Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Development of English Writing Skills

Author

Milan Pegu


Abstract

 Generative artificial intelligence can provide English learners with immediate explanations, alternative expressions, and feedback during composition. Its educational value depends on whether this assistance strengthens independent writing rather than merely improving a submitted text. This narrative review examines 40 journal articles, including 20 contributions from Indian scholars or Indian research contexts, to analyse relationships among AI assistance, writing processes, feedback engagement, and learner agency. The synthesis distinguishes empirical classroom findings from conceptual proposals and separates generative systems from earlier automated writing tools. Evidence supports carefully guided feedback and revision activities, while claims about sustained learning require stronger longitudinal verification. Indian multilingual settings introduce questions about language identity, unequal access, and the transfer of ideas across languages. A teacher-guided sequence of independent drafting, focused AI consultation, reasoned revision, and unaided transfer assessment is proposed. The review concludes that generative AI can support English writing development when learners retain responsibility for meaning, evidence, and linguistic decisions.



Keywords

generative artificial intelligence, English writing, feedback literacy, learner agency, Indian ESL education



Full Text:

Download Paper PDF


References


  • Agnihotri, R. K. (2007). Towards a pedagogical paradigm rooted in multilinguality. International Multilingual Research Journal, 1(2), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313150701489689
  • Azam, M., Chin, A., & Prakash, N. (2013). The returns to English-language skills in India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 61(2), 335–367. https://doi.org/10.1086/668277
  • Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
  • Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
  • Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
  • Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
  • Devasena, R. (2024). Artificial intelligence in education: An alternative to traditional learning. Journal of English Language Teaching, 66(1), 13–21. https://doi.org/10.66121/45wnfw13
  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc198115885
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  • Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication, 29(3), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451260
  • Hornberger, N. H., & Vaish, V. (2009). Multilingual language policy and school linguistic practice: Globalization and English-language teaching in India, Singapore and South Africa. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39(3), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920802469663
  • Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
  • Jamshed, M., Ahmed, A. S. M. M., Sarfaraj, M., & Warda, W. U. (2024). The impact of ChatGPT on English language learners’ writing skills: An assessment of AI feedback on mobile. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 18(19), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v18i19.50361
  • Kachru, B. B. (1986). The power and politics of English. World Englishes, 5(2–3), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1986.tb00720.x
  • Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, 54(2), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868
  • Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587197
  • Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a postmethod pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4), 537–560. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588427
  • Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). A postmethod perspective on English language teaching. World Englishes, 22(4), 539–550. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2003.00317.x
  • Liang, W., Yuksekgonul, M., Mao, Y., Wu, E., & Zou, J. (2023). GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers. Patterns, 4(7), Article 100779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100779
  • Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), Article 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
  • Luhach, S. (2025). Student feedback literacy in technology mediated peer feedback tasks in academic writing. Journal of English Language Teaching, 67(3), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.66121/6fpgjs52
  • Mahapatra, S. K. (2021). Online formative assessment and feedback practices of ESL teachers in India, Bangladesh and Nepal: A multiple case study. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(6), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00603-8
  • Mahapatra, S. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT on ESL students’ academic writing skills: A mixed methods intervention study. Smart Learning Environments, 11, Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00295-9
  • Makwana, V. (2025). A comparative analysis of AI-powered and teacher-led feedback: Investigating student perceptions and writing performance. Journal of English Language Teaching, 67(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.66121/2egpzq30
  • Makwana, V. (2026). ChatGPT overreliance and the erosion of L2 writing agency among ESL undergraduates in Gujarat. Journal of English Language Teaching, 68(2), 26–29. https://doi.org/10.66121/hdmag315
  • Mohanraj, S. (2024). AI, ChatGPT and ELT: A maverick’s view. Journal of English Language Teaching, 66(5), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.66121/cnwnjr79
  • Moulieswaran, N. (2025). Integrating generative AI-powered tools for vocabulary instruction: Strategies for Indian ESL learners – A conceptual analysis. Indian Journal of Language and Linguistics, 6(4), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.54392/ijll2542
  • Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
  • Noy, S., & Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 381(6654), 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh2586
  • Prabhu, N. S. (1990). There is no best method—Why?. TESOL Quarterly, 24(2), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586897
  • Priyadharshini, S. M., & Bavya, S. (2025). Empowering female students with AI: Improving writing skills in higher education. Journal of English Language Teaching, 67(4), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.66121/7s222e16
  • Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education?. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 342–363. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
  • Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
  • Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
  • Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
  • Verma, A., & Arora, S. (2025). Authorship, originality, and linguistic merits in the era of artificial intelligence. Journal of English Language Teaching, 67(3), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.66121/08m1rd81
  • Vogelzang, M., Tsimpli, I. M., Balasubramanian, A., Panda, M., Alladi, S., Reddy, A., Mukhopadhyay, L., Treffers-Daller, J., & Marinis, T. (2025). Effects of mother tongue education and multilingualism on reading skills in the regional language and English in India. TESOL Quarterly, 59(1), 448–485. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3326
  • Yan, D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 13943–13967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4
  • Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—Where are the educators?. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2

Share your valuable work from Social Media Buttons