Generative AI-Assisted Academic Writing in Higher Education EFL Contexts: A Critical Review of Learning Outcomes, Self-Regulated Learning, and Ethical Governance
Aug 2026· Journal of English language teaching and applied linguistics· 0 citations
TL;DR
It is argued that GenAI’s value cannot be judged by writing products alone but requires understanding the interplay among cognition, autonomy, and regulation.
Abstract
GenAI’s rapid proliferation has reshaped EFL academic writing, yet research remains fragmented. This review synthesizes 24 publications (2022–2026) on learning outcomes, self-regulated learning (SRL), and ethical governance. Three findings emerge: (1) positive effects on surface-level writing are confirmed but moderated by intervention duration, task complexity, learner proficiency, and evaluation methods; (2) GenAI’s impact on SRL depends on its role as a scaffold versus a substitute for learner agency, as illuminated by TAM, SCT, and SRL; (3) ethical governance is shifting from plagiarism policing to proactive AI literacy. Gaps persist in longitudinal and process-oriented designs, representation of underserved groups, and theory-driven pedagogy. The review argues that GenAI’s value cannot be judged by writing products alone but requires understanding the interplay among cognition, autonomy, and regulation. An ecologically-informed research agenda is proposed.
The evidence indicates that GenAI can support SRL by functioning as a learning tutor, assisting goal setting and planning, facilitating monitoring and self-evaluation, and improving learning efficiency, and higher-education institutions should combine GenAI access with pedagogical practices that strengthen planning, verification, reflection, critical thinking, and responsible AI literacy.
A context-bounded interpretive framework is proposed suggesting that GenAI’s educational value depends on instructional and governance conditions that preserve autonomy, critical thinking, integrity, and equity.
Mayra Álvarez-Jiménez, Geovanny Cudco, Diego Gamboa et al.· Computers· 0 citations
It is suggested that AI can enhance drafting, revision, and feedback processes, improving coherence, metacognition, and writing confidence, however, these benefits are accompanied by persistent concerns regarding ethical ambiguity, inconsistent policy guidance, and insufficient faculty training.
Samira Dichari, Fadi Jaber· Journal of Education and Tra...· 0 citations
The findings indicate that GenAI adoption in African HEIs is expanding but uneven, concentrated in digitally advanced nations, enhancing personalization, multilingual learning, and research productivity, yet raises ethical concerns about academic integrity.
O. Apata, Peter Oyewole, S. Ajose et al.· Journal of University Teachi...· 0 citations
The Responsible AI Literacy in Education (RAIL-Ed) framework is introduced, developed through a systematic review and qualitative framework analysis of 67 studies (2023-2025), grounded in critical, pragmatist, sociocultural, and human-centered traditions.
S. Hossain, S. Ahmadi, Leqi Li et al.· 0 citations
The findings show that GenAI supports critical thinking when embedded in structured learning activities that require students to question, evaluate, and revise AI-generated content, and highlight the importance of designing AI-supported learning environments that position AI outputs as objects of reasoning rather than sources of answers.