CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Artificial Intelligence in EducationEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

Empowering Chinese Language Learners from Low-Income Families to Improve Their Chinese Writing with ChatGPT’s Assistance Afterschool

Open access
Li, Xiaying, Li, Belle, Cho, Su-Je·2023·Languages
DOI 10.3390/languages8040238
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

ChatGPT is a state-of-the-art generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot released by OpenAI in 2022. It simulates human conversation and has the capability to generate different texts at various levels of sophistication in near real time depending upon the user’s skill in creating prompts. While concerns have been raised about academic dishonesty and cheating among students, ChatGPT has significant academic potential for education, particularly in the field of language learning. This research explores the potential of ChatGPT in supporting and empowering Chinese language learners (CLLs) whose first language is English to enhance their writing skills, mainly focusing on the research question: Is there a functional relation between Chinese language learners from low‐income families using ChatGPT after school twice a week and improvements in their Chinese writing? Four participants with varying language proficiency levels were recruited, and their data were analyzed using an ABA design. Over three weeks, they utilized ChatGPT twice a week for approximately 20 min each after school. The students’ writing scores, writing samples, and learning reflections were used to triangulate the data and enhance the data’s trustworthiness. The findings indicate that (1) each participant made a noticeable improvement in their Chinese writing scores during the intervention and reversal phases; (2) ChatGPT played a crucial role in correcting errors and facilitating the development of complete sentence structures; and (3) the students expressed a sense of empowerment through their interactions with ChatGPT. These findings highlight that ChatGPT shows promise as a supportive tool for CLLs from low-income families, reducing educational inequality and promoting equitable access to language learning opportunities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/languages8040238

Cites

20 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In Li, Li, and Cho's (2023) study, four emergent Chinese language learners from diverse proficiency levels using ChatGPT showed substantial improvements in writing skills.

    “The study involving four emergent Chinese language learners from diverse proficiency levels utilized ChatGPT, revealing substantial improvements in writing skills.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Li, Li, & Cho, 2023

    The Results (section 5.1, page not available) report that all four participants improved their writing scores while using ChatGPT. However, improvement was significant and immediate for those with lower baseline scores but gradual and modest for those with higher scores, so describing the improvements across the group as substantial overstates the finding. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In Li et al. (2023), mean Mandarin writing scores rose significantly from the initial phase to the intervention.

    “There was a clear rise in mean scores, with the initial phase showing lower means and a significant increase during the intervention.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Li, Li, & Cho, 2023

    Section 5.1 (Writing Scores; page unavailable) reports that all four participants’ writing scores improved during the intervention, with baseline means lower than intervention means in the examples given. It describes the improvement as significant and immediate for participants with lower baseline scores, but gradual and modest for those with higher baseline scores; it does not establish a significant increase in mean scores for all participants. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • One student in Li et al. (2023) appreciated ChatGPT as their private tutor.

    “One student appreciated ChatGPT as their private tutor”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Li, Li, & Cho, 2023

  • In Li et al. (2023), ChatGPT provided immediate feedback and assisted with homework, akin to always having a Mandarin teacher available.

    “ChatGPT provided them with immediate feedback and assisted with homework, akin to always having a Mandarin teacher available.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Li, Li, & Cho, 2023

  • Students' reflective accounts in Li et al. (2023) underscored a great sense of empowerment.

    “Reflective accounts from the students underscored a great sense of empowerment.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Li, Li, & Cho, 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Bandameedi, Srinivas. 2022. Artificial Intelligence in Teaching Languages and Social Sciences. International Journal of Early Child- hood Special Education 14: 6143-46. Available online: https://doi-org.avoserv2.library.fordham.edu/10.9756/INTJECSE/V14I5.760 (accessed on 20 May 2023). · DOI
  2. Johnson, Amy M., Kathryn S. McCarthy, Kristopher J. Kopp, Cecile A. Perret, and Danielle S. McNamara. 2017. Adaptive reading and writing instruction in iSTART and W-Pal. Paper presented at the 30th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society (FLAIRS) Conference, Marco Island, FL, USA, May 22-24. Grantee Submission.
  3. Kazdin, Alan E. 2011. Single-Case Research Designs: Methods for Clinical and Applied Settings, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Khanna, Anirudh, Bishwajeet Pandey, Kushagra Vashishta, Kartik Kalia, Bhale Pradeepkumar, and Teerath Das. 2015. A study of today's A.I. through chatbots and rediscovery of machine intelligence. International Journal of u-and e-Service, Science and Technology 8: 277-84.
  5. CrossRef · DOI
  6. Lee, Yen-Fen, Gwo-Jen Hwang, and Pei-Ying Chen. 2022. Impacts of an AI-Based "Chabot" on College students' after-class review, academic performance, self-efficacy, learning attitude, and motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development 70: 1843- 65.
  7. Miller, Mark J. 1985. Analyzing client change graphically. Journal of Counseling and Development 63: 491-94.
  8. CrossRef · DOI · Paper page
  9. Roscoe, Rod D., Scott A. Crossley, Jennifer L. Weston, and Danielle S. McNamara. 2011. Automated assessment of paragraph quality: Introductions, body, and conclusion paragraphs. Paper presented at 24th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society (FLAIRS) Conference, Palm Beach, FL, USA, May 18-20; Menlo Park: AAAI Press, pp. 281-86.
  10. CrossRef · DOI
  11. CrossRef · DOI
  12. Zhai, Chunpeng, and Santoso Wibowo. 2023. A systematic review on artificial intelligence dialogue systems for enhancing English as foreign language students' interactional competence in the University. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4: 100134.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Li, X., Li, B., & Cho, S.-J.
Affiliations
  • Fordham University (US)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
  • Li, Xiaying
  • Li, Belle
ORCID
Venue
Languages
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-10-18
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
238
ISSN
2226-471X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/languages8040238
OpenAlex
W4387744710
Cited by
48
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 19
FWCI
11.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Languages (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
ChatGPT, Chinese as a second language, low-income households, English-speaking learners, generative AI in language learning, after-school tutoring, student empowerment, educational equity, academic dishonesty

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