Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 23 no. 1 (2024)

Stories in the Age of Automation: A Phenomenological Study on the Role of Artificial Intelligence on Students’ Writing

Jeaseree Solis | Melody Idul

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

As automation becomes increasingly integrated into educational settings, understanding its role in shaping students' writing experiences is crucial. The goal of this qualitative phenomenological research was to explore the lived experiences, motivations, role of AI in students’ writing, influence of AI on the learning process, and insights in using AI writing tools of the senior high school students of Monkayo National High School. There were 10 participants in this study who were selected through snowball sampling. An in-depth interview was used to gather the information needed. The findings revealed the potentials and pitfalls of AI in developing the students’ writing skills. Most of the participants have seen AI’s advantages, like completing the writing tasks easily, which meets the deadline, making good-quality outputs adhering to the technicalities of grammar, improving academic achievements, and gaining knowledge about writing. However, there are also some drawbacks, like students becoming indolent and AI dependent; AI diminishes one’s critical thinking skills; AI gives inaccurate information; there is a limitation on usage; it is inaccessible when offline; and it is bad for one’s health. Nevertheless, the role of AI in students' writing processes is significant. Its effectiveness and efficiency cannot be denied, but it should be used in moderation. Hence, incorporating AI in learning should be guided by strategies that balance its benefits with the need to maintain creative and critical thinking in students' writing. Educators should use AI as a tool to enhance, not replace, human creativity. This approach ensures that while students benefit from AI's strengths, they continue to develop their originality and critical thinking skills in writing.



References:

  1. Ahmad, S. F., Han, H., Alam, M. M., Rehmat, M. K., Irshad, M., Arraño-Muñoz, M., & Ariza-Montes, A. (2023). Impact of artificial  intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 10(1).  https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01787-8. Education Research International, 2023, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4253331
  2. Ali, J. K. M., Shamsan, M. A. A., Hezam, T. A., & Mohammed, A. A. Q. (2023b). 
  3. Al-Tkhayneh, K. M., Alghazo, E. M., & Tahat, D. (2023). The Advantages and Disadvantages of using artificial intelligence in  education. https://digitallibrary.aau.ac.ae/handle/123456789/1168.
  4. Anderson, J. D., Li, Y., & Mooney, R. J. (2020). Exploring User Trust of AI Writing Assistance. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference  on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 5572- 5581.
  5. Anggoro, A. (2019). Effects of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of used, and perceived value on behavioral intention to use digital  wallet (A Case Studyof OVO User in Malang). Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa FEB, 7(2), 1–21.
  6. Anwar, Naveed & Safdar, Mahar & Qasim, Mahar Safdar Ali & Mustansar, Mustansar & Qasim, Memona & Khan, Rashid & Akram,  Saba & Khalid, Kehkshan. (2021). Effects of Electronic Devices on Vision in Students Age Group 18-25. Annals of Medical and  Health Sciences Research. 11. 1572-1577. 10.54608/annalsmedical.2021.1.
  7. Arifin, S. (2018). Ethical Considerations in Qualitative Study. ResearchGate.  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328019725_Ethical_Considerations_in_Qualitative_Study
  8. Ashok, M., Madan, R., Joha, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2022). Ethical framework for Artificial Intelligence and Digital technologies. International Journal of Information Management, 62, 102433. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102433
  9. Awada, G., Burston, J., & Ghannage, R. (2020). Effect of student team achievement division through WebQuest on EFL students’  argumentative writing skills and their instructors’ perceptions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(3), 275–300.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1558254
  10. Bailey, D., Southam, A., & Costley, J. (2021). Digital storytelling with chatbots: Mapping L2 participation and perception patterns.  Interactive Technology and Smart Education.
  11. Bailey, J. (2023, August 8). AI in Education. Education Next. https://www.educationnext.org/a-i-in-education-leap-into-new-era machine-intelligence-carries-risks-challenges-promises/
  12. Banzuelo, N. (2023, April 19). What Filipino students are saying about CHATGPT. BusinessWorld Online.  https://www.bworldonline.com/technology/2023/04/19/517952/what-filipino-students-are-saying-about-chatgpt/ 
  13. Boden, Margaret A., ‘What is artificial intelligence?’, Artificial Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction, Very Short Introductions  (Oxford, 2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 23 Aug. 2018), https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780199602919.003.0001, accessed 17  Sept. 2023.
  14. Borenstein, J., & Howard, A. (2021). Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI and Ethics, 1(1), 61–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7
  15. Bowen, N. E. J. A., & Thomas, N. (2020). Manipulating texture and cohesion in academic writing: A keystroke logging study. Journal  of Second Language Writing, 50, 100773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100773.
  16. Callum, K. Mac, & Jeffrey, L. (2013). The influence of students’ ICT skills and their adoption of mobile learning. Australasian Journal  of Educational Technology, 29(3), 303–314.
  17. Chan, C. K. Y., & Lee, K. K. W. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such  as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and Millennial Generation teachers? https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.02878
  18. Chang, T. S., Li, Y., Huang, H. W., & Whitfield, B. (2021, March). Exploring EFL students’ writing performance and their acceptance  of AI-based automated writing feedback. In 2021 2nd International Conference on Education Development and Studies (pp. 31–35).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3459043.3459065.
  19. Changes on Occupations and Sectors. Geneva: ILO.
  20. Chen, W., & Wei, H. (2021). Effect of an AI-Powered Writing Assistant on Writing Quality and Idea Generation. Journal of Educational  Technology & Society, 24(3), 84–97.
  21. Chen, X. (2018). Supporting Writing with Intelligent Writing Assistance: From Writing Rules to Writing Intelligence. Educational  Technology & Society, 21(2), 1–14.
  22. Chen, Y., Jensen, S., Albert, L. J., Gupta, S., & Lee, T. (2022). Artificial intelligence (AI) Student assistants in the classroom: Designing  chatbots to support student success. Information Systems Frontiers, 25(1), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10291-4.
  23. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Los Angeles:  SAGE Publications Warthhall, M. A. (2006). Existential phenomenology. In H. L. Dreyfus, & Wrathall, M. A. (Eds.), A companion to phenomenology and existentialism (pp. 229–239). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
  24. Davis, F. D. (1989). perceived Usefulness, Perceived ease of use, and User Acceptence of inforamtion technology. MIS Quarterly,  13(3), 319–340. 
  25. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management  Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  26. Davis, F. D., 1985. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results  Massachusetts Institute of Technology].
  27. Dawadi, S. (2020). Thematic analysis approach: A step by step guide for ELT research practitioners. Journal of NELTA, 25(1-2).  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612353.pdf
  28. Dornyei, Z. (2020). Innovations and challenges in language learning motivation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429485893. 
  29. Eryilmaz, A., & Basal, A. (2024). The development of the student online learning patience scale (SOLPS). Education and Information  Technologies, 1-19.
  30. Eslit, E. (2023). Integrating Multiple Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence in Language Learning: Enhancing Personalization and  Engagement. Preprints 2023, 2023071044. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202307.1044.v1
  31. Estrellado, C. J., & Miranda, J. C. (2023, May 6). Artificial Intelligence in the Philippine Educational Context: Circumspection and  Future Inquiries. ResearchGate; International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 13, Issue 5, May  2023.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370603250_Artificial_Intelligence_in_the_Philippine_Educational_Context_Circums pection_and_Future_Inquiries.
  32. Fink, Anne. (2000). The Role of the Researcher in the Qualitative Research Process. A Potential Barrier to Archiving Qualitative Data.  Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 1.
  33. Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English writing assistant: Students’ alternative for writing english. Metathesis: Journal  of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.31002/metathesis.v5i1.3519
  34. Gao, J., Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., & Yu, Y. (2021). Writing with Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Comprehensive Overview. arXiv  preprint arXiv:2102.10838.
  35. Gavilán, J. C. O., Díaz, D. Z., Huallpa, J. J., Cabala, J. L. B., Aguila, O. E. P., Puma, E. G. M., Vasquez-Pauca, M. J., Mansilla,  E. B. R., Laura, P. A. S., & Hoces, W. B. (2022). Technological Social Responsibility in University Professors. Eurasian Journal of  Educational Research, 100(100), 104-118. https://ejer.com.tr/manuscript/index.php/journal/article/view/945
  36. Gayed, J. M., Carlon, M. K. J., Oriola, A. M., & Cross, J. S. (2022). Exploring an AI-based writing assistant’s impact on English  language learners. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100055
  37. Ginting, P., Batubara, H. M., & Hasnah, Y. (2023). Artificial intelligence powered writing tools as adaptable aids for academic writing:  Insight from EFL college learners in writing final project. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research And Analysis, 6(10),  4640-4650.
  38. Giroux, M., Kim, J., Lee, J. C., Park, J. (2022). Artificial intelligence and declined guilt: Retailing morality comparison between human  and AI, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 178, No. 4, 1027–1041
  39. GMA Integrated News. (2023, January 18). Students under probe for allegedly using AI in submitted academic requirements. GMA  News Online. https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/857872/using-ai-to-write-essays-is-cheating-says-up-prof/story/.
  40. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., & Singh, R. P. (2022). An era of ChatGPT as a significant futuristic support tool: A study on features, abilities,  and challenges. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 2(4), 100089. https://doi.org/10.  1016/j.tbench.2023.100089.
  41. Hao, S., Wu, Y., & Li, H. (2021). A Review of Deep Learning Methods for Natural Language Processing. IEEE Transactions on Neural  Networks and Learning Systems, 32(2), 567–584. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2020.2990695.
  42. Haristiani, N. (2019, November). Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbot as language learning medium: An inquiry. Journal of Physics:  Conference Series, 1387(1). IOP Publishing.
  43. Haryanto, E. (2019). Students’ attitudes towards the use of Artificial Intelligence Siri in EFL learning at one public university.  International Seminar and Annual Meeting BKS-PTN Wilayah Barat, 190– 195.
  44. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning.  Center for Curriculum Redesign. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v2i1.51
  45. ILO (International Labor Organization). (2020). The Future of Work in the Philippines: Assessing the Impact of Technological
  46. Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023). Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic  review of the literature. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep464.
  47. Informed consent and information letters | Tilburg University. (n.d.). Www.tilburguniversity.edu. Retrieved November 8, 2023, from  https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/research/ethics-review-boards/informed-consent
  48. Iskender, A. (2023). Holy or unholy? Interview with open AI’s ChatGPT. European Journal of Tourism Research, 34, 3414.  https://doi.org/10.54055/ejtr.v34i.3169
  49. Johinke, R., Cummings, R., DiLauro, F., Johinke, R., Cummings, R., & DiLaurao, F. (2023). Reclaiming the technology of higher  education for teaching digital writing in a post—pandemic world. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2), 01.  https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.01
  50. Joo, J., & Sang, Y. (2013). Exploring Koreans’ smartphone usage: An integrated model of the technology acceptance model and uses  and gratifications theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2512–2518. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.002.
  51. Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., & Hüllermeier,  E. (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 
  52. Khare, K., Stewart, B., & Khare, A. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the student experience: An institutional perspective. IAFOR  Journal of Education, 6(3), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.6.3.04
  53. Kim, J. H., Kim, J., Park, J., Kim, C., Jhang, J., & King, B. (2023). When ChatGPT Gives Incorrect Answers: The Impact of Inaccurate  Information by Generative AI on Tourism Decision-Making. Journal of Travel Research, 0(0).  https://doi.org/10.1177/00472875231212996.
  54. Kim, J., & Cho, Y. H. (2023). My teammate is AI: understanding students’ perceptions of student-AI collaboration in drawing tasks.  Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2023.2286206
  55. Kornfeld, L., & Roy, D. (2021). Educational implications of AI writing tools for academic writing. British Journal of Educational  Technology, 52(1), 248–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12973
  56. Krajcik, Z., & Kim, K. (2020). To What Extent Do AI Writing Tools Improve Writing Quality? A Case Study of Master’s Level  Students. Educational Sciences, 10(11), 321. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10110321
  57. Kumar, A. H. S. (2023). Analysis of ChatGPT tool to assess the potential of its utility for academic writing in biomedical domain.  BEMS Reports, 9(1), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.5530/bems.9.1.5
  58. Liang, Y., Meng, F., Zhang, Y., Chen, Y., Xu, J., & Zhou, J. (2021). Infusing multi-source knowledge with heterogeneous graph neural  network for emotional conversation generation. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 35(15), 13343-13352.  https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v35i15.17575 
  59. Liu, S.H., Liao, H.L. and Pratt, J.A. (2009), “Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance”, Computers and  Education, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 599-607
  60. Liu, Y., Han, T., Ma, S., Zhang, J., Yang, Y., Tian, J., He, H., Li, A., He, M., & Liu, Z. (2023). Summary of chatgpt/gpt-4 research  and perspective towards the future of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.01852.  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.01.
  61. Liu, Y., Mittal, A., Yang, D., & Bruckman, A. (2022, April). Will AI console me when I lose my pet? Understanding perceptions of  AI-mediated email writing. Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–13).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.351
  62. Lubowitz, J. H. (2023). ChatGPT, an artifcial intelligence chatbot, is impacting medical literature. Arthroscopy, 39(5), 1121–1122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2023.01.015
  63. Lunney, A., Cunningham, N., & Eastin, M. S. (2016). Wearable fitness technology: A structural investigation into acceptance and  perceived fitness outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 114–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.007.
  64. Marzuki, , Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, , & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization  of students’ writing: EFL teachers’ perspective. Cogent Education, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2236469.
  65. Marzuki, Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization of  students’ writing: EFL teachers’ perspective. Cogent Education, 10(2), 2236469. Students’ Voices. Journal of English Studies in  Arabia Felix, 2(1), 41–49.
  66. Moore, J. L., Rosinski, P., Peeples, T., Pigg, S., Rife, M. C., Brunk-Chavez, B., Lackey, D., Kesler Rumsey, S., Tasaka, R., Curran, P.,  & Grabill, J. T. (2016). Revisualizing composition: How first-year writers use composing technologies. Computers and Composition,  39, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2015.11.001
  67. Mozumder, M. A. I., Athar, A., Armand, T. P. T., Sheeraz, M. M., Uddin, S. M. I., & Kim, H. C. (2023, February). Technological  roadmap of the future trend of metaverse based on IoT, blockchain, and AI techniques in metaverse education. In 2023 25th  International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT) (pp. 1414–1423). IEEE.  https://doi.org/10.23919/ICACT56868.2023. 10079464
  68. Muñoz, Sonia & Gutiérrez-Gayoso, Giovanna & Huambo, Alberto & Domingo, Rogelio & Tapia, Cahuana & Incaluque, Jorge &  Nacional, Universidad & Villarreal, Federico & Cielo, Juan & Cajamarca, Ramírez & Enrique, Jesús & Reyes Acevedo, Jesus & Victor,  Herbert & Huaranga Rivera, Herbert & Luis, José & Pongo, Oscar. (2023). Examining the Impacts of ChatGPT on Student Motivation  and Engagement. Przestrzeń Społeczna (Social Space). 23.
  69. Negahban, A., & Chung, C.-H. (2014). Discovering determinants of user’s perception of mobile device functionality fit. Computers in  Human Behavior, 35, 75–84. 
  70. Nguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Nguyen, B. P. T. (2022). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w.
  71. Peres, R., Shreier, M., Schweidel, D., & Sorescu, A. (2023). On ChatGPT and beyond: How generative artifcial intelligence may afect  research, teaching, and practice. International Journal of Research in Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijresmar.2023.03.001
  72. Peters, M., & Cadieux, A. (2019). Are Canadian professors teaching the skills and knowledge students need to prevent plagiarism?  International Journal for Educational Integrity, 15(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-019-0047-z
  73. Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 22. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8.
  74. Prentice, F. M., & Kinden, C. E. (2018). Paraphrasing tools, language translation tools and plagiarism: an exploratory study.  International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-018-0036-7.
  75. Qizi, S. M. H. (2023). The role of AI in Teaching: Advantages, Disadvantages, and Future Implications. Genius Repository, 24(2795- 7365), 8–12. http://www.geniusrepo.net/index.php/1/article/view/43/43.
  76. Rathinasabapathy, G. & Swetha, R & Veeranjaneyulu, K.. (2023). Emerging Artificial Intelligence Tools Useful for Researchers,  Scientists and Librarians. 36. 163-172.
  77. Reiss, M. J. (2021). The use of AI in education: Practicalities and ethical considerations. London Review of Education, 19(1), 5, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.19.1.05.
  78. Robert, Abill & Potter, Kaledio & Frank, Louis. (2024). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Students’ Learning Experience. Wiley  Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics. 10.2139/ssrn.4716747.
  79. Rogerson, A. M., & McCarthy, G. (2017). Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated  plagiarism? International Journal for Educational Integrity, 13(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-016- 0013-y
  80. Salido, Veronica. (2023). Impact of AI-Powered Learning Tools on Student Understanding and Academic Performance.  10.13140/RG.2.2.17259.31521.
  81. Schemmer, M., Hemmer, P., Kühl, N., Benz, C., & Satzger, G. (2022, April 14). Should I follow AI-based advice? Measuring  appropriate reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making. arXiv.org. https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.06916.
  82. Serrano, M. Á., Vidal‐Abarca, E., & Ferrer, A. (2018). Teaching self‐regulation strategies via an intelligent tutoring system (TuinLecweb): Effects for low‐skilled comprehenders. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(5), 515–525. https://  doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12256
  83. Su, J., & Yang, W. (2023). Unlocking the Power of ChatGPT: A Framework for Applying Generative AI in Education. ECNU Review  of Education, 6(3), 209653112311684. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311231168423
  84. Sumakul, D. T., Hamied, F. A., & Sukyadi, D. (2021). Students’ Perceptions of the Use of AI in a Writing Class. https://www.atlantis press.com/article/125970061.pdf
  85. Syahnaz, M., & Fithriani, R. (2023). Utilizing artificial intelligence-based paraphrasing tool in EFL writing class: A focus on  Indonesian university students’ perceptions. Scope: Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(2), 210-218.
  86. Tarhini, A., Elyas, T., Akour, M. A., & Al-Salti, Z. (2016). Technology, Demographic Characteristics and E-Learning Acceptance: A  Conceptual Model Based on Extended Technology Acceptance Model. Canadian Center of Science and Education, 6(3), 72–89.
  87. Thet, H., & Htay, H. (2021). The Effectiveness of AI Writing Tools on Developing EFL University Students’ Academic Writing Skills.  Journal of NELTA, 26(1), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v26i1.37162
  88. UNESCO. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education | UNESCO. Www.unesco.org. https://www.unesco.org/en/digital education/artificial-intelligence
  89. Utami, S. P. T., Andayani, Winarni, R., & Sumarwati. (2023). Utilization of artificial intelligence technology in an academic writing  class: How do Indonesian students perceive? Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep450
  90. Ventayen, Randy Joy Magno, ChatGPT by OpenAI: Students’ Viewpoint on Cheating using Artificial Intelligence-Based Application  (February 16, 2023). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4361548 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4361548
  91. Vidhani, D. (2024). The art of asking question: Mastering Human-AI (HAI) duet in chemistry through prompt engineering. Research  Square (Research Square). https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3825267/v1
  92. Warschauer, M., Tseng, W., Yim, S., Webster, T., Jacob, S., Du, Q, & Tate, T. (2023). The afordances and contradictions of  AIgenerated text for second language writers. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4404380
  93. Washington, J. (2023). The Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Writer’s Self-Efficacy: A Critical Literature review. Social  Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4538043
  94. Wong, K. M., & Mak, P. (2019). Self-assessment in the primary L2 writing classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 75(2),  183–196. https://doi.org/10. 3138/cmlr.2018-0197
  95. Yoon, H. J., Kim, S., Kim, J.-H., Keum, J.-S., Oh, S.-I., Jo, J., Chun, J., Youn, Y. H., Park, H., & Kwon, I. G. (2019). A lesion based convolutional neural network improves endoscopic detection and depth prediction of early gastric cancer. Journal of clinical  medicine, 8(9), 1310. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091310. 
  96. Yustiana, R. A., Shofiya, A., & Iftanti, E. (2024, January). Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd): Utilization Frequencies in EFL  Writing Class of Higher Education. In PROCEEDING INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ISLAM, LAW, AND SOCIETY  (Vol. 3, No. 1). 
  97. Zheng, L., Niu, J., Zhong, L., & Gyasi, J. F. (2023). The effectiveness of artificial intelligence on learning achievement and learning  perception: A meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9), 5650–5664. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2015693.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic