Approaching the Limits to EFL Writing Enhancement with AI-generated Text and Diverse Learners

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.00367v2
• Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 15:08:32 GMT
• Title: Approaching the Limits to EFL Writing Enhancement with AI-generated Text and Diverse Learners
• Authors: David James Woo, Hengky Susanto, Chi Ho Yeung, Kai Guo,
• Abstract summary: Students can compose texts by integrating their own words with AI-generated text.<n>This study investigated how 59 Hong Kong secondary school students interacted with AI-generated text to compose a feature article.
• Score: 3.2668433085737036
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots, such as ChatGPT, are reshaping how English as a foreign language (EFL) students write since students can compose texts by integrating their own words with AI-generated text. This study investigated how 59 Hong Kong secondary school students with varying levels of academic achievement interacted with AI-generated text to compose a feature article, exploring whether any interaction patterns benefited the overall quality of the article. Through content analysis, multiple linear regression and cluster analysis, we found the overall number of words -- whether AI- or human-generated -- is the main predictor of writing quality. However, the impact varies by students' competence to write independently, for instance, by using their own words accurately and coherently to compose a text, and to follow specific interaction patterns with AI-generated text. Therefore, although composing texts with human words and AI-generated text may become prevalent in EFL writing classrooms, without educators' careful attention to EFL writing pedagogy and AI literacy, high-achieving students stand to benefit more from using AI-generated text than low-achieving students.

Related papers

• Almost AI, Almost Human: The Challenge of Detecting AI-Polished Writing [55.2480439325792]
  Misclassification can lead to false plagiarism accusations and misleading claims about AI prevalence in online content. We systematically evaluate eleven state-of-the-art AI-text detectors using our AI-Polished-Text Evaluation dataset. Our findings reveal that detectors frequently misclassify even minimally polished text as AI-generated, struggle to differentiate between degrees of AI involvement, and exhibit biases against older and smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T18:45:37Z)
• AI as Humanity's Salieri: Quantifying Linguistic Creativity of Language Models via Systematic Attribution of Machine Text against Web Text [53.15652021126663]
  We present CREATIVITY INDEX as the first step to quantify the linguistic creativity of a text.<n>To compute CREATIVITY INDEX efficiently, we introduce DJ SEARCH, a novel dynamic programming algorithm.<n>Experiments reveal that the CREATIVITY INDEX of professional human authors is on average 66.2% higher than that of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T18:55:01Z)
• Decoding AI and Human Authorship: Nuances Revealed Through NLP and Statistical Analysis [0.0]
  This research explores the nuanced differences in texts produced by AI and those written by humans. The study investigates various linguistic traits, patterns of creativity, and potential biases inherent in human-written and AI- generated texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T18:09:03Z)
• Differentiating between human-written and AI-generated texts using linguistic features automatically extracted from an online computational tool [0.0]
  This study aims to investigate how various linguistic components are represented in both types of texts, assessing the ability of AI to emulate human writing. Despite AI-generated texts appearing to mimic human speech, the results revealed significant differences across multiple linguistic features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T05:37:09Z)
• Spotting AI's Touch: Identifying LLM-Paraphrased Spans in Text [61.22649031769564]
  We propose a novel framework, paraphrased text span detection (PTD) PTD aims to identify paraphrased text spans within a text. We construct a dedicated dataset, PASTED, for paraphrased text span detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T11:22:27Z)
• Raidar: geneRative AI Detection viA Rewriting [42.477151044325595]
  Large language models (LLMs) are more likely to modify human-written text than AI-generated text when tasked with rewriting. We introduce a method to detect AI-generated content by prompting LLMs to rewrite text and calculating the editing distance of the output. Our results illustrate the unique imprint of machine-generated text through the lens of the machines themselves.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T18:57:53Z)
• Towards Possibilities & Impossibilities of AI-generated Text Detection: A Survey [97.33926242130732]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized the domain of natural language processing (NLP) with remarkable capabilities of generating human-like text responses. Despite these advancements, several works in the existing literature have raised serious concerns about the potential misuse of LLMs. To address these concerns, a consensus among the research community is to develop algorithmic solutions to detect AI-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T18:11:32Z)
• The Imitation Game: Detecting Human and AI-Generated Texts in the Era of ChatGPT and BARD [3.2228025627337864]
  We introduce a novel dataset of human-written and AI-generated texts in different genres. We employ several machine learning models to classify the texts. Results demonstrate the efficacy of these models in discerning between human and AI-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-22T21:00:14Z)
• Perception, performance, and detectability of conversational artificial intelligence across 32 university courses [15.642614735026106]
  We compare the performance of ChatGPT against students on 32 university-level courses. We find that ChatGPT's performance is comparable, if not superior, to that of students in many courses. We find an emerging consensus among students to use the tool, and among educators to treat this as plagiarism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-07T10:37:51Z)
• AI, write an essay for me: A large-scale comparison of human-written versus ChatGPT-generated essays [66.36541161082856]
  ChatGPT and similar generative AI models have attracted hundreds of millions of users. This study compares human-written versus ChatGPT-generated argumentative student essays.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-24T12:58:28Z)
• Exploring AI-Generated Text in Student Writing: How Does AI Help? [0.0]
  It remains unclear to what extent AI-generated text in these students' writing might lead to higher-quality writing. We explored 23 Hong Kong secondary school students' attempts to write stories comprising their own words and AI-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-10T14:36:47Z)
• Abstractive Summarization of Spoken and Written Instructions with BERT [66.14755043607776]
  We present the first application of the BERTSum model to conversational language. We generate abstractive summaries of narrated instructional videos across a wide variety of topics. We envision this integrated as a feature in intelligent virtual assistants, enabling them to summarize both written and spoken instructional content upon request.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-21T20:59:34Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.