Article Records

Seven Studies on Generative AI and English Learning

Each record identifies the authors, journal, year, and DOI, followed by a concise account of the method and findings. Teaching implications and discussion questions are archive interpretations. Published titles retain their original wording.

7 studies

Study 1
2024PerceptionOnline Journal of Communication and Media Technologies

University Students' Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence-based Tools for English Writing Courses

Authors
Yong-Jik Lee; Robert O. Davis; Sun Ok Lee
Participants
80 Korean university students
Research Focus
The perceived advantages, limitations, and overreliance risks associated with AI-based writing tools such as Google Translate, Papago, and Grammarly.

How the Study Was Conducted

A mixed-methods study combined an online survey of 80 students with a focus-group interview involving five volunteers.

Major Findings

Participants valued translation and language correction but described ways excessive reliance could disrupt their own composing. These are learner reports, not direct measurements of writing improvement.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

Instructors can specify when assistance is appropriate and ask students to explain their revisions.

Interpretive limit: Perceptions and volunteer interview accounts cannot establish causal effects on writing proficiency.

Discussion Questions
  1. When do I use AI tools in English writing, and for what purpose?
  2. Where is the boundary between assistance and overreliance?
  3. What must I protect if I want my English ability to improve while using AI?
Study 2
2024Classroom IntegrationContemporary Educational Technology

A Case Study of Implementing Generative AI in University's General English Courses

Authors
Yong Jik Lee; Robert O. Davis
Participants
89 students enrolled in university general English courses
Research Focus
The integration of generative AI into English writing and speaking activities and its relationship to learner motivation, interest, and confidence.

How the Study Was Conducted

A classroom case study involved 89 students using a GenAI-based instructional model during the spring 2024 semester.

Major Findings

The article reports favorable affective responses in writing and speaking activities, including motivation, interest, and confidence.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

The instructional model offers ideas for course design; its effectiveness should be assessed against clearly defined learning objectives.

Interpretive limit: A classroom case study does not establish that comparable benefits will occur in other courses or populations.

Discussion Questions
  1. What makes an AI-integrated class pedagogically coherent?
  2. Which English learning activities benefit most from AI integration?
  3. What classroom rules should instructors establish for AI use?
Study 3
2025Writing StrategiesOnline Journal of Communication and Media Technologies

Integrating Generative AI into EFL Writing: University Students' Strategies and Perceptions

Authors
Yong-Jik Lee; Robert O. Davis; Jung-In Choi
Participants
59 university EFL students
Research Focus
Learners' strategic use of generative AI across different stages of the English writing process.

How the Study Was Conducted

Quantitative pre- and post-intervention surveys examined three dimensions of writing strategies and experiences with AI.

Major Findings

Reported idea-generation and content-refinement strategies improved significantly. Attitudes toward AI remained positive, with no statistically significant pre–post change.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

Writing instruction can pair AI-assisted planning and revision with reflection on the choices students make.

Interpretive limit: Changes in reported strategy use should not be equated with independently assessed gains in writing quality.

Discussion Questions
  1. How can my writing process be divided into stages?
  2. At which writing stage might AI use be most harmful to learning?
  3. What is the difference between adopting AI output and using it as a reference?
Study 4
2025Cognitive and Affective OutcomesLLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching

EFL University Students' Motivation, Cognitive Load, and Satisfaction with Using GenAI for English Learning

Authors
Yong Jik Lee; Masashi Otani
Participants
University EFL students in an AI-integrated writing course
Research Focus
Motivation, cognitive load, and satisfaction in generative AI-supported English writing instruction.

How the Study Was Conducted

An end-of-semester survey assessed motivation, cognitive load, and satisfaction with AI-integrated writing instruction.

Major Findings

Students reported strong interest in AI-supported writing, moderate mental effort, and favorable course evaluations. Retention of strategies and clarity about AI’s role remained areas for improvement.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

Explicit guidance on prompting and evaluating responses may help learners manage the demands of AI-assisted writing.

Interpretive limit: End-of-semester self-reports cannot demonstrate improvement over time or isolate the effect of AI.

Discussion Questions
  1. What information do I provide when prompting AI?
  2. How do I judge whether an AI-generated English sentence is accurate?
  3. Have I ever experienced AI use as cognitively demanding? Why?
Study 5
2026Writing StrategiesInternational Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education

Implementing AI-integrated English writing: university English language learners writing strategies and perceptions

Authors
Yong-Jik Lee; Seung-Hoon Jeong
Participants
85 Korean university English language learners
Research Focus
AI-integrated English writing strategies and learners' perceptions of those strategies.

How the Study Was Conducted

Surveys and in-depth interviews examined writing strategies and perceptions in a study involving 85 Korean university students.

Major Findings

Learners described brainstorming, Korean-to-English translation, and digital revision support. They perceived language and confidence benefits while raising concerns about dependency, ethics, and reduced human interaction.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

Teachers can use AI as a supplementary resource while requiring independent reasoning and transparent revision decisions.

Interpretive limit: Perceived benefits do not establish measured language gains or explain individual differences in writing achievement.

Discussion Questions
  1. What are three AI-use strategies I currently use?
  2. Which strategies reported in this study have I not tried?
  3. How would the writing of a strategic AI user differ from that of a less strategic AI user?
Study 6
2026Cognitive and Affective OutcomesInternational Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education

University Students' Perspectives on Integrating Generative AI into English Language Learning

Authors
Yong-Jik Lee; Masashi Otani
Participants
University students engaged in English language learning
Research Focus
Cognitive and affective advantages and risks of using generative AI for English learning.

How the Study Was Conducted

A mixed-methods study combined survey responses with individual interviews about cognitive and affective aspects of AI-supported English learning.

Major Findings

Participants valued translation, efficiency, and motivation; perceived benefits for confidence were less pronounced. They also raised concerns about dependency, independent thinking, and dishonest use.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

Course policies can clarify permitted assistance, disclosure requirements, and students’ responsibility for submitted work.

Interpretive limit: Reported concerns about misconduct are not evidence of its frequency or of actual misconduct by participants.

Discussion Questions
  1. What does reduced independent thinking look like in practice?
  2. Where is the line between legitimate AI support and academic misconduct?
  3. Which benefit or risk is most relevant to my own learning?
Study 7
2026AI ReadinessJournal of Asia TEFL

Integrating Generative AI into English Learning: Insights from Korean University EFL Students

Authors
Yong-Jik Lee; Robert O. Davis; Jungin Choi
Participants
73 university students enrolled in general English courses
Research Focus
Actual AI tool use, technological readiness, perceived effects on English learning, and the need for AI literacy instruction.

How the Study Was Conducted

A descriptive survey examined AI use, perceptions, and readiness among 73 undergraduates enrolled in compulsory English courses.

Major Findings

ChatGPT and Google Translate were the most frequently reported tools. Students described moderate readiness, and more than half reported no formal training in AI for language learning.

Teaching Implications (Archive Interpretation)

The reported training gap provides a rationale for structured instruction in critical and responsible AI use.

Interpretive limit: A descriptive survey cannot establish that AI use improves proficiency or that an AI literacy intervention is effective.

Discussion Questions
  1. Where did I learn how to use AI for English learning?
  2. What would I most need to learn in an AI literacy course?
  3. After reading this collection, what should I change in my own AI use?