Should students use AI to write their university appeals?
A growing number of students are turning to AI to write their university appeals. For students unfamiliar with the process, lacking confidence in their writing abilities or unable to afford professional help, AI offers an instant and free solution. But is it a good one?
How AI can help students during the appeal process
AI is most effective in the early stages of drafting. Many students struggle to begin their appeals because they do not know what information is relevant or how to present it in a way that is persuasive and consistent with the university’s regulations. AI can reorganise scattered notes into a clear structure and create a basic narrative that the student can then develop. This can ease the initial writer’s block that often accompanies appeals.
AI can also improve clarity and tone. Some students find formal writing challenging and cannot explain their situation succinctly. AI can refine sentence structure, correct grammar and remove emotive language, making it easier for decision-makers to understand the facts and issues of the appeal. This is particularly useful for students whose English is less proficient or those whose disabilities negatively affect their written communication.
In some cases, AI can help students identify missing information. It can prompt students to include relevant dates, background details or evidence they had not initially considered. This can strengthen the organisation and coherence of the appeal.
The risks
Despite these advantages, AI is - at the time of writing (December 2025) - less reliable when it comes to the substance of the appeal. Generative AI models are not ‘intelligent’ in the ways that humans are. [1] Appeals often turn on nuanced questions of whether medical evidence was properly evaluated, procedural rules were followed, reasonable adjustments were applied or the fairness of the university’s decision. These issues require judgement and insight, and AI can overlook arguments that an experienced human would identify.
Factual inaccuracy is another risk. AI systems can misstate procedures or provide summaries of regulations that do not exist. Because these outputs can appear confident and authoritative, students might not realise that the information is wrong. In appeals, accuracy is crucial. A factual mistake can damage credibility and lead a decision-maker to question the reliability of the entire submission.
AI-generated text can also lack authenticity. A recent University of East Anglia study found that AI-generated essays did not have the originality shown in essays written by real students. [2] The study compared the work of 145 real students with ChatGPT-generated essays. While the essays were found to be coherent and grammatically sound, they lacked a personal touch. This matters for appeals. Panel members read many submissions, and they can often sense when an appeal is written by AI. Students with strong grounds sometimes weaken their case unintentionally by relying on AI-produced text. AI writing is often stale, while good human writing carries a sincerity that AI currently struggles to reproduce. If a decision-maker suspects that an appeal has been shaped too heavily by AI, it may lessen the impact of the arguments or give the impression that the student is incompetent, lazy, or has not fully engaged with the process, which can reduce the prospects of success.
Conclusion
AI can play a useful and often reassuring role in drafting appeals. It is valuable for generating an initial structure, improving clarity and reducing the anxiety associated with beginning a complex piece of writing. However, students should be cautious about relying on AI for the substantive arguments in their appeals. AI lacks the human insight and judgement needed to identify all arguments and build a persuasive case. It can introduce damaging inaccuracies, overlook key issues, and produce writing that sounds impersonal.
LLMs are not a substitute for human legal expertise, critical judgement, or diligent verification.
Every appeal must be checked carefully against the university’s policies and regulations and the specific facts in the case. A human skilled in the identification of arguments should ensure that the AI’s arguments are sound and that no strong arguments have been missed.
If you would like expert advice on your university appeal, or would like assistance with the writing of the appeal itself, contact us now on 0800 368 9230.
References
[1]https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2025/06/artificial-intelligence-illiteracy/683021/
[2]https://www.uea.ac.uk/about/news/article/chatgpt-vs-students-study-reveals-who-writes-better-and-its-not-the-ai
