Enhancing Pre‐Service Teachers' Global Englishes Awareness with Technology: A Focus on AI Chatbots in 3D Metaverse Environments
Open accessAbstract
Although Global Englishes (GE) research continues to grow in English language teaching (ELT), the role of technology in enhancing GE awareness remains underexplored. Addressing this gap, the study investigates the potential of English as a lingua franca (ELF) interactions with artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots in raising GE awareness. Using a quasi‐experimental design, 97 South Korean pre‐service English teachers were divided into a control group (CG, n = 32) and two experimental groups (EG1, n = 31; EG2, n = 34) for 16‐week teacher‐training courses. The CG received no GE instruction, while EG1 conducted a presentation task and EG2 interacted with AI chatbots in 3D metaverse environments. We used a mixed‐methods approach of pre‐ and post‐test surveys and interviews. ANCOVA results for survey data showed that both tasks had positive effects on all facets of GE awareness (e.g., acceptance of one's local English, acceptance of other Englishes, native‐speakerism, ELF confidence and intention, and willingness to incorporate GELT into teaching), with the AI chatbot task exerting a stronger effect on ELF confidence and intention. For practical implications, the findings outlined pedagogical strategies for integrating GELT into computer‐assisted (CA) language learning. Theoretically, we proposed the CA‐GELT approach for future research in the era of generative AI technology.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
GenAI can reduce biases in language learning, such as native-speakerism.
“after interacting with AI chatbots, participants reported a critical reflection on their own English and other varieties.”
From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Lee et al., 2024
GenAI can serve as culturally intelligent tools.
“Cultural understanding and the reduction of biases in language learning, highlighted in studies by Han et al. (2024) and Lee et al. (2024), suggest that GenAI can serve as culturally intelligent tools.”
From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Lee et al., 2024
GenAI has a significant role in reducing native-speakerism and enhancing Global English (GE) awareness among pre-service teachers in an English education program.
“The survey results and interview data point to GenAI's significant role in reducing native-speakerism and enhancing GE awareness among pre-service teachers in an English education program.”
From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Lee et al., 2024
In Lee et al. (2024), statistically significant differences in GE awareness were found between the control group and experimental groups.
“Statistically significant differences in GE awareness were found between the control group (CG) and experimental groups (EG1 and EG2)”
From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Lee et al., 2024
GenAI can reduce biases in language learning.
“Lee et al.'s (2024) study shows how GenAI can reduce biases in language learning.”
From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Lee et al., 2024
Cites
Exploring AI chatbot affordances in the EFL classroom: young learners’ experiences and perspectives
Jeon, J. (2024) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2021.2021241 · Cited by 433 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Artificial intelligence in teaching and teacher professional development: A systematic review
Tan, X., Cheng, G., & Ling, M. H. (2025) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100355 · Cited by 420 · see citing works
Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity
Weng, Z., & Fu, Y. (2025) · International Journal of Technology in Education · doi:10.46328/ijte.1056 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Five studies demonstrate that the use of GenAI can enhance language learners’ understanding of diverse cultures (e.g., Han et al., 2024; Karataş et al., 2024; Mabuan, 2024; Liu, Davin, & Ma, 2024) and reduce their biases in language learning, such as native-speakerism (e.g., Lee et al., 2024).”
- Authors
- Lee, S., Jeon, J., & Choe, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham Ningbo China (CN)
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Jeon, Jaeho
- Venue
- TESOL Quarterly
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2024-01-12
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-74
- ISSN
- 0039-8322 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-7249
- OpenAlex
- W4390840543
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 8
- FWCI
- 92.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- TESOL Quarterly (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
- Keywords
- English as a global language, pre-service English teachers, AI chatbots, English as a lingua franca, computer-assisted language learning, native-speakerism, generative AI in language teaching, teacher professional development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review