This ethical question arose twice recently. Both cases involved postgraduate students who had created academic writing using ChatGPT and openly admitted it.

Student #1. This student was a doctoral student. Before submitting a 2,200-word section of his thesis to his supervisor, the student ran it through Turnitin, which is widely used in colleges and schools to detect plagiarism and content created by AI. Several sections of the text were flagged as being created by AI.

The student wanted those parts of the text to be edited and rewritten, without loss of meaning, so that it would pass the Turnitin test.

Student #2. This student was also a doctoral student. He intended to have his 37,500-word article published in a peer-reviewed journal. It, too, had been created using ChatGPT and had been submitted to his professor for review. A number of amendments were suggested as at least some of the AI-generated content had been detected.

The student wanted his entire article edited and rewritten where necessary so that any AI-generated content would not be detected.

What do the universities say?

Most universities actively encourage students to ensure their papers are edited and proofread and have a proofreading policy or guidelines that must be followed. As an example, here’s what the University of Warwick said:

“Third-party academic proofreaders are not expected to actively amend existing, or create new, content in draft work; instead, they should support the student by identifying errors and or making suggestions relating to – but not creating – content. The University considers the role of the proofreader to be more akin to that of a mentor rather than a content producer or editor of the work.”

The difference between ethical academic proofreading and cheating

Ethical proofreading involves the following:

• Highlighting areas of the discussion that may require fact-checking
• Commenting on any arguments that do not make sense in the context of the rest of the paper
• Correcting spelling, grammatical, and punctuation errors
• Pointing out any material or language that isn’t appropriate, for instance, the use of slang or derogatory terms
• Identifying areas where the writing is unclear
• Highlighting citation errors or a lack of appropriate citation
• Ensuring the paper is formatted in a professional and polished manner
• Pointing out problems, but not solving them

Essay editing or proofreading is cheating if the editor does any of the following:

• Performs any type of research on behalf of the student
• Rewrites sections of text because they are factually incorrect
• Answers the essay prompt on the student’s behalf
• Significantly alters the content or meaning of the text
• Changes the main ideas or arguments
• Adds citations and references
• Composes an analysis for the student
• Significantly restructures the whole essay

How did I approach each case, and what did I do?

Student #1. A careful reading of the text showed that the words used and the language style could be altered without altering the author’s meaning and without restructuring the text.

As it was a case of eliminating filler words, replacing academese with plain English, and using an active voice wherever the context allowed, I concluded that it was ethical for me to undertake the work requested.

The result was that my Plagium check showed that the content had a 0% probability of being plagiarised. I also ran the text through an online AI checker that reported the text to have been human-created.

Student #2. The draft of the 37,500-word article was presented to me with the intention that I should resolve the professor’s comments and suggested alterations, and then rewrite the document as required using a style and language that would pass a Turnitin test.

As is common in articles submitted for publication, there was a declaration that the essay was the work of the author.

Applying the above criteria, it was obvious that I would have to:

• Significantly alter the content; and
• Significantly restructure the essay.

These actions would assist academic fraud. Furthermore, if I did the above, the essay would not be entirely the author’s work, and he could not, therefore, declare that it was.

I declined the job.

What would you have done in each case?