Research article | Open Access
International Journal of Progressive Education 2026, Vol. 22(2) 9-22
“CheatGPT” or Learning Tool?: Unpacking Student Motivations and Policy Influence in the Age of Generative AI
pp. 9 - 22 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19533956
Publish Date: April 12, 2026 | Single/Total View: 0/0 | Single/Total Download: 0/0
Abstract
The rapid adoption of generative AI in academia forces a critical question. Is the technology a "CheatGPT" or a genuine learning tool? This mixed-methods study investigated the perceptions of Japanese university students in English writing courses (n1 = 99, n2 = 96) regarding AI usage by analyzing their motivations, rationale for restraint (ethics), and understanding of institutional policy. Findings indicate an overwhelming majority of participants reported instrumental use of AI but do not feel comfortable doing so. Many reported guilt, and roughly half reported the fear of self-sabotaging their learning skills. Moral ambiguity was common when students were questioned about AI, with participants giving various explanations of what constitutes cheating. The results highlight a strong student demand for clear guidance and suggest that teacher permission is a primary determinant of usage. The study concludes that the lack of universally agreed-upon ethical definitions poses a critical barrier to policy implementation, necessitating immediate, clear, and contextual guidance from instructors and institutions.
Keywords: Generative AI, Academic Integrity, Educational Technology, Plagiarism, Cheating
APA 7th edition
Price, G., & Sakellarios, M.D. (2026).
“CheatGPT” or Learning Tool?: Unpacking Student Motivations and Policy Influence in the Age of Generative AI
. International Journal of Progressive Education, 22(2), 9-22. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19533956 Harvard
Price, G. and Sakellarios, M. (2026).
“CheatGPT” or Learning Tool?: Unpacking Student Motivations and Policy Influence in the Age of Generative AI
. International Journal of Progressive Education, 22(2), pp. 9-22. Chicago 16th edition
Price, Gregory and Marc D. Sakellarios (2026). "
“CheatGPT” or Learning Tool?: Unpacking Student Motivations and Policy Influence in the Age of Generative AI
". International Journal of Progressive Education 22 (2):9-22. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19533956Abir, M. G. H., & Zhou, K. Z. (2025, August 1). Examining generative AI policies in Japanese universities: A qualitative perspective. Available at SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5374222
Carlson, G. D. (2021). Are You Honest? A Study of Self-Reported Academic Misconduct Among Japanese University English Language Learners. 大手前大学 IIE ジャーナル [Otemae University IIE Journal], 7, 7-19. https://otemae.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/2206
Cavazos, J. T., Hauck, K. A., Baskin, H. M., & Bain, C. M. (2024). ChatGPT goes to college: Exploring student perspectives on artificial intelligence in the classroom. Teaching of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241268829
Chan, C. K. Y. (2024). Students’ perceptions of ‘AI-giarism’: Investigating changes in understandings of academic misconduct. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13151-7
Coelho, P. S., & Esteves, S. P. (2007). The choice between a five-point and a ten-point scale in the framework of customer satisfaction measurement. International Journal of Market Research, 49(3), 313-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530704900305
Data Scientist Society. (2025, April 21). Data of Data Scientist シリーズ vol. 65「47%―大学生の生成AI利用率」 [Data of Data Scientist series vol. 65: 47%—University students’ generative AI usage rate]. DSS Journal. Retrieved September 7, 2025, from https://www.datascientist.or.jp/dssjournal/dssjournal-4013/
Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Dollinger, M., & Boud, D. (2024). Validity matters more than cheating. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(7), 1005-1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2386662
Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E., Shinohara, K., & Yasukawa, H. (1999). College cheating in Japan and the United States. Research in Higher Education, 40(3), 343-353. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018703217828
Firat, M. (2023). What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22
Golding, J. M., Lippert, A., Neuschatz, J. S., Salomon, I., & Burke, K. (2025). Generative AI and college students: Use and perceptions. Teaching of Psychology, 52(3), 369-380. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241280350
Graf, A. E. (2024). “You Do You”: Digital-Native College Students’ Perceptions of Cheating and Plagiarism [Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/you-do-digital-native-college-students/docview/2895144273/se-2
Hutton, P. A. (2006). Understanding student cheating and what educators can do about it. College Teaching, 54(1), 171–176. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.54.1.171-176
Keio University. (2023, July 2). Guideline for generative AI usage at Keio University. https://www.itc.keio.ac.jp/en/software_ai_guideline.html
Liu, D. (2005). Plagiarism in ESOL students: Is cultural conditioning truly the major culprit? ELT Journal, 59(3), 234–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci043
Luo, J. (2025). How does GenAI affect trust in teacher-student relationships? Insights from students’ assessment experiences. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(4), 991-1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2024.2341005
Mack, L., & Byanjankar, A. (2025). Understanding policy responses to generative AI in private higher education: Insights from Japan and the United States. Journal of Academic Ethics, 1, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09655-7
Mah, C., Walker, H., Phalen, L., Levine, S., Beck, S. W., & Pittman, J. (2024). Beyond CheatBots: Examining tensions in teachers’ and students’ perceptions of cheating and learning with ChatGPT. Education Sciences, 14(5), 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050500
McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327019EB1103_2
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2024). 2024 White Paper on Science, Technology, and Innovation. https://www.mext.go.jp/en/content/20240611-ope_dev03-000036407-1.pdf
Mok, J. (2024). Students' use of generative artificial intelligence (ChatGPT) at Rikkyo University. 外国語教育研究ジャーナル [Journal of Foreign Language Education Research], 5, 21–39. https://doi.org/10.14992/0002001290
National Federation of University Co-operative Associations. (2024, April 8). Half of Japanese university students have used generative AI. Nippon.com. https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h01946/
National Federation of University Co-operative Associations. (2025). Summary report of the 60th fact-finding survey on student life. https://www.univcoop.or.jp/press/life/report.html
Neff, J., Arciaga, K., & Burri, M. (2024a). EFL students' and teachers' perceptions of the ethical uses of AI tools. Technology in Language Teaching & Learning, 6(3), 1714-1714. https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v6n3.1714
Neff, J., Arciaga, K., & Burri, M. (2024b). The impact of EFL teachers’ demographic backgrounds on the perceptions of ethical AI use. PanSIG Journal, 10(1), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTPanSIGJ10.1-8
Ohmori, F., Saitō, J., Matsuba, R., & Kita, T. (2023, June 8). 大学生のChatGPT利用状況と能力形成への影響に関する調査結果（速報） [Survey results on university students' ChatGPT use and impact on skill formation (Preliminary report)]. DBER Center. https://dber.jp/chatgptsurvey/
Pearse, N. (2011). Deciding on the scale granularity of response categories of Likert type scales: the case of a 21-point scale. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 9(2), 159-171. https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejbrm/article/view/1278
Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(4), 317-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.004
Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing others’ words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201–230. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588141
Pew Research Center. (2025, October 15). How people around the world view AI. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2025/10/15/how-people-around-the-world-view-ai/
Price, G. (2024) Japanese University EFL Student Insights on the Emerging ChatGPT Phenomenon, International Journal of Education, Learning and Development, 12 (5), 83-100. https://doi.org/10.37745/ijeld.2013/vol12n583100
Price, G., & Sakellarios, M. (2023). The Effectiveness of Free Software for Detecting AI-Generated Writing. International Journal of Teaching, Learning and Education. 2 (6). 31-38. https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijtle.2.6.4
Rettinger, D. A., & Kramer, Y. (2009). Situational and personal causes of student cheating. Research in Higher Education, 50(3), 293–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9116-5
Rinnert, C., & Kobayashi, H. (2005). Borrowing words and ideas: Insights from Japanese L1 writers. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication (John Benjamins Publishing Co.), 15(1), https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.15.1.05rin
Sadoshima, S. (2014). アカデミックライティング教育と情報リテラシー: (情報を再定義) し意見を構築できる学生を育てる [Information literacy and academic writing education: Helping students to process information]. 情報の科学と技術 [Information Science and Technology], 64(1), 22–28. https://doi.org/10.18919/jkg.64.1_22
Saito, N. (2024). The comparative analysis of national policies for research and education regarding usage of generative AI in Japan, the USA and the UK. [Unpublished manuscript]. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/302516
Sowden, C. (2005). Plagiarism and the culture of multilingual students in higher education abroad. ELT Journal, 59(3), 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci042
Šupak Smolčić, V., & Bilić-Zulle, L. (2013). Patchwork plagiarism–a jigsaw of stolen puzzle pieces. Biochemia Medica, 23(1), 16-18. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2013.004
Teeter, J. (2014). Deconstructing attitudes towards plagiarism of Japanese undergraduates in EFL academic writing classes. English Language Teaching, 8(1), 95-109. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n1p95
University of Tokyo. (2023, April 3). About generative AI tools in classes: Policy on use of AI tools in classes. https://utelecon.adm.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/docs/ai-tools-in-classes/
University of Tsukuba. (2023, May 11). Basic policy on the use of generative AI at the University of Tsukuba. https://www.tsukuba.ac.jp/en/academics/g-document-fall/pdf/2024fall-generative-AI-en.pdf
Vandehey, M., Michael, A., Diekhoff, G., & LaBeff, E. (2007). College cheating: A twenty-year follow-up and the addition of an honor code. Journal of College Student Development, 48(4), 468–480. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0043
Welding, L. (2023, March 27). Half of college students say using AI on schoolwork is cheating or plagiarism. BestColleges. https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/college-students-ai-tools-survey/
Wheeler, G. (2009). Plagiarism in the Japanese universities: Truly a cultural matter? Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.09.004
Yokohama National University. (2023, June). Use of ChatGPT and other generative AI tools. https://www.ynu.ac.jp/hus/nyushi/30294/detail.html
Yu, H., Glanzer, P. L., & Johnson, B. (2017). Why students cheat: A conceptual framework of personal, contextual, and situational factors. In D. Velliaris (Ed.), Handbook of research on academic misconduct in higher education (pp. 35–59). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1610-1.ch002
