Sep 2026· Journal of Linguistics & Cultural Studies· 0 citations· 10 references
TL;DR
It is argued that the central issue is not whether students use AI, but how responsibility for thinking and decision-making is distributed between students and AI, and proposes a conceptual model in which the depth of AI involvement interacts with learner agency to shape learning outcomes.
Abstract
The rapid diffusion of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is reshaping university-level English writing by lowering the linguistic and cognitive costs of text production. Large language models can generate and revise prose, suggest vocabulary, explain grammatical problems, reorganize paragraphs, and provide immediate feedback. These affordances can improve writing efficiency and the surface quality of students' texts, particularly when learners face linguistic constraints or limited access to individualized feedback. Yet the educational value of GenAI cannot be reduced to technological empowerment. When AI performs ideation, language production, organization, and revision on behalf of learners, opportunities for language output and cognitive engagement may be reduced. This paper examines the resulting tension among writing efficiency, language proficiency, and learner agency through the lenses of second language acquisition, cognitive load, constructivist learning, and self-regulated learning. It argues that the central issue is not whether students use AI, but how responsibility for thinking and decision-making is distributed between students and AI. The paper proposes a conceptual model in which the depth of AI involvement interacts with learner agency to shape learning outcomes. The most productive condition is a collaborative development zone in which students retain ownership of goals, arguments, and final judgments while using AI as a linguistic and cognitive scaffold. The paper further argues for process-based assessment, critical AI literacy, staged AI access, and a redefinition of EFL writing competence. In an AI-mediated environment, effective writing competence extends beyond language generation to include evaluation, strategic collaboration, and meaning reconstruction.
Artificial intelligence (AI)-mediated writing provides a critical case for educational psychology because it reveals how learners regulate cognition, effort, confidence, motivation, and beliefs about competence when fluent external support is available. In English as a foreign language (EFL) writing, such support can c...
Zihang Lan, Chen Niu· Frontiers in Psychology· 0 citations
Background: Generative artificial intelligence has entered language classrooms faster than the evidence base has matured, with most published work centered on English and second-language learning. Filipino language and literature instruction presents a distinct problem because linguistic form, code-switching, historica...
Ivy Joy D. Ganancial· Journal of Leadership for Ba...· 0 citations
How students and teachers in a Colombian university language program perceived GenAI-supported production was explored and four patterns emerged: GenAI as a rehearsal and revision partner; tension between polished output and language ownership; teacher mediation shifting toward critical language awareness; and the need...
Dionelio Jesus Moreno Villalobos· International Journal of AI...· 0 citations
It is argued that the thoughtful integration of AI feedback with teacher feedback, grounded in pedagogical principles and human judgment, can significantly enhance L2 writing instruction.
O. Jamoom, Saaid Ali Omar· Comprehensive Journal of Sci...· 0 citations
It is argued that the central educational challenge is not whether GenAI improves single-task language performance, but how learners develop calibrated trust, critical judgment, self-regulated feedback use, and professional agency in human–AI language-learning environments.
Able to defeat top-ranked human players and more efficient than other models, the new system could help decision-makers in military maneuvers or business negotiations.