robertson scholarship essay questions

How to Win the Robertson Scholarship

Robertson scholarship – introduction.

In this “How to Win a Robertson Scholarship” guide, we’ll cover merit-based scholarship opportunities for high school seniors. Specifically, we’ll talk about how to win the Robertson Scholarship for North Carolina’s top schools: Duke University and UNC-Chapel Hill . We’ll discuss Robertson Scholarship eligibility, the funding it can provide, how to apply, and tips on how to become a Robertson Scholar!

Firstly, this guide will give you an overview of merit-based scholarships, as well as the Robertson Scholarship. Once we’ve looked at the financial and non-financial benefits of the Robertson Scholars program, we’ll explore the Robertson Scholarship acceptance rate .

Then, we’ll share the eligibility criteria for a Robertson Scholarship. We’ll give details on the Robertson Scholarship requirements for the Duke Robertson Scholarship and the UNC Robertson Scholarship. This includes any necessary Robertson Scholarship application materials, the academic scholarship requirements, and the Robertson Scholarship deadline and notification timeline.

This Robertson Scholarship guide will also include the following:

The history of the prestigious Robertson Scholars Program
How the Robertson Scholarship compares to other merit-based scholarships
Frequently asked questions about the Robertson Scholarship
Tips on acing the Robertson Scholarship application process

Advice from College Advisor on other scholarships for college

Merit-Based Scholarships– A Quick Overview

As the cost of college increases, it is more important than ever for students to consider applying for merit-based scholarships and other scholarships for college.

So, what is a merit-based scholarship exactly? Merit-based scholarships are financial aid awards that have no repayment terms and are awarded based on a student’s academic , personal, and/or leadership experiences. Other scholarships for college might be based on region, unique personal hobbies, or winning a research project or essay competition. You can never have too many scholarships for college, so it is critical to begin researching early!

Robertson Scholars Leadership Program

The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program, also known as the Robertson Scholarship, is one among many competitive merit-based scholarship awards. Merit-based scholarships for college can vary in the amounts awarded, competitiveness, and eligibility. For families concerned about the cost of college , merit-based scholarships and other scholarships for college can provide huge savings on the total cost of college. Merit-based scholarships are awarded by colleges and universities as well as private and non-profit organizations.

The review process for merit-based scholarships can take place during the general admissions application review. Alternatively, merit-based scholarships may have a separate application process like the UNC Robertson Scholarship and the Duke Robertson Scholarship. Scholarships for college typically require some sort of formal application or essay .

What is the Robertson Scholarship?

The Robertson Scholarship was founded in 2000 by Mr. & Mrs. Julian Robertson. As natives of North Carolina, the Robertsons wanted to encourage collaboration between Duke University and the University of North Carolina. These schools were prestigious, but they were missing an opportunity to work together. The creation of the Duke Robertson Scholarship and the UNC Robertson Scholarship was an important first step in this collaboration.

In addition, the Robertsons wanted to create a merit-based scholarship for students who had the potential to become exceptional leaders – helping them with the cost of college. The Robertson Scholars’ program graduated its first cohort in 2005 . Since then, it’s forged both business partnerships and research projects between Duke and the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill .

Want to compete for the UNC Robertson Scholarship and the Duke Robertson Scholarship?

To begin with, you need to make a competitive general admissions application. Each institution uses a holistic approach to review admissions applications as well as merit scholarship applications. A holistic review approach allows admissions and merit scholarship committees to look beyond GPA to identify well-rounded applicants. The Robertson Scholarship acceptance rate can be intimidating, but there are some key ways to stand out.

The UNC Robertson Scholarship and the Duke Robertson Scholarship look for four key character traits in applicants. These are purposeful leadership, intellectual curiosity, strength of character, and collaborative spirit. Successful applicants to the Robertson Scholars’ program demonstrate these Robertson Scholarship requirements throughout their application.

Purposeful leadership means that students are fearless and innovative. Reflect on your high school career to identify times when you displayed vision and determination. Students who display purposeful leadership are often motivational and inspiring to those around them.

Beyond academics and leadership

In addition to the academic scholarship requirements, applicants to the Robertson Scholars’ program should display intellectual curiosity. Students should maintain good grades in class . Equally important, they should be critical thinkers, showing the potential to be thought leaders in their fields of interest. Merit scholarship reviewers are often looking for students’ potential to contribute to their future college community .

Strength of character is also an important trait of a successful Robertson Scholarship applicant. Students must display confidence, compassion, empathy, and a strong ethical compass. The Robertson Scholars’ program values these traits because of the strong emotional IQ needed to step into leadership roles.

Finally, in the spirit of its founding, the Robertson Scholars’ Program is seeking students who have a collaborative spirit. Robertson Scholars are bridge builders in their communities and embrace opportunities to learn from others. The Robertson Scholarship application is a perfect place to showcase your passion for leading and serving.

The Benefits of the Robertson Scholarship

So, we know what the Robertson Scholarship requirements are. But what exactly does the Robertson Scholarship award students?

If you win this prestigious merit scholarship, you’re in store for a number of life-changing benefits, both financial and non-financial.

Each summer, scholars take part in international and domestic experiences. These are designed to foster community and help them explore their interests and passions with a culminating professional project. During the school year, members of the Robertson Scholars’ program receive mentorship from program alumni and attend funded academic conferences. They also have structured monthly networking experiences with other Robertson scholars, UNC and Duke faculty members, and program alumni and mentors.

How much money is the Robertson Scholarship?

In addition to a wealth of non-financial benefits, the Robertson Scholars’ program also provides a full merit scholarship. This covers tuition, room and board, and the majority of mandatory fees. A full merit-based scholarship can significantly reduce the cost of college for students and their families.

The Robertson Scholarship does not include additional personal expenses outside of the tuition, room and board, and other fees mentioned above. In contrast, a full-ride merit-based scholarship allows students to explore the full scope of what college has to offer without worrying about the cost of college.

The summer enrichment experiences included in the Robertson Scholars’ program also have financial value. Scholars will receive full funding for academic conferences, two study-abroad semesters, and three additional summer enrichment experiences. Not all scholarships for college are packed with this many benefits.

“Dual citizens”

All Robertson Scholars are “dual citizens” – which means they can immerse themselves in both Duke and UNC campuses. They can take advantage of the UNC Robertson Scholarship and the Duke Robertson Scholarship simultaneously. Students can spend time on both campuses, learning and socializing. In addition to the Robertson Express bus that shuttles students between campuses, students can take part in “ campus switch ”. For this switch scholars spend an entire semester at their neighboring institution during the sophomore year.

When a student is awarded the Duke Robertson Scholarship or the UNC Robertson Scholarship they are joining a long lineage of scholars. Through regional events and alumni mentorship, Robertson Scholars’ Program participants can network with more than 550 alumni .

How competitive is the Robertson Scholarship?

The Robertson Scholars’ Program is a competitive program. There are several thousand applicants each year. Thousands of applicants then turn into a few hundred semi-finalists. Even fewer finalists will ultimately compete in the final round of interviews. The final cohort of scholars includes around 27 recipients of the UNC Robertson Scholarship and the Duke University Scholarship.

The Robertson Scholars’ program provides strong professional and personal development. Alumni of the merit-based scholarship program are often incredibly successful beyond graduation. The UNC Robertson Scholarship and the Duke Robertson Scholarship have prepared hundreds of leaders to excel in the fields of business , medicine , politics, education, and law .

Randall Drain (Duke ‘05’) credits the Robertson Scholars’ program for preparing him for the Mitchell Scholarship & Yale Law Journal. Alumni David Spratte (UNC ’17) and Kasper Kubica (Duke ’17) were Campus Switch peers during the Roberts Scholars Program. Upon graduation, Kubica and Spratte launched a joint business venture, building off of their summer experiences with the Robertson Scholars’ program.

Find out more about all of these successful recipients of the Robertson Scholarship here .

Am I eligible for the Robertson Scholarship?

The Robertson Scholars’ Program is open to current high school students applying for undergraduate admissions at UNC-Chapel Hill or Duke University. Students must enroll at one of these institutions in order to receive scholarship funds.

The Robertson Scholars’ Program also grants scholarships to college students currently enrolled at UNC-Chapel Hill or Duke University. Current students who are awarded the UNC Robertson Scholarship or Duke Robertson Scholarship will receive tuition and room and board for six semesters instead of eight.

Ineligibility

In addition, transfer students are not eligible to apply for the Robertson Scholars’ Program.

Further, current students at Duke and UNC are eligible to apply for the Robertson Scholars Leadership Program. If granted the scholarship, students will have their tuition, room and board, and other fees covered for up to six semesters. They are also eligible for the same summer funding opportunities.

Some eligibility for international students too

International students of all nationalities and citizenship are eligible to apply for the Robertson Scholarship Program as long as they are able to obtain a Visa to study in the US.

In addition to meeting the Robertson Scholarship requirements, students must also meet the academic scholarship requirements. Applicants must have an impressive academic record that includes consistent grades in the most challenging courses available at their high school.

How do I apply for the Robertson Scholarship?

Applying to the Robertson Scholarship Program is a separate process from the normal application process for Duke and UNC. To apply to the Robertson Scholarship, you must apply to either UNC-Chapel Hill , Duke , or both universities by their published deadlines. You must then meet the Robertson Scholarship deadline and complete the separate Robertson Scholarship application. For domestic students, this is November 15th .

The Robertson Program application does not require an official transcript. However, students will need to provide an official transcript as part of their admissions application to UNC-Chapel Hill and Duke .

Each year the Robertson Scholars’ program releases a series of essay prompts for prospective students to complete. Aim to produce a polished, college-level essay that showcases all facets of your personality.

The Robertson Scholars program does not accept test scores of any kind.

Self-reported academics

The academic scholarship requirements only include the self-reported grade point average. Students must have access to their academic transcript to provide accurate self-reported grades.

Compelling recommendations are another important part of the Duke Robertson Scholarship and UNC Robertson Scholarship application review process. At least one letter should come from a teacher who’s witnessed you in the classroom setting. The other recommendation should come from someone that can speak to your character outside of the classroom. This could be a coach, employer, or mentor that has guided you professionally. You can use the same letters used in the Common Application.

When do I apply for the Robertson Scholarship?

For domestic students, the Robertson Scholarship application opens on August 15 th of each year. At that time students can start filling out their application and their recommenders can begin sharing their letters of advocacy. The Robertson Scholarship deadline is November 15 th .

The application window is very narrow and is only open for two months. If you prepare ahead of time , you can submit your merit scholarship application ahead of the Robertson Scholarship deadline with little stress. For example, you can begin soliciting recommendation letters and crafting a personal narrative that shows how you relate to the mission and values of the Robertson Scholars’ program.

In addition to meeting the Robertson Scholarship deadline (November 15 th ), you must also meet the admissions deadlines for Duke and UNC respectively.

When is the Robertson Scholarship due?

It’s very important to begin compiling your application materials prior to the Robertson Scholarship deadline. The spring of junior year is an excellent time to begin preparing for scholarships for college. Identify recommenders who’ve seen you in an academic setting as well as those that can speak to your character and potential to be a leader. Giving your recommenders a current resume or “brag sheet” is a great way to begin this process.

Once applicants submit their Robertson Scholarship application, the Robertson Scholars’ program will select the semi-finalists . All semi-finalists will participate in a round of virtual interviews and a final round of interviews. Then, the review committee will announce the Robertson Scholarship finalists.

Applicants interested in the Duke Robertson Scholarship should decide if they are planning to apply Early Decision or Regular Decision . The Duke Early Decision deadline is November 1 st and the Regular Decision deadline is January 2 nd . The Robertson Scholarship requirements do not favor one deadline over the other.

Applicants interested in the UNC Robertson Scholarship have the option to apply Early Action or Regular Decision. The Early Action deadline for UNC is October 15 th and the Regular Decision deadline is January 15 th .

So, get organized and mark your calendars with your admissions application deadlines as well as the Robertson Scholarship deadline!

Robertson Scholarship – Frequently Asked Questions:

Here are some of the most frequently asked questions about the Robertson Scholarship requirements:

Can I send updates to my application throughout the academic year?

The Robertson Scholarship application allows you to make an update after the initial submission. Updates can be sent to [email protected] . With only one update allowed, it is important to make sure you understand all Robertson Scholarship requirements before submitting your application.

Am I eligible for the Robertson Scholarship if I applied Early Decision?

Yes, students are eligible to apply for the Robertson Scholarship no matter what decision timeline they choose. The most important detail to remember is to meet all application deadlines for your institution and the scholarship program.

Is there special preference given to in-state students applying for the Robertson Scholarship program?

The Robertson Scholars’ program does not prioritize admissions based on regional or national location.

What is the acceptance rate for the Robertson Scholarship program?

The Robertson Scholarship acceptance rate is not published. However, each cohort typically consists of fewer than 30 students from each institution. Applications come from across the world. In light of the large application pools for both the Duke Robertson Scholarship and the UNC Robertson Scholarship, it is fair to assume that the program is very selective.

Can a family member or a family write my recommendation letter?

The recommendation letter should come from at least one teacher and the second should come from someone who can speak to your character. The Robertson Scholars’ program committee suggests you avoid recommendations from family or family friends. That’s because scholarships for college are typically awarded to students based on their performance in a professional and academic context.

Don’t forget to have your recommender submit their letter before the Robertson Scholarship deadline!

Robertson Scholarship vs. Jeffersons Scholarship at University of Virginia

The Robertson Scholarship is one of many prestigious scholarships for college. The Jefferson Scholarship at the University of Virginia is another comparable merit scholarship. This merit scholarship is designed for students who’ve demonstrated excellence and potential in leadership, scholarship, and engaged citizenship .

Unlike the Robertson Scholarship, Jefferson scholars must be nominated instead of applying directly for the merit scholarship. After the nomination process, prospective scholars enter a series of interviews that culminates in a national public competition .

The eligibility requirements for the Jefferson Scholarship are more restrictive than the Robertson Scholarship. The Jefferson Scholarship also requires students to compete in public venues based on their geographic location. The Jefferson Scholarship interview process is in person, in contrast to the video interviews required for the Robertson Scholarship. The Robertson Scholarship acceptance rate and the Jefferson Scholarship acceptance rate are roughly equal.

5 Tips on How to Win the Robertson Scholarship– Final Thoughts

This “Robertson Scholarship” guide has shown you how to apply for the Robertson Scholars’ program. Finally, here are five tips on how to win the Robertson Scholarship!

Prepare for the Robertson Scholarship application by getting organized early and having conversations with your advocates well in advance of the Robertson Scholarship deadline.
Attend an informational webinar to learn more about the Robertson Scholarship requirements and read Robertson Scholars’ program alumni bios to gain more insight into what the committee is looking for and how you can present a compelling application.
Spend some time being introspective and craft a personal narrative that demonstrates the sought-after qualities of a Robertson Scholar. These traits are personal leadership, strength of character, intellectual curiosity, and a collaborative spirit.
Choose recommenders who can speak to both your academic background as well as your leadership and personal traits. It is important for the Robertson Scholars’ program committee to see an applicant that is well-rounded and purpose-driven in addition to meeting the academic scholarship requirements.
Don’t stress too much about the Robertson Scholarship acceptance rate! There is no blueprint for what a Robertson Scholar looks like. The best approach to a successful application is to be authentic and tell your story in your voice.

More CollegeAdvisor Merit-Based Scholarship Resources to explore!

Looking for high-quality information on scholarships for college? Here at CollegeAdvisor.com, we can help you compete for the Robertson Scholarship and other scholarships for college!

How to Win the Coca-Cola Scholarship

CollegeAdvisor.com partners with students as early as their sophomore year to begin preparing for the college admissions and merit-based scholarship process. In addition to one on one appointments, CollegeAdvisor.com hosts free informative webinars to help you learn more about scholarships for college. Through a dedicated financial aid team, CollegeAdvisor.com can help you develop your personal narrative, identify merit-based scholarships, and get organized before your senior year.

Be sure to check out other merit-based scholarship guides from CollegeAdvisor.com ! The guides cover everything, including the Vanderbilt , Coca-Cola , and USC merit-based scholarships.

Finally, and most important, good luck!

This article was written by Chelsea Holley . If you want to get help with your college applications from Chelsea or other CollegeAdvisor.com Admissions Experts , register with CollegeAdvisor.com today. Also, check out our other guides to Merit-Based Scholarships as you embark on your college application journey!

Personalized and effective college advising for high school students.

Advisor Application
Popular Colleges
Privacy Policy and Cookie Notice
Student Login
California Privacy Notice
Terms and Conditions
Your Privacy Choices

By using the College Advisor site and/or working with College Advisor, you agree to our updated Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy , including an arbitration clause that covers any disputes relating to our policies and your use of our products and services.

Robertson Scholars Program

About the robertson scholars program.

Robertson Scholars are a community of leaders within Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, striving to make transformational contributions to society. The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program provides eight semesters of full tuition, room and board, and most mandatory fees for Scholars at Duke and UNC-Chapel Hill. Scholars also have access to generous funding for up to three summer experiences, funding for conferences throughout the academic year, and for two semesters of study abroad.

Interested in becoming a Robertson Scholar?

The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program is the only four year merit scholarship at Duke that has a separate application process. To learn how to apply either as an entering first year student, or as a rising sophomore, please see the Robertson website.

Current Robertson Scholars

Come meet the current Robertson Scholars! Scholars from both Duke and UNC are listed on this site, as Robertson Scholars regularly travel between campuses. During their sophomore year, they live on the opposite campus from their base school.

Robertson Scholarship Tips, Requirements & Acceptance Rate

Robertson Scholarship is among the most prestigious scholarships that have been given to some of the most gifted students in the United States. This article is about Robertson Scholarship Tips this year for a successful application so read on.

This scholarship was established as a tribute to the deceased Robert G. Robertson, this scholarship is awarded to students in high school who have shown excellence in their studies and demonstrate leadership qualities. Students from families of low income and need financial handicapped are the major beneficiaries.

The scholarship pays for the cost of tuition, room and board, fees, and textbooks during up to 4 years undergraduate education in the U.S. accredited university, vocational or college.

What are the Requirements for the Robertson Scholarship?

The Robertson Scholarship Program is a merit-based scholarship that is full-tuition for students planning to pursue a degree into Science, Technology, Engineering or Math (STEM) fields.

The program is available to all domestic students from the United States who are high school seniors. To be qualified to be considered for the Robertson Scholarship, you must be a student with a Grade Point Average (GPA) of at least 3.0 and have completed at least 1 semester of the college level science or math courses.

Possible interview questions

A major and significant elements of an interview is answering questions in a manner that shows your understanding and comprehension regarding your knowledge of the Robertson Scholars program.

Here are some of the questions that are likely to be addressed during the interview

Tell us about your personal story and the reason you’d like to become a Robertson Scholar?
What are some of your career goals?
What is your most career major?
What do you think you can be making a difference in the world through your work as a Robertson Scholar?
Which course are you the most excited about this semester?
What are some examples of how you’ve contributed to the society you live in today?
If you could change just one aspect about your school, What you would, you change and the reason behind it?
What do you consider to be the most pressing issues facing society today? How can it be solved?
What are the reasons you would like to be awarded the Robertson Scholarship, and how will it aid you in reaching your goals?

Who should write my recommendation letter?

We require two letters of recommendation per candidate
A minimum of one person who recommends you is a teacher who has witnessed your work in the classroom
The second recommendation source could be someone who speaks to your character and leadership (teacher or coach supervisor of your job or volunteer or research mentor, etc.)
Family members’ recommendations, friends, or peers are not advisable.
You will be asked to provide the names and email addresses of your referees in the online submission form. The person recommending you will receive an email containing an invitation to provide recommendations, as well as a link to an online form for recommendation.

In conclusion, the question is how to write a good recommendation letter for Robertson Scholarship. The applicant should use correct grammar and punctuation in the letter. Include relevant information about why you would be an asset to the scholarship program and your personal qualities that will contribute to its success. Do not include any additional information beyond what is required, such as letters of recommendation from others or other materials that are unrelated to your qualifications for this scholarship program.

For now, Robertson scholarship acceptance rate is not stable, but try to beat the deadline. If you think you have what it takes to apply for Robertson Scholarship , then we encourage you to read our guidelines on: How To Write A Good Application Letter For Robertson Scholarships.

Scholarship tips you missed

The Best Scholarship Interview Tips in 2024
How to Write an Application Essay for a Scholarship in 2024
How to Write Scholarship Recommendation Letter + 1 Sample

Our Services

Admissions Support

US / Ivy League Admissions

UK / Oxbridge Admissions

EU Universities Admissions

Graduation Admissions

Crimson MBA

College Sport Recruitment

Crimson Foundation Programs

Crimson Rise

Crimson Global Academy

Our University Admissions Strategists

Our Leaders, Advisors and Investors

Our Reviews

Our Mentors

Student Success

Crimson In the News

Careers at Crimson

Job Openings

Tutoring at Crimson

Crimson Scholarships

Crimson Youth Fund

Te Ara a Kupe Beaton Scholarship

Crimson Access Opportunity

Ebooks & Infographics

Successful College Applications

Student Success Stories

Calculators & Converters

US College Admissions Calculator

UK University Admissions Calculator

SAT/ACT Converter

NCEA/GPA Calculator

Mini SAT Practice Test

University Profiles

YouTube & Podcast

YouTube Channel

Top of The Class Podcast

Upcoming Events

+64 9 282 3237

What are the specific reasons for taking one of the most prestigious undergraduate scholarships, the Robertson, over attending Harvard and Stanford?

Great question.

The Robertson program is a unique experience for around 15 Duke students each year. Scholars from the U.S. are chosen from the Duke/UNC application pool of around 60,000 students and the seven or so international scholars (from countries including NZ, Australia, England, Ethiopia and India) are invited following an extremely personal interview process. Clearly, this selection process differs significantly from regular university admissions, and it embodies what the Robertson program aims to achieve - a personalized, engaging and challenging college experience.

My experience as a Robertson has been very different to a regular Duke student ever since our pre-Duke orientation in North Carolina. I have had access to annual summer funding, exclusive dinner and speaker events, grants to attend conferences, five full-time staff members working solely for the current students, dual-citizenship and the University of North Carolina including one semester of residency, a diverse and tight-knit peer group and access to alumni across the world. The program offers the comfort of friendship and support, the challenge of new ideas from different events and members and the resources to do whatever you want. All on top of paying for my ~$70,000USD p.a. tuition.

I am also a huge fan of Duke University. Beyond a beautiful campus is an incredible work-life balance lived by interesting students from all around the world. Especially as an international student, you will be able to take advantage everybody’s different background. For example, in the 16 months since I arrived at Duke I’ve hung out with 15 of my Duke friends back in their respective countries (largely Europe and South America).

Duke’s sporting prowess offers both entertainment and a culture of camaraderie and school spirit. I can watch some of the worlds top age-group athletes compete in national competitions and then catch a meal with them in the same day. One of the nations biggest sporting events, the annual Duke vs UNC Basketball game, is a highlight of the year. Club sport also thrives from an $8 million budget (allegedly 10x as high as the next highest endowment). Last year I travelled to both the Bahamas (rugby) and Amsterdam (hockey) on highly subsidized “dream trips” - an experience unique to Duke Club Sport.

Duke is also one of those rare places where a strong liberal arts program meets hard engineering and life science. Interdisciplinary programs such as Bass Connections seek to capitalize on this intersection to be at the forefront of research, policy and innovation. I am constantly learning things from faculty, peers and programs that I would never have thought existed. Duke is certainly a place to open your mind and expand your understanding of many different aspects of the world.

I could go on all day about the awesome things here at Duke so feel free to reach out to me with specific questions. Good luck with your application!

The Robertson offers resources. They clear the way for you to do what you need to do as grow in experience and understanding.

I think the biggest indicator of that is the Robertson’s summer program: they pay for three summers of activity. The first is spent getting to know the people you’re with, the second and third are spent doing whatever you like, per their approval (which is, as a rule, very generous). Your summer is based in your written proposal, born of what you want to do. For some, this means beefing up their pre-professional credentials (consulting internships, Google internships), and there is no doubt that the Robertson will help you do that. But other cases, which I think embody what is good about the Robertson, involve more personal activities that are central to you as a unique person (writing a novel about growing up as a foster child with no siblings, writing a philosophy about how and why you experience art the way you do, fighting for a social cause with immediate personal impact). Here is where you’ll find a reason to choose the Robertson that has nothing to do with it being “prestigious.”

Best of luck as you choose. You’ve done a lot to get here, and remember: it’s not as impactful it appears.

Hi, If I were to apply and be accepted into UNC Chapel Hill (and not Duke - or got rejected), would I still be able to enrol in Duke instead of UNC Chapel Hill if accepted into the Robertson program? Thank you!

Hi @anonymous5 ,

As a Robertson you are a student of both schools and may take any class at either school. However, you will live at (for the most part), must meet graduation requirements and will receive a degree from your home institution. In your case, that’d be UNC.

TL;DR: You can enrol in classes but not in the school itself.

US COLLEGE ADMISSIONS CALCULATOR

Find a university that best suits you!

We can provide you with a list of a recommended universities.

Enter your score

Get into your dream university. speak with an advisor today..

Terms & Condition

Crimson Education is not affiliated or associated with any university, college, or education institution mentioned on this website.

Scholarship Essay Writing

Scholarship Essay Prompts

Most Popular Scholarship Essay Prompts & Questions

12 min read

Published on: May 16, 2023

Last updated on: Jan 30, 2024

Popular Colleges Scholarship Prompts We Cover

In this article, we provide you with the best and most commonly used essay prompts for the following colleges.

College scholarship essay prompts
Robertson scholarship essay prompts
Park scholarship essay prompts
Vanderbilt scholarship essay prompts
Easy scholarship essay prompts
UCLA alumni scholarship essay prompts
Gilman scholarship essay prompts
Johnson scholarship essay prompts

Feel free to choose any and start writing your scholarship essay or personal statement and show the admission committee why you indeed deserve the financial aid. Make sure to follow the proper scholarship essay format when you are answering these questions.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Current Scholarship Essay Prompts- 2024

Discuss a current global issue and explain how you would propose a solution to address it.
Describe a personal experience that influenced your decision to pursue a particular field of study.
How have you overcome a significant challenge in your life, and how has it impacted your personal growth?
Share a time when you demonstrated leadership and the impact it had on those around you.
Discuss the importance of diversity and inclusion in today's society and how you have contributed to promoting these values.
Describe your career aspirations and how you plan to achieve them.
Discuss a book, movie, or other piece of media that has had a significant impact on your life and explain why.
Share a time when you had to work with someone with a different perspective or background, and how you navigated those differences.
Discuss a community service project you have participated in and the impact it had on the community.
Explain the importance of financial literacy and how you plan to manage your finances in the future.

List of Best College Scholarship Essay Prompts

Here are the most common scholarship essay question examples that you can find on most college applications in the US.

Tell us about yourself.
How will this scholarship help you?
Where do you see yourself ten years from now?
How will you make a difference in our world?
Describe a volunteer experience?
Why do you need this scholarship?
Describe a challenge you have overcome.
Who do you admire the most?
Why do you deserve this scholarship?
Briefly describe your short- and long-term goals.
What are your academic and future goals?
Tell us about a time when you had failed in something.
What makes you unique?
Does any quality or attribute distinguish you from others?
What are your most important extracurricular activities?
What is your biggest strength and weakness?
What are your greatest accomplishments?
What are your strongest personality traits?
How has your education contributed to who you are today?
What is your most prominent achievement, and how does it relate to your field of study?

Additional Scholarship Essay Prompts

Describe a time when you had to step out of your comfort zone and take a risk. What did you learn from the experience?
How have your experiences with diversity and inclusivity shaped your perspective and goals?
What motivates you to pursue your academic and career goals, and how do you stay focused on them?
Describe a moment when you faced adversity and how you overcame it.
How have your family, cultural background, or community influenced your values and beliefs?
Discuss a book, movie, or event that has impacted your life and explain why.
What is the most significant challenge facing your generation, and what solutions would you propose to address it?
Describe a time when you collaborated with others to achieve a common goal. What did you learn from the experience?
What impact do you hope to make in your chosen field or industry, and how will this scholarship help you achieve that goal?

Describe a mentor or role model who has inspired you and explain why.

General Scholarship Essay Topics

Here are some more random scholarship essay topics that you can choose from

A person who has a major influence on your life
Things you have done outside of the classroom that has demonstrated your skills
Have you struggled for something and succeeded?
What leadership qualities do you have?
Why do you want to be a ___?
How do you define leadership?
Describe the importance of a good teammate?
What do you expect to gain from a college degree?
What does success means to you?
A book that has affected you deeply

The 16 Most Popular Scholarship Questions

We have compiled a list of the 16 most popular scholarship questions and how to effectively address them. Letâs take a look!

1. Career How will this scholarship help you achieve your career goals?

When addressing this prompt, discuss your future career aspirations and how the scholarship will support your academic and professional pursuits. Highlight any relevant experiences, skills, or certifications that will contribute to your success.

2. Catch-All Why do you deserve this scholarship?

This prompt allows you to discuss your overall qualifications and achievements that make you a strong candidate for the scholarship. Discuss your academic achievements, extracurricular activities, community service, and future goals.

3. Challenges Discuss a personal or academic challenge you have overcome and how it has shaped you.

When addressing this prompt, be honest and open about a challenge you have faced and how you have overcome it. Highlight any lessons or skills you have gained from overcoming this challenge.

4. Champion Who is a person that has influenced you and why?

When addressing this prompt, discuss a person who has had a significant impact on your life and why. Highlight how their influence has shaped your personal or academic pursuits.

5. Change How will you make a positive impact in your community with the help of this scholarship?

When addressing this prompt, discuss your future community service goals and how the scholarship will support these efforts. Highlight any past community service experiences that demonstrate your commitment to making a positive impact.

6. Character How have your personal values and beliefs influenced your academic pursuits?

When addressing this prompt, discuss your personal values and beliefs and how they have influenced your academic and career goals. Highlight any experiences or achievements that demonstrate your character and commitment to your values.

7. Classroom How will you contribute to the academic community at your future college or university?

When addressing this prompt, discuss how you plan to contribute to the academic community at your future college or university. Highlight any academic or leadership experiences that demonstrate your potential to make a positive impact.

8. College Why have you chosen this particular college or university and how will this scholarship support your academic goals there?

When addressing this prompt, discuss why you have chosen your particular college or university and how the scholarship will support your academic pursuits. Highlight any relevant experiences or goals that align with the college or university's mission or values.

9. Committee Composition What unique perspective do you bring to the scholarship selection committee?

When addressing this prompt, discuss your unique experiences, skills, or background that you believe will contribute to the scholarship selection committee. Highlight any achievements or experiences that demonstrate your potential to make a positive impact.

10. Community How have you contributed to your local community and how will this scholarship support your future community service efforts?

When addressing this prompt, discuss any past community service experiences and how they have made a positive impact. Highlight any future community service goals and how the scholarship will support these efforts.

11. Competition How have you demonstrated your competitive spirit and drive for success?

When addressing this prompt, discuss any academic or extracurricular achievements that demonstrate your competitive spirit and drive for success. Highlight any leadership roles or experiences that demonstrate your potential for future success.

12. Contribution How will you contribute to your field of study through research or other academic pursuits? When addressing this prompt, discuss any research or academic goals you have for your field of study. Highlight any past academic or research experiences that demonstrate your potential to make a positive impact.

13. Control How have you taken control of your academic or personal life and achieved success?

When addressing this prompt, discuss any personal or academic challenges you have faced and how you have taken control of your life to achieve success. Highlight any skills or lessons you have gained from these experiences.

14. Creative How have you used your creativity to solve a problem or make a positive impact?

When addressing this prompt, discuss any experiences or achievements where you have used your creativity to make a positive impact. Highlight any problem-solving skills or unique approaches you have taken to achieve success.

15. Credentials How do your academic credentials and achievements make you a strong candidate for this scholarship?

When addressing this prompt, discuss your academic achievements and credentials that make you a strong candidate for the scholarship. Highlight any honors, awards, or certifications that demonstrate your academic excellence.

16. Culture How have your cultural experiences and background influenced your academic pursuits and goals?

When addressing this prompt, discuss how your cultural experiences and background have shaped your academic pursuits and goals. Highlight any experiences or achievements that demonstrate your unique perspective and potential to make a positive impact in your field of study.

How to Address Scholarship Essay Prompts?

Below you can find some of the most common scholarship questions and tips to answer them. Keep in mind these guidelines while answering the scholarship essay topic of your choice.

Your answers should show that you have a plan for your future and are serious about it. The scholarship committee wants to see that their money is going to someone who has the necessary drive, so don't be shy with what you say.

There's a competition going on - one that you can't afford to lose when your future is at stake. You need to stand out, and the best way to do it is by addressing any weakness with an answer like âI currently have limited knowledge in this area, but I will be able to make up for my lack of experience through diligent study.â These scholarship committees look for applicants who show potential rather than people who already know everything about what they want from life.

It is very important to show the scholarship committee that you are passionate about your goals and ambitions. This will help them decide who they offer scholarships to, so it makes sense to take this question seriously.

While it is impossible to paint a complete image of your entire life in such a short time, you can give an overview of the information about your life that matters most with this scholarship.

To answer this question, show you have a serious plan for the future through education.

Maintaining a strong GPA throughout college is not enough; scholarship committees want more than just an educated student. They also want someone who will use their degree in ways that correspond with it. You'll have some tough competition when trying to prove yourself as a deserving candidate. So, make sure you are realistic about what types of goals and plans can realistically be achieved by going back to school or taking on another graduate program at one university.

This common scholarship essay question is a perfect way to share your thoughts about the importance of community service.

This prompt allows applicants to discuss what they have learned by doing this work and why more students should participate so that communities everywhere will improve.

Tips for Writing an Effective Scholarship Essay

Here are some key tips to keep in mind when writing your scholarship essay:

Address the Prompt: One of the most important things you can do when writing your scholarship essay is to address the prompt directly. Make sure you understand what the prompt is asking you to write about, and focus your essay on that topic.
Be Concise: Scholarship essays often have strict word limits, so it's important to be concise and to the point. Make sure every sentence in your essay serves a purpose and contributes to your overall argument.
Focus on Personal Experiences: Scholarship committees want to get to know you as a person. Thats why it's important to share personal experiences and stories in your essay. Use specific examples and anecdotes to illustrate your points for the scholarship.
Edit and Proofread: Once you've written your essay, take the time to edit and proofread it carefully. Look for typos, grammatical errors and make sure your essay flows smoothly and is easy to read.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long should a scholarship essay be.

Scholarship essays are usually about 500 words or one page long. If you can't find the information about the word or page limit for the essay, it's usually safe to stick to 500 words or one page.

Do scholarship essays need a title?

You can also include a title for your scholarship essay if you want, but this is usually unnecessary.

Is it okay to lie on a scholarship essay?

Scholarships are a great way to save money for college, but lying about your academic achievements could result in serious consequences.

Barbara P (Literature, Marketing)

Barbara is a highly educated and qualified author with a Ph.D. in public health from an Ivy League university. She has spent a significant amount of time working in the medical field, conducting a thorough study on a variety of health issues. Her work has been published in several major publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

Legal & Policies

Privacy Policy
Cookies Policy
Terms of Use
Refunds & Cancellations
Our Writers
Success Stories
Our Guarantees
Affiliate Program
Referral Program
AI Essay Writer

Disclaimer: All client orders are completed by our team of highly qualified human writers. The essays and papers provided by us are not to be used for submission but rather as learning models only.

Robertson Essay Question

Will the Robertson Scholarship Admission committee see the essays I send in to Duke/UNC? Im curious because I was planning on modifying my common app essay for an essay in the Robertson App.

I’d really appreciate a quick reply cause the app is due on Saturday AHHHHH :S

Thanks for the help

What is your essay about?

My son asked the same question last year and Robertson staff replied that they do have access to your full application. So my recommendation is to make Robertson essay different than Common App.

Yes - as I understand it, the Robertson staff do have access to the full application, including Common App essay. I also think they are looking for something different as they are not looking to admit you to school but to a very specific scholar program. I would carefully read the Robertson program history, mission, etc. and use that to inform the essay you submit for them.

This is what the website says:

“We will primarily evaluate students based on the Robertson online application. While we will see students’ Duke and/or UNC applications later in the process, we recommend including all critical information in the Robertson application since the first round of decisions is made without reference to the university applications. As such, students may duplicate essays if they choose, as long the essays answer our specific questions on the online application.”

Therefore, they can see your Common App and Duke essay and they don’t mind you replicating your essay – as long as the Robertson essays answer the posed questions. Sure, you could write different essays but if you have great ones, why not use them?

Board of Directors
Position Statements
Communications
Constitution, Bylaws & Resolutions
Emergency Management
Hazardous Materials
Human Relations
Tech Council
Terrorism and Homeland Security
Training and Education Development
Urban Search & Rescue
Wildland Fire Policy
COS Election
COS Resources
Coaching Program
EVMS Elections
About EMS Section
EMS Election
Latest Updates
Recommended Reading
FRM Conference
Heart Safe Community Awards
James O. Page Award
EFO Election
Executive Fire Officer Program (EFOP)
EFO Symposium & Awards
Federal & Military Fire Services
FLSS Election
FLSS Resources
Fire Alarm Training Series
FLSS Awards
IFSS Election
IFSS Updates
Metro Chiefs
Meet the SHSS Board
SHSS Election
SHSS Resources
SHSS Awards
Volunteer & Combination Officers
Bugle Partners
Bugle Program
Careers at IAFC
Career Center
International Fire Service Research Center and Policy Institute
Chief Officers
Company Officers
Conferences
Officer Development Program Leadership Development Certification Series
IFP Frequently Asked Questions
Online Learning
IAFC Academy
Webinar Library
Comprehensive Opioid, Stimulant & Substance Abuse Program
Technology Council
IAFC Frequency Coordination
UAS Toolkit
Department Administration
Fire Prevention
Lithium-Ion and Energy Storage Systems
Large-Scale Response
Our Facilitators
LMA Conference
Services & Products
Wellness/Fitness Program Summary
Candidate Physical Ability Test
IAFC Recruiting App
Suppression News
Fire Adapted News
Wildland Landscapes News
Wildland Policy News
News Details
Position Details
Wildland Events
Wildland Resource
Wildland News
All Resources
Buyer's Guide
Consulting Services
Grant Funding
Affordable Care Act
Federal Taxation
Homeland Security
Volunteer and Combination
Wildland Fire
Contact NMAS
Hurricane Preparation/Response
Chief's Edge
Community Risk Reduction
Fire-Rescue International
Fire-Rescue Med
Hazmat Conference
Symposium in the Sun
Technology Summit International
WUI Conference
Upcoming Events
Life Membership
Update Profile
Member Benefits
Get Involved
KnowledgeNet
Bugle Brief
Daily Dispatch

2024 Emerging Leader and Emerging Leader Alumni Scholarship Opportunity

July 8, 2024

The Emerging Leader Scholarship and Alumni Scholarship are sponsored by the  Gasaway Consulting Group . The $1500 scholarship stipends are designed to provide an all- expenses paid opportunity for a future fire service leader to attend the  Symposium in the Sun in Clearwater Beach, Florida hosted by the  Volunteer and Combination Officers Section (VCOS) . There are two scholarships awarded by the Gasaway Consulting Group.

Chief Richard B. Gasaway is extremely delighted to be able to provide an opportunity for a future fire service leader to attend the Symposium in the Sun. “VCOS has been very beneficial to my career,” says Chief Gasaway. “I have received many gifts from the Symposiums that I have attended over the years.”

Those who have attended his programs through the years know that Chief Gasaway is a big proponent of paying it forward, giving back and helping others. "This scholarship, along with mentoring and coaching, helps me fulfill my mission of building tomorrow’s leaders today,” Chief Gasaway says.

The Emerging Leader and Alumni scholarships provide funding for airfare, hotel, rental car, meals and conference registration. VCOS membership or IAFC membership is not required to apply.

The  deadline to submit applications is August 15 at 4 PM ET . Email completed applications to Chief Richard B. Gasaway at  [email protected] .

Department Information (please list information for ALL fire departments you currently serve on.)

Department Name
Department Address
Department Phone Number
Population served
Website (if your department has one)
List details of previous IAFC and/or VCOS Scholarships you have received in the past (including the year it was awarded). * Preference will be given to individuals who have not previously received an IAFC or VCOS scholarship. However, having received a scholarship in the past does not eliminate you from consideration.

Essay Question

How have you demonstrated yourself to be a problem solver and a leader of change within your department and within your community? (1,000 words or less)

Deadline : Candidates shall submit the completed application form by 4 PM ET, August 15, 2024. Applications to be emailed to Richard B. Gasaway at  [email protected]

Section VCOS
Featured Volunteer
Featured Department Administration
IAFC Partnerships
Featured Learn & Develop
Human Relations, Diversity & Inclusion
Featured Latest (IAFC)
IAFC Info/News
Featured Home (IAFC)
Featured Leadership
{{Title}} Remove

No categories have been created yet.

Featured Active Shooter Toolkit
Featured Blog
Featured Communications & Technology
Featured Conf & Events
Featured EMS
Featured FDX Blog
Featured FDX home
Featured FDX Resource
Featured Fire Prevention
Featured Grant News
Featured Hazmat
Featured HFC home
Featured HFC Training & Resources
Featured HFC Transport & Commods
Featured Hurricanes
Featured iChiefs
Featured iChiefs List
Featured Large Scale Response
Featured Learn & Develop
Featured Learn & Develop Courses & Training
Featured Legislative News
Featured Lithium Battery
Featured Opioid, Stimulant & Substance Abuse
Featured PDC Reading Recommendations
Featured Personnel
Featured Press Releases
Featured Research
Featured Safety & Health
Featured Smart Alarm Choices
Featured Tools & Topics
Featured Traffic Safety
Featured Wildland
Featured Fire Adapted
Featured Resilient Landscapes
Featured Supression
Featured Wildland Policy
Featured WS A-RIT
featured-vws-a-rit
Active Shooter
Frequency Coordination
Interoperability
Narrowbanding
Public Safety Broadband Network
Community Relations
Customer Service
Marketing & Media
Crisis Communication
Data & Analysis
Economic Environment
Fundraising
Legal Issues
Human Resources
Recruitment2
Volunteer/Career Relations
Information Technology
LODD, PSOB & Ceremonies
Strategic Planning
Epidemics/Emerging Diseases
Fire-based & Private EMS
Firefighter Rehab
(Lightweight) Construction
Alarms and Detectors
Building Codes
Extinguishers
Fire Inspections
Public Education
Government Relations
State Legislation, Regulations
Lithium Battery
Transport Air
Transport Highway
Transport Pipeline
Transport Rail
Transport Water
Human Relations, Diversity & Inclusion
Organizational
Homeland Security/Terrorism
Natural Disasters
state: Florida
state: Georgia
state: Louisiana
state: Mississippi
state: North Carolina
state: South Carolina
state: Texas
state: Virginia
Generational Differences
Leadership Styles
Motivating People
Learn & Develop
Professional Development
Training, Capabilities & Competencies
Fire Behavior
Tech Rescue
Labor/Management Relations
Protected content
Safety & Health
Traffic Safety
Recruitment
Fire-Adapted
Resilient Landscapes
Suppression
Bugle ptnr 3
Bugle ptnr 4
Bugle ptnr 5
Cardiac TK org supporters
COVID Vaccine Comments
Professional Development Committee
Project - Whole Community
Project ALERT
Project FSTAR
Project HFC
Project VWS
Project: NFIRS
Project: Opioid
Project: PERC
Project: SafeQuickClear
Section COS
Section EFO
Section EMS
Heart Safe Community Award
Section EVMS
Section FedMil
Section FLSS
Section Industrial
Section SHS
USR Committee
USR Purpose

Related News

Important update on two vital programs to the fire service: the AFG and SAFER grants read more

NIOSH Request for Comments around Human Factors Considerations - Feedback Requested read more

Ask Congress to Pass the Honoring Our Fallen Heroes Act (H.R. 1719/S. 930) read more

This resource provides lessons learned and suggested next steps as EVs, charging stations, and ESS become more prevalent across the US The challenges associated with responding to EV/ESS emergencies are constantly changing as EV/ESS technologies continue to evolve and become more ...

The IAFC’s Workforce Solutions program through a FEMA SAFER grant has developed a comprehensive guide for volunteer, combination and career departments to run a fire camp to give prospective recruits a taste of life in the fire service. The guide can ...

FSRI is calling on all members of the fire service to “Take C.H.A.R.G.E. of Battery Safety” in the station, at home and in the community, from the initial product purchasing to disposing of the product when it is no longer ...

US Fire Administrator's Summit on Fire Prevention and Control - 2022-2023 Workgroup Report

U.S. Fire Administration 2023 Accomplishments

Terms of Use & Copyright
Privacy Policy
IAFC Logo Usage Policy
Discrimination & Harassment Policy

Blog Outline

Home > Blog > Student > Scholarship > Winning Scholarship Essays for Singapore: Tips & Examples for Indian Students

How to write a strong scholarship essay for Singapore colleges?

30sec Snapshot

Write Your Way to Singapore: Scholarship Essay Guide

Craving a world-class education in Singapore? Scholarships can pave the way! This guide reveals how to write a standout essay that grabs the attention of scholarship committees:

Understand the Landscape: Tailor your essay to the specific scholarship – merit-based, need-based, or program-specific.
Showcase Your Strengths: Highlight academic achievements, leadership, and unique experiences with concrete examples.
Address Financial Need (if applicable): Clearly explain how the scholarship will impact your ability to study in Singapore.
Connect with Singapore: Demonstrate your passion for the country’s academic and cultural environment.
Tell Your Story: Share personal anecdotes that make your essay memorable.

Your Ticket to Singapore: Crafting a Winning Scholarship Essay (with Examples!)

Dreaming of studying in Singapore, the vibrant global hub of education and innovation? Securing a scholarship can be your golden ticket to this academic haven. But how can you make your scholarship essay stand out from the competition? This guide provides expert tips and specific examples tailored for Indian students aiming to study in the Lion City.

Understanding Singapore's Scholarship Landscape

Before you begin writing, it’s crucial to understand the different types of scholarships available in Singapore:

Merit-Based Scholarships: Awarded based on academic excellence, these scholarships often require a high GPA, strong standardized test scores, and a track record of academic achievements.
Need-Based Scholarships: These scholarships focus on your financial situation. You’ll need to demonstrate your financial need and explain how a scholarship will enable you to pursue your studies in Singapore.
Program-Specific Scholarships: Some scholarships are targeted towards specific fields of study or programs. You’ll need to highlight your passion and achievements in the relevant area.

Crafting Your Winning Essay: Tailored Strategies

Here’s how to craft a compelling scholarship essay that speaks directly to the selection committee:

Target the Scholarship: Research the specific scholarship and tailor your essay accordingly. Understand the scholarship’s purpose, goals, and target audience. Highlight how your aspirations and values align with the scholarship’s mission.
Showcase Your Strengths: Don’t be afraid to highlight your academic achievements, leadership qualities, and unique experiences. Quantify your accomplishments with specific examples, such as your GPA, test scores, awards, projects, and extracurricular activities.
Address Financial Need (if applicable): For need-based scholarships, clearly articulate your financial situation and explain how the scholarship will make a significant difference in your ability to pursue your studies in Singapore.
Connect with Singapore: Demonstrate a genuine interest in studying and contributing to Singapore’s dynamic academic and cultural environment. Mention any relevant experiences or research interests that align with Singapore’s strengths in your field of study.
Tell Your Story: Go beyond a mere list of accomplishments. Share personal anecdotes, challenges you’ve overcome, or experiences that have shaped your academic and career goals. Make your essay engaging and memorable.
Proofread Meticulously: Ensure your essay is error-free, well-structured, and flows smoothly. Ask a trusted friend, teacher, or mentor to review your essay for feedback.

Scholarship Essay Examples:

Merit-Based Scholarship Example: “As a top-ranking student with a GPA of 9.5 and a 99th percentile score on the [Standardized Test], I consistently strive for academic excellence. My research project on [Topic] at [Institution] fueled my passion for [Field of Study] and instilled in me a deep appreciation for Singapore’s thriving research ecosystem. I believe that the [Scholarship Name] would provide me with the resources and mentorship to pursue my Master’s degree at [Singaporean University], where I aspire to contribute to cutting-edge research in [Research Area].”
Need-Based Scholarship Example: “Growing up in a modest household in India, pursuing my education has always been a top priority. I have excelled academically, consistently ranking at the top of my class, despite facing financial constraints. The [Scholarship Name] would be a life-changing opportunity, enabling me to pursue my Bachelor’s degree in [Field of Study] at [Singaporean University] and ultimately achieve my dream of becoming a [Your Career Goal].”

What is the Niyo Scholarship -

The Niyo Scholarship for Indian students with sights set on international education this Fall 2024!

Niyo which provides free Zero Forex Cards to Indian students to help them save forex charges while studying abroad has launched a $20,000 scholarship fund divided into 10 scholarships each worth $2,000, to outstanding Indian students who are starting their Master’s or Bachelors programs at universities outside India.

The eligibility criteria are broad to ensure that students from all backgrounds have a chance. Whether you are an academic achiever, facing financial difficulties, demonstrated innovative ideas, or are committed to social work, the Niyo Scholarship can support your journey to a world-class education.

This initiative aims to help students from various fields and encourage diverse talents to pursue their educational dreams abroad.

How to Apply:
Download the Niyo app (click on the button or scan the QR to download).
Get your free Niyo card (it’s quick and easy!).
Watch for the scholarship banner on the Niyo app homepage (will appear once you complete the card order process).
Click on the banner to access the application form.
Fill out the form and submit your application.

2. What countries are eligible?

The scholarship is open to all Indian students starting education abroad in any country outside India, including the
United States
United Kingdom
Netherlands
United Arab Emirates
Philippines
And many more

3. Is academic merit the only factor?

Absolutely not! We celebrate well-rounded individuals. Here’s how you can qualify:
Merit: Stellar academic performance is always impressive.
Financial Need: Facing financial limitations? We understand. Explain how the scholarship would make a difference.
Innovation: Pioneered a groundbreaking project? Showcase your ingenuity!
Social Work: Actively involved in social or environmental causes? Let your dedication shine.

4. Why Apply for the Niyo Scholarship?

There are several compelling reasons to join the Niyo Scholarship race:

Financial Support: Each scholarship provides a substantial $2,000 to ease your educational expenses abroad.
Recognition: Be acknowledged for your academic excellence, innovative spirit, or dedication to social good.
Easy Application: The entire process is conveniently accessible through the user-friendly Niyo app.

5. Can I apply if I already have another scholarship?

6. when will the winners be announced.

Don’t miss out on this incredible opportunity! Download the Niyo app, get your card, and be ready to apply for the scholarship.

Related Blogs

How Many Scholarships Should You Apply for in the Netherlands? (2024 Guide for Indian Students)

Combining Scholarships & Financial Aid in Kyrgyzstan: Indian Student Guide (2024)

Combining Scholarships and Financial Aid in China: A Guide for Indian Students (2024)

How Many Scholarships Should I Apply for to Study in China? (2024 Guide for Indian Students)

How to Write a Winning Scholarship Essay for Dutch Universities (2024 Guide for Indian Students)

How Much Do Dutch Scholarships Cover? 2024 Guide for Indian Students

Recent Blogs

Fascinating Places To Explore In Bali for Indian Travellers

Find out about all the best places to explore in Bali, including the age-old temples, natural landscapes, restaurants, islands, etc. Read now!

Plan Your Best Bali Travel Itinerary from India

Plan your Bali Travel Itinerary with information about the documents, tourist attractions, activities, and other important factors for an exciting vacation.

Shishira & Navneeth

Colourful Festivals In Indonesia for a Cherishable Trip from India

Find out everything you want to know about the lively and colourful festivals in Indonesia that showcase the culture and traditions of this beautiful country.

Network Partners

Download App

Partner T&Cs

Legal Policies & Documents

Verify MobileApp Checksum

SBM Bank Customer Care

Discover more from Niyo

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Stop Paying International Transaction Fees!

Share on Mastodon

High School Students

The robertson scholars leadership program welcomes applications from all students regardless of citizenship or nationality., any student wishing to be considered for the robertson must apply directly using our application. this is the only way to ensure your application is considered by our selection team..

Students who have not yet matriculated to any university apply for The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program using the High School Application. We accept applications from students who elect to apply Early Decision to other institutions as well as applications from students who apply to other scholarship programs. Students may apply to Duke & UNC either Early Action, Early Decision, or Regular Decision.

Application and Interview Timeline

Application Opens: August 15, 2024

Application Due: November 15, 2024

Students who advance past the application stage will be contacted by the Robertson on a rolling basis to schedule interviews.

Finalist Interviews: March 5-March 8, 2025

Eligibility

Students must apply for undergraduate admission to Duke and/or UNC-Chapel Hill the same year they apply to the Robertson Scholars Leadership Program.
Students must apply to the school(s) of their choice by the respective Early or Regular deadlines.
Admission to Duke and UNC-Chapel Hill are separate processes. All forms and correspondence dealing with admission to these institutions should go directly to their respective Offices of Undergraduate Admissions.
International students are eligible to apply for the Robertson as long as they are able to obtain a Visa to study in the United States.
Students on a gap year who have already been admitted to Duke University or UNC-Chapel Hill may not apply for the Robertson until they matriculate to their respective institution.
Transfer students are not eligible to apply.
The Robertson is strictly available for undergraduate students. Students seeking graduate degrees may not apply.

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

240 Accesses

14 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]

Get the Reddit app

Join the A2C Discord!

r/ApplyingToCollege is the premier forum for college admissions questions, advice, and discussions, from college essays and scholarships to college list help and application advice, career guidance, and more.

Question for those applying to the Robertson Scholarship...

I was including the main high school sports I played on the Robertson application, but someone told me that it should only be extracurriculars outside of that such as clubs, startups, other organizations. I thought it was pretty weird that you couldn't add sports on. Is this true or have any of you also included your sports in your application?

IMAGES

William T Robertson Scholarship Essay Entry Form
William T Robertson Scholarship Essay Entry Form
ROBERTSON SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION Doc Template
Robertson Scholarship
10 Common Scholarship Essay Questions and How to Answer Them
Robertson Scholarship

VIDEO

Canadian Beef Check-Off Agency Scholarship Application
Celebrating 30 Years of The Robertson Trust Scholarship
Neil Robertson Tourmates
Commonwealth Shared Scholarship Essay Guide
At 89, Dale Robertson Finally Admitted What We Thought All Along
Meet The Robertson Trust Scholarship Team

COMMENTS

Application FAQs
Application FAQs. Do I need to submit an official transcript for my Robertson Program application? Are standardized tests required to apply? Who should I ask to write a letter of recommendation for me? Do I have to apply Early Decision/Early Action or Regular Decision in order to be considered for the Robertson? Do I have to complete my Duke or ...
I'm a sophomore/Robertson Scholar (full-ride merit scholarship) at Duke
Hey y'all! This sub was my lifeblood a year ago and today is a slow day at work — so I'm happy to answer any questions you have about Duke University, the Robertson Scholars program, or applying to top merit scholarships in general.
Robertson Scholarship
In this "How to Win a Robertson Scholarship" guide, we'll cover merit-based scholarship opportunities for high school seniors. Specifically, we'll talk about how to win the Robertson Scholarship for North Carolina's top schools: Duke University and UNC-Chapel Hill. We'll discuss Robertson Scholarship eligibility, the funding it can provide, how to apply, and tips on how to become a ...
Applying
The Robertson selection process focuses on finding students committed to making systems level changes in the world around them, who believe in possibilities, and have the creative imagination to solve intractable problems. We seek to build a community comprised of individuals seeking to work and learn alongside equally inspired change agents ...
I'm a semi finalist for the Robertson scholarship but don't know how to
So I'm a semi finalist for the Robertson scholarship and I have no idea how to prepare. Apparently there's a really intense 20 minute interview (nothing like an alumni interview) and an 10 minute video we record answering a moral dilemma question (and we only get one chance to record).
Robertson Scholars Program
Robertson Scholars are a community of leaders within Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, striving to make transformational contributions to society. The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program provides eight semesters of full tuition, room and board, and most mandatory fees for Scholars at Duke and UNC-Chapel Hill. Scholars also have access to generous funding ...
Robertson Scholars
The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program provides eight semesters of full tuition, room and board, and most mandatory fees for Scholars at Duke and UNC-Chapel Hill.
The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program
High School This year's Robertson Scholars Leadership Program application for high school students will be available online beginning October 1, 2013 to complete and submit by November 15, 2013.
Robertson Scholarship Practice Questions
I believe that everyone interviewing for this scholarship is well deserving of this, and I know for myself personally that this would be an incredible opportunity to immediately jump into all of the programs and benefits that the Robertson offers.
Robertson Scholarship Tips, Requirements & Acceptance Rate
A major and significant elements of an interview is answering questions in a manner that shows your understanding and comprehension regarding your knowledge of the Robertson Scholars program.
Robertson Scholarship Questions
If anybody could help, I have a few questions regarding the Robertson Scholarship. First, can the recommendations used for the Robertson supplement be the exact same ones submitted to Duke through the Common App? Do the Academic and Mentor Recommenders have to be different people? Finally, could I use a debate teacher as an Academic Recommender? Thanks!
Ask
The Robertson program is a unique experience for around 15 Duke students each year. Scholars from the U.S. are chosen from the Duke/UNC application pool of around 60,000 students and the seven or so international scholars (from countries including NZ, Australia, England, Ethiopia and India) are invited following an extremely personal interview process. Clearly, this selection process differs ...
Robertson Scholarship Recommender Questions (PLEASE HELP REAL QUICK
As per the Robertson Scholars website : At least one recommender should be a teacher who has seen you in a classroom setting. The second recommender may be anyone who can speak to your leadership and character (teacher, coach, counselor, job/volunteer supervisor, research mentor, etc). 3. No; they're separate committees.
Latest Scholarship Essay Prompts 2024 & How to Answer Them
Get expert insights into the best scholarship essay prompts and learn how to write an essay that showcases your unique talents and personality. Check out now!
5 Ways to Make Your Scholarship Essay Stand Out
A well-crafted essay can potentially win students thousands of dollars in scholarships, experts say.
PDF 2023-2024 ACADEMIC YEAR
The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program provides eight semesters of tuition, room, board, and mandatory fees for Scholars attending Duke and UNC-Chapel Hill who are admitted during the high school selection process.
Robertson Essay Question
Robertson Essay Question. Colleges and Universities A-Z Duke University. thenarwhalking November 13, 2014, 12:30am 1. Will the Robertson Scholarship Admission committee see the essays I send in to Duke/UNC? Im curious because I was planning on modifying my common app essay for an essay in the Robertson App. .
Robertson Scholarship
View Robertson Scholarship - Essays.pdf from ENGLISH 657 at Harvard University. Share a quotation (attributable to someone else) that you feel best aligns with your definition of leadership․ How
High School Students
The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program welcomes applications from International students. There is one application for all High School students regardless of nationality or citizenship.
Scholarship Essay Tips for Indian Students in Kyrgyzstan (2024 Guide)
Craft a winning scholarship essay to study in Kyrgyzstan! This guide offers tips for merit-based, need-based, and field-specific scholarships tailored to Indian students.
Robertson Scholarship Question : r/ApplyingToCollege
Robertson Scholarship Question. Application Question. I was lucky enough to be picked as a semifinalist for the Robertson Scholarship for UNC and was wondering if this has any indication on my eventual decision from Duke? I know obviously that it doesn't guarantee any acceptance, but do you guys know of any indication that comes with being a ...
How to Write a Winning Scholarship Essay for China: 2024 Guide for
Unlock scholarships to study in China with a powerful essay! This guide offers expert advice, examples, and strategies for Indian students to craft compelling applications.
Current Duke or UNC Students
Students currently in their first year of study at Duke or UNC-Chapel Hill, who are not transfer students, are invited to apply to join the Robertson Scholars Leadership Program. Students should apply using the Current Duke & UNC Student Application. Students selected through this process will join the Robertson Cohort for Community Summer and will receive full tuition, room and board and fees ...
2024 Emerging Leader and Emerging Leader Alumni Scholarship Opportunity
"This scholarship, along with mentoring and coaching, helps me fulfill my mission of building tomorrow's leaders today," Chief Gasaway says. The Emerging Leader and Alumni scholarships provide funding for airfare, hotel, rental car, meals and conference registration. ... Essay Question.
I'm a Robertson Scholar semifinalist!!!
ApplyingToCollege. r/ApplyingToCollege is the premier forum for college admissions questions, advice, and discussions, from college essays and scholarships to SAT/ACT test prep, career guidance, and more. 1.1M Members. 216 Online.
Winning Scholarship Essays for Singapore: Tips & Examples for Indian
Unlock scholarships to study in Singapore with a powerful essay! This guide offers expert advice, examples, and strategies for Indian students to craft compelling applications.
High School Students
Students who have not yet matriculated to any university apply for The Robertson Scholars Leadership Program using the High School Application. We accept applications from students who elect to apply Early Decision to other institutions as well as applications from students who apply to other scholarship programs. Students may apply to Duke & UNC either Early Action, Early Decision, or Regular ...
Can you spot the bot? Identifying AI-generated writing in college essays
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.
Question for those applying to the Robertson Scholarship...
Posted by u/SarimROTI - 1 vote and 4 comments