Use of AI Tools in EFL Writing Instruction: A Case Study of Chinese Vocational College Instructors

Authors

  • Xiaomin Deng

    Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
    Faculty of Foreign Languages, Nanchong Vocational and Technical College, Nanchong 637131, China
  • Ying Xu

    Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
    Faculty of Economics and Finance, Zhanjiang University of Science and Technology, Zhanjiang 310023, China
  • Supyan Hussin

    Languages and Linguistics Research Center, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia
  • Nur Ainil Sulaiman

    Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i5.9285
Received: 29 March 2025 | Revised: 10 April 2025 | Accepted: 11 April 2025 | Published Online: 23 April 2025

Abstract

Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have begun to reshape language education, particularly in the area of writing instruction. In the context of English as a foreign language (EFL), this study explores the types of AI writing tools currently in use, EFL instructors’ experiences with them, and their perceptions of the role such technologies play in teaching English writing at vocational and technical colleges in China. Adopting a qualitative case study approach, the study involved semi-structured interviews with EFL writing instructors. Participants were purposefully selected based on their experience with integrating AI tools into their teaching practice. Findings suggest that teachers generally viewed AI writing tools as helpful in providing timely feedback and supporting students’ independent writing development. These tools were seen as effective in easing teachers’ routine workloads while offering pedagogically relevant suggestions and feedback to learners. However, participants also expressed concerns regarding their shifting roles in the English writing classroom, raising questions about how to balance the use of automated feedback with human instruction. The study underscores the need for clearer pedagogical frameworks to guide the integration of AI tools to ensure that teachers remain central in fostering critical thinking, language awareness, and writing competence in the EFL context.

Keywords:

AI; EFL; English Writing; Teacher Perceptions; China

References

[1] Li, R., 2020. Based on the Artificial Intelligence Technology in Higher Vocational English Major Students After-School Tutoring System Design Research. Proceedings of The 2020 International Conference on Cyber Security Intelligence and Analytics (CSIA 2020); February 28–29, 2020; Haikou, China. pp. 569–575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43309-3_80

[2] Grami, G.M.A., 2020. An evaluation of online and automated English writing assistants: Collocations and idioms checkers. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. 15(4), 218–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i04.11782

[3] Pheng, K.T., Hashim, H., Sulaiman, N.A., 2021. The use of technology in teaching of writing among Malaysian ESL secondary school teachers. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on CALL. 7(1), 314–330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/call7.22

[4] Demirel, A., Sengul, M., 2022. An investigation of pre-service Turkish teachers’ attitudes toward digital writing. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences. 14(2), 582–597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2022.02.020

[5] Hu, H., Du, K., 2022. TikTok in mobile-assisted English language learning: An exploratory study. International Journal of Information and Education Technology. 12(12), 1311–1320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.12.1755

[6] Zhao, X., 2023. Leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) technology for English writing: Introducing Wordtune as a digital writing assistant for EFL writers. RELC Journal. 54(3), 890–894. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221094089

[7] Fitria, T.N., 2021. QuillBot as an online tool: Students’ alternative in paraphrasing and rewriting of English writing. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities. 9(1), 183–196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v9i1.10233

[8] Barrot, J.S., 2022. Integrating technology into ESL/EFL writing through Grammarly. RELC Journal. 53(3), 764–768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220966632

[9] Nurmayanti, N., Suryadi, S., 2023. The effectiveness of using QuillBot in improving writing for students of English Education study program. Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan: Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pembelajaran. 8(1), 32–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33394/jtp.v8i1.6392

[10] Koltovskaia, S., 2020. Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing. 44, 100450. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450

[11] Choo, Y.B., Li, K.L., 2017. Digital writing in English language writing instruction. ARIEL: An International Research Journal of English Language and Literature. 28, 1–16.

[12] Raitskaya, L., Tikhonova, E., 2022. Writing feedback from a research perspective. Journal of Language and Education. 8(4), 14–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.16377

[13] Van Beuningen, C., 2010. Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies. 10(2), 1–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119171

[14] J. Chandler, 2003. The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 12(3), 267–296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9

[15] Ferris, D.R., 2006. Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In: Hyland, K., Hyland, F. (eds.). Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 81–104.

[16] Carless, D., Winstone, N., 2023. Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy. Teaching in Higher Education. 28(1), 150–163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372

[17] Boud, D., Molloy, E., 2013. Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 38(6), 698–712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462

[18] Carless, D., Boud, D., 2018. The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 43(8), 1315–1325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354

[19] Winstone, N., Carless, D., 2019. Designing Effective Feedback Processes in Higher Education: A Learning-Focused Approach. Routledge: London, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351115940

[20] Lee, I., 2021. The development of feedback literacy for writing teachers. TESOL Quarterly. 55(3), 1048–1059. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3012

[21] Heron, M., Medland, E., Winstone, N., et al., 2023. Developing the relational in teacher feedback literacy: Exploring feedback talk. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 48(2), 172–185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1932735

[22] Molloy, E., Boud, D., Henderson, M., 2020. Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 45(4), 527–540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1667955

[23] Yu, S., Zhang, E.D., Liu, C., 2022. Assessing L2 student writing feedback literacy: A scale development and validation study. Assessing Writing. 53, 100643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2022.100643

[24] Li, F., Han, Y., 2022. Student feedback literacy in L2 disciplinary writing: Insights from international graduate students at a UK university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 47(2), 198–212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1908957

[25] Yang, M., Badger, R., Yu, Z., 2006. A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing. 15(3), 179–200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004

[26] Feng, X., Tang, J., 2012. Calibrating English language courses with major international and national EFL tests via vocabulary range. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics. 35(1), 80–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2012-0007

[27] Lee, I., 2014. Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly. 48(1), 201–213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.153

[28] Han, Y., Hyland, F., 2015. Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing. 30, 31–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002

[29] Zheng, Y., Yu, S., 2018. Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: A case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assessing Writing. 37, 13–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001

[30] Han, Y., 2017. Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System. 69, 133–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.003

[31] Mahfoodh, O.H.A., 2017. “I feel disappointed”: EFL university students’ emotional responses towards teacher written feedback. Assessing Writing. 31, 53–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.07.001

[32] Suzuki, W., Nassaji, H., Sato, K., 2019. The effects of feedback explicitness and type of target structure on accuracy in revision and new pieces of writing. System. 81, 135–145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.006

[33] Zhou, M., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., 2017. Differences in academic status among various types of students in higher vocational colleges. China Building Materials Technology. 1, 118–121.

[34] Landauer, T.K., 2003. Automatic essay assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 10(3), 295–308. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594032000148154

[35] Rezaei, M., Jafari, M., 2014. Investigating the levels, types, and causes of writing anxiety among Iranian EFL students: A mixed method design. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 98, 1545–1554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.577

[36] Baker, T., Smith, L., Anissa, N., 2019. Educ-AI-tion rebooted? Exploring the future of artificial intelligence in schools and colleges. NESTA report. Available from: https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/education-rebooted/2019

[37] Ouyang, F., Zheng, L., Jiao, P., 2022. Artificial intelligence in online higher education: A systematic review of empirical research from 2011 to 2020. Education and Information Technologies. 27(6), 7893–7925. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10925-9

[38] Shoja, L., Maadikhah, M.M., 2024. From CALT to AI: Reviewing the evolution of technology-based language testing and assessment. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.13997.81125

[39] Akgun, S., Greenhow, C., 2022. Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings. AI and Ethics. 2(3), 431–440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7

[40] Li, X., 2019. The Application and Feasibility of Artificial Intelligence in College English Teaching. Proceedings of The 9th International Conference on Education and Social Science; Shenyang, China; 29–31 March 2019. pp. 1627–1631.

[41] Hwang, G.-J., Xie, H., Wah, B.W., et al., 2020. Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 1, 100001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001

[42] Chan, K.S., Zary, N., 2019. Applications and challenges of implementing artificial intelligence in medical education: Integrative review. JMIR Medical Education. 5(1), e13930. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/13930

[43] Huang, J., Saleh, S., Liu, Y., 2021. A review on artificial intelligence in education. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. 10(3), 206–217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0077

[44] Yang, G., 2020. The application of artificial intelligence in English teaching. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology. 2(3), 76–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFS.2020.020309

[45] Bhutoria, A., 2022. Personalized education and artificial intelligence in the United States, China, and India: A systematic review using a human-in-the-loop model. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 3, 100068. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100068

[46] Hosseini, M., Rasmussen, L.M., Resnik, D.B., 2023. Using AI to write scholarly publications. Accountability in Research. 31(7), 415–423. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535

[47] Hu, H., Wang, W., 2024. Research writing in the age of ChatGPT: Resolving the debate. Current Science. 127(8), 887.

[48] Thorp, H.H., 2023. ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science. 379(6630), 313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879

[49] Nazari, N., Shabbir, M.S., Setiawan, R., 2021. Application of artificial intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: Randomized controlled trial. Heliyon. 7(5), e07014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014

[50] Rudolph, J., Tan, S., Tan, S., 2023. ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teachin. 6(1), 342–363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9

[51] Bryman, A., 2011. Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.

Downloads

How to Cite

Deng, X., Xu, Y., Hussin, S., & Sulaiman , N. A. (2025). Use of AI Tools in EFL Writing Instruction: A Case Study of Chinese Vocational College Instructors. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(5), 114–129. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i5.9285

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 5 (May 2025): In progress

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Xiaomin Deng, Ying Xu, Supyan Hussin, Nur Ainil Sulaiman

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.