THE EFFICACY OF CHATGPT IN ENHANCING WRITING PROFICIENCY AMONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
DOI:
10.54443/ijset.v4i10.1081Published:
2025-09-07Downloads
Abstract
This study examines the efficacy of ChatGPT as an AI-assisted learning tool to improve undergraduate English department students' academic writing skills at Bumi Persada University in Indonesia. Twelve participants participated in the study, which used a mixed-methods research methodology. Lexical complexity, grammatical precision, and textual coherence are three important aspects of writing proficiency that were quantitatively measured using a pre-test and post-test paradigm. A deeper understanding of the student experience was made possible by qualitative data collected via semi-structured interviews and comprehensive questionnaires. The results show that there were notable benefits to including ChatGPT in the writing process. Notably, students' writing quality significantly improved, they became more motivated and involved in writing assignments, and they became more capable of learning on their own. However, the study also discovered a significant challenge: an overreliance on AI-generated ideas, which may impede the development of autonomous critical thinking and unique composition skills. The study finds that, while ChatGPT is a beneficial additional tool for second language writing pedagogy, its adoption necessitates careful instructional design to reduce the hazards of dependency and maximize the advantages for long-term skill acquisition.
Keywords:
AI in Education ChatGPT Educational Technology English learning Writing SkillsReferences
Bartlett, Steve, & Burton, Diana. (2020). Introduction to education studies. SAGE.
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012a). Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203832400
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012b). Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203832400
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research Methods in Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203224342
Colorafi, K. J., & Evans, B. (2016). Qualitative Descriptive Methods in Health Science Research. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 9(4), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1937586715614171
Creswell, J. W. ., & Poth, C. N. . (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design. SAGE.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., … Wright, R. (2023). Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (2014). Theory and Practice of Writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315835853
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (2014). Cohesion in English. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315836010
Holmes, Wayne., Bialik, Maya., & Fadel, Charles. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education : promises and implications for teaching and learning. The Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Hyland, Ken. (2019). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2015). Automatically Assessing Lexical Sophistication: Indices, Tools, Findings, and Application. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 757–786. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.194
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary Size and Use: Lexical Richness in L2 Written Production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/16.3.307
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2015). Second Language Research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315750606
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Publications.
Muntazar, T. M., & Hajar, I. (2025). Training on Utilizing Technology in Writing and Publishing Poetry. Jurnal Gramaswara, 5(1), 13–21. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.gramaswara.2024.005.01.02
Patton, M. Quinn. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever Happened to Qualitative Description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334–340.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mawardi, Ibnu Hajar, Jumaida Fajar Nassriati, T. Muntazar, Helmiyadi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
