PROMPTED BAND LABELS AND LINGUISTIC PATTERNING IN AI-GENERATED IELTS WRITING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31851/hze05z19Keywords:
Generative Artificial Intelligence, IELTS Writing Task 2, Band-Level Prompting, Lexical Diversity, Discourse OrganizationAbstract
This study examines the extent to which a generative AI model demonstrates consistency and patterned variation when responding to IELTS Writing Task 2 prompts differentiated by band-level instructions. Specifically, it investigates how Google Gemini adapts its written output when producing essays aligned with distinct proficiency targets. Using a controlled research design, the study analyses 24 AI-generated essays produced under two band conditions Band 6.0 and Band 7.5 while holding the task prompt and topic constant, with band instruction as the sole experimental variable. Lexical diversity was measured using the Measure of Textual Lexical Diversity (MTLD) and the Moving Average Type-Token Ratio (MATTR), and discourse organisation was examined through key argumentative markers. The findings reveal that Band 7.5 prompts consistently generate essays with higher lexical diversity and more cohesive discourse organisation than Band 6.0 prompts, despite comparable text lengths. These results suggest that generative AI encodes latent representations of writing proficiency that are activated by band-level cues and realised probabilistically rather than deterministically. By adopting a within-system, corpus-based approach rather than comparing human and AI texts, this study demonstrates that proficiency distinctions in AI-generated writing emerge through systematic yet non-fixed adaptations, with important implications for AI-assisted language assessment and instruction.
References
Al Hosni, J. (2025). Preserving Authorial voice in academic texts in the age of generative ai: A thematic literature review. Arab World English Journal, 16(3), 244–258. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol16no3.14
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
Amirjalili, F., Neysani, M., & Nikbakht, A. (2024). Exploring the boundaries of authorship: a comparative analysis of AI-generated text and human academic writing in English literature. Frontiers in Education, 9(March), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1347421
Andriani, E. L. (2025). ELTR Journal, e-ISSN 2579-8235 ,. 9(2), 86–112.
Cappello, N., Rodriguez, D., Hernandez, E., & Canabate, D. (2025). Writing in movement : movement-based performing arts for developing physical education teachers ’ identity Escribir moviéndose : artes escénicas en movimiento para desarrollar la identidad de docentes de educación física Authors How to cite in APA Keyword. Retos: Nuevas Tendencias En Educación Física, Deporte y Recreación, 63, 829–845. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v63.111684
Devitska, A., & Horvat-Choblya, A. (2024). Linguistic domains: comparison of texts written by human and artificial intelligence. Věda a Perspektivy, 11(42). https://doi.org/10.52058/2695-1592-2024-11(42)-358-365
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
Erviti, A. I. (2017). Discourse constructions in English: meaning, form and hierarchies: A study from the point of view of the Lexical Constructional Model. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/tesis?codigo=121205
Fattah, H. A., Vadivel, B., Shaban, A. A., & Shanmugam, K. (2023). Enhancing English language education: the impact of ai integration in the classroom. Journal of Humanities and Education Development, 5(6), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.22161/jhed.5.6.15
Fleckenstein, J., Meyer, J., Jansen, T., Keller, S. D., Köller, O., & Möller, J. (2024). Do teachers spot AI? Evaluating the detectability of AI-generated texts among student essays. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6(January). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100209
Huang, H.-Y. C., Barrett, N. E., Tseng, Lo, M.-F., & Chiung-Jung. (2024). The Effectiveness of Shadowing Practice with Web-Based Apps: Towards Promoting the Comprehensibility and Lexical-Level Intelligibility of EFL Students’ Presentations. English Teaching and Learning, 48, 505–524. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42321-023-00145-w
Jaya, A., Hartono, R., Wahyuni, S., & Yulianto, H. J. (2025). Los efectos de la estrategia de aprendizaje basado en proyectos con actividad física en función del género sobre el rendimiento escolar y la confianza en sí mismos de los estudiantes. Retos: Nuevas Tendencias En Educación Física, Deporte y Recreación, 66, 349–360. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v66.110067
Jiang, F. (Kevin), & Hyland, K. (2025). Does ChatGPT Write Like a Student? Engagement Markers in Argumentative Essays. Written Communication, 42(3), 463–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883251328311
Joshi, A., Dabre, R., Kanojia, D., Li, Z., Zhan, H., Haffari, G., & Dippold, D. (2024). Natural Language Processing for Dialects of a Language: A Survey. Computer Science, 1(1). http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.05632
Lin, Z. (2025). Techniques for supercharging academic writing with generative AI. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 1(9), 426–431. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-024-01185-8
Liu, L. (2025). Impact of AI gamification on EFL learning outcomes and nonlinear dynamic motivation: Comparing adaptive learning paths, conversational agents, and storytelling. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 11299–11338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13296-5
Markauskaite, L., Marrone, R., Poquet, O., Knight, S., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Howard, S., Tondeur, J., De Laat, M., Buckingham Shum, S., Gašević, D., & Siemens, G. (2022). Rethinking the entwinement between artificial intelligence and human learning: What capabilities do learners need for a world with AI? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3(February). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100056
Mazari, N. (2025). Building Metacognitive Skills Using AI Tools to Help Higher Education Students Reflect on Their Learning Process Resumen Introduction. RHS-Revista Humanismo y Sociedad, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22209/rhs.v13n1a04
Mei, P., Brewis, D. N., Nwaiwu, F., Sumanathilaka, D., Alva-Manchego, F., & Demaree-Cotton, J. (2025). If ChatGPT can do it, where is my creativity? generative AI boosts performance but diminishes experience in creative writing. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 4(December 2024), 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100140
Mubarok, Y., Sudana, D., Yanti, D., Sugiyo, Aisyah, A. D., & Af’idah, A. N. (2024). Abusive Comments (Hate Speech) on Indonesian Social Media: A Forensic Linguistics Approach. Academic Journal, 14(5), 1440. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1405.16
Pham, T. H. Van. (2022). Efl learners’ deployment of discourse markers in ielts essays: from beliefs to practices. Tạp Chí Nghiên Cứu Nước Ngoài. https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4873
Putri, A. D., Jaya, A., & Marleni, M. (2023). Exploring the Students’ Speaking Ability Based on Their Different Personalities. Esteem Journal of English Education Study Programme, 6(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.31851/esteem.v6i1.10203
Révauger, G., & Rident, F. (2025). “I, too”, shall have to prompt? A study of EFL students and their unmonitored use of GenAI in the completion of an imitation task in poetry. Alsic, 1(28). https://doi.org/10.4000/137dy
Rodriguez-Donaire, S. (2024). Influence of Prompts Structure on the Perception and Enhancement of Learning through LLMs in Online Educational Contexts. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.1006481
Rosdiana, S., Noercolies, M. A., & Fauzan, M. H. (2024). The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Teaching Writing Skills. EDUCASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan, Pengajaran, Dan Pembelajaran, 9(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.21462/educasia.v9i1.251
Saed, H. A., Haider, A. S., Al-Salman, S., & Hussein, R. F. (2021). The use of YouTube in developing the speaking skills of Jordanian EFL university students. Heliyon, 7(7), e07543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07543
Sharma, A., Kumar, P., & Dhamija, S. (2025). From Prompts to Performance. 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394287499.ch10
Sherine, A., Seshagiri, A. V. S., & Sastry, M. M. (2020). Impact of whatsapp interaction on improving L2 speaking skills. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(3), 250–259. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i03.11534
Sheng Cheng, X., Wu, P., & Liang, L. (2025). Detecting the knowledge structure of generative artificial intelligence research. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515251353188
Soughati, N., El Hadi, K., & Flyura, A. (2025). Technopedagogical Making Workshop and Writing/ Programming. XLinguae, 18(1), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2025.18.01.12
Torky, S. A. E. F. I., & Ahmed, N. H. A. E. G. S. (2025). Promoting EFL students’ reading comprehension, grammatical competence, collocational competence and critical thinking disposition via data-driven pedagogical translation. Egyptian Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(1), 191–266. https://doi.org/10.21608/ejes.2025.446747
Wu, J. (2025). Comparing Linguistic Features between Human-written High-Scoring IELTS Essays and AI-Generated ones. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 7(8), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2025.7.8.8
Xiaofan, W., & Annamalai, N. (2025). Investigating the use of AI tools in English language learning: A phenomenological approach. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16188
Zhang, M., & Crosthwaite, P. (2025). More human than human? Differences in lexis and collocation within academic essays produced by ChatGPT-3.5 and human L2 writers. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2024-0196
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Wirdatul Khasanah, Herlinda Nur Fauziya, Dwiki Dermawan, Mulat Sarira
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.
