Cited by 6Artificial Intelligence in EducationEnglish Language Learning and TeachingEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

EFL Students’ Perceptions on Using ChatGPT as an AI Tool for Developing Academic Writing Skills: A Case Study at University College of Haql

Open access
Ahmed Othman, Ahmed Khider·2025·Journal of Curriculum and Teaching

Abstract

With advancing artificial intelligence (AI) technology, writing assistance tools now include plagiarism detectors, ChatGPT and grammar checkers. These AI tools help students of EFL to improve their writing, communication, creativity, and critical thinking, thereby developing language skills and academic success. Various writing tasks are supported by the Open AI Chat GPT application, and this study explores the perceptions of students regarding its effectiveness for improving their skills in academic writing. Using a closed-ended questionnaire with Likert scale for the collection of data, the quantitative study involved a sample of 50 students from the English language program within the University College of Haql, Saudi Arabia, who had used ChatGPT during one semester. Findings show a majority of respondents held a positive view of their use of ChatGPT for increasing motivation to learn (42.5%), provision of user-friendly and comprehensive features (43.5%), and assisting in correction of grammatical errors (33.3%). Some respondents were neutral with regard to the ability of ChatGPT to offer explanations for improving skills in writing (33.5%). To conclude, ChatGPT is able to serve as a tool of value to help students enhance their writing skills in English, though there is potential for further refinements to be made that would offer explanations in greater detail.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5430/jct.v14n3p18

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Learner-focused studies generally report positive perceptions, linking ChatGPT use to increased motivation, engagement, and perceived writing improvement.

    “Learner-focused studies generally report positive perceptions, linking ChatGPT use to increased motivation, engagement, and perceived writing improvement (Teng, 2024; Kivrak, 2024; Othman, 2025).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Authors
Ahmed Othman, A. K.
Venue
Journal of Curriculum and Teaching
Publisher
Sciedu Press
Published
2025-06-28
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
18
ISSN
  • 1927-2677 (ISSN-L)
  • 1927-2685
OpenAlex
W4411748839
Cited by
6
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1
FWCI
3.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Curriculum and Teaching (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
ChatGPT, AI-assisted writing, academic writing skills, EFL learners, student perceptions, writing motivation, grammatical error correction, AI-assisted language learning

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