academic writing
Jenni AI vs. Google Gemini: Comparing AI Tools for Academic Writing and Avoiding Cheating
Jan 30, 2025
Written by Alessandra Giugliano, MSc, University of Amsterdam
AI Writing Tools: Jenni vs. Gemini and Academic Integrity
AI writing tools have become invaluable resources for students tackling the challenges of academic writing. From grammar checks to idea generation, these tools streamline the writing process. However, with the rapid growth of AI technology, choosing the right tool can be daunting.
In this blog post, we compare two AI writing tools: Jenni AI and Google Gemini. To provide a real-world perspective, we tested these tools using a member of the thesify team’s paper written for a theory course during their MSc in Medical Sociology and Anthropology. This essay’s complex nature offered the perfect opportunity to evaluate how these tools perform in nuanced academic settings.A critical consideration for students is how these tools align with academic integrity and support learning. We’ll explore how Jenni AI and Google Gemini handle plagiarism concerns, encourage responsible use, and impact the writing process. By analyzing their limitations and advantages, we aim to help students make informed decisions about their AI writing support.
Finally, we ‘ll introduce thesify, an AI-powered academic assistant, and highlight how it stands out as a superior alternative. By the end, you’ll have a clear understanding of each tool’s strengths and weaknesses, helping you make an informed decision about the best AI writing support for your academic needs.
Jenni AI: A Versatile Tool, but Is It Academic-Integrity Friendly?
Jenni AI comes packed with features that make academic writing easier, but when put to the test, some concerns about its role in maintaining academic integrity arise. Here’s what you need to know:
Prompt-Based Writing: One standout feature of Jenni AI is the ability to input detailed assignment prompts. During testing, this allowed the tool to generate tailored content that aligned with the structure of the assignment. However, there’s a risk here—relying too heavily on this feature might conflict with university policies that expect students to demonstrate independent critical thinking.
In testing, Jenni AI’s feature allowed tailored content creation for an essay on medical sociology and anthropology theory. The tool successfully aligned its suggestions with the paper’s structure, such as its focus on bio-power and abjection, but risked presenting fully generated content that lacked depth and originality.
Fluency Improvements: The "Improve Fluency" feature effectively refines sentence structure and flow. In practice, it worked well for smoothing out awkward phrasing but didn’t address deeper issues, such as weak theorizing or incomplete argumentation, as seen in specific sections of the essay. For example, during testing, Jenni AI improved the readability of a section discussing Bergschmidt’s theoretical lens but failed to strengthen weak arguments, such as the connection between bio-power and clinical treatment. This tool works best for surface-level edits rather than addressing deeper analytical gaps.
Rewriting Tools: With options for paraphrasing, simplifying, or lengthening text, Jenni AI gives you flexibility in revising your work. However, during testing, these tools occasionally removed citations that had been manually inputted, requiring additional checks to maintain academic coherence. While this issue was minor, it highlights the importance of carefully reviewing AI-generated edits.
During testing, when rewriting a section on "abjection," Jenni AI accidentally removed a manually added citation, requiring a time-consuming review. While rare, this highlights the importance of double-checking AI-edited content for errors.
AI Chat for Questions: Jenni AI includes a built-in chat where you can ask questions during the writing process, which can assist with clarifying concepts or refining your approach.
Document Upload and Auto-Citation: Jenni AI allows you to upload documents and auto-generate citations, streamlining the process of managing sources. Don’t forget to review the generated citations to ensure they are accurate and meet academic requirements.
Google Gemini Writing Support: Features and Integrity Considerations
Google Gemini offers practical features designed to improve writing efficiency, especially if you’re already part of the Google Workspace ecosystem. But how does it hold up in the academic context? Here’s what testing revealed:
Integrated with Google Workspace: Gemini comes included with Google Workspace subscriptions, so it’s not free, but it’s already part of what many students pay for. This integration makes it easily accessible alongside your existing tools, like Google Docs and Drive.
Text Rephrasing Options: Gemini’s tone-adjustment feature allows you to modify text for formal, persuasive, or friendly styles. While this can help refine the tone of your writing, it doesn’t enhance the depth or quality of your arguments. Using this tool sparingly is key to avoiding over-reliance on AI for stylistic tweaks that might dilute your critical thinking efforts.
Shorten and Expand Paragraphs
The paragraph tools enable you to adjust text for clarity or length (Screenshot 5). However, testing revealed that the "shorten" option often removed essential details, leading to weaker arguments. This could be problematic in assignments requiring theoretical depth or complex ideas, potentially raising concerns about academic integrity if critical points are unintentionally lost.
Shortening a paragraph on Butler’s concept of "the abject other" removed critical details about its societal implications, resulting in a weaker argument. This can hinder assignments that require theoretical depth.
No Support for Detailed Prompts
Unlike other tools, Gemini doesn’t allow you to input specific assignment prompts. This lack of context-specific functionality limits its usefulness for crafting nuanced academic essays, especially those requiring detailed analysis or tailored structure.
This limitation was apparent when using the tool on the test theory paper—Gemini couldn’t provide guidance tailored to the essay’s focus on phenomenology and bio-power, which made it less effective for crafting nuanced academic writing.
AI Tools for Students: Comparing Usability of Jenni AI and Google Gemini
Both Jenni AI and Google Gemini provide useful features for academic writing, but their limitations may challenge students seeking comprehensive support.
Jenni AI: Offers detailed prompts for tailored content creation, aligning with specific assignment needs. However, this feature risks over-reliance on AI-generated text, which may conflict with academic expectations for originality and critical thinking.
Google Gemini: Lacks support for detailed prompts, limiting its effectiveness for assignments requiring nuanced analysis or custom structure.
2. Citation Management
Jenni AI: Provides auto-citation for uploaded documents but may remove manually added citations during edits, requiring extra review for accuracy.
Google Gemini: Retains citations seamlessly during edits (Screenshot 8), offering reliable source management.
3. Cost Efficiency
Jenni AI: Operates on a free or paid plan, with the free plan not being sufficient for regular use.
Google Gemini: Bundled with Google Workspace subscriptions, making it cost-effective for students already using these services. However, its limited academic-specific features may reduce its value.
4. Argumentation and Analysis
Jenni AI: Although effective at improving fluency and language flow, it fell short when addressing weak theorizing or incomplete arguments in the tested essay. For example, sections discussing Foucault’s concept of bio-power were rephrased fluently but lacked added depth or critical insights.
Google Gemini: Focused more on stylistic improvements, Gemini’s rephrasing tools didn’t enhance the depth of theoretical analysis. Simplifying paragraphs often removed key elements of the argument, as seen in attempts to refine a discussion of "abjection" in Butler’s framework.
Takeaway
While both tools offer practical features, neither fully supports the deeper critical thinking and analysis required for rigorous academic assignments. For students needing tailored guidance, tools like thesify—which provide actionable feedback and prioritize academic growth—may be better suited.
AI Tools and Cheating: What Students Need to Know
AI writing tools like Jenni AI and Google Gemini can assist with academic tasks, but their use raises questions about cheating if students rely on them improperly. Universities value original thought and critical analysis, and using AI to generate or significantly alter content may blur the lines of academic integrity. Based on our testing, here’s how specific features of these tools might cross into ethically questionable territory.
1. Rephrasing and Shortening: Misrepresentation Risks
Google Gemini’s Rephrase and Shorten features can unintentionally alter the meaning of a text. For example, during testing, the Shorten tool removed critical theoretical details about Foucault’s "bio-power," diluting the argument. If a student submits such content without revising it for accuracy, they could face accusations of misunderstanding or misrepresenting their sources, which might be interpreted as academic dishonesty.
Similarly, the Rephrase tool was effective in adjusting tone, but rephrased text occasionally softened the strength of an argument, making it less precise. For example, during testing, the tool suggested rephrasing the title of an essay about "heroin dependence" to "heroin addiction". While seemingly a minor tweak, this change undermines the essay's academic precision by conflating two distinct terms in sociology and medical anthropology.
Universities often expect students to demonstrate clarity and depth in their writing, and relying on tools that simplify language without critical oversight could result in work that falls short of academic standards.
2. Generative Text and Prompts: Who’s Doing the Work?
AI tools like Jenni AI simplify content creation, but their automated text generation features can raise concerns about originality and academic integrity. For instance, during testing, Jenni AI was able to produce a well-structured and coherent analysis of a sociology theory essay based on detailed prompts. This included generating text aligned with theoretical concepts such as Foucault's idea of "bio-power." While this might seem like a convenient shortcut, it introduces an ethical dilemma: how much of the final submission is your work, and how much is the AI’s?
The automated suggestions, as seen in the screenshot, reflect an over-reliance on the tool’s generative features.
With minimal input, Jenni AI can produce paragraphs that mimic academic tone and structure. However, universities expect students to engage deeply with the material, demonstrating their own analytical skills and understanding. By accepting AI-generated content without revision, you risk submitting work that doesn’t fully reflect your intellectual contributions.The core issue here is transparency and intent. If a student uses AI-generated text and presents it as their own, this could be seen as academic dishonesty, especially if the university requires disclosure of AI use. Even when the AI’s output is accurate and fits well into the essay, failing to engage critically with the material or relying too heavily on AI could raise red flags with institutions that emphasize originality and ethical writing practices.
In contrast, thesify provides actionable feedback designed to support student learning without generating or rewriting large sections of text. For example, during testing, thesify highlighted specific weak points in an essay, such as insufficient analysis of evidence and missing connections to the thesis (Screenshot below).
thesify’s detailed guidance ensures students remain actively involved in their revisions and avoid shortcuts that compromise academic integrity.
3. Citation Management and Plagiarism Risks
Proper citation is a given when considering academic integrity, but AI tools present unique challenges in this area:
Jenni AI’s auto-citation feature simplifies source management, especially when juggling multiple references. However, the responsibility to verify accuracy still rests with you. Failing to review citations for correctness or completeness could result in accidental plagiarism, especially if the generated references don’t fully align with your source material.
Google Gemini, while retaining citations during edits, doesn’t offer auto-citation or allow document uploads. This means you’ll need to manually manage references, which increases the risk of errors or omissions if you’re working under tight deadlines.Both tools require careful oversight to ensure that citation practices remain accurate and aligned with academic expectations. Neglecting this aspect could lead to significant consequences under institutional plagiarism policies.
Is It Cheating?
The line between using AI tools as support and crossing into academic dishonesty can be blurry. Here’s how common scenarios might be viewed:
Generating content: If you rely on Jenni AI’s prompt-based writing feature to create substantial portions of your work, your university might consider it a substitute for independent thinking. This could violate policies requiring original analysis.
Editing tools: Using features like Gemini’s rephrasing or Jenni AI’s rewriting tools to simplify or reword text without careful review might misrepresent the original material. This could constitute misrepresentation if it significantly alters meaning or weakens your argument.
Unacknowledged AI use: Submitting work without disclosing the role of AI in its creation is a common breach of academic integrity policies. Institutions increasingly expect students to be transparent about AI-assisted workflows, and failing to disclose this information could lead to disciplinary action.
A Better Way Forward
While tools like Jenni AI and Google Gemini offer useful features, their limitations in fostering genuine academic growth and maintaining transparency underscore the importance of choosing the right tool. thesify, by contrast, encourages you to develop your critical thinking skills while providing actionable feedback to strengthen your academic work ethically.
Explaining AI Tool Use to Universities: What Students Should Know
Universities are placing increasing emphasis on transparency when it comes to the use of AI writing tools like Jenni AI and Google Gemini. Clearly explaining how you utilized these tools can help maintain academic integrity and demonstrate compliance with institutional policies. Here’s how you can document and communicate your AI usage effectively:
For Jenni AI Users
Specify AI’s role in your process: Clearly state how you used features like fluency improvements or rephrasing. Emphasize that the tool acted as a supplement to your writing, not as a replacement for your critical thinking or analysis.For example, one unique feature of Jenni AI is its ability to auto-generate counterarguments based on existing content (see Screenshot below).
During testing, Jenni AI generated a counterargument about disability theory that critiqued its limitations regarding intersectional challenges and barriers to inclusion.
While the output aligned with the topic, this raises important questions about academic integrity. If you submit this AI-generated text without significant revision or critical engagement, universities may view it as lacking originality or as a substitution for your own analytical work. To maintain integrity:
Review and refine: Explain how you evaluated the AI-generated counterargument, added nuance, and ensured alignment with your thesis.
Acknowledge AI’s limitations: Note areas where the AI’s suggestions required additional evidence, clarification, or contextual understanding.
Describe manual refinements: Highlight your active role in editing and refining the AI-generated content. For instance, explain how you ensured citations were accurate, filled gaps in arguments, or strengthened the clarity of your points after using features like paraphrasing or expansion.
Acknowledge limitations: If you used generative tools for specific sections, address the steps you took to verify and refine the content, such as cross-checking with your sources or ensuring compliance with your university's AI usage policies.
For Google Gemini Users
Focus on enhancements over rewriting: Explain how Gemini’s tools, like rephrasing and shortening, were used to fine-tune language without altering the meaning or structure of your arguments.
Discuss your oversight efforts: Mention how you reviewed AI-edited sections to ensure critical theoretical details remained intact, particularly when using simplification or expansion tools for complex academic content.
Highlight targeted applications: Emphasize that you used Gemini as a resource for improving clarity or adjusting tone, not as a shortcut for producing content or analyzing material.
General Best Practices for AI Transparency
Note AI usage in your assignment: Include a brief mention in your introduction or appendices explaining how AI tools supported your work. For example, specify that they were used for language refinement or citation management.
Cite AI tools appropriately: When relevant, include references to AI tools in your bibliography or footnotes, acknowledging their specific contributions to your process.
Emphasize your original contributions: Make it clear that you retained full ownership of your work by demonstrating critical thinking, in-depth analysis, and originality throughout your submission.By openly documenting your use of AI tools, you not only reduce the risk of being accused of plagiarism or dishonesty but also show that you can ethically and responsibly integrate technology into your academic efforts. While tools like Jenni AI and Google Gemini offer valuable assistance, using a platform like thesify could streamline this process further by providing tailored, ethical academic support that’s easy to document and defend.
Check out our detailed blog post on how to use AI without cheating.
What Makes thesify Different?
When comparing AI tools for academic writing, thesify emerges as a uniquely tailored option, designed specifically to help students excel while maintaining academic integrity. Unlike Jenni AI and Google Gemini, thesify focuses on fostering critical thinking, providing in-depth feedback, and ensuring ethical AI use. Here’s how thesify stands out:
Comprehensive Feedback: Unlike Jenni AI, which focuses on fluency improvements and rephrasing, and Google Gemini, which primarily provides tone adjustments or simplifications, thesify delivers comprehensive, nuanced feedback tailored to academic needs. For example, in the test essay, Jenni AI generated fluent content but failed to address deeper issues like incomplete argumentation or missing theoretical connections. Similarly, Google Gemini simplified text but often removed critical theoretical details. In contrast, thesify highlighted areas for improvement, such as the need for a deeper critique of Foucault’s perspective on heroin dependence and clearer theoretical connections.
Thesify's ability to identify specific gaps in analysis while offering concrete suggestions to strengthen the essay.
Seamless Citation Management: Citation errors can lead to academic integrity issues, but thesify automatically checks and integrates citations, saving time and maintaining consistency.
Critical Thinking Support: Rather than just rephrasing text, thesify encourages you to engage more deeply with your material. It provides specific suggestions to strengthen your analysis, ensuring your arguments are well-supported and align with academic standards. This focus on fostering intellectual engagement sets it apart as a tool for learning, not just writing.
Ethical AI Design: thesify is built with academic growth in mind. By emphasizing transparency and personalized feedback, it helps you remain in control of your work while avoiding shortcuts that could raise academic integrity concerns. It doesn’t generate content for you; instead, it enhances your writing process by acting as a virtual academic assistant.With its commitment to supporting students ethically and effectively, thesify is not just another AI tool—it’s an academic partner that helps you grow as a writer while meeting institutional expectations.
Conclusion: Choosing the Right AI Tool
AI tools like Jenni AI and Google Gemini offer students valuable assistance, but they come with limitations that may not align with academic integrity or the demands of higher education.
Jenni AI offers prompt-based content generation and advanced rewriting features, which can be helpful for streamlining the writing process. However, its generative capabilities may raise questions about originality, and students must remain cautious to avoid over-relying on AI for critical thinking or content creation.
Google Gemini integrates well with Google Workspace and provides tools for rephrasing and simplifying text. While accessible and convenient, it may not meet the needs of students tackling complex or heavily analytical assignments due to its lack of detailed prompt customization.For students seeking an AI tool that balances usability with a focus on academic integrity, exploring options beyond these two tools might be worth considering.
Tools, like thesify, that prioritize feedback, critical thinking, and citation accuracy can support not only better writing but also a stronger learning experience. Whatever tool you choose, understanding how to use AI responsibly and transparently remains essential to aligning with university expectations and achieving academic success.