
Technology has undoubtedly imposed itself as a crucial tool in developing linguistic skills to the extent that many educational institutions worldwide have integrated it into their teaching methods. In the context of EFL (English as a Foreign Language) writing, the introduction of writing-assisted tools, particularly ChatGPT, has raised questions about their impact on students' writing abilities. This study aims to examine the effects of using electronic writing-assisted tools on EFL students' writing, focusing on five key areas: vocabulary, grammar, coherence, cohesion, and idea generation. To guide the research, a quasi-experiment was conducted with 52 EFL undergraduate students at the University of Algiers 2 in Algeria. The study found that students frequently relied on ChatGPT and Google to generate ideas and improve vocabulary. However, no significant improvements were observed in these areas, nor in grammar, coherence, or cohesion. Additionally, the participants reported that teacher feedback was more valuable than automated feedback due to its perceived accuracy and quality. Thus, the findings suggest that while students use AI tools to generate written content, they do not fully utilize them to foster deep learning, improve writing competence in key areas, or develop independent writing skills. The study highlights the need for educators to develop strategies that help students better utilize technology to enhance their writing skills and produce high-quality original work.
automated writing evaluation (AWE), ChatGPT, Language and Literature, authoring tools, P, Artificial intelligence (AI), automated feedback
automated writing evaluation (AWE), ChatGPT, Language and Literature, authoring tools, P, Artificial intelligence (AI), automated feedback
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
