li, Y., Wang, Q., and Zhang, L. “AI-Assisted Academic Writing: Opportunities and Challenges.” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 61, no. 1, 2024, pp. 89–106, https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221149384.
  23. Meyers, Chet. Teaching Students to Think Critically. Jossey-Bass, 1986.
  24. Marcus, Gary, and Davis, Ernest. Rebooting AI: Building Artificial Intelligence We Can Trust. Vintage Books, 2020.
  25. Moon, Jennifer. Critical Thinking: An Exploration of Theory and Practice. Routledge, 2008.
  26. ---. Achieving Success Through Academic Assertiveness: Real Life Strategies for Today’s Higher Education Students. Routledge, 2009.
  27. Nazari, Nabi. “Application of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Digital Writing Assistant in Higher Education: Randomized Controlled Trial.” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 7, 2021, e07014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014.
  28. Onder, S. “AI and the Future of Higher Education: Critical Thinking at Risk?” Educational Futures, vol. 15, no. 2, 2025, pp. 88–102.
  29. Peneva, I., and Mavrodiev, S. “AHistorical Approach to Assertiveness.” Psychological Thought, vol. 6, no. 1, 2013, pp. 3–26, https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v6i1.14.
  30. Pereira, R., et al. “Generative Artificial Intelligence and Academic Writing: An Analysis of the Perceptions of Researchers in Training.” Management Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2024. Emerald Group Publishing.
  31. Royce, T., and Bennett, L. “The Paradox of AI in Higher Education: Efficiency versus Intellectual Capacity.” Journal of Learning Analytics, vol. 9, no. 1, 2025, pp. 34–52.
  32. Taneri, P. “Adaptive Learning Systems and Student Engagement.” Educational Technology & Society, vol. 23, no. 4, 2020, pp. 78–92.
  33. Taylor, R. D., et al. “Promoting Positive Youth Development Through School-Based Social and Emotional Learning Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of Follow-Up Effects.” Child Development, vol. 88, no. 4, 2017, pp. 1156–1171, https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864.
  34. Thenmozhi, P., and Bharathy, D. D. “Relationship between the Level of Assertiveness and Academic Performance among Arts and Science College Students.” Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research, vol. 9, no. 3, 2019, pp. 293–296, https://doi.org/10.5958/2349-2996.2019.00061.3.
  35. Vagos, P., and Pereira, A. “A Cognitive Perspective on Understanding and Training Assertiveness.” Estudo Geral, 2016, https://estudogeral.uc.pt/bitstream/10316/46772/1/Vagos%26Pereira_2016_%20A%20COGNITIVE%20PERSPECTIVE%20ON%20ASSERTIVENESS.pdf.
  36. Verdú, E., et al. “Tailoring Instruction with AI: Meeting Diverse Learner Needs.” Computers & Education, vol. 113, 2017, pp. 1–17.
  37. Vygotsky, Lev. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Edited and translated by M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, and E. Souberman, Harvard University Press, 1978.
  38. Young, R. E. A Critical Theory of Education: Habermas and Our Children’s Future. Teachers College Press, 1980.
  39. Zhang, Y., et al. “Academic Writing as a Developmental Process: The Role ofAI Tools.” Studies in Higher Education, vol. 47, no. 5, 2022, pp. 1021–1035, https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1859676