As artificial intelligence (AI) tools become ubiquitous in higher education, scholars and instructors question the continued value of essay writing as an assessment and learning strategy. Critics argue that generative models like ChatGPT can automate much of the writing process, potentially diminishing students’ engagement with core cognitive and rhetorical skills. Drawing on literature from writing-to-learn research, AI in education, and composition studies, this paper argues that essay writing remains indispensable for graduate‐level social science students. Three key dimensions including cognitive development, rhetorical fluency, and metacognitive reflection are examined to demonstrate how essay assignments cultivate critical thinking, scholarly voice and self‐regulated learning in ways AI cannot fully replicate. Further, integrating AI ethically into the writing process can enhance these outcomes when assignments are reconfigured to emphasize process, attribution, and oral defense. Implications for course design and academic integrity policies are discussed, with recommendations for leveraging AI as a pedagogical partner rather than a substitute.

essay writing, artificial intelligence, critical thinking, metacognition, higher education

1. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 29–58.

2. Chen, C., & Gong, Y. (2025). The role of AI-assisted learning in academic writing: A mixed methods study on Chinese as a second language students. Education Sciences, 15(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020141

3. Du, J., & Orsini, M. (2024). Co-designing AI attribution policies with students: A participatory approach to academic integrity. Journal of Educational Technology Policy, 12(3), 45–63.

4. Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading–writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39–50.

5. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.

6. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–455.

7. Jen, S. L., & Salam, A. R. (2024). Using artificial intelligence for essay writing: Insights from a systematic review. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on ChatGPT, 90–99. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/ChatGPT.5

8. Kim, J., Yu, S., Detrick, R., & Li, N. (2024). Exploring students’ perspectives on generative AI-assisted academic writing. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12878-7

9. Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11(3), 203–270. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021913217281

10. Male, H., Timu, T. M., & Sabrina, D. (2025). The role of artificial intelligence (AI) in essay writing: Student perceptions and pedagogical implications. SIGEH ELT: Journal of Literature and Linguistics, 5(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.36269/sigeh.v5i1.3115

11. Popenici, S. A., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8

12. Stojanovic, L., Radojcic, V., Savić, S., Cvetkovic, A. S., & Sarcevic, D. (2023). The influence of artificial intelligence on creative writing: Exploring the synergy between AI and creative authorship. International Journal of Engineering Inventions, 12(12), 70–74. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijier/v12i12.13

13. Vemula, M. (2025). Academic writing in the age of AI: Opportunities, challenges, and best practices. The Scientific Scholar Publishing, 4(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.17311/tsp.2025.08.14

14. Yancey, K. B., Robertson, L., & Taczak, K. (2014). Writing across contexts: Transfer, composition, and sites of writing. College Composition and Communication, 66(2), 357–382.