format essay muet 2022

MUET Writing Malaysia – Definitive Guide with Essay Example

MUET Essay Writing Test Guide with Example

MUET is a test that all Malaysian students must take in order to apply for their desired course. It consists of 3 parts: Language Proficiency, General Paper, and Subject Knowledge Test. The Language Proficiency section tests the student’s command of the English language through various writing tasks such as essay writing, letter-writing, and summarizing text. This blog post will aim to provide you with tips on how to score well in this section of MUET by providing an example of an essay topic along with guidelines on how it should be written.

What is MUET writing in Malaysia?

MUET is also known as the Malaysian University English Test seeks to measure the English proficiency among candidates who plan on pursuing tertiary studies at universities located within Malaysia.

The MUET is a test that tests the four language skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. While some people may be better at one or two than others; they’re all important to hone in order for anyone interested in pursuing an education around these topics.

The MUET writing test is challenging- students have to transfer information from a non-linear source and write an essay of at least 350 words on the topic given.

MUET Essay Task 1: Report writing (40 marks)

You have been given 40 minutes to complete the task.
Study and analyze the information.
Describe the information or the process in a report format
Write between 150-200 words

MUET Essay Task 2: Extended writing (60 marks)

The essay must not be less than 350 words
Given 50 minutes to complete the task
Your essay can be:

– Analytical- – Descriptive – Persuasive – Argumentative

Topics for MUET Essay Writing

The following topics are perfectly acceptable for a MUET essay, as all are general knowledge questions that every university or college student should know.

Why do people commit suicide for selfish reasons? Discuss
The most valuable thing in life is friendship do you agree?
Some people prefer street food others prefer homemade which one is the best to support your answer in 350 words
Education must be free for every child do you agree or not?
Impact of social media on people
Some people prefer small towns to live in others one prefer to live in a city why? Which one do you prefer?

MUET Essay Writing Format

MUET is a challenging exam because it includes writing within the Academic Writing Format. For many students, this format may be unfamiliar and difficult to understand or execute in their answers at test time so they don’t score well on that section of MUET.

This difficulty can come from being unaware of how academic writing differs from other forms such as creative or personal essays which are more common formats for essay questions outside of the MUET testing space.

1. Introduction paragraph:

Introduce your topic to the reader.

Use catchy lines, questions, brief definitions, etc.
Must have a thesis statement a statement which consists of the main big ideas
Never use: “research or study” use words like on the basics of my readings, in my opinion, as this is essay writing, not a research paper.
Never use: “ can be defined as” use words like “In my opinion, I believe that, etc.”

2. Body paragraph:

Body paragraph: must have 3 paragraphs.

State the main idea
Often written as the first sentence of each paragraph
Supporting details and ideas
Examples, elaborations, explanations,s, and descriptions can also be included
Must support the main idea discussed in this particular body/body paragraph
Use linkers, connectors, and transition words.

Conclusion paragraph:

Restate the main idea
Use words like hence, therefore, thus, as a result.
Write it like it is the last sentence of the paragraph.

3. Concluding paragraph:

Bring the ending of things that you have discussed earlier.
Restate your thesis statements.
The conclusion must have 4 sentences
You may suggest, give opinions or reaffirm your stand
Use words: To conclude, to summarize, as a conclusion, finally, lastly, eventually, to encapsulate.

Tips to write MUET Essay for Malaysian Students

The best way to write a MUET essay is to have a succinct thesis in the introduction and also be cognizant of transitions between one topic and another.

Moreover, it’s important to know your audience when you’re writing an essay for MUET. One key point which is usually overlooked by students is having knowledge about the specific subject they’re talking about.

Transfer information
Use good grammar
Carefully analyze the graphical information
Give your opinion
Think critically
If you’re aiming at scoring Band 5 or higher, then critical thinking is a must.
If your aim is to score Band 5 or higher on the exam, it’s time for some serious rigor and reflection.

Use these tools to help with critical thinking: Short term, mid-term and long term effects

Example: Alcohol
Short term: yellow teeth/bad breath
Mid-term: waste of money
Long term: Health problems such as cancer
Individual, society, and government
Individual: Set goals and prepare for change
Society: Must not encourage one to consume alcohol.
Government: Must stop fundraising

Types of MUET Essays

MUET essays are usually of the expository type, they can also be argumentative or persuasive.

While an essay with a descriptive header generally has a focus on what is being described.
An essay with a narrative header (or “story”) generally puts a priority on how something was done or what it felt like to do it and the completion
And an informative-explanatory (inform + explain) header offers treatment or analysis of existing data, facts, practices, etc.
Persuasive essay questions require you to take up a position on an issue and then persuade or convince the reader about your viewpoint based upon evidence. These can come in the form of anecdotes, facts, statistics etcetera
Expository Essays are different from other types of essays in that they don’t require any persuasion but instead simply look for evidence supporting or disproving what you have been told/asked about.

Importance of MUET essay

You will be required to take the MUET test if you are planning on pursuing your university degree at local public university.

However, note that this requirement is not compulsory for those who wish to pursue their education outside of these institutions and choose instead to study at private schools or international ones (MUET tests are only necessary when applying for scholarships).

Remember also, that different universities may have different English proficiency requirements so make sure you check what they need before sending off an application.

The grading system for MUET

When students get their MUET result, they’ll be able to see the mark for each paper and then an overall score. Band 1 is when the student will have to take two extra English courses during holiday time; a Band 3 or 4 means one course more than this. If you’re in bands 5 or 6- excellent! You don’t need any additional lessons over the summer holidays whatsoever.

MUET Essay writing Band 6- Very good user (Aggregated score: 260-300)

The speaker demonstrates a strong command of the language, and their fluency is unparalleled. They are highly expressive in everything they say, accurate with words that express both nuance and precision when needed most. The person’s understanding of context should not be questioned – it appears as if this individual functions flawlessly when interacting verbally or written textually via various languages.

MUET Essay writing Band 5- Good user (Aggregated score: 220-259)

Hire experts for muet test & essay writing.

Assignment writer Malaysia is staffed by a team of writers who are experts in the Marketing and business field, holding master’s degrees or PhDs. These professional homework writers can provide assistance with case study writing for your marketing projects as well as thesis support at an affordable price point.

If you are interested in getting the best Marketing Assignment Help, turn to Freelance assignment writers and get your top-tier help. Our Essay Writers Malaysia knows academic writing requirements inside out so they can provide research topics that meet any student’s needs.

Struggling to understand your assignment? Get the help you need from professionals. Collaborate with us and get the best assignments completed on time while still understanding everything.

Buy Custom Written Academic Papers From Malaysia Assignment Helpers

50000+ Orders Delivered

4.9/5 5 Star Rating

Confidential & Secure

Group Assignment Help

Online Exam -Test & Quiz

Cheapest Price Quote

Diploma & Certificate Levels

Semester & FYP Papers

Summative & Individual

GBA & Reflective

Last Minute Assistance

UP TO 15 % DISCOUNT

Instant Paper Writing Services by Native Malaysia Writers

Get Assistance for Assignments, online Exam, and Projects Writing

MUET Writing Malaysia – Definitive Guide with Essay Example

The Malaysian University English Test (MUET) is a normalized assessment that surveys the English language capability of Malaysian students. It is a pivotal necessity for admission into tertiary training establishments in Malaysia and is perceived by employers as a benchmark for English capability in the job market. The MUET Writing component holds significant weightage, as it evaluates the candidates’ ability to express ideas, organize thoughts, and communicate effectively in written form. This definitive guide aims to provide an in-depth understanding of the MUET Writing test format, scoring criteria, and tips for success. Furthermore, we will present a sample essay to illustrate the application of these guidelines.

Table of Contents

MUET Writing Test Format

The MUET Writing test consists of two tasks: Task A and Task B. Task A requires candidates to write an interpretive essay based on a set of input texts, while Task B assesses their ability to produce a discursive essay on a given topic. Each task has a specific time allocation:

Task A: Interpretive Essay

Time: 30 minutes

Word Limit: 150-200 words

Task B: Discursive Essay

Time: 60 minutes

Word Limit: 350-500 words

It is essential to manage your time wisely to complete both tasks within the allocated time frame.

Scoring Criteria

MUET Writing is scored based on four key areas:

Task Fulfillment

How well the candidate addresses the given task and demonstrates an understanding of the requirements.

Language Accuracy

The ability to use appropriate grammar, vocabulary, and sentence structures effectively.

Cohesion and Coherence

How well ideas are organized and connected, resulting in a logical and cohesive essay.

Appropriateness of Style

The candidate’s ability to adopt an appropriate tone, register, and style for the given task.

Every area is doled out a particular band score going from 0 to 6, and the last score is the normal of the four band scores. It is urgent to focus on every angle to maximize your score.

Tips for MUET Writing Success

Understand the Task Requirements

Carefully read the instructions and ensure you fully comprehend what is expected of you in each task.

Plan and Organize

Take a few minutes to plan your essay structure before writing. Create an outline with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.

Time Management

Allocate appropriate time for each task. Prioritize Task B since it carries more marks but ensure you complete Task A within the assigned time as well.

Language Use

Demonstrate a wide range of vocabulary, sentence structures, and grammar. Avoid repetitive language and aim for precision and clarity in your writing.

Use linking words and phrases to connect ideas and create a smooth flow. Check the logical progression of your arguments and ensure they support your thesis statement.

Introduction and Conclusion

Craft an engaging introduction that provides context and a clear thesis statement. Conclude your essay by summarizing your main points and offering a thoughtful closing statement.

Practice Writing

Regularly practice writing essays within the word limit to enhance your speed and proficiency. Seek feedback from teachers or peers to identify areas for improvement.

Sample Essay: Task B

Topic: “Social media has had a significant impact on interpersonal communication. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages.”

Essay Example

In today’s digital age, social media platforms have upset the manner in which we impart. While they offer a few advantages, there are likewise disadvantages to consider. This essay will investigate the disadvantages and burdens of social media’s effect on relational communication.

Body Paragraph 1

Benefits One of the essential benefits of social media is its capacity to interface with individuals across distances. Platforms like Facebook and Twitter empower people to keep in contact with loved ones, paying little heed to geological obstructions. Moreover, Assignment Help Malaysia gives a platform for people to offer their viewpoints, encouraging sound discussions and widening points of view.

Body Paragraph 2

Disadvantages Then again, social media can adversely affect relational correspondence. Unreasonable dependence on digital platforms can prompt a decrease in eye-to-eye communication, lessening the profundity of personal connections. In addition, the steady openness to arranged pictures and romanticized adaptations of individuals’ lives on platforms like Instagram can prompt insecurities and low confidence.

social media’s effect on relational correspondence is a situation with two sides. While it permits us to interface and draw in with others all the more effectively, it can likewise block significant, up close, and personal cooperation. In this manner, it is fundamental to find some kind of strike between the advantages and downsides of social media to guarantee its positive impact on our lives.

MUET Report: Assessing English Language Proficiency among Malaysian Students

The Malaysian University English Test (MUET) plays a vital role in assessing the English language proficiency of Malaysian students. This report aims to analyze MUET performance among students in Malaysia and Assignment Help provide recommendations for enhancing English language proficiency. By examining test scores, identifying trends, exploring challenges, and proposing strategies, this report aims to contribute to the improvement of English language education in Malaysia.

MUET Speaking Topics

Here are some MUET Speaking topics that are commonly used in the test:

Technology and its Impact on Society
Environmental Issues and Conservation
Education System Reforms
Youth Empowerment and Volunteerism
Globalization and Its Effects on Culture
Health and Fitness in Modern Society
Social Media and Its Influence on Relationships
Economic Development and Income Inequality
Tourism and Its Impact on Local Communities
The Role of Government in Promoting Entrepreneurship

These topics cover a scope of contemporary issues that expect the possibility to offer their viewpoints, take part in conversations, and present contentions. It is essential to remain refreshed on current undertakings and have a balanced comprehension of every point.

MUET Preparation and Essay Writing

If you’re looking to hire experts for both MUET test preparation and essay writing assistance, here are some steps you can follow:

Determine Your Needs

Assess whether you need assistance with overall test preparation or specific sections such as writing, speaking, listening, or reading. Additionally, consider if you require help specifically with essay writing or need a comprehensive approach.

Research Online Tutoring Platforms

Explore reputable online tutoring platforms that offer expert assistance in language proficiency exams like MUET. Platforms like Preply, iTalki, Verbling, and Tutor.com provide a wide range of qualified tutors who specialize in language exams. You can filter tutors based on their expertise in essay writing and test preparation.

Check Tutors’ Profiles

Review the profiles of potential tutors. Look for individuals with experience teaching or tutoring MUET and a demonstrated proficiency in essay writing. Pay attention to their qualifications, educational background, teaching style, and reviews from previous students to assess their suitability.

Schedule Consultations

Arrange consultations or trial sessions with shortlisted tutors. Use this opportunity to discuss your needs, goals, and expectations. Inquire about their approach to essay writing, test preparation strategies, and their ability to tailor their guidance to your specific requirements.

Seek Writing Assistance

If you specifically require essay writing support, consider engaging an expert academic writer or editor. Platforms like Upwork, Freelancer, or Essay Writing Services provide access to professional writers with expertise in various subjects, including essay writing. Review their profiles, portfolios, and client feedback to ensure their proficiency.

Discuss Expectations and Goals

Clearly communicate your expectations, goals, and areas of focus to the tutors or writers. Make sure they understand your requirements for MUET test preparation and essay writing. Provide any specific essay prompts or topics you need assistance with, and discuss the desired outcome for your essays.

Collaboration and Practice

Collaborate with the tutors or writers to create a study plan and a schedule that incorporates both test preparation and essay writing. Regularly practice writing essays under their guidance and utilize their feedback to improve your writing skills. Additionally, work with them to develop effective strategies for the different sections of the MUET test.

MUET Group Discussion

MUET (Malaysian University English Test) includes a Group Discussion component, which assesses your ability to engage in a discussion and express your ideas effectively in English. Here are some tips to excel in the MUET Group Discussion:

Understand the Format:

Familiarize yourself with the format and requirements of the MUET Group Discussion. Typically, a group of candidates will be given a topic and asked to discuss it for a specific duration. You will be assessed based on your ability to communicate fluently, express opinions, listen to others, and collaborate in a group setting.

Improve English Language Skills

Upgrade your English language abilities by perusing generally, working on talking and tuning in, and extending your jargon. Focus on punctuation, sentence construction, and articulation.

Practice Active Listening

During the discussion, actively listen to what others are saying. Show interest, maintain eye contact, and respond appropriately. Engage in the conversation by building upon others’ points, asking relevant questions, and seeking clarification when needed.

Respect Others’ Views

Show respect for the opinions of other participants, even if you disagree. Be open-minded and consider different perspectives. Practice active and respectful listening by acknowledging others’ points and responding constructively.

Manage Time Effectively

Time management is crucial in Group Discussions. Keep track of the time allotted for the discussion and ensure that all participants have a chance to contribute. If the discussion gets off track, steer it back to the main topic and encourage others to stay focused.

Practice with Mock Group Discussions

Organize practice sessions with classmates or friends. Choose relevant topics, set time limits, and simulate the actual MUET Group Discussion. Practice maintaining a balance between listening and speaking, and work on improving your communication skills within a group setting.

The MUET Writing component is an important part of the Malaysian University English Test that evaluates candidates’ ability to express ideas and communicate effectively in written form. This definitive guide has provided an overview of the test format, scoring criteria, and valuable tips for success. Additionally, a sample essay exemplified the application of these guidelines. To excel in MUET Writing, it is crucial to understand the task requirements, plan and organize your essays, manage time effectively, utilize language accurately, ensure cohesion and coherence, and practice regularly. By following these recommendations, you can enhance your performance and achieve success in the MUET Writing test.

MUET essay writing tips

To achieve success in the MUET writing test you need to understand the tasks, questions and answer techniques. We take you through how to approach these for the best results with top tips.

The best preparation for any test is practice. The same is true for the MUET writing test, with two questions designed to test your written English language ability. It’s a good idea for the MUET writing test to practice both of these questions and the different components they are made up of. We guide you through what kind of questions you can expect to see in the MUET writing test, how to answer them and some tips for this section of the MUET exam.

*You can get more detailed information and tips for the MUET writing test with our most recent guide.

MUET essay writing question one example

For the MUET writing test question one, you are required to create and write a reply to a letter or email. This will need to be at least 100 words long for the task and should make use of all of the information in the email or letter provided. Let’s take a closer look at an example:

Your classmate, Elliott, was unable to visit your English teacher who was injured because he was ill. Read the email from him asking about the visit that he had missed.

From: Elliott

Subject: How is Mrs. Alina doing?

How are you? How is Mrs.Alina doing since her injury? I am really sad that I could not join all of you to visit her as I was down with a fever and cough.

I heard that Mrs. Alina hurt he arm quite seriously. Am I right? How did it happen?

Please update me on her situation and when she will be back at school.

I hope I can visit her soon. Would you like to come with me then?

Write soon.

When approaching this task you can break down the email into distinct sections so that you can reply effectively. You can use the paragraph structure for this purpose. For example:

Let Elliott know how you are and explain what the current situation with Mrs. Alina is.

Describe what happened to Mrs. Alina and how severe the accident was.

Give an update on when Mrs. Alina will be returning to school.

Answer Eliott on whether you would like to accompany him on a visit to Mrs. Alina.

Here is a basic model answer reply for question one:

To: Elliott

RE: Update on Mrs. Alina

I am well thank you. I hope you are feeling better and recovered from your fever and cough. Mrs. Alina was in the emergency ward for a few hours and she was discharged on the same day. She has been home resting since.

Yes, you are right. Mrs. Alina injured her arm quite seriously. She was cooking in the kitchen when she slipped and fell. It was quite a bad fall and he husband had to take her to hospital.

She will be on best rest for about two weeks and should be back in school immediately after. She hopes not to be away for too long as our exams are drawing near.

Yes, most definitely, I will visit her with you, when you are ready. That would really cheer her up.

In the meantime, take care and see you soon.

Tips for MUET essay writing question one

Our top tips for success in the MUET writing test question one are:

Stick to the allocated time for the question which is about 25 minutes.

Read the instructions and questions carefully.

Make notes and highlight keywords and phrases.

Practice writing in a shorter format and more concisely.

Practice identifying questions and ideas.

Know the level of English is required for good marks. In this case, a CEFR level ranging between a minimum of A2 (elementary) to C1 (advanced).

MUET essay writing question two example

For the MUET writing test question two, you are required to write a short essay based on a statement or question that is provided. This should be 250 words or more and you need to be able to express an opinion, form an argument and provide justification. Your MUET essay should relate directly to the statement or question you have been asked, so make sure to stay on topic.

We can now turn our attention to the type of question you may come across for the MUET writing test part two.

You attended a talk by a youth speaker. During the talk, the speaker suggests that to reduce crime in the long term, courts should significantly reduce prison sentences and focus on education and community work to help criminals not re-offend. Prison is not a cure for crime

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the opinion?

Remember that for your MUET essay you should have an introduction, followed by three points each a paragraph long and then a conclusion. Let’s take a look at a possible introductory paragraph for this task.

Everyone thinks that reducing our crime rate is very important. Some people think that reducing prison sentences and replacing this with education and community work is a solution instead. On the other hand, there are those who believe that keeping prison sentences long is still the most suitable way to deal with crime. In my opinion, the method chosen would depend on the type and seriousness of the crime committed.

Ensure that when you are writing your subsequent paragraphs you make your point, give an explanation and then an example to back this up. Let’s look at a possible example:

Some think that an individual with a higher level of knowledge and education are less likely to commit a crime. It has been proven that crime occurs less often in countries with higher levels of education. In addition, community service is another great way of preventing reoffence. For example, in Singapore, when an offender is caught littering. They are sentenced to 100 hours of community service picking up litter.

Tips for MUET essay writing question two

Read the question carefully to see what type of essay you will write, discursive, argumentative or descriptive.

Test yourself under pressure by sticking to a time limit. In the exam, you will only have 50 minutes for this task.

Make lists of vocabulary and words while studying so that you can use these effectively when writing.

Try to engage in Engish discussions and talks. You can even watch discussions online to help. This can help identify opinions and arguments.

Sketch out a plan for your MUET essay with the main ideas and structure. This will help when you write.

If you are getting ready to take the MUET exam soon you will find our guides to the MUET speaking , reading and listening tests useful.

'Study in Malaysia' eBook

Enjoy what you’ve read? We’ve condensed the above popular topics about studying in Malaysia into one handy digital book.

Search for a course

3 Fields to study in Malaysia

The steady, robust economy of Malaysia has seen the growth of many industries and increased interest in a number of study fields. Whilst Malaysian universities are globally ranked and offer students high-calibre education, it is within these fields that they’re offered unique perspectives and insight in growing international fields. Thinking of studying abroad in Malaysia? Let our overview of three key fields you should consider studying help outline your

Get in touch

Bumi Gemilang

Blog Pendidikan dan Informasi

MUET Writing : Sample Essays (Malaysian University English Test)

MUET Writing : Sample Essays (Malaysian University English Test) .

Untuk Rujukan. KPM (Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia). Semoga Perkongsian informasi, maklumat, makluman, pemberitahuan, laman web, sesawang, pautan, portal rasmi, panduan, bahan rujukan, bahan pembelajaran dan pengajaran, sumber rujukan dalam post di blog Bumi Gemilang berguna dan dapat membantu para pengguna. 0820

Introduction To MUET (New Format 2021) (CEFR-Aligned) (1-28)
Success in MUET (CEFF-Aligned) (1-50) (PL) [2]
Master Class MUET (CEFR-Aligned) (1-50) (SAS) [2]
Model Test Paper MUET (CEFR-Aligned) (1-32) (PL) [2]
Get Ahead in MUET (CEFR-Aligned) (1-38) (PS) [2]
MUET My Way (CEFR-Aligned) (1-35) (PL) [2]
Score in MUET (CEFR-Aligned) (1-22) (IB) [2]
MUET My Way (CEFR-Aligned) (1-41) (PL) [1]

……………………………………………………………..

Model Answer Essay (Band 5) and Feedback
MUET Essay Guide
Sample MUET Writing Scripts
MUET – Sample Essays
Teknik Menjawab – Guidelines For MUET Writing
Linkers in MUET
Writing About A Bar Chart – Report
Writing About Survey Results – Report
MUET Writing Question 1
MUET Writing – Sample
MUET Essay Sample
MUET Writing Sample
MUET Writing Sample Answer .
MUET Tips : Writing, Speaking, Reading & Listening

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

Doa-Doa Amalan Menghadapi Ujian dan Peperiksaan + Amalan Pelajar Cemerlang (PU)

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

18 Tips, Teknik dan Kaedah Belajar Secara Efektif

Untuk mendapatkan segala Maklumat Terkini atau Updates blog Bumi Gemilang :

(1) Follow / Like Bumi Gemilang Facebook Page .

https://www.facebook.com/BumiGemilang2

(2) Join / Sertai 2 Telegram Groups blog Bumi Gemilang .

Join / Sertai 2 Telegram Groups To Follow Blog Bumi Gemilang

(3) Follow Twitter blog Bumi Gemilang .

https://twitter.com/BumiGemilang

………………………………………………………………………………….

Terima Kasih kerana membaca post ini.

…………………………………………………………………………………

Please Share This Post :

2 thoughts on “muet writing : sample essays (malaysian university english test)”.

Bumi Gemilang tak pernah mengecewakan. Terima kasih! 😀

Write a Comment Cancel reply

★all are equal before the law★

MUET Writing 101: How to Tackle Email Writing Question

Addressing an email appropriately can pose a challenge for students. The question arises: should one merely answer the provided questions, or is it advisable to include additional information? What are your thoughts on this dilemma?

When tasked with writing a minimum of 100 words, what should we include? What do we aim to communicate?

As a starting point, what steps can we take?

To begin with, let’s establish the foundational steps…

Step 1: Familiarize yourself with the task.

How? Examine the email (stimulus) and pinpoint the following:

a. Recognize the keyword(s) in the question or instruction. b. Who is the sender of the email? c. Who is the intended recipient of the email? d. What is the primary subject matter of the email?

Formal or casual language?

In essence, the keywords and language style in the stimulus will indicate the register students should adopt when composing their email replies.

STOP RIGHT THERE! Need to know how to reply a letter for MUET question? Click https://ezuddin.com/2024/05/mastering-the-art-of-reply-why-reply-letters-matter-in-the-muet-exam/

Ok. Moving ON!!!!!!…

This is the example of the email question.

Your colleague, Rita, was absent from work because she had to attend her sister’s wedding. Read the email from her asking about the Innovative Writing Convention that she missed.

Using all the notes given, write a reply of at least 100 words in an appropriate style .

Step 2: Incorporate all the notes, keywords, and details from the email into your response.

Now, carefully review the instructions and the email to identify the specific notes and keywords to utilize when drafting your email reply. Highlight or underline them as you read through each paragraph.

Your colleague, Rita, was absent from work because she had to attend her sister’s wedding. Read the email from her asking about the Innovative Writing Convention that she missed.

What is our next course of action?

Perhaps this will aid in clarifying the writing process.

After identifying the notes or key ideas ,observe the possible response (refer no 1, 2, 3 & 4).

“Using all the notes given, write a reply of at least 100 words in an appropriate style .”

Based on the information above, here’s what you should consider: –

Begin your email with a proper salutation , such as “Hi John” or “Hello buddy.”
Start by identifying the key points or “ notes ” within the instructions and each paragraph. You might underline these for clarity.
Once you’ve highlighted the notes, craft a response for each paragraph, ensuring that you address the specific points mentioned. It’s crucial to i nclude relevant keywords from the instructions and elaborate on them in your response.
When composing your replies, make sure to “ AGREE ” with any questions posed. For instance, (point no 2) if asked, “Did you join…?” your response should affirmatively state “Yes” before providing further details. Similarly, for point no 3 “Was it interesting?” respond positively and expand upon your answer.
Given the email format, you have the flexibility to use an informal or casual language style in your responses.

STEP 3: Write the response

As always, when we are set to write the response, we should write in paragraphs. We could refer to the each of the notes above to write each of the paragraphs.

Sample responses

Note 1 (for paragraph 1)

The convention was indeed a great one! A lot of audience were there and they loved it.

Note 2 (for paragraph 2)

Yes it was interesting even though I was expecting rather new ideas from the presenter. Nonetheless, a few participants were chosen to give a highlight on the topic for a particular session and it was amazing to see the outcome. Our officemate, Mr Zooki, was in the limelight at that time. He even mentioned some quotes in British accent which to me is rather funny since he is the serious type in the office.

Note 3 (for paragraph 3)

Well, it was interesting and, actually one of the main ideas in the writing activities as well. I would say, we had different perspective about property investment though it was not part of the main purpose of this convention. But, surprisingly, his ideas on how to use other people’s money and increase your asset is worth to try for people like us.

Note 4 (for paragraph 4)

Yes, I would love to. Let me check my schedules first because I have tonnes of paperwork nearing to that occasion. I need to re-organize the workload and I will let you know as soon as possible.

So, the email would look like this.

Alright, that’s all for now. Here are some tips to keep in mind:

When responding to inquiries about a previous event, ensure your reply includes precise details such as the venue, date, organizer, and other relevant information mentioned in the email.
If you need to describe the event, employ appropriate adjectives and sensory details. Consider what you heard, saw, or felt during the event to enhance your description.
Use suitable expressions to convey various purposes, such as expressing preferences, reactions, disagreements, or declining requests.
Aim to provide detailed information by elaborating on your main points. This “advance mode” of communication can offer a more comprehensive understanding of your response.

Ok. Goodluck and Adieu……

Again. Need to know how to reply a letter? Click https://ezuddin.com/2024/05/mastering-the-art-of-reply-why-reply-letters-matter-in-the-muet-exam/

Oh BTW. If you need more samples and exercises, you may get this handy book by clicking the image below.

12 Replies to “MUET Writing 101: How to Tackle Email Writing Question”

why aren’t you coming back? its 2021

I am back 🙂

Thank youuuu ,I really love ittt

Hi Ezuddin, Thanks for sharing your notes here. I am preparing my son to take MUET this year (he just finished his form 5/SPM) and I find your site to be very helpful. I can’t thank you enough. Permit me to use your samples in slides, acknowledging you and the source, of course. Thanks once again! (From Veronica: A teacher-mom)

Hi madam, sure. Go ahead. ?

TQVM for sharing the tips how to write an email. May I use your notes for my students,

no biggie. Go ahead.

hi I have a question, so to write the response do we need to also write the from : Jimmy, subject : innovative or we can just straight away write the first paragraph?

follow the format. And the answer is Yes.

Pingback: Mastering the Art of Reply: Why Reply Letters Matter in the MUET Exam -

Comments are closed.

A blogspot to offer ideas & support especially for the writing of MUET Task 2 essay (Extended Writing); & also for the teaching of English for MUET (if the mood appears!)

Sunday 17 July 2022

Muet session 2/2022 - 800/4 writing task 2 (extended writing) - "lack of appreciation for our culture.." -my take..

REMINDER:

PLEASE DO NOT PLAGIARISE THIS ESSAY.

You attended a talk at school in conjunction with Malaysia's Independence Day. During the talk, the guest speaker made the following statement:

"The lack of appreciation for our culture has caused Malaysians to lose their true identity.”

Write an essay expressing your opinion on the statement. Write at least 250 words. [60]

--&&&---

Culture is among one of the important aspects of our life. Culture is said to have the ability to help mould our true identities. Yet, is it true that the lack of appreciation for our culture has made Malaysians to lose their true identity? I agree with the statement as the Malaysian multiracial culture is diminishing, Malaysians are embracing an international culture and a true Malaysian identity has never existed.

First and foremost, the Malaysian multiracial culture is diminishing and at a fast rate too. Malaysia has been known as a multiracial and multicultural country for centuries. Its people – namely the Malays, Chinese, Indians and several other indigenuous races like the Ibans – have been sharing and co-existing in this small, prosperous country for so long. All of these people have been mixing with each other, respecting one anothers’ beliefs and celebrating everyone’s different festivals perhaps since Independence was declared in 1957. This is the true multicultural and multiracial Malaysia. Yet, with the advancement of technology, this culture of Malaysia is diminishing at a very fast rate. The technological advancement, which led to the creation of non-face-to-face communication applications such as WhatsApp, Skype, Face Time, video calls and emails brought about less connections and communications in the real world, with real people. Many of us are opting for this kind of communication and interaction, due to its simplicity and time saving traits. Subsequently, there is less of mixing, socialising and interacting with the general Malaysian public of different backgrounds, ethnicities, cultures and beliefs; causing a lack of understanding, appreciation and respect for other Malaysians and ultimately the multicultural, multiracial Malaysia. Many of us now tend to respect only our own race, culture and belief and could be said to have developed a dislike and hatred towards cultures and beliefs that are different from ours. Following this position and situation, the appreciation for our multicultural and multiracial Malaysian culture is slowly being eroded; resulting in each Malaysian to also slowly lose connection with his own country, yet more connected to his historical country of origin. For example, some Malays of Middle Eastern descent are now looking back to Middle East for a cultural connection. Some even start giving their children Middle Eastern names, using more of some Arabic words at home; and reviving, cooking and serving recipes from “back home”. They sometimes often feel proud of and boast of their heritage instead of being Malaysians. In this way, Malaysians could lose their identity as citizens of Malaysia, feeling more connected to their original countries, history, racial as well as cultural backgrounds; and hence would prefer this identity more rather than as Malaysians. Thus, it appears true to say that the lack of appreciation for our culture due to the appraisal for one’s own culture has made Malaysians to lose their true identity.

Next, Malaysians are embracing the international identity. The world is now a global village, thanks to the process of globalisation. Far and remote areas are joining the united “big world” to become a complete federation of the countries of the world. Perhaps, in a few years to come, there will be no country known according to its original name as the world strengthens its unity and would only be known by one-yet-representing-all name. As this wave of "global identity" extends its fingers to every nook and corner of the world, Malaysia is not spared. Many of our young people are embracing the international look, style, lifestyles and even names. To hear Malaysians being addressed using Western or Korean names is not strange anymore now. Businesses also are metamorphosing into a “global” icon or image, leading to us feeling like we are in a foreign business area rather than in Malaysia. Names that resemble international places such as Farenheit88, Design Village, Crescent Dew or Starhill Gallery are common in Malaysia now. Therefore, as Malaysians look outwards to foreign countries in their vision to be part of the global village, the absorption of the foreign cultures and customs are inevitable. More and more Malaysians are claiming that they are part of the world community and thus, are more appreciative of the world or global culture than of their original country. We could see this when Malaysians are found to be quicker to celebrate international festivals like Bon Odori or Songkran, joining in the festivities rather than the Thaipusam congregation or the Penang International Boat Race. Some Malaysians are even integrating this new culture into their personal lives by opting for “international” names like Mikhail, Anastasia or Aidan – names that are not nor do not sound Malaysian. As they embrace the identity of world citizen, celebrating and appreciating perhaps all cultures and their festivals, inevitably the appreciation of our own culture would be less; and as they label or claim themselves more as the citizens of the world or the people of the global village, they would lose their identity as Malaysians. It is in this way that the given statement is found true, and so it could be said that the Malaysian identity is lost due to the lack of appreciation for our culture and the growth of appreciation for the world culture.

Finally, a true Malaysian identity has never existed. Being multiracial and multicultural since its inception in 1957, and after its re-birth in 1963, Malaysia has always been accepted as represented by its three main races namely the Malays, Chinese and Indians. There just could not be one race representing this country without the other two. As so, there has never been one single identity for the citizens of Malaysia. If ever the name “Malaysia” is spoken whether in a local or international platform, these three races or ethnicities would automatically come into mind. In terms of food and festivals, it is those of these three races that are being highlighted, promoted and accepted as representative of Malaysia, like Hari Raya, Chinese New Year and Deepavali and food such as Nasi Lemak, Mooncakes and Thosai. Never has there been one single cultural festival or one same traditional food for all Malaysians to associate with. Due to this emphasis on the main three races of Malaysia, their food and festivals, one true single identity of Malaysians has never existed. As a result of this, citizens of Malaysia frequently celebrate these festivals and appreciate the corresponding cultures separately according to their ethnicities, religious beliefs and connections to the respective racial groups. In other words, as an example, only the Muslims and Malays would celebrate Hari Raya with their extended or nuclear families; and likewise for the other races. Malaysia has no festival which every Malaysian would celebrate together as a way to relish its culture and heritage like the Thanksgiving Day in the USA. Such is the situation, Malaysian’s identity could be said as always “fragmented”. Malaysians would mainly associate themselves to these three main races or to their own racial and cultural background should they not belong to one of these groups. When there is no single identity of Malaysians, there is also no single culture of Malaysia. Almost everyone is Malaysia is just celebrating their own cultural heritage but renaming it as the Malaysian culture. Ultimately, the actual Malaysian culture which consists of that of the three main races lacks appreciation and Malaysians are left without one single identity that everyone could feel belonged to. Thus, as explained here, Malaysians lose their true identity due to the lack of appreciation for our culture is undeniable due to the inexistence of a single true identity for Malaysians and of course, the inexistence of a single culture for Malaysia and the appreciation for it.

In a nutshell, the claim that the lack of appreciation for our culture has caused Malaysians to lose their true identity has been proven true due to reasons such as Malaysia’s multiracial culture is diminishing fast, Malaysians are embracing the international culture and identity; and there has never been one single culture and identity for Malaysia and Malaysians. It is hoped that despite their differences, Malaysians would always find one single cause that would unite all of them regardless of their cultural and historical heritage, the importance of which has been implied by the late Kofi Annan, “We may have different religions, different languages, different coloured skin, but we belong to one human race.”

---&&&---

A Personal Comment : I find this question rather tough, being a Muet teacher myself. I wrote this essay in about 3 days. I wonder how the candidates could or would do it in just 50 minutes. Furthermore, this question requires vast knowledge on the aspects of "identity", "Malaysia and Malaysian identity" and also those of other countries as well in order to provide comparison, etc. To candidates, I hope you realise the need to be knowledgable in order to keep up with the difficulty level of this task - MuetMzsa

2 comments:

This comment has been removed by the author.

Hi, is it ok if I use the article for annotation assignment ?

MUET my way...

Sunday, july 24, 2022.

Hello New MUET Batch of 2022/23 Students

Hi to both teachers and students of MUET..

As a new academic year dawns, we try to brush ourselves up and figure out what we should be doing whether it is to be a better teacher or a student.

Here's a things-to-do list.

A) Students:

1. Buy my MUETMYWAY Textbook published by Pelangi.

2. Complete the grammar module in the first chapter of the book. The first part analyses your grammar competency and fossilised errors. Then it allows you to fix your errors step by step. The last section lets you see how the formulas are used in actual writing and how to edit by yourselves. I guarantee you that this is the most important skill that will push you up a band or two. It is what differentiates a band 3 from bands 4 & 5. The new book will have sentence writing skills section.. I put so much effort into this because writing good grammatically good sentences brings home the message accurately and succinctly.

3. Next, use various highlighters and highlight all the phrases in the vocab section that you have never heard of before, and will consciously use in the near future for all 4 skills. To build your vocab, you need to have more low frequency words .. this means word level, then phrases level, sentence and paragraph level.. add proverbs and sayings.. and tune up your critical thinking. The new book will have additional vocab including current issues and main concepts that F6 students need to master in order to write or speak with flair. You need to cross reference with the dictionary or Google or Wikipedia.. for example, if you don't know what is euthanasia... or if you cannot give a single reason why prostitution should be legalised, then you definitely have a lot of surfing and reading up to do. Remember, the more you read, the more you internalise good quality vocab. The revised textbook (2022 version) will also have a list of most commonly mispronounced words. Use google to click on the audio icon to hear the correct pronunciation. Do you know the real pronunciation for 'tuition'? I bet you will get it 99.9% wrong.

4. Go through all the notes in the 4 chapters on Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing. I have put my heart and soul into all the notes especially on the speaking and writing chapters where students can learn how to construct a great academic essay.. Learn about hooks, stands, thesis statements, topic sentences, concluding sentences and the 3Rs in conclusions: Recap, Reiterate, Recommend.

5. Try out the Model test twice. The first time do it exam style. Time yourself for your speaking responses, 2 mins for the individual speech. Cross check your points with the suggested answers. Try out the group discussion with some friends, if they don't mind helping. Use the QR codes to download the listening tracks and answer within the timeframe given. Time yourself too for the Reading and Writing sections. Check answers. Then after a month, do the same test all over again and see if you have higher marks. Logically it should be higher, of course!

6. You can then try out the Model Test Book I published, also with Pelangi. Same style.. 1st time exam style, 2nd try with reference to dictionaries, Google n etc. Actually there are two books, 1st set published in 2020/21 and new out is out 2022.. in total you have 8 model tests to drill yourselves with.

7. You can then send me sample essays for me to mark or sample videos of individual presentations that you self-recorded. I charge RM10 per essay/video.. email to [email protected]. You can BOOST me AFTER I send you my feedback. :)

B) Teachers

1. Follow steps 1-7 from the point of view of a teacher. I have expressed step by step everything that needs to be covered in the textbook.. Fix their grammar first, then fix their vocab, move on to fix each of the 4 skills then drill with model tests. You may email me your queries on how to be a better teacher. And you may look for the MUET Teachers Telegram group but you will need to show the admins your timetable to prove you really are a MUET teacher. Once in the group you will have access to lively discussions and the official MUET Repository. Here you will find past exam papers, more worksheets, important documents like official MPM MUET downloadable materials, suggested Schemes of Work.. etc. This is the best MUET support group in Malaysia.

2. Read up on the last chapter of the MUETMYWAY textbook. I wrote a whole chapter outlining teaching skills and ideas... all the techniques are beneficial to both new and seasoned teachers. Seasoned teachers may not be receptive to my 'spin' on teaching MUET as it involves a lot of Project Based Learning and hands-on experiential learning.. bottom up is better than top down approach. Again, if you have questions, and need teaching guidance, feel free to email me at [email protected] and we can also chat on Whatsapp.

I never meant to fall into the business of selling books. The opportunities presented itself. Maybe this is the best way that God has planned for me to share my knowledge and help my brethren. Together we are brothers and sisters in the pursuit of knowledge and life long learning. Huiyoooo!

Friday, July 15, 2022

Suggested Answers MUET Session 2, 2022

Bah.. I'm sure you're dying to know. Without further ado, here are my answers. Feel free to discuss politely in the comments. Rude ones will be deleted. You may debate til the cows come home but I will stick to these answers.

MUET S2 2022

Remember these are NOT official MPM answers.

Post in the comments what u got. Here is a prediction of ur band.

X times 7.5

For instance,

if u got 25 over 40, do the math for 25 x 7.5 =

That makes u a Band 3.5 for Reading. Get it?

TQ for Being Visitor No:

Blog archive.

► June (1)
► April (1)
► November (1)
► July (2)
► January (4)
► January (2)
► October (1)
► August (1)
► July (1)
► May (1)
► April (2)
► March (1)
► February (2)
► January (1)
► December (2)
► February (1)
► October (4)
► September (1)
► May (3)
► August (2)
► March (2)
► May (2)
► November (5)
► June (2)
► November (3)
► October (3)
► July (4)
► March (3)
► December (1)
► March (7)
► September (3)
► July (6)
► March (4)
► January (8)
► November (7)
► October (7)
► September (4)
► April (9)
► March (8)
► February (3)
► January (3)
► November (6)
► August (5)
► July (5)
► April (6)
► August (4)

MUET NEW FORMAT

Tuesday, august 23, 2022, introduction to muet writing.

MUET Paper 4: Writing (800/4)

-T o assess the ability of test takers to communicate in writing in the context of higher education, covering both more formal and less formal writing genres

MUET Writing Test Specification

Max score: 90 marks

Duration: 75 minutes

Number of tasks: 2

Number of questions: 2

Task format

Task 1: Guided Writing (at least 100 words)

Task 2: Extended Writing (at least 250 words)

Language functions

• Giving precise information

• Describing experiences, feelings and events

• Providing advice, reasons and opinions

MUET Writing Test Structure

Task 1: Guided Writing

Stimulus: Letter or email (100−135 words) Each note is no longer than 4 words.

Response: Letter or email of at least 100 words

Time allowed: 25 minutes

Text type: -Email

-Letter ( Formal letter / Informal letter)

Task 2: Extended Writing

Stimulus: Statement setting out an idea or a problem in 40−80 words

Response: Essay (discursive, argumentative, or a problem-solution) of at least 250 words

Time allowed: 50 minutes

Text type: -Discursive Essay

-Argumentative Essay

-Problem Solution Essay

Monday, August 22, 2022

Introduction to muet reading.

Objective of the MUET Reading test:

To assess the ability of test takers to understand reading texts in the higher education context, covering both more formal and less formal text types.

MUET Reading Test Specification

Number of texts: 10

Number of parts: 7

Number of questions: 40

Question types: MCQ

Possible genres

MUET Reading Test Structure

Part 1 text length: three short texts of the same text type, thematically linked, amounting to a total of 100 to 150 words question type: multiple matching (three texts preceded by 4 multiple matching questions) number of questions: 4 part 2 and 3 text length: two texts each of 300 to 450 words question type: mcqs - 3 options number of questions: 10 part 4 text length: two independent texts based on the same theme (not necessarily of the same text type) amounting to a total of 700 to 800 words question type: two mcqs based on text 1, two mcqs based on text 2, and two mcqs comparing the two texts (3 options) number of questions: 6 part 5 text length: one text of 500 to 600 words question type: a gapped text with 6 missing sentences (7 options) number of questions: 6 part 6 and 7 text length: two texts of 700 to 900 words each question type: mcqs - 4 options number of questions: 14, introduction to muet speaking.

MUET Paper 2: Speaking (800/2)

-To assess the ability of test takers to give an oral presentation of ideas individually

-To interact in small groups in both more formal and less formal academic contexts.

MUET Speaking Test Specification

Duration: Approximately 30 minutes

Number of Part: 2 Parts

Part 1: Individual Presentation

Part 2: Group Discussion

MUET Speaking Test Structure

Part 1 (Individual Presentation)

Task Type: Individual presentation based on a written prompt

-2 minutes to prepare

-2 minutes to present

Language Functions

Each task should elicit some of the following functions:

• expressing opinions

• giving reasons

• elaborating

• justifying

• summarising

• concluding

Part 2 (Group Discussion)

Task Type: Group discussion based on a written question and five prompts in the form of a mind map

-3 minutes to prepare

-8 to 12 minutes to discuss

The task should elicit some of the following functions:

• inferring

• evaluating

• initiating

• prompting

• negotiating

• turn-taking

• interrupting

Sunday, August 21, 2022

Introduction to muet listening, muet listening test specification, muet listening test structure, saturday, august 20, 2022, what is muet.

MUET stands for Malaysian University English Test .

Malaysian Examinations Council (MEC) has been responsible for the Malaysian University English Test (MUET).

Objective of MUET

-To measure the English language proficiency of candidates who intend to pursue first degree studies

-In order to help institutions make better decisions about the readiness of prospective students for academic coursework and their ability to use and understand English in different contexts in higher education.

MUET Test Dates

MUET is administered 3 times a year. The sessions are named:

MUET Session 1
MUET Session 2
MUET Session 3

* The Listening, Reading and Writing tests are taken on the same day, but the Speaking test is taken at times spread over a duration of two weeks.

The Malaysian Examination Council (MEC) also administered MUET on Demand (MoD)

*All four components are taken on the same day, depending on the number of candidates and subject to the availability of rooms for the Speaking test.

MUET on Demand (MoD) has two types

-Computer Based Test

-Paper Based Test

SPEAKING TEST OPTION (MoD)

-Candidates now may sit for Speaking Test via Face-to-Face or Online.

Note: Speaking Test Online will be held (one week before) the Written Test.

Reference (MoD Speaking Online)

Video

https://www.mpm.edu.my/en/mod/guide-for-muet-speaking-online-test

https://www.mpm.edu.my/en/mod/zoom-handbook-for-muet-candidates

Speaking Test Date (Online)

https://www.mpm.edu.my/mod/jadual-waktu-mod-speaking-online

MUET TEST COMPONENTS

MUET Aggregated Scores

Note: Candidates are required to attempt all four components to obtain an overall band score. No certificate will be awarded to candidates who fail to attempt all four components.

MUET Paper 4: Writing (800/4) Objective of the MUET Writing test: -T o assess the ability of test takers to communicate in writing in the...

INTRODUCTION TO MUET LISTENING MUET Paper 1: Listening (800/1) Objective of the MUET Listening test: To assess the ability of test takers to understand spoken discourse i...
INTRODUCTION TO MUET SPEAKING MUET Paper 2: Speaking (800/2) Objective of the MUET Speaking test: -To assess the ability of test takers to give an oral presentation of i...

Original article
Open access
Published: 08 July 2024

Can you spot the bot? Identifying AI-generated writing in college essays

Tal Waltzer ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4464-0336 1 ,
Celeste Pilegard 1 &
Gail D. Heyman 1

International Journal for Educational Integrity volume 20 , Article number: 11 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

The release of ChatGPT in 2022 has generated extensive speculation about how Artificial Intelligence (AI) will impact the capacity of institutions for higher learning to achieve their central missions of promoting learning and certifying knowledge. Our main questions were whether people could identify AI-generated text and whether factors such as expertise or confidence would predict this ability. The present research provides empirical data to inform these speculations through an assessment given to a convenience sample of 140 college instructors and 145 college students (Study 1) as well as to ChatGPT itself (Study 2). The assessment was administered in an online survey and included an AI Identification Test which presented pairs of essays: In each case, one was written by a college student during an in-class exam and the other was generated by ChatGPT. Analyses with binomial tests and linear modeling suggested that the AI Identification Test was challenging: On average, instructors were able to guess which one was written by ChatGPT only 70% of the time (compared to 60% for students and 63% for ChatGPT). Neither experience with ChatGPT nor content expertise improved performance. Even people who were confident in their abilities struggled with the test. ChatGPT responses reflected much more confidence than human participants despite performing just as poorly. ChatGPT responses on an AI Attitude Assessment measure were similar to those reported by instructors and students except that ChatGPT rated several AI uses more favorably and indicated substantially more optimism about the positive educational benefits of AI. The findings highlight challenges for scholars and practitioners to consider as they navigate the integration of AI in education.

Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming ubiquitous in daily life. It has the potential to help solve many of society’s most complex and important problems, such as improving the detection, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic disease (Jiang et al. 2017 ), and informing public policy regarding climate change (Biswas 2023 ). However, AI also comes with potential pitfalls, such as threatening widely-held values like fairness and the right to privacy (Borenstein and Howard 2021 ; Weidinger et al. 2021 ; Zhuo et al. 2023 ). Although the specific ways in which the promises and pitfalls of AI will play out remain to be seen, it is clear that AI will change human societies in significant ways.

In late November of 2022, the generative large-language model ChatGPT (GPT-3, Brown et al. 2020 ) was released to the public. It soon became clear that talk about the consequences of AI was much more than futuristic speculation, and that we are now watching its consequences unfold before our eyes in real time. This is not only because the technology is now easily accessible to the general public, but also because of its advanced capacities, including a sophisticated ability to use context to generate appropriate responses to a wide range of prompts (Devlin et al. 2018 ; Gilson et al. 2022 ; Susnjak 2022 ; Vaswani et al. 2017 ).

How AI-generated content poses challenges for educational assessment

Since AI technologies like ChatGPT can flexibly produce human-like content, this raises the possibility that students may use the technology to complete their academic work for them, and that instructors may not be able to tell when their students turn in such AI-assisted work. This possibility has led some people to argue that we may be seeing the end of essay assignments in education (Mitchell 2022 ; Stokel-Walker 2022 ). Even some advocates of AI in the classroom have expressed concerns about its potential for undermining academic integrity (Cotton et al. 2023 ; Eke 2023 ). For example, as Kasneci et al. ( 2023 ) noted, the technology might “amplify laziness and counteract the learners’ interest to conduct their own investigations and come to their own conclusions or solutions” (p. 5). In response to these concerns, some educational institutions have already tried to ban ChatGPT (Johnson, 2023; Rosenzweig-Ziff 2023 ; Schulten, 2023).

These discussions are founded on extensive scholarship on academic integrity, which is fundamental to ethics in higher education (Bertram Gallant 2011 ; Bretag 2016 ; Rettinger and Bertram Gallant 2022 ). Challenges to academic integrity are not new: Students have long found and used tools to circumvent the work their teachers assign to them, and research on these behaviors spans nearly a century (Cizek 1999 ; Hartshorne and May 1928 ; McCabe et al. 2012 ). One recent example is contract cheating, where students pay other people to do their schoolwork for them, such as writing an essay (Bretag et al. 2019 ; Curtis and Clare 2017 ). While very few students (less than 5% by most estimates) tend to use contract cheating, AI has the potential to make cheating more accessible and affordable and it raises many new questions about the relationship between technology, academic integrity, and ethics in education (Cotton et al. 2023 ; Eke 2023 ; Susnjak 2022 ).

To date, there is very little empirical evidence to inform debates about the likely impact of ChatGPT on education or to inform what best practices might look like regarding use of the technology (Dwivedi et al. 2023 ; Lo 2023 ). The primary goal of the present research is to provide such evidence with reference to college-essay writing. One critical question is whether college students can pass off work generated by ChatGPT as their own. If so, large numbers of students may simply paste in ChatGPT responses to essays they are asked to write without the kind of active engagement with the material that leads to deep learning (Chi and Wylie 2014 ). This problem is likely to be exacerbated when students brag about doing this and earning high scores, which can encourage other students to follow suit. Indeed, this kind of bragging motivated the present work (when the last author learned about a college student bragging about using ChatGPT to write all of her final papers in her college classes and getting A’s on all of them).

In support of the possibility that instructors may have trouble identifying ChatGPT-generated test, some previous research suggests that ChatGPT is capable of successfully generating college- or graduate-school level writing. Yeadon et al. ( 2023 ) used AI to generate responses to essays based on a set of prompts used in a physics module that was in current use and asked graders to evaluate the responses. An example prompt they used was: “How did natural philosophers’ understanding of electricity change during the 18th and 19th centuries?” The researchers found that the AI-generated responses earned scores comparable to most students taking the module and concluded that current AI large-language models pose “a significant threat to the fidelity of short-form essays as an assessment method in Physics courses.” Terwiesch ( 2023 ) found that ChatGPT scored at a B or B- level on the final exam of Operations Management in an MBA program, and Katz et al. ( 2023 ) found that ChatGPT has the necessary legal knowledge, reading comprehension, and writing ability to pass the Bar exam in nearly all jurisdictions in the United States. This evidence makes it very clear that ChatGPT can generate well-written content in response to a wide range of prompts.

Distinguishing AI-generated from human-generated work

What is still not clear is how good instructors are at distinguishing between ChatGPT-generated writing and writing generated by students at the college level given that it is at least possible that ChatGPT-generated writing could be both high quality and be distinctly different than anything people generally write (e.g., because ChatGPT-generated writing has particular features). To our knowledge, this question has not yet been addressed, but a few prior studies have examined related questions. In the first such study, Gunser et al. ( 2021 ) used writing generated by a ChatGPT predecessor, GPT-2 (see Radford et al. 2019 ). They tested nine participants with a professional background in literature. These participants both generated content (i.e., wrote continuations after receiving the first few lines of unfamiliar poems or stories), and determined how other writing was generated. Gunser et al. ( 2021 ) found that misclassifications were relatively common. For example, in 18% of cases participants judged AI-assisted writing to be human-generated. This suggests that even AI technology that is substantially less advanced than ChatGPT is capable of generating writing that is hard to distinguish from human writing.

Köbis and Mossink ( 2021 ) also examined participants’ ability to distinguish between poetry written by GPT-2 and humans. Their participants were given pairs of poems. They were told that one poem in each pair was written by a human and the other was written by GPT-2, and they were asked to determine which was which. In one of their studies, the human-written poems were written by professional poets. The researchers generated multiple poems in response to prompts, and they found that when the comparison GPT-2 poems were ones they selected as the best among the set generated by the AI, participants could not distinguish between the GPT-2 and human writing. However, when researchers randomly selected poems generated by GPT-2, participants were better than chance at detecting which ones were generated by the AI.

In a third relevant study, Waltzer et al. ( 2023a ) tested high school teachers and students. All participants were presented with pairs of English essays, such as one on why literature matters. In each case one essay was written by a high school student and the other was generated by ChatGPT, and participants were asked which essay in each pair had been generated by ChatGPT. Waltzer et al. ( 2023a ) found that teachers only got it right 70% of the time, and that students’ performance was even worse (62%). They also found that well-written essays were harder to distinguish from those generated by ChatGPT than poorly written ones. However, it is unclear the extent to which these findings are specific to the high school context. It should also be noted that there were no clear right or wrong answers in the types of essays used in Waltzer et al. ( 2023a ), so the results may not generalize to essays that ask for factual information based on specific class content.

AI detection skills, attitudes, and perceptions

If college instructors find it challenging to distinguish between writing generated by ChatGPT and college students, it raises the question of what factors might be correlated with the ability to perform this discrimination. One possible correlate is experience with ChatGPT, which may allow people to recognize patterns in the writing style it generates, such as a tendency to formally summarize previous content. Content-relevant knowledge is another possible predictor. Individuals with such knowledge will presumably be better at spotting errors in answers, and it is plausible that instructors know that AI tools are likely to get content of introductory-level college courses correct and assume that essays that contain errors are written by students.

Another possible predictor is confidence about one’s ability to discriminate on the task or on particular items of the task (Erickson and Heit 2015 ; Fischer & Budesco, 2005 ; Wixted and Wells 2017 ). In other words, are AI discriminations made with a high degree of confidence more likely to be accurate than low-confidence discriminations? In some cases, confidence judgments are a good predictor of accuracy, such as on many perceptual decision tasks (e.g., detecting contrast between light and dark bars, Fleming et al. 2010 ). However, in other cases correlations between confidence and accuracy are small or non-existent, such as on some deductive reasoning tasks (e.g., Shynkaruk and Thompson 2006 ). Links to confidence can also depend on how confidence is measured: Gigerenzer et al. ( 1991 ) found overconfidence on individual items, but good calibration when participants were asked how many items they got right after seeing many items.

In addition to the importance of gathering empirical data on the extent to which instructors can distinguish ChatGPT from college student writing, it is important to examine how college instructors and students perceive AI in education given that such attitudes may affect behavior (Al Darayseh 2023 ; Chocarro et al. 2023 ; Joo et al. 2018 ; Tlili et al. 2023 ). For example, instructors may only try to develop precautions to prevent AI cheating if they view this as a significant concern. Similarly, students’ confusion about what counts as cheating can play an important role in their cheating decisions (Waltzer and Dahl 2023 ; Waltzer et al. 2023b ).

The present research

In the present research we developed an assessment that we gave to college instructors and students (Study 1) and ChatGPT itself (Study 2). The central feature of the assessment was an AI Identification Test , which included 6 pairs of essays. In each case (as was indicated in the instructions), one essay in each pair was generated by ChatGPT and the other was written by college students. The task was to determine which essay was written by the chatbot. The essay pairs were drawn from larger pools of essays of each type.

The student essays were written by students as part of a graded exam in a psychology class, and the ChatGPT essays were generated in response to the same essay prompts. Of interest was overall performance and to assess potential correlates of performance. Performance of college instructors was of particular interest because they are the ones typically responsible for grading, but performance of students and ChatGPT were also of interest for comparison. ChatGPT was also of interest given anecdotal evidence that college instructors are asking ChatGPT to tell them whether pieces of work were AI-generated. For example, the academic integrity office at one major university sent out an announcement asking instructors not to report students for cheating if their evidence was solely based on using ChatGPT to detect AI-generated writing (UCSD Academic Integrity Office, 2023 ).

We also administered an AI Attitude Assessment (Waltzer et al. 2023a ), which included questions about overall levels of optimism and pessimism about the use of AI in education, and the appropriateness of specific uses of AI in academic settings, such as a student submitting an edited version of a ChatGPT-generated essay for a writing assignment.

Study 1: College instructors and students

Participants were given an online assessment that included an AI Identification Test , an AI Attitude Assessment , and some demographic questions. The AI Identification Test was developed for the present research, as described below (see Materials and Procedure). The test involved presenting six pairs of essays, with the instructions to try to identify which one was written by ChatGPT in each case. Participants also rated their confidence before the task and after responding to each item, and reported how many they thought they got right at the end. The AI Attitude Assessment was drawn from Waltzer et al. ( 2023a ) to assess participants’ views of the use of AI in education.

Participants

For the testing phase of the project, we recruited 140 instructors who had taught or worked as a teaching assistant for classes at the college level (69 of them taught psychology and 63 taught other subjects such as philosophy, computer science, and history). We recruited instructors through personal connections and snowball sampling. Most of the instructors were women (59%), white (60%), and native English speakers (67%), and most of them taught at colleges in the United States (91%). We also recruited 145 undergraduate students ( M age = 20.90 years, 80% women, 52% Asian, 63% native English speakers) from a subject recruitment system in the psychology department at a large research university in the United States. All data collection took place between 3/15/2023 and 4/15/2023 and followed our pre-registration plan ( https://aspredicted.org/mk3a2.pdf ).

Materials and procedure

Developing the ai identification test.

To create the stimuli for the AI Identification Test, we first generated two prompts for the essays (Table 1 ). We chose these prompts in collaboration with an instructor to reflect real student assignments for a college psychology class.

Fifty undergraduate students hand-wrote both essays as part of a proctored exam in their psychology class on 1/30/2023. Research assistants transcribed the essays and removed essays from the pool that were not written in third-person or did not include the correct number of sentences. Three additional essays were excluded for being illegible, and another one was excluded for mentioning a specific location on campus. This led to 15 exclusions for the Phonemic Awareness prompt and 25 exclusions for the Studying Advice prompt. After applying these exclusions, we randomly selected 25 essays for each prompt to generate the 6 pairs given to each participant. To prepare the texts for use as stimuli, research assistants then used a word processor to correct obvious errors that could be corrected without major rewriting (e.g., punctuation, spelling, and capitalization).

All student essays were graded according to the class rubric on a scale from 0 to 10 by two individuals on the teaching team of the class: the course’s primary instructor and a graduate student teaching assistant. Grades were averaged together to create one combined grade for each essay (mean: 7.93, SD: 2.29, range: 2–10). Two of the authors also scored the student essays for writing quality on a scale from 0 to 100, including clarity, conciseness, and coherence (combined score mean: 82.83, SD : 7.53, range: 65–98). Materials for the study, including detailed scoring rubrics, are available at https://osf.io/2c54a/ .

The ChatGPT stimuli were prepared by entering the same prompts into ChatGPT ( https://chat.openai.com/ ) between 1/23/2023 and 1/25/2023, and re-generating the responses until there were 25 different essays for each prompt.

Testing Phase

In the participant testing phase, college instructors and students took the assessment, which lasted approximately 10 min. All participants began by indicating the name of their school and whether they were an instructor or a student, how familiar they were with ChatGPT (“Please rate how much experience you have with using ChatGPT”), and how confident they were that they would be able to distinguish between writing generated by ChatGPT and by college students. Then they were told they would get to see how well they score at the end, and they began the AI Identification Test.

The AI Identification Test consisted of six pairs of essays: three Phonemic Awareness pairs, and three Studying Advice pairs, in counterbalanced order. Each pair included one text generated by ChatGPT and one text generated by a college student, both drawn randomly from their respective pools of 25 possible essays. No essays were repeated for the same participant. Figure 1 illustrates what a text pair looked like in the survey.

Example pair of essays for the Phonemic Awareness prompt. Top: student essay. Bottom: ChatGPT essay

For each pair, participants selected the essay they thought was generated by ChatGPT and indicated how confident they were about their choice (slider from 0 = “not at all confident” to 100 = “extremely confident”). After all six pairs, participants estimated how well they did (“How many of the text pairs do you think you answered correctly?”).

After completing the AI Identification task, participants completed the AI Attitude Assessment concerning their views of ChatGPT in educational contexts (see Waltzer et al. 2023a ). On this assessment, participants first estimated what percent of college students in the United States would ask ChatGPT to write an essay for them and submit it. Next, they rated their concerns (“How concerned are you about ChatGPT having negative effects on education?”) and optimism (“How optimistic are you about ChatGPT having positive benefits for education?”) about the technology on a scale from 0 (“not at all”) to 100 (“extremely”). On the final part of the AI Attitude Assessment, they evaluated five different possible uses of ChatGPT in education (such as submitting an essay after asking ChatGPT to improve the vocabulary) on a scale from − 10 (“really bad”) to + 10 (“really good”).

Participants also rated the extent to which they already knew the subject matter (i.e., cognitive psychology and the science of learning), and were given optional open-ended text boxes to share any experiences from their classes or suggestions for instructors related to the use of ChatGPT, or to comment on any of the questions in the Attitude Assessment. Instructors were also asked whether they had ever taught a psychology class and to describe their teaching experience. At the end, all participants reported demographic information (e.g., age, gender). All prompts are available in the online supplementary materials ( https://osf.io/2c54a/ ).

Data Analysis

We descriptively summarized variables of interest (e.g., overall accuracy on the Identification Test). We used inferential tests to predict Identification Test accuracy from group (instructor or student), confidence, subject expertise, and familiarity with ChatGPT. We also predicted responses to the AI Attitude Assessment as a function of group (instructor or student). All data analysis was done using R Statistical Software (v4.3.2; R Core Team 2021 ).

Key hypotheses were tested using Welch’s two-sample t-tests for group comparisons, linear regression models with F-tests for other predictors of accuracy, and Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs, Hox 2010 ) with likelihood ratio tests for within-subjects trial-by-trial analyses. GLMMs used random intercepts for participants and predicted trial performance (correct or incorrect) using trial confidence and essay quality as fixed effects.

Overall performance on AI identification test

Instructors correctly identified which essay was written by the chatbot 70% of the time, which was above chance (chance: 50%, binomial test: p < .001, 95% CI: [66%, 73%]). Students also performed above chance, with an average score of 60% (binomial test: p < .001, 95% CI: [57%, 64%]). Instructors performed significantly better than students (Welch’s two-sample t -test: t [283] = 3.30, p = .001).

Familiarity With subject matter

Participants rated how much previous knowledge they had in the essay subject matter (i.e., cognitive psychology and the science of learning). Linear regression models with F- tests indicated that familiarity with the subject did not predict instructors’ or students’ accuracy, F s(1) < 0.49, p s > .486. Psychology instructors did not perform any better than non-psychology instructors, t (130) = 0.18, p = .860.

Familiarity with ChatGPT

Nearly all participants (94%) said they had heard of ChatGPT before taking the survey, and most instructors (62%) and about half of students (50%) said they had used ChatGPT before. For both groups, participants who used ChatGPT did not perform any better than those who never used it before, F s(1) < 0.77, p s > .383. Instructors’ and students’ experience with ChatGPT (from 0 = not at all experienced to 100 = extremely experienced) also did not predict their performance, F s(1) < 0.77, p s > .383.

Confidence and estimated score

Before they began the Identification Test, both instructors and students expressed low confidence in their abilities to identify the chatbot ( M = 34.60 on a scale from 0 = not at all confident to 100 = extremely confident). Their confidence was significantly below the midpoint of the scale (midpoint: 50), one-sample t -test: t (282) = 11.46, p < .001, 95% CI: [31.95, 37.24]. Confidence ratings that were done before the AI Identification test did not predict performance for either group, Pearson’s r s < .12, p s > .171.

Right after they completed the Identification Test, participants guessed how many text pairs they got right. Both instructors and students significantly underestimated their performance by about 15%, 95% CI: [11%, 18%], t (279) = -8.42, p < .001. Instructors’ estimated scores were positively correlated with their actual scores, Pearson’s r = .20, t (135) = 2.42, p = .017. Students’ estimated scores were not related to their actual scores, r = .03, p = .731.

Trial-by-trial performance on AI identification test

Participants’ confidence ratings on individual trials were counted as high if they fell above the midpoint (> 50 on a scale from 0 = not at all confident to 100 = extremely confident). For these within-subjects trial-by-trial analyses, we used Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs, Hox 2010 ) with random intercepts for participants and likelihood ratio tests (difference score reported as D ). Both instructors and students performed better on trials in which they expressed high confidence (instructors: 73%, students: 63%) compared to low confidence (instructors: 65%, students: 56%), D s(1) > 4.59, p s < .032.

Student essay quality

We used two measures to capture the quality of each student-written essay: its assigned grade from 0 to 10 based on the class rubric, and its writing quality score from 0 to 100. Assigned grade was weakly related to instructors’ accuracy, but not to students’ accuracy. The text pairs that instructors got right tended to include student essays that earned slightly lower grades ( M = 7.89, SD = 2.22) compared to those they got wrong ( M = 8.17, SD = 2.16), D (1) = 3.86, p = .050. There was no difference for students, D (1) = 2.84, p = .092. Writing quality score did not differ significantly between correct and incorrect trials for either group, D (1) = 2.12, p = .146.

AI attitude assessment

Concerns and hopes about chatgpt.

Both instructors and students expressed intermediate levels of concern and optimism. Specifically, on a scale from 0 (“not at all”) to 100 (“extremely”), participants expressed intermediate concern about ChatGPT having negative effects on education ( M instructors = 59.82, M students = 55.97) and intermediate optimism about it having positive benefits ( M instructors = 49.86, M students = 54.08). Attitudes did not differ between instructors and students, t s < 1.43, p s > .154. Participants estimated that just over half of college students (instructors: 57%, students: 54%) would use ChatGPT to write an essay for them and submit it. These estimates also did not differ by group, t (278) = 0.90, p = .370.

Evaluations of ChatGPT uses

Participants evaluated five different uses of ChatGPT in educational settings on a scale from − 10 (“really bad”) to + 10 (“really good”). Both instructors and students rated it very bad for someone to ask ChatGPT to write an essay for them and submit the direct output, but instructors rated it significantly more negatively (instructors: -8.95, students: -7.74), t (280) = 3.59, p < .001. Attitudes did not differ between groups for any of the other scenarios (Table 2 ), t s < 1.31, p s > .130.

Exploratory analysis of demographic factors

We also conducted exploratory analyses looking at ChatGPT use and attitudes among different demographic groups (gender, race, and native English speakers). We combined instructors and students because their responses to the Attitude Assessment did not differ. In these exploratory analyses, we found that participants who were not native English speakers were more likely to report using ChatGPT and to view it more positively. Specifically, 69% of non-native English speakers had used ChatGPT before, versus 48% of native English speakers, D (1) = 12.00, p < .001. Regardless of native language, the more experience someone had with ChatGPT, the more optimism they reported, F (1) = 18.71, p < .001, r = .37). Non-native speakers rated the scenario where a student writes an essay and asks ChatGPT to improve its vocabulary slightly positively (1.19) whereas native English speakers rated it slightly negatively (-1.43), F (1) = 11.00, p = .001. Asian participants expressed higher optimism ( M = 59.14) than non-Asian participants ( M = 47.29), F (1) = 10.05, p = .002. We found no other demographic differences.

Study 2: ChatGPT

Study 1 provided data on college instructors’ and students’ ability to recognize ChatGPT-generated writing and about their views of the technology. In Study 2, of primary interest was whether ChatGPT itself might perform better at identifying ChatGPT-generated writing. Indeed, the authors have heard discussions of this as a possible solution to recognize AI-generated writing. We addressed this question by repeatedly asking ChatGPT to act as a participant in the AI Identification Task. While doing so, we administered the rest of the assessment given to participants in Study 1. This included our AI Attitude Assessment, which allowed us to examine the extent to which ChatGPT produced attitude responses that were similar to those of the participants in Study 1.

Participants, materials, and procedures

There were no human participants for Study 2. We collected 40 survey responses from ChatGPT, each run in a separate session on the platform ( https://chat.openai.com/ ) between 5/4/2023 and 5/15/2023.

Two research assistants were trained on how to run the survey in the ChatGPT online interface. All prompts from the Study 1 survey were used, with minor modifications to suit the chat format. For example, slider questions were explained in the prompt, so instead of “How confident are you about this answer?” the prompt was “How confident are you about this answer from 0 (not at all confident) to 100 (extremely confident)?”. In pilot testing, we found that ChatGPT sometimes failed to answer the question (e.g., by not providing a number), so we prepared a second prompt for every question that the researcher used whenever the first prompt was not answered (e.g., “Please answer the above question with one number between 0 to 100.”). If ChatGPT still failed on the second prompt, the researcher marked it as a non-response and moved on to the next question in the survey.

Data analysis

Like Study 1, all analyses were done in R Statistical Software (R Core Team 2021 ). Key analyses first used linear regression models and F -tests to compare all three groups (instructors, students, ChatGPT). When these omnibus tests were significant, we followed up with post-hoc pairwise comparisons using Tukey’s method.

AI identification test

Overall accuracy.

ChatGPT generated correct responses on 63% of trials in the AI Identification Test, which was significantly above chance, binomial test p < .001, 95% CI: [57%, 69%]. Pairwise comparisons found that this performance by ChatGPT was not any different from that of instructors or students, t s(322) < 1.50, p s > .292.

Confidence and estimated performance

Unlike the human participants, ChatGPT produced responses with very high confidence before the task generally ( m = 71.38, median = 70) and during individual trials specifically ( m = 89.82, median = 95). General confidence ratings before the test were significantly higher from ChatGPT than from the humans (instructors: 34.35, students: 34.83), t s(320) > 9.47, p s < .001. But, as with the human participants, this confidence did not predict performance on the subsequent Identification task, F (1) = 0.94, p = .339. And like the human participants, ChatGPT’s reported confidence on individual trials did predict performance: ChatGPT produced higher confidence ratings on correct trials ( m = 91.38) than incorrect trials ( m = 87.33), D (1) = 8.74, p = .003.

ChatGPT also produced responses indicating high confidence after the task, typically estimating that it got all six text pairs right ( M = 91%, median = 100%). It overestimated performance by about 28%, and a paired t -test confirmed that ChatGPT’s estimated performance was significantly higher than its actual performance, t (36) = 9.66, p < .001. As inflated as it was, estimated performance still had a small positive correlation with actual performance, Pearson’s r = .35, t (35) = 2.21, p = .034.

Essay quality

The quality of the student essays as indexed by their grade and writing quality score did not significantly predict performance, D s < 1.97, p s > .161.

AI attitude Assessment

Concerns and hopes.

ChatGPT usually failed to answer the question, “How concerned are you about ChatGPT having negative effects on education?” from 0 (not at all concerned) to 100 (extremely concerned). Across the 40% of cases where ChatGPT successfully produced an answer, the average concern rating was 64.38, which did not differ significantly from instructors’ or students’ responses, F (2, 294) = 1.20, p = .304. ChatGPT produced answers much more often for the question, “How optimistic are you about ChatGPT having positive benefits for education?”, answering 88% of the time. The average optimism rating produced by ChatGPT was 73.24, which was significantly higher than that of instructors (49.86) and students (54.08), t s > 4.33, p s < .001. ChatGPT only answered 55% of the time for the question about how many students would use ChatGPT to write an essay for them and submit it, typically generating explanations about its inability to predict human behavior and the fact that it does not condone cheating when it did not give an estimate. When it did provide an estimate ( m = 10%), it was vastly lower than that of instructors (57%) and students (54%), t s > 7.84, p s < .001.

Evaluation of ChatGPT uses

ChatGPT produced ratings of the ChatGPT use scenarios that on average were rank-ordered the same as the human ratings, with direct copying rated the most negatively and generating practice problems rated the most positively (see Fig. 2 ).

Average ratings of ChatGPT uses, from − 10 = really bad to + 10 = really good. Human responses included for comparison (instructors in dark gray and students in light gray bars)

Compared to humans’ ratings, ratings produced by ChatGPT were significantly more positive in most scenarios, t s > 3.09, p s < .006, with two exceptions. There was no significant difference between groups in the “format” scenario (using ChatGPT to format an essay in another style such as APA), F (2,318) = 2.46, p = .087. And for the “direct” scenario, ChatGPT tended to rate direct copying more negatively than students ( t [319] = 4.08, p < .001) but not instructors (t[319] = 1.57, p = .261), perhaps because ratings from ChatGPT and instructors were already so close to the most negative possible rating.

In 1950, Alan Turing said he hoped that one day machines would be able to compete with people in all intellectual fields (Turing 1950 ; see Köbis and Mossink 2021 ). Today, by many measures, the large-language model, ChatGPT, appears to be getting close to achieving this end. In doing so, it is raising questions about the impact this AI and its successors will have on individuals and the institutions that shape the societies in which we live. One important set of questions revolves around its use in higher education, which is the focus of the present research.

Empirical contributions

Detecting ai-generated text.

Our central research question focused on whether instructors can identify ChatGPT-generated writing, since an inability to do so could threaten the ability of institutions of higher learning to promote learning and assess competence. To address this question, we developed an AI Identification Test in which the goal was to try to distinguish between psychology essays written by college students on exams versus essays generated by ChatGPT in response to the same prompts. We found that although college instructors performed substantially better than chance, they still found the assessment to be challenging, scoring an average of only 70%. This relatively poor performance suggests that college instructors have substantial difficulty detecting ChatGPT-generated writing. Interestingly, this performance by the college instructors was the same average performance as Waltzer et al. ( 2023a ) observed among high school instructors (70%) on a similar test involving English literature essays, suggesting the results are generalizable across the student populations and essay types. We also gave the assessment to college students (Study 1) and to ChatGPT (Study 2) for comparison. On average, students (60%) and ChatGPT (63%) performed even worse than instructors, although the difference only reached statistical significance when comparing students and instructors.

We found that instructors and students who went into the study believing they would be very good at distinguishing between essays written by college students versus essays generated by ChatGPT were in fact no better at doing so than participants who lacked such confidence. However, we did find that item-level confidence did predict performance: when participants rated their confidence after each specific pair (i.e., “How confident are you about this answer?”), they did perform significantly better on items they reported higher confidence on. These same patterns were observed when analyzing the confidence ratings from ChatGPT, though ChatGPT produced much higher confidence ratings than instructors or students, reporting overconfidence while instructors and students reported underconfidence.

Attitudes toward AI in education

Instructors and students both thought it was very bad for students to turn in an assignment generated by ChatGPT as their own, and these ratings were especially negative for instructors. Overall, instructors and students looked similar to one another in their evaluations of other uses of ChatGPT in education. For example, both rated submitting an edited version of a ChatGPT-generated essay in a class as bad, but less bad than submitting an unedited version. Interestingly, the rank orderings in evaluations of ChatGPT uses were the same when the responses were generated by ChatGPT as when they were generated by instructors or students. However, ChatGPT produced more favorable ratings of several uses compared to instructors and students (e.g., using the AI tool to enhance the vocabulary in an essay). Overall, both instructors and students reported being about as optimistic as they were concerned about AI in education. Interestingly, ChatGPT produced responses indicative of much more optimism than both human groups of participants.

Many instructors commented on the challenges ChatGPT poses for educators. One noted that “… ChatGPT makes it harder for us to rely on homework assignments to help students to learn. It will also likely be much harder to rely on grading to signal how likely it is for a student to be good at a skill or how creative they are.” Some suggested possible solutions such as coupling writing with oral exams. Others suggested that they would appreciate guidance. For example, one said, “I have told students not to use it, but I feel like I should not be like that. I think some of my reluctance to allow usage comes from not having good guidelines.”

And like the instructors, some students also suggested that they want guidance, such as knowing whether using ChatGPT to convert a document to MLA format would count as a violation of academic integrity. They also highlighted many of the same problems as instructors and noted beneficial ways students are finding to use it. One student noted that, “I think ChatGPT definitely has the potential to be abused in an educational setting, but I think at its core it can be a very useful tool for students. For example, I’ve heard of one student giving ChatGPT a rubric for an assignment and asking it to grade their own essay based on the rubric in order to improve their writing on their own.”

Theoretical contributions and practical implications

Our findings underscore the fact that AI chatbots have the potential to produce confident-sounding responses that are misleading (Chen et al. 2023 ; Goodwins 2022 ; Salvi et al. 2024 ). Interestingly, the underconfidence reported by instructors and students stands in contrast to some findings that people often expressed overconfidence in their abilities to detect AI (e.g., deepfake videos, Köbis et al. 2021 ). Although general confidence before the task did not predict performance, specific confidence on each item of the task did predict performance. Taken together, our findings are consistent with other work suggesting confidence effects are context-dependent and can differ depending on whether they are assessed at the item level or more generally (Gigerenzer et al. 1991 ).

The fact that college instructors have substantial difficulty differentiating between ChatGPT-generated writing and the writing of college students provides evidence that ChatGPT poses a significant threat to academic integrity. Ignoring this threat is also likely to undermine central aspects of the mission of higher education in ways that undermine the value of assessments and disincentivize the kinds of cognitive engagement that promote deep learning (Chi and Wylie 2014 ). We are skeptical of answers that point to the use of AI detection tools to address this issue given that they will always be imperfect and false accusations have potential to cause serious harm (Dalalah and Dalalah 2023 ; Fowler 2023 ; Svrluga, 2023 ). Rather, we think that the solution will have to involve developing and disseminating best practices regarding creating assessments and incentivizing cognitive engagement in ways that help students learn to use AI as problem-solving tools.

Limitations and future directions

Why instructors perform better than students at detecting AI-generated text is unclear. Although we did not find any effect of content-relevant expertise, it still may be the case that experience with evaluating student writing matters, and instructors presumably have more such experience. For example, one non-psychology instructor who got 100% of the pairs correct said, “Experience with grading lower division undergraduate papers indicates that students do not always fully answer the prompt, if the example text did not appear to meet all of the requirements of the prompt or did not provide sufficient information, I tended to assume an actual student wrote it.” To address this possibility, it will be important to compare adults who do have teaching experience with those who do not.

It is somewhat surprising that experience with ChatGPT did not affect the performance of instructors or students on the AI Identification Test. One contributing factor may be that people pick up on some false heuristics from reading the text it generates (see Jakesch et al. 2023 ). It is possible that giving people practice at distinguishing the different forms of writing with feedback could lead to better performance.

Why confidence was predictive of accuracy at the item level is still not clear. One possibility is that there are some specific and valid cues many people were using. One likely cue is grammar. We revised grammar errors in student essays that were picked up by a standard spell checker in which the corrections were obvious. However, we left ungrammatical writing that didn’t have obvious corrections (e.g., “That is being said, to be able to understand the concepts and materials being learned, and be able to produce comprehension.“). Many instructors noted that they used grammatical errors as cues that writing was generated by students. As one instructor remarked, “Undergraduates often have slight errors in grammar and tense or plurality agreement, and I have heard the chat bot works very well as an editor.” Similarly, another noted, “I looked for more complete, grammatical sentences. In my experience, Chat-GPT doesn’t use fragment sentences and is grammatically correct. Students are more likely to use incomplete sentences or have grammatical errors.” This raises methodological questions about what is the best comparison between AI and human writing. For example, it is unclear which grammatical mistakes should be corrected in student writing. Also of interest will be to examine the detectability of writing that is generated by AI and later edited by students, since many students will undoubtedly use AI in this way to complete their course assignments.

We also found that student-written essays that earned higher grades (based on the scoring rubric for their class exam) were harder for instructors to differentiate from ChatGPT writing. This does not appear to be a simple effect of writing quality given that a separate measure of writing quality that did not account for content accuracy was not predictive. According to the class instructor, the higher-scoring essays tended to include more specific details, and this might have been what made them less distinguishable. Relatedly, it may be that the higher-scoring essays were harder to distinguish because they appeared to be generated by more competent-sounding writers, and it was clear from instructor comments that they generally viewed ChatGPT as highly competent.

The results of the present research validate concerns that have been raised about college instructors having difficulty distinguishing writing generated by ChatGPT from the writing of their students, and document that this is also true when students try to detect writing generated by ChatGPT. The results indicate that this issue is particularly pronounced when instructors evaluate high-scoring student essays. The results also indicate that ChatGPT itself performs no better than instructors at detecting ChatGPT-generated writing even though ChatGPT-reported confidence is much higher. These findings highlight the importance of examining current teaching and assessment practices and the potential challenges AI chatbots pose for academic integrity and ethics in education (Cotton et al. 2023 ; Eke 2023 ; Susnjak 2022 ). Further, the results show that both instructors and students have a mixture of apprehension and optimism about the use of AI in education, and that many are looking for guidance about how to ethically use it in ways that promote learning. Taken together, our findings underscore some of the challenges that need to be carefully navigated in order to minimize the risks and maximize the benefits of AI in education.

Data availability

Supplementary materials, including data, analysis, and survey items, are available on the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/2c54a/ .

Abbreviations

Artificial Intelligence

Confidence Interval

Generalized Linear Mixed Model

Generative Pre-trained Transformer

Standard Deviation

Al Darayseh A (2023) Acceptance of artificial intelligence in teaching science: Science teachers’ perspective. Computers Education: Artif Intell 4:100132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100132

Article Google Scholar

Bertram Gallant T (2011) Creating the ethical academy. Routledge, New York

Book Google Scholar

Biswas SS (2023) Potential use of Chat GPT in global warming. Ann Biomed Eng 51:1126–1127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03171-8

Borenstein J, Howard A (2021) Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI Ethics 1:61–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7

Bretag T (ed) (2016) Handbook of academic integrity. Springer

Bretag T, Harper R, Burton M, Ellis C, Newton P, Rozenberg P, van Haeringen K (2019) Contract cheating: a survey of Australian university students. Stud High Educ 44(11):1837–1856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788

Brown TB, Mann B, Ryder N, Subbiah M, Kaplan JD, Dhariwal P, Neelakantan A, Shyam P, Sastry G, Askell A, Agarwal S, Herbert-Voss A, Krueger G, Henighan T, Child R, Ramesh A, Ziegler D, Wu J, Winter C, Amodei D (2020) Language models are few-shot learners. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 33. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165

Chen Y, Andiappan M, Jenkin T, Ovchinnikov A (2023) A manager and an AI walk into a bar: does ChatGPT make biased decisions like we do? SSRN 4380365. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4380365

Chi MTH, Wylie R (2014) The ICAP framework: linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychol 49(4):219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823

Chocarro R, Cortiñas M, Marcos-Matás G (2023) Teachers’ attitudes towards chatbots in education: a technology acceptance model approach considering the effect of social language, bot proactiveness, and users’ characteristics. Educational Stud 49(2):295–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1850426

Cizek GJ (1999) Cheating on tests: how to do it, detect it, and prevent it. Routledge

R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/

Cotton DRE, Cotton PA, Shipway JR (2023) Chatting and cheating: ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations Educ Teach Int. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148

Curtis GJ, Clare J (2017) How prevalent is contract cheating and to what extent are students repeat offenders? J Acad Ethics 15:115–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-017-9278-x

Dalalah D, Dalalah OMA (2023) The false positives and false negatives of generative AI detection tools in education and academic research: the case of ChatGPT. Int J Manage Educ 21(2):100822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100822

Devlin J, Chang M-W, Lee K, Toutanova K (2018) BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805

Dwivedi YK, Kshetri N, Hughes L, Slade EL, Jeyaraj A, Kar AK, Baabdullah AM, Koohang A, Raghavan V, Ahuja M, Albanna H, Albashrawi MA, Al-Busaidi AS, Balakrishnan J, Barlette Y, Basu S, Bose I, Brooks L, Buhalis D, Wright R (2023) So what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges, and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice, and policy. Int J Inf Manag 71:102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

Eke DO (2023) ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: threat to academic integrity? J Responsible Technol 13:100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060

Erickson S, Heit E (2015) Metacognition and confidence: comparing math to other academic subjects. Front Psychol 6:742. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00742

Fischer I, Budescu DV (2005) When do those who know more also know more about how much they know? The development of confidence and performance in categorical decision tasks. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 98:39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.04.003

Fleming SM, Weil RS, Nagy Z, Dolan RJ, Rees G (2010) Relating introspective accuracy to individual differences in brain structure. Science 329:1541–1543. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1191883

Fowler GA (2023), April 14 We tested a new ChatGPT-detector for teachers. It flagged an innocent student. The Washington Post . https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/04/01/chatgpt-cheating-detection-turnitin/

Gigerenzer G (1991) From tools to theories: a heuristic of discovery in cognitive psychology. Psychol Rev 98:254. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.254

Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U, Kleinbölting H (1991) Probabilistic mental models: a brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychol Rev 98(4):506–528. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.4.506

Gilson A, Safranek C, Huang T, Socrates V, Chi L, Taylor RA, Chartash D (2022) How well does ChatGPT do when taking the medical licensing exams? The implications of large language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. MedRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.23.22283901

Goodwins T (2022), December 12 ChatGPT has mastered the confidence trick, and that’s a terrible look for AI. The Register . https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/12/chatgpt_has_mastered_the_confidence/

Gunser VE, Gottschling S, Brucker B, Richter S, Gerjets P (2021) Can users distinguish narrative texts written by an artificial intelligence writing tool from purely human text? In C. Stephanidis, M. Antona, & S. Ntoa (Eds.), HCI International 2021 , Communications in Computer and Information Science , (Vol. 1419, pp. 520–527). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78635-9_67

Hartshorne H, May MA (1928) Studies in the nature of character: vol. I. studies in deceit. Macmillan, New York

Google Scholar

Hox J (2010) Multilevel analysis: techniques and applications, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York, NY

Jakesch M, Hancock JT, Naaman M (2023) Human heuristics for AI-generated language are flawed. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120 (11), e2208839120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2208839120

Jiang F, Jiang Y, Zhi H, Dong Y, Li H, Ma S, Wang Y, Dong Q, Shen H, Wang Y (2017) Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future. Stroke Vascular Neurol 2(4):230–243. https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2017-000101

Joo YJ, Park S, Lim E (2018) Factors influencing preservice teachers’ intention to use technology: TPACK, teacher self-efficacy, and technology acceptance model. J Educational Technol Soc 21(3):48–59. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26458506

Kasneci E, Seßler K, Küchemann S, Bannert M, Dementieva D, Fischer F, Kasneci G (2023) ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learn Individual Differences 103:102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

Katz DM, Bommarito MJ, Gao S, Arredondo P (2023) GPT-4 passes the bar exam. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4389233

Köbis N, Mossink LD (2021) Artificial intelligence versus Maya Angelou: experimental evidence that people cannot differentiate AI-generated from human-written poetry. Comput Hum Behav 114:106553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106553

Köbis NC, Doležalová B, Soraperra I (2021) Fooled twice: people cannot detect deepfakes but think they can. iScience 24(11):103364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.103364

Lo CK (2023) What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Educ Sci 13(4):410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410

McCabe DL, Butterfield KD, Treviño LK (2012) Cheating in college: why students do it and what educators can do about it. Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD

Mitchell A (2022) December 26). Professor catches student cheating with ChatGPT: ‘I feel abject terror’. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2022/12/26/students-using-chatgpt-to-cheat-professor-warns

Radford A, Wu J, Child R, Luan D, Amodei D, Sutskever I (2019) Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI https://openai.com/research/better-language-models

Rettinger DA, Bertram Gallant T (eds) (2022) Cheating academic integrity: lessons from 30 years of research. Jossey Bass

Rosenzweig-Ziff D (2023) New York City blocks use of the ChatGPT bot in its schools. Wash Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/01/05/nyc-schools-ban-chatgpt/

Salvi F, Ribeiro MH, Gallotti R, West R (2024) On the conversational persuasiveness of large language models: a randomized controlled trial. ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.14380

Shynkaruk JM, Thompson VA (2006) Confidence and accuracy in deductive reasoning. Mem Cognit 34(3):619–632. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193584

Stokel-Walker C (2022) AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — should professors worry? Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7

Susnjak T (2022) ChatGPT: The end of online exam integrity? ArXiv . https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.09292

Svrluga S (2023) Princeton student builds app to detect essays written by a popular AI bot. Wash Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/01/12/gptzero-chatgpt-detector-ai/

Terwiesch C (2023) Would Chat GPT3 get a Wharton MBA? A prediction based on its performance in the Operations Management course. Mack Institute for Innovation Management at the Wharton School , University of Pennsylvania. https://mackinstitute.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Christian-Terwiesch-Chat-GTP-1.24.pdf

Tlili A, Shehata B, Adarkwah MA, Bozkurt A, Hickey DT, Huang R, Agyemang B (2023) What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learn Environ 10:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x

Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind - Q Rev Psychol Philos 236:433–460

UCSD Academic Integrity Office (2023) GenAI, cheating and reporting to the AI office [Announcement]. https://adminrecords.ucsd.edu/Notices/2023/2023-5-17-1.html

Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Polosukhin I (2017) Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 30. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762

Waltzer T, Dahl A (2023) Why do students cheat? Perceptions, evaluations, and motivations. Ethics Behav 33(2):130–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2026775

Waltzer T, Cox RL, Heyman GD (2023a) Testing the ability of teachers and students to differentiate between essays generated by ChatGPT and high school students. Hum Behav Emerg Technol 2023:1923981. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/1923981

Waltzer T, DeBernardi FC, Dahl A (2023b) Student and teacher views on cheating in high school: perceptions, evaluations, and decisions. J Res Adolescence 33(1):108–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12784

Weidinger L, Mellor J, Rauh M, Griffin C, Uesato J, Huang PS, Gabriel I (2021) Ethical and social risks of harm from language models. ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2112.04359

Wixted JT, Wells GL (2017) The relationship between eyewitness confidence and identification accuracy: a new synthesis. Psychol Sci Public Interest 18(1):10–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616686966

Yeadon W, Inyang OO, Mizouri A, Peach A, Testrow C (2023) The death of the short-form physics essay in the coming AI revolution. Phys Educ 58:035027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/acc5cf

Zhuo TY, Huang Y, Chen C, Xing Z (2023) Red teaming ChatGPT via jailbreaking: bias, robustness, reliability and toxicity. ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2301.12867

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Daniel Chen and Riley L. Cox for assistance with study design, stimulus preparation, and pilot testing. We also thank Emma C. Miller for grading the essays and Brian J. Compton for comments on the manuscript.

This work was partly supported by a National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship for T. Waltzer (NSF SPRF-FR# 2104610).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093-0109, USA

Tal Waltzer, Celeste Pilegard & Gail D. Heyman

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors collaborated in the conceptualization and design of the research. C. Pilegard facilitated recruitment and coding for real class assignments used in the study. T. Waltzer led data collection and analysis. G. Heyman and T. Waltzer wrote and revised the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tal Waltzer .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Waltzer, T., Pilegard, C. & Heyman, G.D. Can you spot the bot? Identifying AI-generated writing in college essays. Int J Educ Integr 20 , 11 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-024-00158-3

Download citation

Received : 16 February 2024

Accepted : 11 June 2024

Published : 08 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-024-00158-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Artificial intelligence
Academic integrity
Higher education

International Journal for Educational Integrity

ISSN: 1833-2595

Submission enquiries: [email protected]
General enquiries: [email protected]

This website is for MUET Candidates who want to be prepared for the test

FEATURED , WRITING

Discursive essay sample question.

March 8, 2022

The term discursive essay could cause a certain level of anxiety for some. This happens when the person does not really know what a discursive essay really is.

However, I believe that all this worry should not be there really. This is because a discursive essay is really like any other essay that you would need to write during your time of study.

Basically, writing a discursive essay is not so hard if you know how. In this blog I’m going to show you a sample question of a discursive essay.

I believe that it is important for you to know what the question is going to be like first to be able to understand what is required of you in the question. You would need to familiarize yourself with the question beforehand.

To achieve this we will go through this question part by part.

The discursive essay

In a discursive essay you will need to present your opinion on the topic given and provide a balanced view of it. Here you will be able to showcase your ability to present ideas and flex your ability to discuss about a topic in a constructive way.

Writing a discursive essay would involve presenting your ideas, describing what you particularly observe that is happening around you and in our society in general with regards to the topic being discussed. You will be giving your opinion from both sides of the arguments and so this means that you would write about both sides of the view.

Time allocated for the question

The MUET writing paper consists of two tasks. They are task 1 and task 2. In task 2 you will have to write an extended writing essay.

The time that you should allocate for writing this essay in task 2 is 50 minutes. The duration of time for the entire MUET writing paper is 75 minutes.

So, you will spend the first 25 minutes of your time, answering task 1. Once you are done with task 1, you are going to straightaway move on to answering task 2.

I would like to advise you to use the first few minutes to prepare for task 2.

Preparing for task 2 involves brainstorming on the content points, thinking of the elaborations and listing examples for you to use in the writing of your essay. There is a lot for you to do here and it should all be done within the first 5 minutes of your time.

Yes it is going to be a little bit of a rush for sure. You would need to think very fast and in a more objective way.

In your mind will be just the topic and thinking about the contents and the support for the contents . Write all that you are thiinking of on paper.

You will do the selection of ideas that you will be using after that.

The situation given

In this essay, it says that you went for a talk. And in this talk, a fresh graduate gave a speech.

During the speech the fresh graduate made a comment which would be the focus of the discursive essay.

In this situation, the person giving the comment was a fresh graduate. It is interesting to see that the person making the comment was a fresh graduate and not someone else like a police officer or a lecturer for instance.

By using the fresh graduate as the person giving the comment it would bring with it some connotations.

This is because just by mentioning a fresh graduate, few things will come up to mind. Among others would be the challenges they would potentially face during a job hunt, being too choosy in looking for a job and also, the current unemployment rate.

So, when you are writing about the topic in your discursive essay later you would need to include and remember these issues mentioned above.

The topic of discussion

In the situation given the fresh graduate made a comment that a person’s career choice should be based on the person’s interest alone.

This comment would mean that when looking for a job the fresh graduates should focus on a particular career choice that they would prefer. This would disregard the other opportunities that may come their way should they not be the types of jobs that they would be interested in.

Let’s now focus on the topic being discussed. When a person would only go for and accept the job that they are interested in, it would result in two things.

The first is the person’s job opportunity distinctly would be narrowed down to a very limited few. The second would cause the person to have to wait perhaps much longer for the type of jobs that they are interested in to come by.

Certainly by only going for jobs that a person is interested in would seem quite idealistic. What’s with the current unemployment rate going on in our country.

The situation with the current pandemic that we are all facing certainly does not help the matter. With more people facing the danger of retrenchment and losing their source of income, only looking for a jobs based on the person’s interests is in fact rather naive.

These would be your opinion about why you feel a person should be open to accepting jobs that may not be of their interest. You feel that the person should practise prudence and accept the jobs that they have succeeded in getting. Perhaps later in the future, when the opportunity arrives for them to move on to another job that they actually love then they could always do just that.

On the other hand saying all that does not mean that you totally disregard the importance of having a career that you are interested in.

This is because you could see clearly from experience and from your observation around you that having the job of your interests would only lead to success.

This would include the success at work and success in life where you will find happiness and job satisfaction from the career that you love.

Consequently having a job that you love would certainly contribute to your overall quality of life.

The content points to use

So these are the items that you would need to think of and talk about in the content points when preparing for your essay.

Write these ideas down in a more constructive way.

Perhaps you can have two points to support and another two points to oppose the topic.

From these four points you will choose only 3 content points that you will be working on and elaborate in your essay.

For a discursive essay you need to first of all mention and discuss content points to support the topic given. Use the two content points you already have for the first two contents- content 1 and content 2 to support the topic here. And in your final content which is content 3, you will switch your view and you will oppose to the topic given.

This is how you would write your content points for a discursive essay.

Fulfilling the task set in task 2

In this question, the task that you will need to fulfill is for you to write an essay expressing your opinion on the statement.

The task clearly states for you to provide your own point of view.

So voicing out the your point of view with regard to the statement made in a clear way is the task that you need to fulfil here in task 2. Your task in not to sway the reader to agree with your point of view. In fact you are simply writing in order to provide the two different arguments of the topic.

You would also need to discuss the current subject matter in an engaging and informative way.

To be engaging is to be able to keep the interest of the readers as they read your essay.

So again, remember that your purpose is not to influence the readers to agree with you but for them to see your point of view and to provoke the readers’ thoughts on that matter. By doing this also you are giving a mature treatment to your essay writing. This shows critical thinking on your part.

As you are writing the discursive essay, bear in mind that you need to write it in a more formal way.

Your writing would involve discussing ideas and evaluating the topic. And to make your arguments clear you would need to add in examples based on your observation around you.

Length of essay

For this essay, you would need to write more than 250 words. Writing a longer essay would provide an in depth review of the subject matter.

Share this article

Proverbs to use in MUET Speaking

I encourage my students to use proverbs in English all the time. If used correctly

MUET Exam Format

If you are on this page then there is a great chance that you are

MUET Reading Test Format

The reading test is paper 3 of the Malaysian University English Test (MUET). It is

MUET Listening: Top tips for success

I always tell my students not to make any mistakes in the Malaysian University English

Roslina Abdul Latiff

Muet teacher.

Hello everyone. I am a MUET teacher teaching the sixth formers in a school in the historic city of Melaka, Malaysia. I have been teaching for more than 25 years and I am also a book writer. I hope I can be of some help to you in achieving the band that you need.

MUET speaking part 1 sample answer

This is the heading, muet tutorial.

Subscribe to my channel for more tutorials

COMMENTS

MUET Writing test format
This new format of the writing paper has a weighting of 25% of the whole MUET exam. This weighting is the same as the other 3 papers namely the listening, speaking and reading papers. So, each skill has the same weighting of 25%. The maximum mark for this paper is 90 marks. This is the same maximum mark for the other three papers as well.
MUET essay writing test guide and tips
Top tips for the MUET writing test. You'll probably want to know what our top tips for success in the MUET writing test are: Practice your English language writing as much as you can. Make notes and lists of words and vocabulary to expand your language knowledge. Use practice questions to develop arguments and opinions.
MUET Writing Sample Essay Academic Excellence
Here is the complete sample essay for the topic of academic excellence. Read through the introduction, content points and the conclusion to see the flow of the essay. Take note of the way I have written the introduction and conclusion. Do drop me a line if you want me to focus on how to write an introduction and a concluding paragraph for your ...
MUET Writing Tips
4 Tips to write MUET Essay for Malaysian Students. 5 Types of MUET Essays. 6 Importance of MUET essay. 7 The grading system for MUET. 7.1 MUET Essay writing Band 6- Very good user (Aggregated score: 260-300) 7.2 MUET Essay writing Band 5- Good user (Aggregated score: 220-259) 8 Hire Experts for MUET Test & Essay Writing.
Argumentative essay structure for MUET
Argumentative essay structure for MUET. March 15, 2022. In an argumentative essay as the word suggests, you will have to present arguments for why you agree or disagree to the topic. This is the type of essay that will ask you to take a clear stand on the topic being discussed. You will then need to explain your position on the topic by ...
MUET writing test model answers
The task is marked out of 60, which is 66 per cent of your total MUET test mark. You will need to allocate approximately 50 minutes for the completion of this question. You may be asked to complete a different type and style of essay depending on the question. For example: Discursive essay. Problem-based essay . Argumentative essay
MUET Writing Malaysia
The MUET Writing component is an important part of the Malaysian University English Test that evaluates candidates' ability to express ideas and communicate effectively in written form. This definitive guide has provided an overview of the test format, scoring criteria, and valuable tips for success. Additionally, a sample essay exemplified ...
MUET essay writing tips
Tips for MUET essay writing question one. Our top tips for success in the MUET writing test question one are: Stick to the allocated time for the question which is about 25 minutes. Read the instructions and questions carefully. Make notes and highlight keywords and phrases. Practice writing in a shorter format and more concisely.
Step 2 of 3
WHAT'S IN THIS VIDEO:1. Overview of Essay Planning (0:05)2. Planning for Argumentative & Discursive Essays (7:50)3. Planning for Problem-Solution Essay (20:3...
MUET SESSION 1 2022
MUET SESSION 1 2022M. OVERALL PERFORMANCEFor Session 1 2022, 29 585 cand. The percentages of the candidates for each paper, 800/1 Listening, 800/2 Speaking, 800/3 Reading, 800/4 Writing, and the subject, 800 MUET, according to bands are as follows: Band. CEFR.
MUET Writing : Sample Essays (Malaysian University English Test)
→ → Koleksi Soalan Peperiksaan Percubaan SPM 2023, 2022, 2021 + Skema Jawapan (Semua Subjek) . → → Contoh Soalan UASA (Ujian Akhir Sesi Akademik) Tahun 4, 5, 6 dan Tingkatan 1, 2, 3 + Skema Jawapan . ... MUET Writing : Sample Essays (Malaysian University English Test).
Analysis of Past Year MUET Extended Essay Questions (Essay ...
This document provides an analysis of past writing tasks from the MUET (Malaysia University English Test) exams between 2008 and 2022. It includes 15 sample tasks from 2022, 12 from 2021, 5 from 2020, 4 from 2019, 1 from 2018, 2 from 2017, 4 from 2016, 4 from 2015, 4 from 2014, 4 from 2013, 5 from 2012, 3 from 2011, 2 from 2010, 2 from 2009, and 1 from 2008. The tasks involve responding to ...
MUET Writing Examples
Academic year: 2021/2022. Uploaded by: Anonymous Student. This document has been uploaded by a student, just like you, who decided to remain anonymous. ... SAMPLE OF A FULL ESSAY. ... MUET Argumentative Essay Topics and Points Outline. english critical writing 100% (6) 1.
MUET Writing 101: How to Tackle Email Writing Question
STEP 3: Write the response. As always, when we are set to write the response, we should write in paragraphs. We could refer to the each of the notes above to write each of the paragraphs. Sample responses. Note 1 (for paragraph 1) The convention was indeed a great one! A lot of audience were there and they loved it.
MUET Writing Task 2
Your essay needs to be written according to this format as it will give your essay a very good structure. You would need to have the three key parts to your essay. The first part of your essay is your introduction. The second part would be your three content points and the last part of your essay is the conclusion.
4MUET : MUET SESSION 2/2022
MUET SESSION 2/2022 - 800/4 WRITING TASK 2 (EXTENDED WRITING) - "LACK OF APPRECIATION FOR OUR CULTURE.." -MY TAKE. ... Write an essay expressing your opinion on the statement. Write at least 250 words. [60]--&&&---Culture is among one of the important aspects of our life. Culture is said to have the ability to help mould our true identities.
MUET my way...: 2022
You can then send me sample essays for me to mark or sample videos of individual presentations that you self-recorded. I charge RM10 per essay/video.. email to [email protected]. ... Anyway.. below are my answers for the 3rd Session of the MUET Reading paper, 22nd Jan 2022. Happy marking! If you want to estimate your band, just use your ...
MUET my way...: July 2022
Actually there are two books, 1st set published in 2020/21 and new out is out 2022.. in total you have 8 model tests to drill yourselves with. 7. You can then send me sample essays for me to mark or sample videos of individual presentations that you self-recorded. I charge RM10 per essay/video.. email to [email protected].
MUET Paper 4 Writing (Sample Essay)
MUET [Task 1] - SAMPLE ESSAY 2- MUET [Task 2] - SAMPLE ESSAY 24-Task 1. You are advised to spend about 25 minutes on this task. Your friend, Danny, was unable to join the English Language Skills Workshop because he was sick. Read the letter from him asking about the workshop which he missed.
How to write a MUET discursive essay
In a discursive essay: the main idea is to explore the topic of discussion. present both sides of the argument - for and against. include discussion of the topic, present ideas and opinions. there is no direct purpose to convince the reader to agree with your views. When you are writing a discursive essay your main idea is to explore the topic ...
MUET NEW FORMAT: August 2022
MUET NEW FORMAT Tuesday, August 23, 2022. INTRODUCTION TO MUET WRITING ... Task format. Task 1: Guided Writing (at least 100 words) Task 2: Extended Writing (at least 250 words) Language functions • Giving precise information ... Response: Essay (discursive, argumentative, or a problem-solution) of at least 250 words ...
Sample Discursive Essay (MUET)
Sample Discursive Essay (MUET) - Free download as Word Doc (.doc / .docx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. Respect must be earned through actions, not assumed based on status or identity. People naturally respect those who stay true to themselves and their principles without trying too hard to impress others. While some level of respect should be given initially ...
Can you spot the bot? Identifying AI-generated writing in college essays
The release of ChatGPT in 2022 has generated extensive speculation about how Artificial Intelligence (AI) will impact the capacity of institutions for higher learning to achieve their central missions of promoting learning and certifying knowledge. Our main questions were whether people could identify AI-generated text and whether factors such as expertise or confidence would predict this ability.
Discursive essay sample question
Time allocated for the question. The MUET writing paper consists of two tasks. They are task 1 and task 2. In task 2 you will have to write an extended writing essay. The time that you should allocate for writing this essay in task 2 is 50 minutes. The duration of time for the entire MUET writing paper is 75 minutes.

MUET Writing Malaysia – Definitive Guide with Essay Example

What is MUET writing in Malaysia?

MUET Essay Task 1: Report writing (40 marks)

MUET Essay Task 2: Extended writing (60 marks)

Topics for MUET Essay Writing

MUET Essay Writing Format

1. Introduction paragraph:

2. Body paragraph:

3. Concluding paragraph:

Tips to write MUET Essay for Malaysian Students

Types of MUET Essays

Importance of MUET essay

The grading system for MUET

MUET Essay writing Band 6- Very good user (Aggregated score: 260-300)

MUET Essay writing Band 5- Good user (Aggregated score: 220-259)

Related Post

MUET Writing Malaysia – Definitive Guide with Essay Example

MUET Writing Test Format

Task A: Interpretive Essay

Task B: Discursive Essay

Scoring Criteria

Task Fulfillment

Language Accuracy

Cohesion and Coherence

Appropriateness of Style

Tips for MUET Writing Success

Understand the Task Requirements

Plan and Organize

Time Management

Language Use

Introduction and Conclusion

Practice Writing

Sample Essay: Task B

Essay Example

Body Paragraph 1

Body Paragraph 2

MUET Report: Assessing English Language Proficiency among Malaysian Students

MUET Speaking Topics

MUET Preparation and Essay Writing

Determine Your Needs

Research Online Tutoring Platforms

Check Tutors’ Profiles

Schedule Consultations

Seek Writing Assistance

Discuss Expectations and Goals

Collaboration and Practice

MUET Group Discussion

Understand the Format:

Improve English Language Skills

Practice Active Listening

Respect Others’ Views

Manage Time Effectively

Practice with Mock Group Discussions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

MUET essay writing tips

MUET essay writing question one example

Tips for MUET essay writing question one

MUET essay writing question two example

Tips for MUET essay writing question two

3 Fields to study in Malaysia

Get in touch

MUET Writing : Sample Essays (Malaysian University English Test)

Please Share This Post :

Write a Comment Cancel reply

MUET Writing 101: How to Tackle Email Writing Question

Step 1: Familiarize yourself with the task.

Step 2: Incorporate all the notes, keywords, and details from the email into your response.

STEP 3: Write the response

12 Replies to “MUET Writing 101: How to Tackle Email Writing Question”

Sunday 17 July 2022

2 comments:

MUET my way...

Friday, July 15, 2022

TQ for Being Visitor No:

Popular Posts

MUET NEW FORMAT

MUET Writing Test Specification

MUET Writing Test Structure

Monday, August 22, 2022

MUET Reading Test Structure