Research on the Development Path of College Students’ English Writing Competence from the Perspective of Human-Machine Collaboration: An Exploratory Application Based on Generative Artificial Intelligence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65170/jtr.v2i1.41Keywords:
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), Chinese College Students, English Writing Competence, Human-Machine Collaboration, Intelligent Writing AssistanceAbstract
This study investigates the application of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in enhancing Chinese college students’ English writing proficiency, while addressing the dual challenges posed by GAI’s inherent limitations and students’ intrinsic writing deficiencies. A questionnaire survey (supplemented by 6 semi-structured interviews) was conducted among 200 college students from 12 universities in China, utilizing a self-designed Questionnaire on the Current Status of College Students’ Use of Generative AI in English Writing. The findings indicate that ChatGPT was the most widely used GAI tool, framework construction prior to writing was the primary application scenario, and 92.0% of students expressed willingness to continue using GAI for writing assistance. Based on these empirical insights, a three-stage competence enhancement strategy system was constructed: (1) Pre-writing: Students independently develop writing outlines before leveraging GAI for supplementary inspiration, with teachers providing evaluation criteria for GAI to reference; (2) While-writing: Students complete first drafts independently, then utilize GAI for targeted revision, while teachers guide students in discerning the validity of GAI-generated feedback; (3) Post-writing: Students submit revision reports and reflect on their writing processes, with teachers establishing electronic portfolios for students based on human-machine interaction records. This study demonstrates that GAI application, when scientifically guided, can significantly improve students’ writing logic and vocabulary application. The proposed strategy system aims to achieve the organic integration of "technology empowerment" and "competence-based education," providing practical implications for advancing English writing instruction reform and the deep integration of GAI with foreign language education.
References
Anson, C. M., & Straume, I. (2022). Amazement and trepidation: Implications of AI-based natural language production for the teaching of writing. Journal of Academic Writing, 12(1), 1-9.
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52-62.
Bitchener, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Written corrective feedback for L2 development. Multilingual Matters.
Carvalho, L., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Tsai, Y. S., Markauskaite, L., & De Laat, M. (2022). How can we design for learning in an AI world?. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100053.
Chen, M., & Lyu, M. C. (2024). College English writing teaching in the context of ChatGPT. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studied, (1), 161-168.
Chung, P. J., Patel, D. R., & Nizami, I. (2020). Disorder of written expression and dysgraphia: definition, diagnosis, and management. Translational pediatrics, 9(Suppl 1), S46.
Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in education and teaching international, 61(2), 228-239.
Duijnhouwer, H., Prins, F. J., & Stokking, K. M. (2012). Feedback providing improvement strategies and reflection on feedback use: Effects on students’ writing motivation, process, and performance. Learning and instruction, 22(3), 171-184.
Evmenova, A. S., & Regan, K. (2019). Supporting the writing process with technology for students with disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 55(2), 78-85.
Fryer, L. K., Ainley, M., Thompson, A., Gibson, A., & Sherlock, Z. (2017). Stimulating and sustaining interest in a language course: An experimental comparison of Chatbot and Human task partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 461–468.
Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2023). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. NPJ digital medicine, 6(1), 75.
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(7), 8435-8463.
Guo, K., Wang, J., & Chu, S. K. W. (2022). Using chatbots to scaffold EFL students' argumentative writing. Assessing Writing, 54, 100666.
Hu, J. S., & Qi, Y. J. (2023). Foreign language education in China in the era of ChatGPT: Seeking change and adaptation. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education, (1), 3-6.
James, C. (2013). *Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Routledge.
Ji, H., Han, I., & Ko, Y. (2023). A systematic review of conversational AI in language education: Focusing on the collaboration with human teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(1), 48-63.
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures; applied linguistics for language teachers.
Malecka, B., Boud, D., & Carless, D. (2022). Eliciting, processing and enacting feedback: Mechanisms for embedding student feedback literacy within the curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(7), 908–922.
Mohamed, A. M. (2023). Exploring the potential of an AI-based Chatbot (ChatGPT) in enhancing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching: Perceptions of EFL faculty members. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 3195–3217.
Naidoo, L. J. (2024). Max. Classroom Capacity: On Student Self-Assessment of Personality. TIP: The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 61(3).
Qin, Y. (2023). Exploration of foreign language teaching methods in human-computer symbiosis scenarios: Taking ChatGPT as an example. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education, (2), 24-29.
Ranalli, J., & Yamashita, T. (2022). Automated written corrective feedback: Error-correction performance and timing of delivery. Language Learning & Technology, 26(2), 1–25.
Shen, S. S., & Zhu, Z. T. (2023). ChatGPT-like products: Internal mechanism and its impact on learning evaluation. Chinese Journal of Distance Education, 43(04), 8-15.
Su, Y., Liu, K., Lai, C., & et al. (2021). The progression of collaborative argumentation among English learners: A qualitative study. System, 98, 102471.
Sun, G. H., & Hoelscher, S. H. (2023). The ChatGPT storm and what faculty can do. Nurse Educator, 48(3), 119-124.
Susnjak, T., & McIntosh, T. R. (2024). ChatGPT: The end of online exam integrity?. Education Sciences, 14(6), 656.
Tong, H., & Yang, Y. J. (2024). Research on the potential and risks of generative artificial intelligence in educational applications based on the "moralization of technology" theory. e-Education Research, (7), 12-18.
Tsai, C. Y., Lin, Y. T., & Brown, I. K. (2024). Impacts of ChatGPT-assisted writing for EFL English majors: Feasibility and challenges. Education and information technologies, 29(17), 22427-22445.
Wang, G. L. (2009). Error analysis of EFL advanced learners' use of pluperfect - A case study. Read and Write Periodical, (11), 21–26.
Wang, X. N., & Li, Y. Z. (2024). Artificial intelligence and educational transformation. e-Education Research, (8), 13-21.
Wei, S., & Li, L. Y. (2023). Research on AI-assisted second language writing feedback: Taking ChatGPT as an example. Foreign Languages in China, (3), 33-40.
Xu, F. (2011). A multi-perspective theoretical review and reflection on English writing teaching methodologies. Foreign Language World, (2), 57–64.
Yang, L. R. (2024). Second language acquisition in the context of ChatGPT and large language models. Modern Foreign Languages, (4), 578-585.
Yang, M., & Wang, Y. W. (2023). ChatGPT's "understanding" and "meaning": On the form, function, and stance behind its generated language. Foreign Languages in China, 20(3), 24–32.
Yang, Z. K., Wu, D., & Chen, M. (2019). Emerging technologies facilitate the reconstruction of education ecology. China Educational Technology, (2), 1–5.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 You Ma; Hui Shi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
