Photo: FacultyFocus.com
Professors across universities are grappling with a pressing question:
If students use Artificial Intelligence to write essays, reports, and long-form assignments, are they still the true authors of their work?
Students are expected to produce original writing. Universities emphasize intellectual ownership — the idea that your ideas, analysis, and words should reflect your own thinking. Yet outside academia, writing is rarely a solitary act.
Consider journalism. A reporter writes a story. An editor revises it before publication.
Consider book publishing. An author submits a manuscript. Editors suggest revisions — sometimes major ones — before the book reaches readers.
So what’s the difference?
Is a student using AI really so different from a reporter working with an editor?
Let’s unpack it.
The Reporter and the Editor
In journalism, collaboration is built into the system.
A reporter will typically :
- Conduct interviews
- Verify facts
- Organize the narrative
- Write the draft
Whereas an editor will typically:
- Refine clarity
- Adjust the tone
- Cut the piece for length
- Ensure the legal and ethical standards are followed
- Align the piece with the publication’s mission
How much of the reporter’s work remains in the final article?
Typically, most of it.
The facts, structure, and intellectual framing originate from the reporter. Editors may rewrite sentences or restructure sections, but they do not generate the reporting itself. The reporter is still credited as the author because the intellectual labor belongs to them.
The editor improves expression. They do not replace authorship.
The Book Author and the Publishing Editor
The publishing world operates similarly.
An author:
- Creates the ideas
- Develops characters or arguments
- Structures the narrative
- Writes the manuscript
Editors may:
- Suggest structural revisions
- Request rewrites
- Improve pacing
- Strengthen clarity
Sometimes these revisions are substantial. Entire chapters might be reworked. But crucially, the author does the rewriting. The core ideas remain the author’s. The voice remains the author’s. Intellectual ownership remains with the author.
Again, editing enhances authorship — it does not substitute for it.
Now Enter Artificial Intelligence
The situation changes when we introduce AI into academic writing.
There are two very different ways students might use AI.
Scenario 1: AI as a Ghostwriter
A student enters a prompt.
AI generates the argument, structure, examples, and transitions.
The student lightly edits the output and submits it.
In this case, who performed the intellectual work?
If the ideas, organization, and much of the wording come from AI, then AI has functioned less like an editor and more like a ghostwriter.
This is fundamentally different from the reporter–editor relationship.
An editor revises your work.
AI can generate the work itself.
That distinction matters.
Scenario 2: AI as an Editor or Tutor
Now imagine a different case.
The student writes a complete draft independently. They will typically use AI to do the following:
- Check grammar
- Suggest clearer phrasing
- Improve transitions
- Offer structural feedback
The student decides which suggestions to accept.
In this case, AI functions much more like an editor. The student remains the intellectual author. The core ideas, reasoning, and structure originate from the student.
This use resembles journalism and publishing much more closely.
The Real Difference: Intellectual Labor
The heart of the issue is not whether AI is involved.
The real question is:
Who performed the intellectual labor?
In journalism and publishing, the reporter (and author) generates the ideas. Whereas in education, students are supposed to generate ideas.
Universities assign essays not simply to produce polished writing, but to assess:
- Critical thinking
- Argument development
- Analysis
- Organization
- Writing ability
- Mastery of material
If AI performs those tasks, the assignment no longer measures the student’s learning. And that’s where the tension lies.
Purpose Matters
There is another key difference: purpose.
Journalism and publishing are collaborative industries by design. Editing is expected. It is institutionalized. Academic assignments, however, are assessments. They exist to evaluate an individual’s ability. The goal of a university essay is not to produce the best possible paper at any cost. The goal is to demonstrate the student’s thinking.
If AI replaces that thinking, the educational purpose changes entirely.
A Philosophical Shift
For centuries, tools have helped humans express their ideas more effectively.
A) Dictionaries.
B) Spellcheck.
C) Grammar guides.
D) Editors.
These tools refined human thought. AI represents something new. It does not merely refine expression — it can generate structure, arguments, and analysis. The line between assistance and substitution becomes blurred. And the ethical question becomes simpler — and harder — at the same time:
Is AI helping the student think better?
Or is it doing the thinking for them?
So, Is It the Same?
If AI is used like an editor — to refine a student’s original work — the analogy to journalism and publishing holds. If AI is used as a ghostwriter — to generate the intellectual substance — the analogy breaks down. Editors polish authors. They do not replace them. That is the difference.
And that distinction is where universities are now drawing their lines.


