The Effectiveness of Using AI Tool Grammarly in Improving ESL University Students’ Descriptive Writing Scores in English Proficiency Courses

The current study investigates the effectiveness of using artificial intelligence (AI) tool Grammarly in improving English as a Second Language (ESL) university students’ descriptive writing scores in English proficiency courses. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed, involving 150 ESL university students from five Malaysian universities across the Northern (Perak), Central (Selangor), Eastern (Terengganu), Southern (Johor), and Sarawak research zones, all of whom met the English proficiency criteria of MUET Band 3.0 or CEFR Level B1. Data were collected using a quasi-experimental comparative groups pretest–posttest design, a survey questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analysed through independent samples t-tests, one-way ANOVA, post-hoc tests, Spearman’s correlation, and descriptive analysis, while qualitative data were examined through content analysis. The quantitative findings indicate that Grammarly did not produce statistically significant improvements in overall descriptive writing scores. Nevertheless, its effectiveness varied across research zones, with the strongest impact observed in the Southern and Central zones, moderate or inconclusive effects in the Northern and Eastern zones, and negligible impact in Sarawak. A weak but statistically significant positive relationship was observed between the frequency of Grammarly usage and improvements in descriptive writing scores. Complementing these results, the qualitative data revealed that university students perceived Grammarly as a supportive tool that enhanced language accuracy, vocabulary usage, and writing confidence. Importantly, these positive perception did not consistently translate into measurable improvements in overall descriptive writing scores, particularly for higher-order writing skills, and concerns regarding over-reliance were noted. Collectively, the quantitative and qualitative findings provide a nuanced understanding of the role of Grammarly in supporting university students’ development of descriptive writing scores. By addressing a research gap within the Malaysian context, the current study offers a critical, real-world perspective on the integration of Grammarly, highlighting both its pedagogical benefits and limitations. The findings provide practical insights for university students, educators, and higher Education institutions seeking to make informed decisions regarding the use of Grammarly to support the development of descriptive writing scores.

artificial intelligence; artificial intelligence tool; ESL university students; Grammarly; descriptive writing scores

1. Abdul et al. (2022). Exploring artificial intelligence using Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) for writing skills. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 7(SI9), 547–553. https://doi.org/10.21834/ebpj.v7isi9.4304 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ali, H. (2022). The importance of the four English language skills: Reading, writing, speaking, and listening in teaching Iraqi learners. Humanitarian and Natural Sciences Journal, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.53796/hnsj3210 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Angela, C. (2019). English the lingua-franca of global business. Journal of emerging technologies and innovative research, 6(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Anistasya, C. (2022). Students’ difficulty in writing English: Affected by vocabulary skills. Journal of English Education, Literature and Linguistics, 5(2), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.31540/jeell.v5i2.1521 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. USA: Longman [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Council of Europe (2018). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment, companion volume with new descriptors. Strasbourg Cedex: Council of Europe. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Dahri et al. (2024) Investigating AI-based academic support acceptance and its impact on students’ performance in Malaysian and Pakistani higher education institutions. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12599-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dewi, U. (2023). Grammarly as automated writing evaluation: Its effectiveness from EFL students’ perceptions. Lingua Cultura, 16(2), 155–161. https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v16i2.8315 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Fahmi, M. & Cahyono, B. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. Jees (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Faisal, F., & Carabella, P. A. (2023). Utilizing Grammarly in an academic writing process: Higher-Education students’ perceived views. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 8(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v8i1.1006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fitri, A. I., Masrul, M., & Asilestari, P. (2022). An analysis on students’ ability in writing descriptive text. Journal of English Language and Education, 7(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10.31004/jele.v7i2.290 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hadiat, A. W. F. (2022). The use of Grammarly to enhance students’ accuracy in writing descriptive text. Journal of English Education Program (JEEP), 9(2), 133. https://doi.org/10.25157/(jeep).v9i2.8552 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Jerbi, D. (2023). Exploring the latest frontiers of artificial intelligence: A Review of trends and developments. TechRxiv. https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.22717327.v1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lestari, I. (2020). Error analysis of simple present in writing descriptive text. Eltics: Journal of English Language Teaching and English Linguistics, 5, 43-49. https://doi.org/10.31316/eltics.v5i2.748 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Malaysian Examinations Council. (2019). Regulations, and test specifications. 1–45. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Manolescu, D. (2023). A quick snapshot of the English language. Journal of Critical Studies in Language and Literature, 4(1), 14–20. https://doi.org/10.46809/jcsll.v4i1.191 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Maulidiyah, T. N., & Mandarani, V. (2023). Deciphering descriptive text challenges: Seventh grade students’ writing difficulties. Academia Open, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.21070/acopen.8.2023.3020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mubarok et al. (2020). Grammarly: An online EFL writing companion. Eltics, 5(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Naka, L., & Spahija, D. (2022). Impact of English language as a human capital in the higher education institutions’ development strategy. Corporate and Business Strategy Review, 3(2), 262–272. https://doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv3i2siart7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Osamor et al. (2023). Chatbots and AI in education (AIEd) tools: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(2), pp. 332–345. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.29 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Pavlyuk, E. S., & Salisu, C. A. (2022, June 13). English as a tool for cross cultural interaction in business education. Chronos, 7(4), 96–99. https://doi.org/10.52013/2658-7556-66-4-28 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Rahim et al. (2022). AI-based chatbots adoption model for higher-education institutions: A hybrid PLS-SEM-neural network modelling approach. Sustainability, 14(19), 12726. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912726 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Shahzod et al. (2021). English is a global language and importance of knowing foreign languages. Science Education, 2(6):578-580. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sharma, P. (2023). The use of imagery and its significance in literary studies. Journal of English Studies, 14, 114–127. https://doi.org/10.3126/ojes.v14i1.56664 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Singgih, M., & Rachmasisca, M. F. (2020). The effect of using the concept mapping model and student learning activities on narrative writing ability at SD Negeri 3 Selamider Bandar Lampung. Journal of Didactique Indonesian, 1(2), 3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Singh, S.V., & Hiran, K.K. (2022). The impact of AI on teaching and learning in higher education technology. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 22(13), pp. 135–148. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v22i13.5514 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Siregar, D. Y. (2022). Students’ abilities in writing descriptive text at grade seventh students of SMP Dar Al-Falah in Tanjungbalai. Vision, 18(2), 130. https://doi.org/10.30829/vis.v18i2.2180 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Solikhah, S. W., Turohmah, N. N., & Heriyanto, D. (2023). Student learning comparison using the song “Dear God” by Avenged Sevenfold to improve listening skills. Journal on Education, 6(1), 710–718. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v6i1.2985 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Wulva, K. S. (2023). Students’ ability to rewrite the retelling descriptive text. International Journal of Business and Information Technology, 4(1), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.47927/ijobit.v4i1.660 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Younis et al. (2023). ChatGPT Evaluation: Can it replace Grammarly and Quillbot tools? British Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.32996/bjal.2023.3.2.4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar