Enhancing Secondary ESL Students’ Writing Proficiency with AI powered Writing Tools: An Empirical Study

The increasing presence of artificial intelligence (AI) in language education has accelerated the use of AI powered writing tools to support English as a Second Language (ESL) learners. Despite their growing adoption, empirical evidence on their effectiveness at the secondary school level within Malaysian international school contexts remains limited. This study investigates the influence of AI-powered writing tools on the writing proficiency of 41 secondary ESL students enrolled in an international school in Kuala Lumpur. A quantitative research design was employed, involving pre-test and post-test writing tasks and a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire examined students’ perceptions of grammar accuracy, vocabulary development, sentence restructuring, learner autonomy, and challenges associated with AI use. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics via SPSS. The findings revealed high mean scores for perceived improvement in grammar recognition and correction (M = 4.10, SD = 1.11), vocabulary variety (M = 3.95, SD = 1.16), and sentence restructuring ability (M = 3.90, SD = 1.18). Students also reported positive perceptions of AI feedback in promoting independent revision (M = 3.78, SD = 1.11) and critical evaluation of AI-generated suggestions (M = 4.00, SD = 1.10). However, a moderate level of dependence on AI-powered writing tools was identified (M = 3.73, SD = 1.18). Overall, the results indicate that AI-powered writing tools can effectively support multiple dimensions of ESL writing proficiency when integrated with appropriate instructional guidance. The study highlights the pedagogical value of AI-assisted writing while emphasising the need for balanced implementation to prevent excessive reliance.

artificial intelligence; ESL writing; writing development; AI-assisted learning; learner perceptions

1. Aladini, A. (2023a). AI applications impact on improving EFL university academic writing skills and their logical thinking. Educational Sciences Journal, 2(4), 27–44. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aladini, A. (2023b). Enhancing ESL vocabulary through AI-powered learning platforms. Asian Journal of Language Studies, 14(3), 75–90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alamar, A., & Amin, E. A. (2023). EFL students' perception of using AI paraphrasing tools in English language research projects. Arab World English Journal, 14(3), 166–181. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Alamar, H., & Amin, R. (2023). AI-assisted paraphrasing tools and academic writing among ESL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and AI in Education, 9(1), 22–37. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Aliyu, H., Musa, M., & Idris, R. (2022). The impact of automated writing evaluation tools on ESL learners’ writing performance. Journal of Language and Education, 8(2), 45–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Aliyu, J., Osman, S., Kumar, J. A., Talib, C. A., & Jambari, H. (2022). Students’ engagement through technology and cooperative learning: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Learning and Development, 12(3), 23–40. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Aliyu, M., Hussin, S., & Abdullah, N. A. (2022). Artificial intelligence and writing proficiency: A review of the literature. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 18(2), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Aliyu, S., Noraini, I., & Mansor, N. (2022). The role of AI in automated grammar correction: [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Implications for ESL writing instruction. Journal of Educational Technology and Language Learning, 15(2), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (2006). Research in education (10th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Boone, H. N., & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert scale data. Journal of Extension, 50(2), 1–5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2023). Generative AI and prompt engineering: The art of whispering to let the genie out of the algorithmic world. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), i–vii. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Burkhard, M. (2022). Student perceptions of AI-powered writing tools: Towards individualized teaching strategies. Journal of Educational Management and Technologies, 7(1), 73–90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Cherner, T., & Mitchell, C. (2020). Deconstructing EdTech frameworks based on their creators, features, and usefulness. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(3), 1–26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Chong, C. L., Aziz, N. H., & Mahmud, R. (2023). Digital literacy among Malaysian secondary students: A challenge for AI integration. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1), 21–36. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Evans, J. D. (1996). Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Brooks/Cole Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Gall, M. D., & Gall, J. P. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ismail, K., Noor, M., & Liew, J. (2022). Common ESL writing errors among Malaysian secondary school students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 13(4), 776–785. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kassim, N., & Lim, S. H. (2023). Time constraints and feedback challenges in Malaysian ESL classrooms. Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 11(1), 33–47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Lee, S., & Idris, M. N. (2025). Exploring AI tools in ESL writing instruction: A Malaysian case study. Journal of Modern Educational Research, 8(1), 88–102. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Marzuki, Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization of students’ writing: EFL teachers’ perspective. Cogent Education, 10(2), 2236469. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mohamed, A. M. (2023). Exploring the potential of an AI-based chatbot (ChatGPT) in enhancing English as a foreign language teaching: Perceptions of EFL faculty members. Education and Information Technologies, Advance online publication. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Muslimin, A. I., Mukminatien, N., & Ivone, F. M. (2023). TPACK-SAMR digital literacy competence, technostress, and teaching performance: A correlational study among EFL lecturers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(2), e409. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Muslimin, A., Nordin, N. M., & Razak, N. A. (2024). Learner engagement with AI-generated feedback in ESL writing classrooms. Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 33–47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Muslimin, P., Nordin, N., & Halim, A. F. (2024). AI in ESL classrooms: Enhancing learner autonomy and feedback reception. International Journal of Language Education and Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 33–48. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Oxford, R. L. 1990. Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Puentedura, R. (2014). Learning, technology, and the SAMR model: Goals, processes, and practice. SAGE. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Rahim, A. R., Kaur, J., & Yusof, R. (2024). Digital tools and ESL learner engagement: Insights from Malaysian secondary schools. Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 30(2), 56–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Tan, S. C., Neo, M., & Lim, W. Y. (2023). Integrating AI tools in ESL writing instruction: Benefits and challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(5), 987–1005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Tan, Y. C., Noor, M., & Ismail, K. (2023). Integrating ChatGPT in ESL classrooms: Benefits and challenges. Journal of English Education and Innovation, 5(4), 17–29. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Wang, Y., Li, Z., & Zhang, X. (2023). Automated feedback and ESL writing development: A systematic review. System, 115, 102993. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Wang, Y., Lim, C. P., & Cheah, H. M. (2023). Harnessing AI for ESL writing development: Insights from secondary classrooms. Educational Technology & Society, 26(2), 120–132. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Wong, L. H., Lee, H. J., & Ooi, J. (2023). Teacher workload and the quality of feedback in ESL writing. Journal of Educational Management and Innovation, 4(2), 55–67. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Yaw, K., et al. (2023). Research ethics in applied linguistics. Language Teaching, 56(4), 478–494. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Zhou, M., Lee, H. J., & Ong, E. (2022). Student perceptions of AI-powered writing tools in language learning. Asian Journal of Education, 43(1), 1–15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Enhancing English Vocabulary Skills for Grade 9 Students ‘Using Deal or No Deal’ Game
• Enhancing Grade 8 English Engagement: Fill My Bag Strategy
• Enhancing Pre-Service Teachers’ Communication Competence: An Input to a Communication Skills Development Module
• Lower Secondary School Students' Attitude toward Reading in English
• Learner Autonomy and Attitudes toward Philippine English: Predictors of Grammar Performance among College ESL Students