Developing AI Chatbots for English Process Writing

This research explores the design and efficacy of a personalized AI chatbot, developed using the GPT-4.0 API, to support seventh-grade students at Kinderfield-Highfield School Pontianak in mastering English process writing. The study addresses the critical need to balance the immense potential of AI assistance with the preservation of academic integrity and the development of independent writing skills. Guided by the ADDIE instructional design model, the research began with a comprehensive needs analysis to identify student challenges, including idea generation, grammatical accuracy, and a lack of consistent feedback. The resulting chatbot was meticulously fine-tuned with specialized prompts to guide learners through each stage of the writing process: pre-writing, drafting, revising, and editing. Data was gathered through expert evaluations and student checklists following implementation. Results demonstrated that the chatbot was highly effective in boosting students' motivation, engagement, and writing effectiveness, particularly during the drafting and editing phases. However, the study also identified key areas for refinement, such as enhancing the clarity of feedback and fostering greater independent thought during the pre-writing and revising stages. Experts affirmed the tool's convenience, educational value, and potential for future use. The study concludes that while AI chatbots present a transformative tool for personalized writing instruction, their design must strategically encourage critical thinking rather than dependence to fully realize their benefits in the L2 classroom.

AI Chatbots, English Process Writing, Educational Technology

1. Basturkman, H. (2010). Developing Courses in English for Specific Purposes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Branch, M. R. (2009). Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. New York: Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Butterfield, A. L. and C. K. Jung. (2013). A hybrid approach to second language writing. Journal of the Korean English Education Society 12(1), 123-139. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. De Larios, J. R., L. Murphy and J. Marín. (2002). A critical examination of L2 writing process research. In S. Ransdell and S. Barbier, eds., New Directions for Research in L2 Writing, 11-47. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Ene, E. and V. Kosobucki. (2016). Rubrics and corrective feedback in ESL writing: A longitudinal case study of an L2 writer. Assessing Writing 30, 3-20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Hong, K. (2014). How to assess L2 English writings from L2 English teachers’ perspective. The Journal of Mirae English Language and Literature 19(4), 365-390. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Hyland, K. (2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Kang, S. and M. Sung. (2024). EFL students’ self-directed learning of conversation skills with AI chatbots. Language Learning & Technology 28(1), 1-19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Lipson, M. Y., J. Mosenthal, P. Daniels and H. Woodside-Jiron. (2000). Process writing in the classrooms of eleven fifth-grade teachers with different orientations to teaching and learning. The Elementary School Journal 101(2), 209-231. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Liu, X. (2024). Formative writing assessment: An EFL teacher’s beliefs and practices. Changing English 31(2), 200-210. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Nicolás-Conesa, F., J. R. de Larios and Y. Coyle. (2014). Development of EFL students’ mental models of writing and their effects on performance. Journal of Second Language Writing 24(1), 1-19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ningrum, S. (2023). ChatGPT’s impact: The AI revolution in EFL writing. Borneo Engineering & Advanced Multidisciplinary International Journal 2(SI), 32-37. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Park, J. (2017). Benefits of the process approach in L2 writing: From the prospective teacher’s perspectives. The Journal of Linguistic Science 82, 117-136. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Seels, B. B., & Richey, R. C. (1994). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Washington DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Tomlinson. (2011). Materials Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Williams, M. and R. L. Burden. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Yang, H. (2018). Influence of learner training on students’ process writing in automated writing evaluation- supported class. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning 21(3), 88-114. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Yuan, Y., H. Li and A. Sawaengdist. (2024). The impact of ChatGPT on learners in English academic writing: Opportunities and challenges in education. Language Learning in Higher Education 14(1), 41-56. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Zou, M. and L. Huang. (2023). The impact of ChatGPT on L2 writing and expected responses: Voice from doctoral students. Education and Information Technologies 29(11), 13201-13219. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Evaluating the Impacts of Mind Mapping Strategy on Developing EFL Students’ Critical Reading Skills
• Significance of Reading Instructions for Language Improvement in Children with Down Syndrome
• Prenasalised Consonants in Liangmai
• Metadiscourse Matters: Definitions, Models, and Advantages for ESL/ EFL Writing
• Blank Minds and Stuck Voices: Understanding and Addressing Cognitive Anxiety in High-Stakes ESL Speaking Tests