Improving The Methodology for Developing Future English Teachers’ Writing Skills Through AI Integration

Madrakhimova Mukhlisa Shokir Qizi

doi:10.58905/athena.v4i4.805

Authors

Madrakhimova Mukhlisa Shokir Qizi Urgench State Pedagogical Institute, Urgench, Uzbekistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58905/athena.v4i4.805

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence, Generative AI, Writing Skills, Pre-Service English teachers, AI Literacy

Abstract

The rapid spread of artificial intelligence (AI) writing tools has created both new opportunities and new risks for foreign language teacher education, particularly in the development of academic writing competence. This article addresses the problem of how AI-based tools can be integrated into the professional training of pre-service English teachers so that they strengthen, rather than replace, learners’ own writing ability. Drawing on process-writing theory, sociocultural scaffolding, self-regulated learning, and the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework, the study proposes a five-stage AI-integrated methodology: (1) orientation and digital literacy awareness, (2) AI-assisted drafting, (3) AI-mediated feedback and revision, (4) critical evaluation and pedagogical reflection, and (5) autonomous and reflective writing. AI support is deliberately reduced across the stages, moving learners from AI-dependent to AI-informed, self-regulated practice. The methodology was tested in a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest design with an experimental group and a control group, using an analytic rubric with five criteria. Both groups started from comparable baselines (mean pretest scores of 2.75 and 2.72 on a five-point scale). The experimental group’s mean gain (1.27 points) was more than twice that of the control group (0.57 points), with normalized gains of 0.54–0.61 versus 0.23–0.27. The largest difference appeared in the critical evaluation of AI-generated text (+1.54 vs. +0.67). The results suggest that systematic, teacher-guided AI integration can improve organizational, lexical-grammatical, and rhetorical writing competence while building the critical AI literacy that future teachers will need in their own classrooms. Practical recommendations for English teacher education curricula are provided.

References

K. Hyland, Second Language Writing. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2003.

G. Kessler, "Technology and the future of language teaching," Foreign Lang. Ann., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 205–218, 2018.

K. Hyland and F. Hyland, "Feedback on second language students' writing," Lang. Teach., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 83–101, 2006.

R. Godwin-Jones, "Partnering with AI: Intelligent writing assistance and instructed language learning," Lang. Learn. Technol., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 5–24, 2022.

E. Kasneci et al., "ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education," Learn. Individ. Differ., vol. 103, Art. no. 102274, 2023.

L. Kohnke, B. L. Moorhouse, and D. Zou, "ChatGPT for language teaching and learning," RELC J., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 537–550, 2023.

Y. Su, Y. Lin, and C. Lai, "Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms," Assess. Writ., vol. 57, Art. no. 100752, 2023.

J. S. Barrot, "Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials," Assess. Writ., vol. 57, Art. no. 100745, 2023.

D. R. E. Cotton, P. A. Cotton, and J. R. Shipway, "Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT," Innov. Educ. Teach. Int., vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 228–239, 2024.

L. Flower and J. R. Hayes, "A cognitive process theory of writing," College Compos. Commun., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 365–387, Dec. 1981.

W. Grabe and R. B. Kaplan, Theory and Practice of Writing: An Applied Linguistic Perspective. London, U.K.: Longman, 1996.

M. Warschauer, "A developmental perspective on technology in language education," TESOL Q., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 453–475, 2002.

M. Stevenson and A. Phakiti, "The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing," Assess. Writ., vol. 19, pp. 51–65, 2014.

J. Ranalli, "Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it?," Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn., vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 653–674, 2018.

S. Link, M. Mehrzad, and M. Rahimi, "Impact of automated writing evaluation on teacher feedback, student revision, and writing improvement," Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn., vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 605–634, 2022.

Z. V. Zhang and K. Hyland, "Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing," Assess. Writ., vol. 36, pp. 90–102, 2018.

S. Koltovskaia, "Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study," Assess. Writ., vol. 44, Art. no. 100450, 2020.

D. Yan, "Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation," Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 28, pp. 13943–13967, 2023.

J. Escalante, A. Pack, and A. Barrett, "AI-generated feedback on writing: Insights into efficacy and ENL student preference," Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 20, Art. no. 57, 2023.

J. Steiss et al., "Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students' writing," Learn. Instr., vol. 91, Art. no. 101894, 2024.

C. K. Y. Chan and W. Hu, "Students' voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education," Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 20, Art. no. 43, 2023.

P. Mishra and M. J. Koehler, "Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge," Teach. Coll. Rec., vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1017–1054, 2006.

D. Long and B. Magerko, "What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations," in Proc. CHI Conf. Human Factors Comput. Syst., Honolulu, HI, USA, 2020, pp. 1–16.

D. T. K. Ng, J. K. L. Leung, S. K. W. Chu, and M. S. Qiao, "Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review," Comput. Educ.: Artif. Intell., vol. 2, Art. no. 100041, 2021.

F. Miao and W. Holmes, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research. Paris, France: UNESCO, 2023.

O. Zawacki-Richter, V. I. Marín, M. Bond, and F. Gouverneur, "Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—Where are the educators?," Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, Art. no. 39, 2019.

L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1978.

P. D. Pearson and M. C. Gallagher, "The instruction of reading comprehension," Contemp. Educ. Psychol., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 317–344, 1983.

B. J. Zimmerman, "Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview," Theory Pract., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 64–70, 2002.

S. C. Weigle, Assessing Writing. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002.

R. R. Hake, "Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses," Amer. J. Phys., vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 64–74, 1998.