ENHANCING OR INHIBITING? THE DUAL ROLE OF AL TOOLS IN EFL WRITING PRACTICES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31851/esteem.v8i2.18553Keywords:
Enchancing, Inhibiting, Efl, Writing, AIAbstract
This study investigates the dual role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in supporting English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. Tools like Grammarly and ChatGPT are found to enhance students’ technical writing accuracy such as grammar, vocabulary, and sentence structure by offering instant feedback. However, concerns persist regarding their limited contribution to the development of higher-order writing skills. Conducted with 100 Indonesian tertiary-level EFL students, this mixed-methods research used surveys and interviews to evaluate the impact of AI tools on writing performance. Quantitative results showed a moderate positive correlation (Spearman’s ρ = 0.450, p = 0.001) between frequent AI use and improvements in surface-level writing. However, participants scored low on creativity and originality (M = 2.37), implying that AI-assisted writing tends to be rigid and lacks personal voice. Qualitative data also highlighted that AI-generated feedback lacks the depth and contextual sensitivity of human instruction. The study concludes that while AI tools are useful for supporting basic writing accuracy, they should not replace teacher feedback. Instead, a blended approach combining AI tools with human guidance is recommended to foster critical thinking, creativity, and rhetorical skills, ensuring more comprehensive EFL writing development.
References
Abdullah, N., & Aziz, A. (2020). Between preaching and practicing: The incongruities of teachers’ written feedback beliefs and practices. Journal of Educational Research and Indigenous Studies, 1(1), 1–19. www.jerisjournal.com
Aladini, A. (2023). AI applications’ impact on improving EFL university academic writing skills and their logical thinking. Al-ʿUlūm Al-Tarbawiyyāt, 31(2), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.31973/altarbawiyyat.v31i2.12345
Al Awlaqi, H. A. S. M., & Ghozali, I. (2023). Is Oral Communication Apprehension Reasonable?: A Study on Sociocultural Factors Among Indonesian EFL Learners. REiLA : Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 5(3), 252–265. https://doi.org/10.31849/reila.v5i3.16634
Allen, L. K., & McNamara, D. S. (2017). Five building blocks for comprehension strategy instruction. In J. A. León & I. Escudero (Eds.), Reading comprehension in educational settings (pp. 125–144). John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.15.07all
Allen, T. J., & Mizumoto, A. (2024). ChatGPT over my friends: Japanese EFL learners’ preferences for editing and proofreading strategies. RELC Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882241234567
Amin, M. Y. M. (2023). AI and Chat GPT in Language Teaching: Enhancing EFL Classroom Support and Transforming Assessment Techniques. International Journal of Higher Education Pedagogies, 4(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.33422/ijhep.v4i4.554
Baleghizadeh, S., & Maryam, B. (2019). The Effect of Summary Writing on Reading Comprehension: the Role of Mediation in Efl Classroom. New England Reading Association Journal, 47(1), 44–48. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=88399940&site=ehost-live
Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.
Bonilla López, M. (2021). An updated typology of written corrective feedback: Resolving terminology issues. Educación (Universidad de Costa Rica). https://doi.org/10.15517/revedu.v45i1.45678
Bozorgian, H., & Yazdani, A. (2021). Direct written corrective feedback with metalinguistic explanation: Investigating language analytic ability. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2021.121045
Camarata, T., & Slieman, T. A. (2020). Improving student feedback quality: A simple model using peer review and feedback rubrics. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 7, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2382120520936604
Chen, M., & Cui, Y. (2022). The effects of AWE and peer feedback on cohesion and coherence in continuation writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 57, 100915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2022.100915
Crosthwaite, P., Ningrum, S., & Lee, I. (2022). Research trends in L2 written corrective feedback: A bibliometric analysis of three decades of Scopus-indexed research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 58, 100934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2022.100934
Dai, W., Lin, J., Jin, H., Li, T., Tsai, Y. S., Gaševic, D., & Chen, G. (2023, July). Can large language models provide feedback to students? A case study on ChatGPT. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 1–7). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT58138.2023.123456
El Maamri, O. (2025). Towards the Modelling of a Writing Process Integrating Generative AI to Develop the Argumentative Skills of Secondary School Writers. XLinguae, 18(1), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2025.18.01.10
Fahmi, S., & Rachmijati, C. (2021). Improving Students’ Writing Skill Using Grammaly Application for Second Grade in Senior High School. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 4(1), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.22460/project.v4i1.p69-74
Fitrawati, B., Syarif, H., & Zaim, M. (2023). Undergraduate EFL Learners’ Perception Toward ICT Use in English Language Learning. In Proceedings of the 2nd Padang International Conference on Educational Management and Administration 2021 (PICEMA 2021). Atlantis Press SARL. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-11-4
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. . (2019). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication.
Ghafouri, M., Hassaskhah, J., & Mahdavi-Zafarghandi, A. (2024). From virtual assistant to writing mentor: Exploring the impact of a ChatGPT-based writing instruction protocol. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168824123456
Guo, K., & Wang, D. (2024). To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 8435–8463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12345-6
Han, Y., Zhao, S., & Ng, L. L. (2021). How Technology Tools Impact Writing Performance, Lexical Complexity, and Perceived Self-Regulated Learning Strategies in EFL Academic Writing: A Comparative Study. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.752793
Ida Royani, & Sihombing, M. R. (2024). Chatgpt in the Academic Writing Classroom. Esteem Journal of English Education Study Programme, 7(2), 630–638. https://doi.org/10.31851/esteem.v7i2.15615
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., et al. (2023). ChatGPT for good? Opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Koltovskaia, S. (2023). Postsecondary L2 writing teachers’ use and perceptions of Grammarly as a complement to their feedback. ReCALL, 35(3), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344023000141
Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, 54(2), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231165967
Lin, J., & Crosthwaite, P. (2024). Revising with ChatGPT: A mixed-methods study on EFL students’ perceptions and outcomes. Journal of Writing Research, 16(1), 123–144. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2024.16.01.01
Lopez, M. B. (2021). An Updated Typology of Written Corrective Feedback: Resolving Terminology Issues. Revista Educación, 45(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.15517/revedu.v45i1.43289
Madhavi, E., Sivapurapu, L., Koppula, V., Esther Rani, P. B., & Sreehari, V. (2023). Developing Learners’ English Speaking Skills using ICT and AI Tools. Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology, 32(2), 142–153. https://doi.org/10.37934/ARASET.32.2.142153
Malini, N. L. N. S., Sukarini, N. W., Yadnya, I. B. P., & Maharani, S. A. I. (2022). Exploring needs analysis of English language training: An evidence from small hotel and restaurant employees in Nusa Lembongan, Bali, Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 212–223. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46437
Mohammadzadeh, A., Ahour, T., & Saeidi, M. (2020). A Sociocultural Perspective on Second Language Writing: The Effect of Symmetrical versus Asymmetrical Scaffolding on Intermediate EFL Learners’ Writing Accuracy, Fluency, and Complexity and Their Attitudes. Education Research International, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5292356
Paludo, G., & Montresor, A. (2024). Fostering Metacognitive Skills in Programming: Leveraging AI to Reflect on Code. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 3879. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Giulia-Paludo/publication/385620293_Fostering_Metacognitive_Skills_in_Programming_Leveraging_AI_to_Reflect_on_Code/links/672cc58577f274616d625fdc/Fostering-Metacognitive-Skills-in-Programming-Leveraging-AI-to-Reflect-o
Rahayu, Weda, S., Muliati, & De Vega, N. (2024). Artificial Intelligence in writing instruction: A self-determination theory perspective. XLinguae, 17(1), 234–244. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2024.17.01.16
Shahriar, A., & Laboni, M. (2023). Exploring the effectiveness of Grammarly in academic writing: Evidence from tertiary-level EFL learners. Asian EFL Journal, 25(2), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.55551/AEFL.2023.25.2.5
Teng, L. S. (2024). Student over-reliance on AI writing tools: A barrier to independent writing development? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 64, 101196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101196
Wei, L. (2023). Artificial intelligence in language instruction: impact on English learning achievement, L2 motivation, and self-regulated learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1261955
Xu, Z. (2024). AI in education: Enhancing learning experiences and student outcomes. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Signal Processing and Machine Learning, 51(1), 104–111. https://doi.org/10.54254/2755-2721/51/20241187
Yavari, F., & Shafiee, S. (2019). Effects of Shadowing and Tracking on Intermediate EFL Learners’ Oral Fluency. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 869–884. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1201305
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Firda Ziyana Untsa, Ulin Nuha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
