People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

English Language Department

The integration of AI (ChatGPT) to
enhance critical writing skills the case of
third-year secondary school EFL learners

A dissertation submitted in partial of the requirements for the

Degree of Secondary school English language teacher

Submitted by: Yousra Kamar Ezamane Belkacem / Lilia Zeddek

Chairperson: ……………………………. Examiner: ……………………………

Under the supervision: Dr. Belkhir Fethi

Academic Year 2023/2024

 Dedication 1

I would like to express my profound gratitude for

the consistent support and encouragement I have
received throughout my academic journey. I am
extremely thankful to my mother for her
unwavering belief in my abilities and steadfast
support, as well as to my father and all my family
members for their assistance during challenging
times. I would also like to extend special
recognition to my dear friend Zeddek Lilia for her
exceptional support, collaboration, and
companionship. Our combined efforts have
enabled us to overcome obstacles and uplift each
other throughout our five-year journey.
Additionally, I am grateful to the English language
teachers at ENS Oran for nurturing our spirit of
inquiry. Lastly, I am thankful for my unwavering
determination in the face of emotional burnout,
as persevering through life's challenges has
always been my ultimate goal.
 Dedication 2
I am gratefully proud of myself for all the painstaking efforts I have
put in during my five years at ENS Oran, notably this year in
collaboration with my best friend Yousra Kamar Ezamane, whose
love, support, and hard work played a great role in the success of
our research project. Thus, professional collaboration can indeed
lead to success, but compatibility can spark brilliance.

I am forever thankful for my family and notably my grandma and

mother’s unwavering support which has been my rock when life
seemed insurmountable ensuring my success.

I am hugely appreciative to my friends and classmates: Telli

Sofiane, Hamel Ghania, Rabh Allah Fatima, Fatah Salima,
Belkacem Manel, Ouis Fatima Zohra, Benaissa Oumayma,
Bousoltane Abir, Akal chaima, Mokerfi Oumaima, Lilia
Gotwig, Mellish Fifi Laks, lacheb Dalila, Ouadji Habiba, Gine
sarah rayhane, whose computational help, academic and
emotional support went above and beyond.

Lastly, I dedicate this work to my two sisters Imane and Lamis, and
my little brother Abd Rahim who always looked up to me as their
role model.

이마네, 라미스, 그리고 내 남동생 라힘 사랑해요.

 Acknowledgments

We are deeply grateful to our teacher and supervisor, Dr.

Belkheir Fethi, for his invaluable methodological expertise
and scientific guidance throughout the year, which greatly
contributed to the success of our research project.

We also extend our sincere gratitude to the members of the

jury ………………………………………………………………… who
agreed to read and evaluate our work, providing comments
and feedback that we greatly appreciate.

We would like to thank our trainer Taleb Soummar Amal for

her dedicated support in her classes and for providing us
with constructive feedback.

Additionally, we would like to express our gratitude to the

third-year students of Mrah Abdelkader Secondary School
for their valuable participation in our research project.
 Abstract
Writing critically is one of the crucial 21st-century skills that EFL educators should foster,
notably in the contemporary era, which is highly empowered by artificial intelligence. In this
vein, educators are perhaps now more than ever required to digitize their classes with AI-
powered tools responsibly to fulfill the digital needs of their “digital native” learners
primarily and to create an explanatory environment for the students to investigate the efficacy
of AI tools ChatGPT in improving their critical writing skills. Debunking the use of these
technologies is no longer sustainable. Yet, a well-studied methodology that can promote the
use of AI tools in enhancing students' critical thinking and writing skills is a global
educational need in the EFL context.

This research aims to investigate the role of ChatGPT as a pedagogical tool in improving
students' critical writing skills. The researchers implemented a mixed-method approach to
conduct this research scientifically. A structured observation, two checklists, a questionnaire
addressed to the EFL secondary school learners, and a structured interview provided insights
from EFL teachers regarding the critical writing skills of their students, unveiling their
attitude towards ChatGPT as an independent variable of our research questions. Through the
utilization of ChatGPT as a pedagogical tool, the study revealed a significant enhancement in
the learner's critical writing skills. The integration of ChatGPT not only helped the learners
strengthen their critical thinking abilities but also improved their writing skills within a
EFLsetting.

Keywords: AI, ChatGPT, writing as a process, critical writing skills

 Table of contents

Dedication 1..............................................................................................................................2
Dedication 2..............................................................................................................................3
Acknowledgments.....................................................................................................................4
Abstract.....................................................................................................................................5
Table of contents......................................................................................................................6
List of figures.............................................................................................................................8
List of Tables...........................................................................................................................10
General introduction................................................................................................................11
CHAPTER 1: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE......................................................................13
1.1. Introduction......................................................................................................................14
1.2. Writing..............................................................................................................................14
1.2.1. Definition of Writing...................................................................................................15
1.2.2. Writing skills..............................................................................................................16
1.2.2.1. Grammatical correctness and vocabulary..........................................................16
1.2.2.2. Clarity..................................................................................................................17
1.2.2.3. Precision and Concision.....................................................................................17
1.2.2.4. Coherence and Cohesion...................................................................................17
1.2.2.5. Punctuation and Spelling....................................................................................18
1.2.3. Factors affecting Arab learners in EFL learning........................................................18
1.2.3.1. Linguistic factors.................................................................................................18
1.2.3.2. Educational factors.............................................................................................19
1.2.4. Approaches to teaching writing.................................................................................19
1.2.4.1. Product-based approach....................................................................................19
1.2.4.2. Process-based approach....................................................................................20
1.3. Critical writing...................................................................................................................22
1.3.1. Critical thinking..........................................................................................................22
1.3.1.1. The Etymology of Critical Thinking.....................................................................22
1.3.1.2. The necessity of teaching critical thinking in EFL education..............................23
1.3.1.3. Critical writing.....................................................................................................23
1.4. Artificial intelligence.........................................................................................................24
1.4.1. Difference between Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence............................24
1.4.2. History of AI...............................................................................................................25
 1.4.3. Different Platforms Powered by AI............................................................................25
1.4.4. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Learning and Education...............................25
1.4.5. The Implementation of AI (ChatGPT) in EFL Writing Classes..................................26
1.4.6. The enhancement of critical thinking in the AI-powered era (CHATGPT).................27
1.4.7. The integration of AI (ChatGPT) to improve critical writing.......................................28
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................30
2.1. Introduction......................................................................................................................31
2.2. Research Design.............................................................................................................31
2.2.1. Sampling...................................................................................................................34
2.2.1.1. Participants.........................................................................................................34
2.2.1.2. Interview Informants...........................................................................................34
2.2.1.3. Questionnaire informants....................................................................................35
2.2.2. Classroom sessions..................................................................................................35
2.3. Data collection.................................................................................................................36
2.3.1. Tool 1........................................................................................................................36
2.3.1.1. Description of Structured Observation................................................................36
2.3.1.2. Analysis of the structured observation................................................................39
2.3.2. Tool 2........................................................................................................................40
2.3.2.1. Description of the Checklists..............................................................................40
2.3.2.2. Analysis of the Checklists...................................................................................41
2.3.3. Tool 3........................................................................................................................43
2.3.3.1. Description of the students’ questionnaire..........................................................43
2.3.3.2. Analysis of the students’ questionnaire..............................................................43
2.3.4. Tool 4........................................................................................................................46
2.3.4.1. Description of the Structured Interview...............................................................46
2.3.4.2. Analysis of the Structured Interview...................................................................47
2.3.5. Tool 5........................................................................................................................62
2.3.5.1. Description of the test.........................................................................................62
2.3.5.2. Analysis..............................................................................................................63
2.4. Results Discussion...........................................................................................................64
General conclusion.................................................................................................................66
Limitations...........................................................................................................................67
List of bibliography..................................................................................................................68
Appendices.............................................................................................................................75
 List of figures
Figure 1: Benjamin bloom’s taxonomy....................................................................................23
Figure 2: A diagram Presenting The cognitive stages the chemistry students have gone
through while interacting with ChatGPT in writing their essays (during the experiment at
Georgia Gwinnett College)......................................................................................................28
Figure 3: A writing task with a “machine-in-the-loop”..............................................................29
Figure 4: The interface of ChatGPT........................................................................................32
Figure 5: An example of ChatGPT prompting.........................................................................33
Figure 6: A demonstrative bar graph for the final checklist results.........................................42
Figure 7: A bar graph representing the averages of critical thinking skills of the students
based on their findings in the questionnaire...........................................................................44
Figure 8: A bar graph representing the averages of writing skills based on the students’
questionnaire responses.........................................................................................................45
Figure 9: A bar graph representing the students’ attitude towards the use of ChatGPT in
improving their critical thinking and writing skills.....................................................................46
Figure 10: Students' understanding of the topic according to the teacher's perceptions........47
Figure 11: Students demonstrate understanding in their writing according to the teacher's
perceptions.............................................................................................................................48
Figure 12: Teachers’ perception of students ability to analyze their written productions........49
Figure 13:Teachers' views on the learners ' use of synonyms to the keywords in their
productions.............................................................................................................................49
Figure 14: Teachers' views on their students' deconstruction of the topic ideas....................50
Figure 15: Teachers’ views on their learners’ ability to synthesize ideas..............................51
Figure 16: Teachers' views on the learners' ability to evaluate ideas.....................................51
Figure 17: Teachers' perception of the learner's ability to speak out their ideas regarding the
choice of the topic of their task...............................................................................................52
Figure 18: Teachers' use of Ai tools.......................................................................................53
Figure 19: Teachers' use of ChatGPT for various purposes...................................................53
Figure 20: Teachers' attitude towards the integration of ChatGPT in their classes................54
Figure 21: Learners' attitude towards writing classes based on the teachers' perception......54
Figure 22: Challenges faced by the students in their written tasks.........................................55
Figure 23: Teachers' viewpoints on coherence in the learners' written pieces.......................55
Figure 24: Teachers' viewpoints on cohesion in the learners' written pieces.........................56
Figure 25: Teachers' viewpoints on clarity in the learners ' written pieces.............................56
Figure 26: Teachers’ viewpoints on precision in the learners' written pieces.........................57
Figure 27: Teachers' viewpoints on punctuation in the learners' written pieces.....................58
Figure 28: Teachers' viewpoints on spelling in the learners' written pieces...........................58
Figure 29: Teachers rating their student's writing...................................................................59
Figure 30: Learners' perception of integrating ChatGPT in the writing classes based on the
teacher's viewpoints................................................................................................................59
Figure 31: Learners' trust towards ChatGPT based on the teachers' viewpoints...................60
Figure 32: Teachers' perception towards ChatGPT as a tool to improve their learners' critical
thinking skills...........................................................................................................................61
Figure 33: Teachers' perception towards ChatGPT as a tool to improve their learners' writing
skills........................................................................................................................................61
Figure 34: ChatGPT in writing classes: a Recommendation study.........................................62
Figure 35: A line graph representing pre and post-test results...............................................64
 List of tables
Table 1: the participants in the case study..............................................................................34
Table 2: the interview informants (teachers’ interviewees).....................................................34
Table 3: The questionnaire informants...................................................................................35
Table 4: observation grid description......................................................................................37
Table 5: Observation Grid Analysis........................................................................................38
General introduction
In the 21st century, teaching English is closely intertwined with the rapidly expanding
technological and virtual landscape. Today's young learners exhibit a strong inclination and
proficiency in utilizing the internet and artificial intelligence. Therefore, educators need to
embrace these advancements and leverage them for educational enrichment.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly prevalent across various
industries, including education. This has had a particularly noticeable impact on foreign
language learning, with positive outcomes being observed. Many believe that English as a
Foreign Language (EFL) learners often struggle with writing due to its complexity and
difficulty to acquire. As a result, teaching writing skills is considered crucial, with experts
emphasizing that it should be approached as a gradual process rather than a final product. By
viewing writing as a dynamic process, learners are encouraged to engage in creativity,
reflection, and continuous refinement of their ideas, leading to a deeper level of analysis and
understanding of any given topic.

AI has the potential to be a valuable asset in education, particularly in enhancing

students' critical thinking and writing abilities. The incorporation of AI into education
involves not only updating techniques but also maximizing learning potential. Therefore, the
strategic and efficient use of these resources in classrooms primarily consisting of "digital
natives," as defined by Prensky (2001), has the potential to greatly improve critical writing
skills.

In the effort to improve the critical writing skills of EFL learners, educators may find
it beneficial to integrate AI tools into their instruction. Despite this potential, AI tools are
often underutilized and misunderstood. This study aims to challenge common misconceptions
about AI tools by examining the role of AI, specifically ChatGPT, in enhancing critical
writing skills in the EFL context. The research will delve into how ChatGPT can effectively
contribute to improving EFL learners' critical writing abilities.

Research questions:

For this aim, two research questions are formed:

1) Does incorporating AI (ChatGPT) in EFL teaching writing enhance students' critical

thinking?

11
 2) Can the integration of AI in EFL teaching writing enhance students' critical writing
skills?

Hypotheses:

To these research questions, two hypotheses are suggested:

1) Critical thinking can be promoted through the use of ChatGPT in the written class
provided that students are effectively instructed.
2) An effective integration of AI (ChatGPT) in the writing class can provide an optimal
scaffolding for the learners to write critically.

Methodology:

The researchers have chosen to use a mixed-method approach, which involves

gathering both qualitative and quantitative data. To achieve this, we developed an observation
grid to collect data on the learners' attitudes toward writing, their interactions with ChatGPT,
as well as any difficulties and challenges they might face when interacting with the AI tool
during the classroom sessions. Additionally, two checklists were given to the participants
during the sessions to assess any improvements observed after using ChatGPT. This study
involved 7 participants from Mrah Abdelkader Secondary School. The researchers
administered a questionnaire to 23 learners from the Mrah secondary school to gather
perceptions on the research study. Additionally, educators from Oran City participated in
structured interviews regarding the study. We also collected test results from classroom
sessions to track any progress observed after integrating ChatGPT.

Structure of the Work:

The work consists of two main chapters. The first chapter provides a comprehensive
overview of writing skills, critical thinking skills, and artificial intelligence (AI) based on the
existing literature. The second chapter is dedicated to the empirical part. It describes the
research design, including the methodology, unveiling the functionality of ChatGPT,
sampling, and classroom sessions. It also covers describing the data tools, analyzing their
results, discussing the results, and presenting the general conclusion with some limitations

12
CHAPTER 1: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
1.1. Introduction

Given that present-day learners are tech-savvy, living in a highly digital era powered
by AI, there has been a growing interest lately in incorporating ChatGPT in EFL writing
teaching to enhance the student's critical thinking and writing skills. Although a great
population globally harbors a skeptical view over the use of ChatGPT in EFL writing
instruction, perceiving it as a tool threatening academic integrity, this tool is regarded as a
“sine qua non” for the enhancement of critical thinking and writing skills in the process of
writing for another minority. This chapter aims to explore theoretically the targeted variables
of our dissertation work “the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL writing education for
improving critical writing skills”. Therefore, the proficiency and devoted to providing
valuable literature about writing skills (definition of writing, the sub-skills of writing, factors
that impede writing proficiency, and exploring different writing teaching approaches). The
second section will highlight the mechanism of critical thinking (presenting its definition,
investigating the necessity of its integration in EFL education underscoring the link between
writing and critical thinking, with a focus on honing critical writing skills. The last section
emphasizes the significance of incorporating AI-powered tools in education to enhance the
quality of the learner's education, notably writing and critical writing skills.

1.2. Writing

Learning a new skill can be tough. Whether it's writing or swimming, it can be
challenging and requires guidance. Writing in a second language can be especially hard, but
recent research has helped to understand the process better. Traditional writing instruction in
schools may not be enough for individual students. There is a growing need for more flexible
approaches that can adapt to the unique circumstances of each student. Fortunately,
innovative technologies like ChatGPT, offer new possibilities for enhancing writing
instruction and fostering critical thinking skills.

14
1.2.1. Definition of Writing

15
 Understanding the process of writing is crucial for anyone aiming to improve their
writing skills. The term 'writing' can be defined in different ways. According to The Collins
Dictionary (1987), writing refers to the act of creating a group of letters or symbols on a
surface to communicate. Another definition by Richards et al. (1985) describes writing as a
system of written symbols that represent sounds, syllables, or words of a language. Moreover,
Ingram and King (1988) differentiate between 'writing' and 'composing,' where the former is
an activity suggested by the teacher while the latter is a more extensive process. Likewise,
Kaplan (1988), highlights that composition involves heuristic acts like writing novels or
philosophical treatises while writing adheres to conventions found in corporate and
journalistic contexts. The concept of the writing process is crucial across various educational
domains.

Writing is a crucial skill that enables people to communicate their thoughts and
feelings. It is a social skill that requires practice and perseverance to improve. Teaching
writing to English language learners helps them enhance their language capabilities and
discover their learning styles. Better writing skills enable students to express themselves
proficiently in their academic endeavors. Writing is crucial for language development and can
be improved through practice. In today's digital age, effective writing is necessary for clear
communication and success in life. Overcoming writing challenges leads to personal growth
and professional advancement. Writing and speaking are different modes of communication.
Writing happens at different times and places, which makes it challenging to communicate
effectively. Unlike speaking, writing requires planning and preparation to convey the message
(Nunan,1989)

Kress (1982) has pointed out grammatical distinctions between writing and speech,
stating that fully subordinated clauses characterize writing, whereas speech consists of chains
of coordinated and weakly subordinate clauses. Nunan (1989) emphasizes that writing is a
complex cognitive activity, especially for those learning English as a foreign language.
Writing requires control of various variables at the sentence level all at the same time,
including (vocabulary, sentence structure, topic, punctuation, and spelling).

16
 Writing is not a natural activity, unlike speaking which is instinctive and learned by all
physically and mentally normal people. White (1981, cited in Nunan, 1989) highlights that
writing is a learned skill that must be acquired through education and practice. Writing is a
recent invention that permits the transmission of messages from one setting to another,
making it possible to receive, store, and produce a written message at any time. Different
from spoken language, which is ephemeral and can fade quickly. writing is a long-term form
of communication.

1.2.2. Writing skills

Writing skills permit writers or students to express their thoughts and ideas in written
form effectively. In the context of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and According to
Sun, T., Wang, C. & Kim, S (2021), Writing skills encompass the ability to express ideas with
clarity, precision, and concision. They include mastery over writing mechanics, such as
grammar and punctuation, to make sure that the text is understandable and follows the
language conventions. Ting, S, Chuang, W, & Stella, Y, and Kim (2023) state that These
skills are essential for effective communication and are measurable through various scales
that assess one’s proficiency in these areas. Based on the existing literature, one may
synthesize that good writing entails clarity, grammatical accuracy, vocabulary, concision and
precision, coherence and cohesion, and punctuation and spelling.

1.2.2.1. Grammatical correctness and vocabulary

Writing in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) is greatly influenced by grammatical

correctness and vocabulary. According to Hiebert & Kamil (2005), vocabulary is a way of
understanding words. Whereas Strickland et.al (2007) note that learning vocabulary is not
simply learning words, as words do not only assist one in naming things but also help in
thinking and discussing them. EFL students need a strong vocabulary for it has been tightly
linked to their reading and writing performance. It is knowledgeable that students with a
higher vocabulary tend to read and write more effectively. Additionally, according to Thi
Trung Dinh Le (2023), EFL learners generally grapple with wrong verb forms and subject-
verb agreement in fragment sentences. To rephrase, Students' writing skills could be
significantly improved by both vocabulary and grammar mastery.

17
1.2.2.2. Clarity

According to David, P. & Amy, M (2022), realizing clarity in writing requires the use
of clear, concise, and simple language that is easy for the reader to understand. It is also
important to organize the content logically so that the reader can follow the flow of thoughts.
Additionally, both of the methodologists have stressed that providing sufficient context and
background information is crucial to ensure that the reader can fully grasp the subject matter.
Another significant aspect of achieving clarity in writing is synthesizing and evaluating
sources that are relevant to the topic at hand. This means taking the time to review and
analyze the information that has been gathered and then using that information to form a clear
and well-supported argument.

1.2.2.3. Precision and Concision

Precision and concision are important elements for effective communication and
clarity in writing, and more particularly in EFL. According to Roger K.B, (1999), precision
involves using specific and accurate language to convey ideas, which is important for clear
communication, avoiding ambiguity, and creating a logical structure. On the other hand,
concision requires expressing ideas efficiently and using the fewest words possible to convey
accurate meanings. This skill is valuable for students to master because it helps them
communicate their ideas, avoid redundancy, and save time and even space.

1.2.2.4. Coherence and Cohesion

Coherence and cohesion play vital roles in ensuring that a piece of writing flows
logically and effectively. According to Mark. B (2016) Coherence and cohesion are
indispensable components of academic writing in an EFL setting. On one hand, and as stated
by Mark. B (2016) Coherence ensures that all sentences in a paragraph are logically
connected and flow in a relevant and understandable manner. Whereas Cohesion uses
linguistic elements like transition words and pronouns to create connections between ideas
and make the reading experience smooth and coherent (Santos & Hage, 2015).

18
1.2.2.5. Punctuation and Spelling

According to Mohammed H.M. & Bedoor. S. D (2021) Punctuation and spelling are
crucial elements of EFL writing. Correct punctuation and spelling can greatly impact the
clarity and effectiveness of writing. They are essential for conveying meaning and ensuring
that the targeted message is understood by the reader. Proper punctuation helps to structure
sentences and convey the intended tone, while correct spelling ensures that words are
recognized and understood. Based on a Case Study of Yemeni University EFL Learners at
Sana'a University, errors in EFL writing include capitalization errors, spelling errors, and
punctuation errors. Capitalization errors are the most frequent type of error, accounting for
40% of all errors in one study. Spelling errors are also common, accounting for 30% of all
errors in the same study. Punctuation errors are the least frequent type of error, accounting for
30% of all errors in the same study (Mohammed H. M and Bedoor S. D, 2021).

1.2.3. Factors affecting Arab learners in EFL learning

Writing in English as a foreign language poses many challenges for Arab students.
Though it is assumed that these challenges are merely caused by linguistic factors, the truth is
that they stem from an interplay of linguistic and educational factors. In this regard, it is
important to understand the common challenges faced by Arab students when writing in
English so that effective measures can be taken to improve their writing skills.

1.2.3.1. Linguistic factors

A lot of studies have investigated the challenges that Arab learners face when writing
in English. Salamah's (1981) contrastive analysis study identified that many writing issues are
triggered by the differences in morphology between English and Arabic. Moreover, El-
Shimy's (1982) study even validated these findings by highlighting the syntactic differences
as an important contributing factor. Additionally, Doushaq and Sawaf's (1988) research
focused on the difficulties that Arab writers face while using English phrasal verbs,
synthesizing that they generally tend to use main verbs because of the lack of phrasal verbs in
Arabic. These studies, along with many others, have identified the systematic problems that
are caused by the linguistic differences between Arabic and English, which Arab learners face
when writing.

19
1.2.3.2. Educational factors

After adopting the 'Arabisation' policy, Algeria and many other Arab countries
experienced a decline in English proficiency among learners. The negative impact was due to
the teaching and learning systems, as well as educational policies in schools and universities.
Research shows that the introduction of 'Arabisation' in 1965 led to a significant drop in
English proficiency among university students in Sudanese schools and universities
(Aboubaker, A, E,2002). It is widely spread among EFL instructors that Arab students face a
lot of challenges in developing proficiency in English writing. According to Aboubaker, A, E,
(2002), The shift in teaching methods at the university level has highlighted deficiencies in
Arab students' critical thinking, analysis, and writing skills in English. They struggle to
differentiate between details and concepts, face challenges in transitioning from middle and
secondary education to university and find it difficult to evaluate their writing. This highlights
the need for a more comprehensive approach to education reform, addressing curriculum
alignment and assessment practices to better prepare learners for higher education.

1.2.4. Approaches to teaching writing

The term "approach" in language teaching is referred to the theories that explain the
nature of language and language learning. They serve as the basis for the practices and
principles in language education. When it comes to teaching writing as a second language,
many different methods are used, each with its own set of underlying assumptions and
objectives that determine its focus and approach (Richards & Rodgers, 1993, p. 16).

1.2.4.1. Product-based approach

According to Aboubaker, A, E, (2002), This writing approach focuses on developing a

deep understanding of language, with a specific emphasis on using (cohesive devices, proper
grammar, and effective vocabulary). An important aspect of this approach is acknowledging
the four-stage process of learning to write, which includes familiarization, guided practice,
controlled exercises, and ultimately, unrestricted writing. (Aboubaker, A, E,2002)

20
 The goal of the familiarization phase is to introduce students to a given text. Through
guided and regulated writing stages, students can enhance their skills with increasing
independence. The ultimate objective is to provide students with the most important tools and
guidance to write without any constraints. Once students have acquired the skills and
confidence needed, they can move to the free writing phase where they can express their
creativity and thoughts through authentic writing assignments, such as composing letters,
crafting stories, or formulating essays in this phase, students apply their learned skills
practically. They learn to identify prepositions, room names, and locations within buildings. A
group of 79 learners can generate simple sentences related to homes, schools, or mosques
using a replacement table or provided lines during controlled writing. (Aboubaker, A, E,2002)

In the upcoming lesson, students will practice descriptive writing skills and creativity
by participating in a guided writing exercise. They will write about a house or a mosque.
Later, they will move on to more complex writing tasks, such as composing free-form pieces
about their own homes or nearby mosques. This approach helps students improve their
writing skills and creativity by allowing them to express their individuality and perspectives.
However, it may not fully develop important process skills such as preparation, editing,
writing, and rewriting, or leverage the diverse knowledge and abilities of students.
(Aboubaker, A, E,2002).

1.2.4.2. Process-based approach

1.2.4.2.1. Definition of Writing Process

According to Montague (1995), the writing process is a systematic approach that

writers use to create meaning. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (1996)
states that this involves pre-writing activities like analyzing the topic, considering the
audience, brainstorming, and planning, followed by drafting, revising, and editing.

According to Silva (1993) and other prominent scholars such as Jones (1990), Kraples
(1990), Krashen (1984, 1992), Leki (1992), Raimes (1991), Grabe and Kaplan (1996), there is
currently no comprehensive theory of L2 writing. These researchers presented a historical
overview of the development of L2 writing theory and practice from the 1960s to the present
time to support their academic position.

Raimes (1991) categorizes methods of L2 composition into four focal points:

21
a) This approach focuses on producing well-formed sentences through controlled composition
to test learners' grammatical rules application.

b) Focus on the writer (1976): This approach aims to understand how second language writers
plan, draft, revise, and edit their texts.

c) Focus on content and discipline (1986): This approach stresses personal meaning and
learners' need to compose field-specific texts with expertise and skills.

d) Focus on the reader (1986): This approach focuses on writing as a social construct and
producing texts for specific audiences.

Silva (1990) suggests that effective L2 composition involves meaningful

communicative interaction that includes the production and sharing of information.

1.2.4.2.2. The Process-Oriented Approach

"The process" is a writing approach that emphasizes generating and connecting ideas
over following grammar and spelling rules. It involves collaboration and educational
intervention at different stages, resulting in high-quality written work with an emphasis on
content.t (Aboubaker, A, E,2002).

This approach differs from traditional and product-oriented approaches by focusing on

classroom activities that promote proficient language use. It emphasizes the writer's actions,
like planning and revising, rather than just the final product's appearance, organization,
spelling, and grammar. (Applebee, 1986: 69).

Aboubaker, A, E, (2002) suggests a process-centered approach to error in education

that involves aligning writing tasks with learners' needs, promoting creativity, respecting
cultural backgrounds, providing formal feedback, and error correction. The approach, also
known as "repair," aims to address potential communication problems and errors. Flower and
Hayes (1980) proposed a model of writing that consists of three main areas: the Task
Environment, the Writer's Long-Term Memory (LTM), and the Writing Process. The Task
Environment includes the assignment, topic, and audience. The Writing Process consists of
organizing and interacting with sub-processes, such as planning, translating, and reviewing.
Writer's LTM includes knowledge, processes, plans, strategies, and grammar. (Flower and
Hayes,1980).

22
 Planning in writing is a continuous process that involves generating ideas, organizing
them, and setting goals. It includes decision-making about the message to convey and writing
strategies that happen before putting words on paper. Communication decisions affect
organization and goal achievement. Planning continues throughout the writing process but
cannot be explicitly expressed.

Translating in writing means converting thoughts into language-independent symbols,

which can create new challenges and force learners to reevaluate their ideas. The translating
model, as described by Flower and Hayes (1980), involves generating complete sentences and
using questions to determine the next part of the sentence.

The last step in writing is reviewing, which involves revising and evaluating the
content. Reviewing can interrupt other processes, and it helps identify and correct
inaccuracies in language. The reviewing model also helps writers evaluate their work to
determine if they are achieving their goals. (Flower and Hayes, 1980).

1.3. Critical writing

1.3.1. Critical thinking

1.3.1.1. The Etymology of Critical Thinking

The words “critical”, “criticism” and “critic" originate from the ancient Greek term
“Kritikos”, meaning able to judge, discern and decide. In modern English, a critic is someone
whose job involves making evaluative judgments about different subjects (music, film, food).
However, “critical thinking”, coined by John Derwey and elaborated upon in Benjamin’s
Bloom's taxonomy, introduced in 1956, involves an active high level of cognitive engagement
with information through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of a given information,
(Kennedy et al.,1991). As described by Walker and Mettler (2020, p. 22),” critical thinking
involves activities such as analyzing arguments, evaluating claims for plausibility and
relevance, drawing conclusions, constructing one's arguments, and reflecting on one's
reasoning”.

23
 Figure 1: Benjamin bloom’s taxonomy

1.3.1.2. The necessity of teaching critical thinking in EFL education

In this context, Stobaugh (2013) highlights that critical thinking is essential for
preparing students to adapt to the evolving circumstances of the 21st century. However,
critical thinking skills are not innate; they require instruction and practice to be developed
fully. Research indicates a global deficiency in critical thinking skills among EFL learners,
leading to subpar written performance (Stapelton, 2002, p. 251; Alagozlu, 2007, p. 120).
Consequently, EFL educators should prioritize teaching critical thinking to enhance student's
writing abilities, aligning with Stobaugh's assertion about its relevance in modern education.

1.3.1.3. Critical writing

Teaching EFLlearners to write critically requires students to have background

information about the target subject or area, analyze given information, evaluate its validity,
and produce a final synthetic production of that targeted subject (Paul & Elder, 2007).

Paul and Elder (2007), proposed that being a critical thinker entails reading and
writing critically. Thus, reading any given material critically is needed to result in critical
writing. Reading critically involves examining different points of view with an open and
inquiring mind, evaluating the given arguments and our position, and drawing conclusions as
to whether a particular point of view is persuasive. On the other hand, Writing critically
means presenting one’s synthesized conclusions in a clear and well-reasoned way to persuade
others.

Paul and Elder (2007) suggest that writing which is not based on critical reading might
well be merely personal and exist without either context or wider purpose. Hence, one’s
critical writing serves as a key source for another critical reader to be insightfully engaged
with.

24
1.4. Artificial intelligence

1.4.1. Difference between Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence

Many authors and specialists in the field of computer science have attempted to
provide a concise and precise definition of artificial intelligence about human intelligence.
As explained by Plebe and Perconte (2022), human intelligence encompasses innate cognitive
capacities such as speaking, reasoning, and persuading, nurtured through various social
structures like family and education. However, Xia (2022) defines artificial intelligence as a
branch of computer science that is utilized in designing and developing intelligent systems
that mimic human behaviors (acting and making decisions in a human-like manner).

Plebe and Perconte (2022), put it: "Human Intelligence is the sum of those cognitive
abilities that give the human being a relative autonomy, which can be categorized as
'intelligence profiles' or 'multiple intelligences. Manju (2014) claims that COMPUTATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE is known as superior to Human Intelligence due to its memory capacity, but
COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE is not capable of interpreting meanings. Hence,
COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE is used for information processing but does not know
what is processed. On the other hand, the human brain has the capacity of processing with the
knowledge of processed data". Therefore, the term artificial intelligence was coined to
describe the application of human intelligence mechanisms in computer systems (Vassileva,
2008).

Plebe and Perconte (2022), contend that the negative connotation associated with the
term "artificial" stems from its contrast with "natural," yet it can also denote anything created
through human intelligence, whether tangible or intangible. Ultimately, they argue that
artificial intelligence, which is man-made, is a product of human intelligence. Despite their
inherent differences, both human and artificial intelligence are dynamically connected and
mutually influence each other.

They stress that artificial intelligence should serve to assist humanity rather than pose
a threat to it. Their arguments imply that though artificial intelligence is developed by its
human counterpart, it is still influential in the sense of triggering human intelligence to
collaboratively coexist with it enhancing the human cognitive capacities to critically
remediate the shortcomings resulting from artificial intelligence.

According to Plebe & Perconte (2022, p. 19), "[t] this is why intelligence if it is in
danger of becoming something entirely artificial, is also in danger of betraying its deepest

25
meaning. If intelligence is what makes us human, to make it artificial is to turn it against
humans."

1.4.2. History of AI

Saygin (2003, p. 211), notes that the term "artificial intelligence" originated at
Dartmouth College in 1956 when history marked the first development of a human-like
functioning machine, the Turing machine, designed by Alan Turing, known as the father of
theoretical computer science and AI. The machine could think and make decisions processing
different types of calculations in a human-like manner.

Mainzer (2020) credits the development of AI to scientists like McCulloch, Von

Neumann, Wiener, and Pitts Gardener. Shabbir (2018) categorizes AI into weak AI, limited to
the study of human intelligence simulating limited human cognitive tasks, and strong AI,
which deeply integrates computational and human intelligence to enable human-like computer
functions across diverse tasks.

1.4.3. Different Platforms Powered by AI

The Net Generation, also known as Generation Z, experienced a significant surge in

the introduction of technological platforms powered by AI during the period between 1990
and 2010. Google Maps, Uber, Ola, email spam filters, plagiarism checkers, facial recognition
by Facebook and Google, Google Drive, Google voice and text searching, personal assistants
such as Siri and Alexa, Spotify, and Netflix are among the early examples of AI-powered
platforms introduced during the Gen Z era (Verma, 2021).

1.4.4. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Learning and Education

According to Flogie and Aberšek (2019, p. 38), the present generation, referred to as
"digital natives'' coined by Marc Prensky, appears to be well-accustomed and reliant on the
use of information and communication technologies. Therefore, Harword & Asal (2009),
Oblinger & Oblinger (2005), Cobelon & Ahlquist (2016), Kenedy, Dalgarno, Benet, Gray,
and Waycott (2009) emphasize that the learning styles and preferences of this generation have
been prodigiously influenced by their daily use of digital technologies, making them active
knowledge constructors, multitaskers, and quick information navigators more than ever
before. They expect technology to be an integral part of their learning process.

According to Oblinger & Oblinger (2005), students are potentially able to

meaningfully and creatively use a given information in a context when they autonomously

26
learn it themselves through their research. Therefore, Holstein (2016), states that artificial
intelligence is a speedily progressing technology that many future works and tasks will be
potentially fulfilled with its assistance. Hence, it is suitable for students to be exposed to this
technique. Thus, Language teachers should never prohibit the use of AI-powered tools in their
classes, notably in their writing classes where AI-powered writing assistant tools can provide
a significant scaffolding for the students to master their writing proficiency in their targeted
languages. It is an unavoidable reality, which is why they should responsibly embrace them,
creating a transparent and exploratory environment for their students to critically explore
them under their guidance (Alharbi, 2023).

Moreover, some experts warn that the cognitive development and self-control of
modern children are negatively influenced by digital technology, leading to `digital dementia"
(a cognitive disability of ICT users) (Proekt, Kosheleva, Lugovaya Koreshikh, 2017, p. 88).
However, neurosurgeon Pirtošek (2017), specializing in dementia at the University Medical
Center in Ljubljana, demonstrated that digital technology has no negative effects on
adolescent brain development or dementia. On the contrary, it was proven by Flogie, Barle,
Lakota, and Aberšek (2017) that innovative educational teaching approaches supported by
modern ICT have transformed the educational environment for students, effectively boosting
taxonomic and cognitive competence levels compared to traditional teaching methods.

1.4.5. The Implementation of AI (ChatGPT) in EFL Writing Classes

The development of AI and the design of ChatGPT have the potential to revolutionize
education. “Outright banning or dismissing ChatGPT is no longer sustainable. Therefore, it is
crucial to explore responsible ways of integrating this technology into the educational setting
“(Harunsari, 2023, p. 358). ChatGPT can serve as a personal tutor, aiding in research,
answering questions, improving language skills, and supporting non-linear learning (Bozic &
Poola, 2023; Verma,2021, p. 73).

Liu et al. (2021) found that AI-supported language learning tools improve writing
proficiency for EFL learners. Similar findings were echoed by Zhao (2022), Chen (2023), and
Salvagno et al. (2023). In Yan’s(2023)study, ChatGPT significantly improved writing
performance and motivated participants. Incorporating AI tools like ChatGPT enhances
engagement and motivation, as well as boosts students' confidence and self-efficacy in writing
(Yan, 2023; Song & Song, 2022)

27
 Studies have shown that EFL students face common challenges such as vocabulary
limitations, grammar issues, and difficulties generating ideas during writing (Crossley et al.,
2016; Hayes & Flower, 2016). Integrating ChatGPT in EFL writing teaching can help address
these issues, assisting students throughout the writing process, including outline preparation,
content revision, proofreading, and reflection (Su et al., 2023, as cited in James Woo & Guo,
2023).

In an experiment conducted at a private university in Jakarta, Harunsari (2023, p.

362), 16 students used ChatGPT in a creative writing class where they were instructed to use
it as a digital assistant suggesting ideas and fine-tuning their written works, by sharing
ChatGPT history links with the teacher to ensure free plagiarism submitted works. The
majority of students' final works scored higher than their traditional written works, with very
minimal cases of plagiarism.

1.4.6. The enhancement of critical thinking in the AI-powered era (CHATGPT)

Given the fact of the unceasing development of AI-powered platforms, educators can
responsibly integrate ChatGPT in EFL education to enhance the learners’ critical thinking
skills. In other words, CHATGPT technology can be used in EFL education as a digital
assistant the output of which can be critically read by the students promoting their critical
writing Exactly as it is implemented in the following studies.

According to Bloom (1956) and Anderson (2001), intelligent AI-based learning

environments enhance individualization, differentiation, creative thinking, critical thinking,
and problem-solving skills. Bloom (1984) found a significant 2 standard deviation difference
between students who received one-on-one tutoring compared to those who only had
conventional classroom teaching. Furthermore, according to a study conducted at Georgia
Gwinnett College (GGC) (Guo and Lee, 2023), Chemistry students were guided to
responsibly use ChatGPT in their course to submit an effective written essay. Initially, the
teacher guided the account setup. Then, students worked in groups to brainstorm ideas and
create relevant prompts for ChatGPT. Finally, they critically evaluated ChatGPT's output
before integrating it into their essays. The results showed a significant improvement in
students' confidence to ask insightful questions, analyze information, and comprehend
complex concepts, as ChatGPT provided diverse perspectives challenging their current ways
of thinking.

28
Figure 2: A diagram Presenting The cognitive stages the chemistry students have gone through while
interacting with ChatGPT in writing their essays (during the experiment at Georgia Gwinnett
College)

1.4.7. The integration of AI (ChatGPT) to improve critical writing

Integrating ChatGPT into the learning process can greatly enhance learners’ critical
thinking and writing skills. This advanced AI model offers a significant amount of data that
students can analyze critically, which is important to sharpen their critical thinking abilities. It
involves carefully examining data, questioning its validity, understanding its implications,
negotiating meaning, and seeking clarifications. ChatGPT should not replace EFL students'
writing efforts entirely but should be used collaboratively.

Students and AI can work together to create written pieces, fostering an interactive

and productive approach (Clark et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2022). This process starts with a
student prompting ChatGPT to generate text output. Next, the student carefully evaluates the
data, questioning its reliability and understanding its significance. After the evaluation phase,
students get engaged in a deep process that involves drafting, interpreting, evaluating, and
synthesizing the information provided by ChatGPT. They then integrate this evaluated
information into their writing, ensuring that it all flows coherently. Su et al. (2023) thoroughly
explored how ChatGPT would help students throughout the writing process, from the starting
outlines to final proofreading. Meanwhile, Yan (2023) investigated how EFL students interact
with ChatGPT in writing classrooms, uncovering its potential to enhance writing instruction.
As demonstrated by (Harunsari, 2023, p358)," Therefore, students should carefully construct
prompts, evaluate the quality of the generated text, and then decide whether to incorporate it

29
into their writing. By engaging in this process, students can enhance their critical thinking and
independent problem-solving skills".

Figure 3: A writing task with a “machine-in-the-loop”

In conclusion, the integration of ChatGPT into the writing process marks a turning
point in educational methodologies. By leveraging the various components outlined in this
chapter, educators can utilize the power of ChatGPT to not only improve critical thinking and
writing abilities in students but also transform the entire writing experience, resulting in the
creation of thought-provoking and compelling pieces.

30
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
2.1. Introduction

This chapter represents the practical part of the research study which aims to provide
answers to the previously mentioned hypotheses. In other words, this chapter is devoted to
explore the attitude of the EFL learners and Teachers towards the incorporation of ChatGPT
in EFL teaching to promote the critical writing skills of the students.

It first presents an overview about the different methods the researchers used to
conduct this study. Then, the researchers provide a short exploration of ChatGPT, which is an
AI -powered tool that was explored practically throughout the case study conducted by the
researchers with Third year EFL students to test its effectiveness in enhancing critical
thinking and writing skills. Afterwards, a detailed description is provided about all the data
tools used in the conduction of the study, displaying the collected data of the targeted
population illustrated with pie charts to be analyzed and interpreted according to the research
hypotheses in the result discussion part. The conclusion of this chapter is dedicated to
additional recommendations and suggested solutions for any experienced or expected
challenges that would stand as a barrier hindering the applicability of the incorporation of
ChatGPT as an effective AI powered tool to enhance the critical thinking and writing skills of
EFL students.

2.2. Research Design

To pursue methodological rigor, the researchers opted for a triangular design. In this
light, the researchers used; four checklists, a questionnaire for the students, a structured
observation, and a structured EFL teachers’ interview to back up the case study of the
research which targets the exploration of the effectiveness of ChatGPT in enhancing the
critical thinking and writing skills of the students. ChatGPT 3.5 which stands for (Generative
pre-trained Transformer) technology, is a language model developed by OpenAI and launched
in November 2022. It is based on advanced algorithms and trained on a large dataset,
generating human-like responses to any input, deployable across applications like chatbots
and virtual assistants (Bozic & Poola, 2023). Open AI CEO Altman announced a new paid
version, ChatGPT 4 Turbo, in 2024, offering updated knowledge and sophisticated features.

Due to its friendly interface, its popularity, its free accessibility through various
platforms (apps, websites...) and being a versatile AI -powered tool, ChatGPT Turbo 3.5
proved to be the best fit for the case study as an independent variable of the researchers
‘research study.

32
 The website interface of ChatGPT involves a text-based interaction section where
users can input their inquiries to receive desired outputs. It is based on the GIGO system (a
garbage in and a garbage out), (Verma, 2021, p. 71). This is to say, that the quality of output
is determined by the input. The suggested outputs provided by ChatGPT are accompanied by
small icons, enabling users to copy the output and provide feedback. Additionally, if
necessary, the output can be read aloud automatically for the user. The interface also features
a chat history on its left margin, allowing users to share the chat link or revisit previous
conversations with the bot. It is noted at the bottom of the interface that the bot may make
mistakes, hence users need to verify important information.

Figure 4: The interface of ChatGPT

To effectively incorporate ChatGPT into EFL education, educators need to undergo

vocational training that can provide them with a robust understanding of the mechanism of
ChatGPT, and the necessary skills and competencies for leveraging its capabilities in favor of
improving their students' language skills. As Verma (2021) articulated, teachers require
foundational literacy, including literacy, numeracy, scientific literacy, information
communication technology literacy, financial literacy, and cultural and civic literacy.
Concerning competencies, the author stated critical thinking, problem-solving,
communication, and collaboration as essential skills to be developed. Additionally, character
qualities such as curiosity, grit, adaptability, leadership, and social and cultural awareness are
necessary, according to Luckin et al. (2016). Another important literacy to master for accurate

33
interaction with ChatGPT, is the ability to prompt adequately to guarantee a wished-for output
(Brown et al,2020, White et al,2023). Prompt engineering refers to the process of crafting an
appropriate prompt to a chatbot so that it produces the desired output (Liu et. al,2021).

Eager. B. & Brunton. R (2023) suggested systematic steps to follow to avoid a generic
undesired output suggested by ChatGPT. The authors stated that the user of ChatGPT should
go through Four main steps in their process of prompting. At first, they have to determine a
specific desired output in mind besides their learning objective. Example: ‘I need a chatbot to
provide me with the rules of capitalization to decide whether the proper names mentioned in
my essays should be capitalized or not’. Secondly, the user again has to formulate a well-
expressive instruction consisting of an action verb, a user background, the context of their
instruction, and the desired format of the desired output. Example: ‘I am a high school B2
EFL learner and have to submit a well-written essay’ ➡ (the context and the user’s
background). ‘Please provide me’ ➡ (action verb) with a (list) of the rules of capitalization ➡
(the desired format of the output). Thirdly, the authors proposed to take some time to reflect
on the output suggested by ChatGPT. Lastly, if the output was not as effective as expected,
the user may consider iterating again till they get the most satisfactory answers as the last step
while interacting with the bot.

Figure 5: An example of ChatGPT prompting

The researchers have chosen (3) different EFL classes and (5) EFL Secondary school
teachers from Oran as the targeted population who provided valuable data for the
investigation of this research study.

34
2.2.1. Sampling

2.2.1.1. Participants

Intending to conduct this research study, the researchers selected 3rd-year EFL
students from Mrah Abdelkader Secondary as a targeted population for the case study. (7)
students (3) boys and (2) girls, were from a math class and (2) boys were from foreign
languages stream. The students were provided with four checklists to complete as part of the
case study.

Table 1: the participants in the experimental test

Participants Gender Age Grade Stream

Math class (3
boys and 2 girls)

7participants 5boys / 2 girls 16-19 3rd grade Foreign

Languages (2
boys)

2.2.1.2. Interview informants

To gain insights from secondary schools, EFL teachers were interviewed on the topic
of the incorporation of ChatGPT in secondary schooling to enhance the students' critical
writing skills, the researchers conducted a structured interview with 5 EFL secondary school
teachers from Oran City, whose data added valuable insights to the research study. The
targeted schools are as follows: Allal Mohamed, Belkermi Secondary School, and Ghobrini
Mustapha Secondary School.

Table 2: the interview informants

Interview Years of teaching Region /Secondary

Gender
Informants/Teachers experience school
Interview informant 1-5years of teaching Ghizlane Hebbas
Female
1 experience Adda (Oran)
Interview informant 1-5 years of teaching Allal Mohamed
Male
2 experience (Oran)
Interview informant 1-5 years of teaching Belakkemi
Female
3 experience Abdelkader (Oran)
Interview informant Above 20 years of Belakkemi
Female
4 teaching experience Abdelkader (Oran)
Interview informant 1_5 years of Ghobrini Mustapha
Male
5 teaching experience (Oran)

35
2.2.1.3. Questionnaire informants

As for the questionnaire, the researchers took into account the 7 students mentioned
earlier in the case study, in addition to 16 other participants from the third-year classes,
resulting in a total of 23 participants from the Math class, technical math class, and foreign
languages stream.

Table 3: the questionnaire informants

Questionnaire
Gender Age Grade Stream
informants

Technical Math class (8

informants)
16 girls
3rd year Math (9 informants)
23 informants 16-19
7 Boys
Foreign
languages(6informants)

2.2.2. Classroom sessions

To investigate this study and prove the effectiveness of the integration of ChatGPT in
EFL education to promote critical thinking and writing skills, the researchers had to perform
dual roles, teachers and researchers. As teachers, they had to ensure good instruction and
orientation of the students, facilitating their writing process during an experimental test where
the students have to write in the pre-test phase about two topics, following the same pattern in
their post-test writing which ChatGPT assists. Researchers had to use different data tools to
collect the needed data for the research study. For the experimental test, (7) third-year
students from Mrah Abdelkader secondary school were selected; (5 participants from the
math class and the other 2 from the foreign languages stream) to carry out a case study that
can test and put the research hypotheses into practice. The experimental test was conducted in
several sessions (for 4 days with a cumulative total of 7 hours) starting from February 12th
until February 15th. As "Ethics in Business" is a common unit between the two targeted
classes, the researchers have chosen " nepotism" as the first topic and " smuggling" as the
second topic for the experimental test.

Their first drafts (pre-test T1and T2) were written in a traditional way (the researchers
and the participants suggested some guideline ideas related to the causes & consequences of
nepotism & smuggling in both topics, with some solutions to eradicate these unethical
phenomena). However, the second time (post-test T1 and T2 writing), the participants were
36
instructed to use ChatGPT to enhance their initial drafts about the two topics (to improve their
writing skills), asking them to spot their mistakes in their initial drafts about the two topics
separately at first. Then, instructing the chatbot to edit their initial drafts without their
mistakes. Finally, to boost their critical thinking skills, they asked ChatGPT to provide them
with additional compositions about the two topics separately so that they can incorporate
some additional ideas suggested by ChatGPT in their second-time compositions
(synthesizing) their final works after understanding, analyzing, and evaluating those AI-
presented compositions.

2.3. Data collection

2.3.1. Tool 1

2.3.1.1. Description of structured observation

For an effective investigation of this study, the researchers who functioned as covert
observants and complete participants during the experiment had to use a structured
observation to collect quantitative data from the participants to identify their attitude towards
ChatGPT and writing, which is one of the EFL productive skills, prior the use of ChatGPT
and while its use, observing their performance span in both phases; during their pre-test (topic
1and topic 2) and in their post-test (topic 1and topic 2) writing to test the effectiveness of the
integration of ChatGPT in EFL education as a tool to promote their critical writing skills,
observing their interaction with ChatGPT, the challenges they mostly faced during the
interaction and underscoring their final attitude after writing in the both previously mentioned
phases.

37
 Table 4: the observation grid description

Pre-Test T1 Pre-Test T2 Post-Test Post-

Observational items T1 Test
T2

Excited to write
Their
attitude
Bored of writing
towards
writing
Tired of writing

Excited to use it

Their Already familiar

attitude with it
towards (showing a
ChatGPT neutral attitude)
Not interested in
it
Their Having an easy
interaction interaction with
with it
ChatGPT Facing
difficulties while
interacting with
it
Their Writing in a
performanc short time
e Span Writing in a long
time
An average
writing time
Challenges Asking for
faced in vocabulary
both stages Long time
writing
Technical
problems (No
Net,
smartphones...)
Their final Showing
attitude hesitation
towards Showing
their writing confidence

38
 Table 5: observation grid analysis

Observational
Pre-test T1 Pre-test T2 Post-testT1 Post-testT2
item

Excited to write yes No Yes No

Their attitude Bored of writing No Yes No Yes

towards writing

Tired of writing No No No Yes

Excited to use it / / Yes No

Familiar with it
Their attitude
(showing a neutral / / No Yes
towards
attitude)
ChatGPT

Not interested in it / / No No

Having an easy
/ / No Yes
interaction with it
Their
interaction with Facing difficulties
ChatGPT while interacting with / / Yes No
it

Writing in a short
No Yes No Yes
time
their
performance Writing in a long time No No Yes No
span

An average writing
Yes No No No
time

Asking for
Yes No Yes No
vocabulary

Challenges faced
while interacting Long time writing No No Yes No
with it
Technical problems
(No net, No No Yes Yes
smartphones...)
Their final
attitude towards Showing hesitation Yes No No No
their writing

Showing confidence No Yes Yes Yes

39
2.3.1.2. Analysis of the structured observation

The researchers targeted collecting the needed data related to the six observational
items exploring the students’ attitudes towards writing, ChatGPT, their interaction with
ChatGPT, their written performance span, the challenges they encountered along the case
study while writing, and underscoring their final attitude towards their written productions in
both stages: in the pre-test topics (nepotism and smuggling) and the post-test topics (nepotism
and smuggling).

To interpret the collected data, which is shown in the table, the researchers had to
underscore the difference between the collected data in the pre-tests (pre-test T 1 and pre-test
T 2) in comparison to the ones related to post-tests (post-test T 1 and post-test T 2).

To start with, the seven participants of the test showed a dual attitude towards writing
in both stages: in the pre-test and the post-test. This is to say, they showed excitement and
boredom before the use of ChatGPT and after its use while writing about both topics
(nepotism and smuggling), though some turned tired in the post-test synthesized writing.

Moreover, in the pre-test, the students demonstrated an average and short writing span.
However, during their second post-test writing, some students took a longer time to write
while others wrote briefly. This explains that as they got familiar with ChatGPT, they became
quick achievers submitting their works in a short time with no difficulties while interacting
with it.

Furthermore, the researchers detected that one of the dominant challenges the
participants encountered in both phases was their lack of vocabulary. However, as they got
assisted repeatedly by ChatGPT, their linguistic insufficiency was solved besides to some
technical problems related to ChatGPT.

Lastly, a remarkable change the researchers observed after the participants used
ChatGPT to synthesize their works in post-test T1and T2, was that they showed a confident
attitude toward their final synthesized written compositions in comparison to the hesitation
they expressed non-verbally. This proves that the use of AI-powered tools indeed helps boost
the students’ self-confidence and their self-concept, as stated by Verma in her book, "The
Impact of AI Technologies on Teaching, Learning, and Research in Higher Education" by
Shivani Verma Km. Mayawati Government Girls P.G. College, India.

40
2.3.2. Tool 2

2.3.2.1. Description of the checklists

In the research study, two checklists were employed to facilitate the participants’ self-
assessment and to help the researchers evaluate and measure their progress as well. One
checklist was intended for the draft version (pre-test phase of the two topics), which was filled
in before the use of ChatGPT, while the second one, was designed for the synthesized version
(post-test phase of the two topics) which was filled in after the use of ChatGPT. Each
checklist comprised 18 inquiry statements, and the value of each indicator was determined
using a rating Likert scale that ranged from "not at all" to "a very large extent." This approach
enables a comprehensive assessment of the efficacy of ChatGPT in enhancing the
participants’ critical writing. The following elements will describe each section of the
checklist, starting with the pre-checklist and moving on to the post-checklist.

Pre-checklist: A checklist for critical thinking and writing skills (concerned with the
draft versions) see appendix ( )

Section one: Critical thinking skills

In this particular section of the study, we aimed to collect data from high school
students who participated in our case study regarding their critical thinking abilities. To
achieve this, we developed the first section of Bloom's Taxonomy cognitive skills, which
focused on four key areas - understanding, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. These items
were thoughtfully crafted to gather relevant and reliable data on the student's critical thinking
aptitude. The questions (Q1 - Q9): cover all the cognitive elements mentioned above and
require the students to demonstrate their comprehension of the subject matter, stating the
extent to which they analyzed the presented information, synthesized new ideas, and
evaluated their drafts’ content.

Section two: Writing skills

Our research aimed to gather comprehensive and assessable data on the writing skills
of secondary school students. The second section of the pre-checklist focuses on assessing the
students' writing skills. Therefore, questions 10 to 18 were designed to evaluate the students'
grammatical correctness, punctuation, spelling, conciseness, precision, clarity, coherence and
cohesion, and revision in their drafts.

41
Post checklist: A checklist for critical thinking and writing skills with the use of
ChatGPT

Upon The completion of their initial draft, learners will have access to ChatGPT to
refine their work with the guidance of the teacher's prompts (included in the lesson plan's
appendix). A post-checklist, comprising 17 questions related to critical thinking and writing
skills, was created to evaluate the improvement of the student’s critical writing skills after the
use of ChatGPT in their final written work in comparison to their initial drafts.

Section 1: Critical thinking skills with the use of ChatGPT

(Q1-Q4): Evaluate the students' comprehension and analysis of the feedback provided
by ChatGPT on their submitted drafts.

(Q5-Q8): highlight the students' final synthesized works should be highlighted to

illustrate the degree to which they integrated their original ideas with those proposed by
ChatGPT, effectively assessing the amalgamation.

Section 2: Writing skills with the use of ChatGPT

(Q9-Q17): aim to Evaluate how effectively students combined their original ideas with
those suggested by ChatGPT to craft their final synthesized works. This will reveal the degree
to which the students effectively synthesized their original ideas with those provided by
ChatGPT.

2.3.2.2. Analysis of the checklists

The researchers selected bar graphs as visual aids to illustrate the responses to the
checklists, and to analyze the collected data. The data was categorized into pre-test and post-
test and represented in a bar graph. To accomplish this, the researchers utilized the learners'
responses from the checklists, which were based on the Likert scale and converted to
numerical values as follows: (not at all = 1, to a small extent = 2, to a large extent = 3, and a
very large extent = 4). These numerical values were entered into an Excel sheet for
calculation, resulting in averages for critical thinking, writing, and critical writing skills,
which were then presented in the form of a bar graph. The decision to employ bar graphs was
based on their capacity to provide a visually intuitive means of comparing differences and
tracking progress among learners.

The bar graph below compares the data from the pre-test and post-test to illustrate
learners' progress after using ChatGPT. It showcases the average scores in critical thinking,

42
and writing skills, resulting in critical writing. Each variable has two sets of data points. The
blue bars represent the average scores before using ChatGPT to edit the samples, while the
red bars represent the averages after utilizing the AI tool. In the bar graph presented below, it
is evident that the pre-test average score of critical thinking skills yields an average score of
approximately 2,82. After the integration of ChatGPT, a discernible advancement is observed,
registering an increase of roughly 3,21. The bars in the middle of the graph depict writing
skills. The initial test score is approximately2,76, while the average score in the post-test is
around 3,18. The data suggests a notable enhancement in the overall writing skills, as
evidenced by the learners' feedback on the checklists (see appendix). The researchers aimed to
gather data about the averages of critical thinking and writing proficiency skills to derive the
average score for critical writing among the learners, as depicted in the latter bars of the
graph. The pre-test average score is approximately2,64, as indicated by the blue bar in the
visual aid below. Conversely, the post-test average of 3,19 in critical writing is reflected by
the red bar.

The data from the bar graphs indicates a substantial improvement in learners' critical
thinking and writing skills from the pre-test to the post-test phase, which can be attributed to
the support provided by ChatGPT. The analysis of checklists offers clear insights into the
overall enhancement of the learners' critical writing skills.

Figure 6: A demonstrative bar graph for the final checklist results

43
2.3.3. Tool 3

2.3.3.1. Description of the students’ questionnaire

As far as the pupils‘ questionnaire is concerned, (23) students whose age varied from
(16) to (19) years old, were selected to provide the needed data for the study.(39.1%)Math
class, (26.1%) foreign languages class and (34.8%) Technical Math class. The respondents
consist of (30.4%) of male students and (69.6 %) of female students.

This questionnaire is designed to collect quantitative and qualitative data from 23

students who were kindly requested to fill it in. the questionnaire consists of 29 questions (3
multiple choice questions and 26 closed ended questions) divided into 4 sections.

Section 1: “Assessing students’ application of Bloom’s taxonomy in their written

productions”. (Q1-Q9): aim to assess the extent to which the learners go through Bloom’s
taxonomy cognitive stages (understanding, analysis, creativity and evaluation) while writing
their written productions.

Section 2: “identifying the EFL teachers’ perception towards ChatGPT”. (Q9-Q13):targets

exploring the perception of EFL teachers towards ChatGPT and its use in EFL education and
their level of familiarity with the tool.

Section 3: “Assessing the written performance of the students”. (Q15-Q29): aim to identify
the degree to which the students’ writings are grammatically correct, well spelt and
punctuated, cohesive and coherent, concise and precise, clear and well structured. This section
also reveals the challenges faced by the students while writing, rating their own written
performance in a scale out of ten. At the end of this section, the learners provided their
feedback showing the extent of which they perceive ChatGPT as a helpful AI powered tool in
fostering their critical thinking and writing skills.

2.3.3.2. Analysis of the students’ questionnaire

After the researchers had calculated the averages of critical thinking skills , writing
skills of the students and their attitude towards the use of ChatGPT in English written related
tasks, based on the numerical data, which were presented in Excel (following the same
aforementioned process in the checklist analysis),The researchers opted for bar graphs as a
visual illustrative support demonstrating the data collected from secondary school EFL
learners revealing their attitude towards ChatGPT and their critical thinking and writing skills
in their usual English writing Tasks.

44
Section 1: Critical thinking skills

According to the responses of the students, which are displayed in the bar graph
below, it reveals a notable consistency in the application of bloom's taxonomy cognitive
stages in students’ writing tasks .In other words, It indicates that the students apply bloom's
taxonomy stages (lower order of thinking stages and higher order of thinking skills) relatively
in a balanced way in their writing tasks ranging from understanding to the highest cognitive
skill which is evaluation. The bar graph showcases that the students predominantly apply the
understanding Skill in the writing with an average score of 2.9 and 3 average) in comparison
to the students’ capacity of analyzing the ideas of a given topic ,which is the following
cognitive skill that marks (2.8 and 2.9) of its application. As for the synthesis stage, 2.9
indicates the students’ familiarity with the integration of their ideas with other ideas while
writing (the ones suggested by the teacher as guideline ideas or the ones which the students
look for as a a result of their research ).However, the average 2 .5 , which marks the lowest
average in the graph , highlights a lack of proficiency in deconstructing a suggested topic of
their writing resulting in a final reconstruction of it as an advanced synthetic process in their
writing process. Furthermore, the data indicates that while students exhibit a moderate
evaluation of their final written works (average score of 2.7), They actively engage in
evaluating the choice of choice of topics to a significant extent (average score of 2.8).

Figure 7: A bar graph representing the averages of critical thinking skills of the students based on
their findings in the questionnaire

Section 2: Writing skills

Based on the bar graph data, students exhibit strong writing proficiency with an
average score of 3 for coherence, clarity, spelling, and punctuation. However, grammar usage

45
and precision show a moderate average of 2.5. The lowest average of 2 indicates a challenge
in producing concise content due to vocabulary limitations, impacting coherence, precision,
and cohesion in their writing.

Figure 8: A bar graph representing the averages of writing skills based on the students’ questionnaire
responses

Section 3: ChatGPT

According to the data displayed below, 2.5 indicates that students share a common
positive attitude towards ChatGPT as a result of their familiarity with it and their frequent
interaction with it in different tasks notably the English writing tasks .They hold a positive
perception of ChatGPT conceiving it as an effective AI based assistant tool that can improve
their critical thinking and writing skills in their English writing tasks classes, as it is
represented relatively with 2.5average.(Although the graph shows a lesser efficacy of
ChatGPT in the enhancement of their critical thinking skills in comparison to their writing
skills). 3, which is the highest average in the graph, marks the students’ positive
recommendation of ChatGPT to their friends due to its versatile utility. In summary, the
findings of the questionnaire reveal that the students are being highly digitized showing a
great familiarity with AI powered tools yet, they need a responsible utility of it to boost their
criticality and writing skills in EFL learning.

46
 Figure 9: A bar graph representing the students’ attitude towards the use of ChatGPT in improving
their critical thinking and writing skills

2.3.4. Tool 4

2.3.4.1. Description of the structured interview

To address our research questions, we engaged secondary school English language

teachers to understand their perspectives on integrating unconventional artificial intelligence
materials, such as ChatGPT, in their classrooms. The study involved conducting a structured
interview with five EFL teachers (three female teachers and two male teachers) from various
secondary schools in Oran. The interview comprised 29 questions, with 26 of them being
closed-ended and three being multiple-choice ones asking participants to elaborate, explain, or
narrate personal experiences. The questions were divided into four sections for a
comprehensive understanding of the teachers' attitudes toward AI integration in their teaching
methodologies. The Likert scale options provided are as follows: Not at all, To a small extent,
To a large extent, and a very large extent. the sections have been organized in the following
manner:

Section 1:

Teachers need to evaluate the critical thinking abilities of their students in EFL writing
classes. Questions Q1-Q8 aim to determine if learners are applying Bloom's cognitive skills in
their thinking, such as comprehending the subject matter, making connections, breaking down
ideas, using synonyms, deconstructing concepts, and synthesizing multiple perspectives.

47
Section 2:

The following questions (Q9-Q13) aim to gather the teacher's opinions on ChatGPT as
an AI tool and pedagogical instrument in EFL teaching writing. The questions cover their
familiarity with the tool, expectations, usage experience and purposes, and whether they
approve of their students using it in the classroom for learning purposes.

Section 3:

The questions from Q14 to Q29 are designed to gauge the teacher's opinions on their
students' writing skills. The focus is on assessing whether the students' writing is clear,
concise, grammatically correct, and well-spelled, and rating them on a scale of one to ten.
Additionally, the teachers were asked if they believed that the use of Chat GPT in EFL
education could enhance their students' critical thinking and writing abilities.

2.3.4.2. Analysis of the Structured Interview

Section 1: Teachers' Perceptions Towards Their Learners’ critical thinking skills

Question 1: To what extent do your students show their understanding of any given
topic during the written expression?

The interview results show that 60% of the teachers responded with "to a large
extent", while the remaining 40% chose "to a small extent". These findings suggest that most
teachers think that their students have a good understanding of the writing topic and possess
the necessary skills to comprehend it to a considerable extent.

Figure 10: Students' understanding of the topic according to the teacher's perceptions

48
Question 2: To what extent is the understanding of your students demonstrated in their
writings?

Based on the results presented below, it appears that 80% of the interviewed teachers
believe that their students' understanding of a given topic is only slightly reflected in their
written work. On the other hand, 20% of the teachers reported that their students can
effectively demonstrate a good understanding of the topic through their writing. These
findings suggest that there may be a gap in the level of understanding demonstrated by
students in their written assignments.

Figure 11: Students demonstrate understanding in their writing according to the teacher's perceptions

Question 3: To what extent do your students analyze (making links & breaking down the
given topic's ideas into pieces) during the written expression?

This study was conducted to assess the ability of learners to analyze and draw logical
connections in their writing, as observed by their teachers. The findings revealed that 80% of
the teachers reported that their students demonstrated a low level of proficiency in analyzing
the given content, while 20% observed that their learners displayed a good ability in
analyzing the content.

49
 Figure 12: Teachers’ perception of students ability to analyze their written productions

Question 4: To what extent do your students think of synonyms to the topic's instruction
keywords?

The purpose of this inquiry is to gauge the extent to which teachers believe that their
students utilize synonyms when presented with specific keywords related to a particular
subject. Based on the findings displayed in the pie chart, it was observed that 80% of the
teachers chose "to a small extent," while 20% chose "to a large extent." Consequently, we can
infer that according to the majority of teachers, students seldom prefer to use synonyms when
provided with a topic.

Figure 13:Teachers' views on the learners ' use of synonyms to the keywords in their productions

50
Question 5: To what extent do your students deconstruct the topic's ideas by
reconstructing them again to form their final written production?

The following statement intends to evaluate the learners' proficiency in breaking down
and creating ideas regarding a given writing topic. Based on the pie chart presented, 20% of
the teachers responded with "not at all," while 80% selected "to a small extent." This data
indicates that the learners might face difficulties in analyzing by breaking down concepts into
smaller parts and comprehending the interconnections between them.

Figure 14: Teachers' views on their students' deconstruction of the topic ideas

Question 6: To what extent do your pupils synthesize (create their point of view as a
result of combining different perspectives about a given topic while writing?

This inquiry intends to explore the ability of learners to generate unique perspectives
by combining and blending various viewpoints from different resources, based on the
experiences of their teachers. The results of the study indicate that 80% of the participants
responded with "to a small extent, “while 20% opted for "not at all." This strongly suggests
that the learners have a limited ability to draw insightful conclusions in their written pieces.

51
 Figure 15: Teachers’ views on their learners’ ability to synthesize ideas

Question 7: To what extent do your pupils evaluate their written production before
submitting it?

Evaluating ideas is a crucial aspect of the writing process. However, based on the
interview responses 80% of teachers believe their students possess only a small amount of this
skill, while the remaining 20% believe their students lack it entirely. Therefore, it's evident
that most secondary school learners struggle with evaluating ideas.

Figure 16: Teachers' views on the learners' ability to evaluate ideas

Question 8: Do your students usually comment on the suggested topics related to the
written production? (commenting to which extent they find a given topic boring or
interestingly informative)

According to the results obtained, 60% of the teachers reported that their students
generally evaluate and express their opinions on the topic proposed by the teacher, either

52
positively or negatively. On the other hand, 40% of the teachers stated that their students
rarely comment or share their views on the subject of the writing task. This may be due to a
variety of reasons, including the individualism and reserved nature of some learners when it
comes to interacting with their instructors.

Figure 17: Teachers' perception of the learners ability to speak out their ideas regarding the choice of
the topic of their task

Section 2: The teacher's opinions on ChatGPT as an AI tool and pedagogical instrument

in EFL teaching writing

Question 9: Have you heard about ChatGPT?

This inquiry aims to gather insights regarding the level of engagement of educators
with technology and innovation. As per the results, all participants are well-versed in AI tools.
The researchers also inquired about their views on ChatGPT, providing three options for the
respondents: (1) It is beneficial, (2) It is concerning, and (3) It can be beneficial if used
responsibly. The findings revealed that all participants opted for the third choice. This
suggests that high school teachers are open to incorporating AI into their teaching, provided
that it is used thoughtfully and cautiously.

Question 11: Have you used ChatGPT?

An inquiry was presented to gain more insights into the participants' familiarity. The
findings presented in the pie chart below show that the participants' responses varied. 20
participants reported never using the tool, while another 20 reported using it but to a small
extent. Additionally, 20 participants reported using it to a large extent, with the highest
number of users from the participants being the last 40. This result shows a diverse range of
AI users among our population.

53
 Figure 18: Teachers' use of Ai tools

Question 12: What did you use ChatGPT for?

The researchers conducted an inquiry and provided five options for the participants to
respond to. These options were lesson planning, general research, designing instructional
material, suggesting educational games for teaching, and all of the above. According to the
results, 75% of the participants used ChatGPT for general research, while the remaining 25%
chose the above options.

Figure 19: Teachers' use of ChatGPT for various purposes

Question 13: Would you allow your students to use ChatGPT in the writing task
responsibly?

In this inquiry, we aimed to understand teachers' perceptions about the responsible

integration of ChatGPT in their writing tasks. Out of the total population, 20% expressed
complete rejection of the integration, while another 20% chose to integrate it to a large extent.
The highest ranking of 60% of the teachers opted to integrate it to a small extent.

54
 Figure 20: Teachers' attitude towards the integration of ChatGPT in their classes

Section 3: The teacher's opinions on their students' writing skills.

Question 14: Do you think your students find the writing class enjoyable?

Out of the total number of participants, 60% responded that they found writing class to
be somewhat boring and difficult, while 40% stated that they found it to be very challenging.
This indicates that writing classes are still perceived as less engaging and interesting than
other courses. Therefore, teachers must reflect on their teaching methods and strategies to
make writing classes more engaging and enjoyable for students.

Figure 21: Learners' attitude towards writing classes based on the teachers' perception

Question 15: What are the challenges you believe are mostly impeding your students
from performing their writing tasks?

Researchers provided a list of common obstacles that learners face when producing
written work. The list included options such as vocabulary, writer's block, translation,
grammar, spelling, punctuation, and structuring written responses. The findings of the study
revealed that the majority of participants, 80%, identified vocabulary as the primary constraint

55
to their writing. The remaining 20% of participants identified grammar as the main obstacle.
This suggests that among the obstacles listed, vocabulary is the most significant constraint to
learners' written production, followed by grammar.

Figure 22: Challenges faced by the students in their written tasks

Question 16: Is your students' writing coherent?

The skill of coherence is considered important in writing. According to the findings

presented in a pie chart, 80 of the teachers reported that their students' writing was coherent,
while 20 teachers found their students' narratives to be coherent. The majority of participants
noted that EFL learners appear to lack coherence skills in their written narratives.

Figure 23: Teachers' viewpoints on coherence in the learners' written pieces

Question 17: Is your students' writing cohesive?

An important aspect of effective writing is cohesion, which is closely related to

coherence. As a result, we anticipated that the outcomes would be quite similar. Based on the
data presented in the pie chart, 80% of the surveyed instructors indicated that their students'

56
writing exhibited only a slight degree of cohesion, while 20% reported a significant level of
cohesion.

Figure 24: Teachers' viewpoints on cohesion in the learners' written pieces

Question 18: To what extent does your students' writing show clarity?

Based on the research, 60 out of the participants reported that their learners' writing
was clear to a small extent, while 40 claimed it was clear to a large extent. This indicates that
only a portion of secondary school learners can effectively communicate their ideas with
clarity, while the majority of them still face difficulties in presenting information that is clear
and understandable to their readers.

Figure 25: Teachers' viewpoints on clarity in the learners ' written pieces

Question 19: To what extent is the writing of your students concise?

According to the data represented in the pie chart, a significant portion of educators
interviewed have reported that their students' writing lacks concision. Specifically, 60% of the
respondents indicated that their learners' writing is somewhat concise, while the remaining

57
40% reported that their students' writing demonstrates a high level of concision. Furthermore,
out of the total number of participants, 100 claimed that the written pieces produced by their
learners lacked precision to a certain extent. It is evident from the data that precision is the
first area where the participants have reached a consensus regarding their learners' narratives.
Additionally, the importance of grammar in EFL is widely recognized, particularly in high
school contexts. It was expected that the participants would possess a high level of
grammatical skill in their learners' writing. However, according to the pie chart, the
participants reported that their learners' grammatical skills were poor to a small extent, based
on the Likert scale. This suggests that there may be issues with the way grammar is being
taught.

Figure 26: Teachers’ viewpoints on precision in the learners' written pieces

Question 22: To what extent does the writing of your students reflect the correct use of
punctuation?

According to the results of the inquiry, 60 out of the participants reported that their
learners can punctuate correctly to a small extent, while 20 participants indicated a large
extent of correct punctuation. The remaining 20 participants chose "not at all" on the Likert
scale of responses. These findings suggest that while some learners struggle with punctuation
as a skill, others do not.

58
 Figure 27: Teachers' viewpoints on punctuation in the learners' written pieces

Question 23: To what extent does the problem of misspelling is present in your students'
writing?

The researchers conducted an inquiry to investigate the issue of spelling mistakes

made by students. Out of the total respondents, 40% stated that their learners' writing pieces
are largely full of spelling mistakes, whereas another 40% claimed that the issue is slightly
manifested in their learner's written work. The remaining 20% of teachers reported that the
issue is to a large extent present. This suggests that spelling mistakes are quite common in
secondary schools. Therefore, integrating a tool or an instrument that would measure the
learners' mistakes and help them correct them could be beneficial.

Figure 28: Teachers' viewpoints on spelling in the learners' written pieces

59
Question 24: How would you rate the writings of your learners on a scale out of ten?

As part of an effort to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the writing skills of

the learners, an inquiry was conducted. Out of the total of 100 participants, 60 of them rated
their learners' written pieces as 5 when asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 10. Meanwhile, 20 of
the participants rated their learners' writing between 6 to 9, and the remaining 20 rated 1 to 4.

Figure 29: Teachers rating their students writing

Question 25: Do you think your students would like to use ChatGPT in the writing
class?

Based on the results, 80% of the participants reported that their students would use
ChatGPT to a significant extent in their writing classes. The remaining 20% believed that
their learners would use the tool to a very large extent. This indicates that, according to the
teachers' perceptions, ChatGPT could be a useful tool for teaching writing.

Figure 30: Learners' perception on integrating ChatGPT in the writing classes based on the teacher's
viewpoints

60
Question 26: Would you trust the information, suggestions, and answers provided by
ChatGPT?

Based on the results findings,60% of the participants stated that their students to a
large extent would trust any information or suggestions suggested by the tool, whereas 40%
of the population opted for it to a small extent. Based on the majority of the responses, we
conclude that secondary school learners have a high level of trust in AI tools.

Figure 31: Learners' trust towards ChatGPT based on the teachers' viewpoints

Question 27: Do you think the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL education can enhance
the previously mentioned critical thinking skills (understanding, analyzing, evaluation,
and synthesis) of students while writing?

Based on the responses provided earlier, it appears that EFL learners face challenges
in developing critical thinking skills. The pie chart below indicates that 60% of the
participants believe that their students' critical thinking abilities would be marginally
improved, while the remaining 40% believe that the tool would significantly enhance their
critical thinking skills. This suggests that a majority of EFL teachers still view AI tools, such
as ChatGPT, primarily as search engines or tools for providing answers.

61
 Figure 32: Teachers' perception towards ChatGPT as a tool to improve their learners' critical
thinking skills

Question 28: Do you think the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL education can enhance
the writing skill (cohesion, coherence, clarity, and the sound use of Mechanic) of
students?

According to the findings, (60%) of the surveyed educators believe that chatbots
powered by GPT can significantly enhance the learner's writing skills, while (40%) claim that
it may only provide a small improvement. Based on this data, it can be inferred that the
majority of EFL learners agree that the use of AI tools can help in improving their writing
skills.

Figure 33: Teachers' perception towards ChatGPT as a tool to improve their learners' writing skills

62
Question 29: How likely would you recommend the use of ChatGPT in the writing
classes?

The purpose of our inquiry was to gather perceptions and attitudes of teachers towards
the integration of an automated writing tool, ChatGPT, in writing classes. The inquiry aimed
to collect meticulous analytical insight into the incorporation of this tool and its effectiveness
in improving writing skills. During the structured interview, (60%) of the teacher participants
stated that they would recommend the use of ChatGPT in their writing classes to a large
extent. The remaining 40% of participants pointed out that they would recommend it but to a
small extent. Based on these findings, it can be inferred that EFL teachers hold generally
positive viewpoints toward the integration of this tool in their writing classes. These results
offer an essential push for researchers to propose ways and strategies to help teachers
complete this innovative process of AI-based instruction.

Figure 34: ChatGPT in writing classes: A recommendation study

2.3.5. Tool 5

2.3.5.1. Description of the test

To assess the critical writing skills of learners, the researchers chose teaching sessions
where the selected group produced written work about two topics (nepotism and smuggling)
in two different ways. First, in the "pre-test," they evaluated the learners aforementioned skills
without using ChatGPT to edit their work. Then, in the post-test phase, they integrated
ChatGPT to help edit the initial drafts from the pre-test phase. The researchers gathered the
drafts and the writing that had been edited by ChatGPT for assessment. The researchers
evaluated and measured the progress of the learners from their original drafts to the
synthesized works by giving them marks on a scale out of 10, considering critical writing
elements (critical thinking skills and writing skills). The participants were coded as in the

63
checklists using (P1to P7) to maintain consistency. Additionally, the researchers used Excel to
calculate the average scores of each participant and created line graphs to show the average
scores, highlighting any noticeable progress from the pre-average to the post-average scores.

2.3.5.2. Analysis

The line graph compares the pre and post average scores of the 7 participants (labeled
P1 to P7 on the X-axis) with data points displayed on the Y-axis. The graph features lines
connecting the data points to demonstrate the relationship between the variables, along with a
key clarifying the data sets represented in the graph. The pre-average score is represented by
the blue line, while the post-average score is denoted by the red line.

At the beginning of P1, the average score after the intervention of ChatGPT starts
slightly higher than the average score before the ChatGPT intervention. From P2 to P4, scores
decrease compared to P1, reaching the lowest point at P3. Interestingly, all 3 participants
achieved higher post-intervention scores, as indicated by the blue line on the graph, compared
to their pre-intervention scores. Based on the findings, it is clear that utilizing ChatGPT to
edit students' written work results in improving critical writing outcomes. There is a
significant increase in scores from P4 to P5, as shown by the blue line, reaching the highest
point at P5. However, when compared to the red line, it is evident that integrating ChatGPT
represents a successful intervention that positively affected the outcomes. Following P5, both
scores decrease through P6 and P7, but the post-average score consistently remains higher
than the pre-average score. In essence, the post-average score is consistently superior to the
pre-average score from P2 onward, indicating that the AI tool intervention had a positive
impact on the post-evaluation phase.

64
 Figure 35: A line graph representing pre and post-test results

2.4. Results Discussion

Based on the data collected through structured observation, student questionnaires,

and structured interviews with EFL teachers, the researchers have synthesized that, belonging
to the Z generation with a short teaching experience, the interviewed teachers, who state an
extensive use of ChatGPT (as a machine in the loop), exhibit a positive perception of the tool
primarily as a valuable writing assistant tool rather than a catalyst for enhancing critical
thinking skills. Eventually, this sentiment is echoed too in the students’ questionnaire
responses, which may stem from their vocabulary deficiencies—a significant writing
challenge impeding their proficiency, consistently highlighted in both student questionnaires
and teacher interviews. Additionally, the researchers identified this vocabulary limitation as
the primary obstacle students faced in pre-test writing, a hurdle that was effectively overcome
in their post-test compositions with the aid of ChatGPT.

The research hypotheses of this study were significantly validated by the checklist-
pertained data results, indicating that students showed improved performance in critical
thinking and writing skills when using ChatGPT. The data collected suggests that high school
students have a restricted capacity to evaluate given content and seldom utilize alternate
words when presented with a topic. Additionally, they seem to struggle with comprehending
ideas and expressing their perspectives in written tasks; nevertheless, all of these analytical
thinking abilities demonstrated notable enhancement after students utilized the AI tool,
underscoring the beneficial impact of AI-based education in writing classes on students'
critical thinking skills. In addition to vocabulary and grammar, the analysis of collected data

65
revealed a deficiency in coherence and precision among EFL learners in their written
compositions. Following the integration of ChatGPT, a notable enhancement was observed in
the learners' written output, thereby presenting substantial opportunities for EFL educators to
advance their learners' overall critical thinking and writing competencies. It's important to
note that even after integrating ChatGPT, certain writing skill issues persisted across the
student's written work. This emphasizes the need for further investigation to comprehend the
underlying reasons for these fluctuations.

The test results align closely with the data provided in the checklist, indicating a
significant improvement based on its results following the incorporation of AI to enhance
students' critical writing skills. This underscores the pivotal role of AI in education.
Furthermore, the results show that students had a quite better experience using the AI tool
compared to the traditional method. Emphasizing the importance of effective user experience
and AI in educational settings for optimal outcomes underscores the critical role of ChatGPT
in enhancing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ critical writing proficiency.

Furthermore, despite the teacher's and students' familiarity with ChatGPT, both groups
require mastery through vocational training to effectively integrate ChatGPT into EFL writing
instruction to enhance critical writing skills. This would also serve to make the writing class
more engaging, as indicated by teachers' responses regarding students' negative attitudes
towards the writing class. For example, in the experiment, some individuals encountered
issues unrelated to the use of ChatGPT but still needed to hone their prompting skills (i.e.,
their communication with ChatGPT). They required guidance and orientation to facilitate
their interaction with ChatGPT. Therefore, both teachers and students would benefit from
training to successfully utilize ChatGPT in the classroom.

The findings from the structured observation, checklists, questionnaire, structured

interview and the test proved that the incorporation of AI tools, specifically ChatGPT,
significantly improves the critical writing skills of EFL learners. This integration enables
learners to actively and critically interact with ChatGPT by analyzing, synthesizing and
evaluating the output suggested by the bot in accordance with their inputs, improving their
writing skills along the process as well.

66
General conclusion

The field of language teaching is always evolving and in need of fresh ideas. It is
crucial to incorporate current popular trends to keep students motivated to learn. One
particularly intriguing suggestion is to incorporate AI into the EFL classroom, as it provides
valuable opportunities for teachers to actively engage their students.

The main objective of this research was to examine the impact of integrating AI tools,
specifically ChatGPT, on enhancing the critical writing skills of English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) learners. EFL instructors must understand that the writing abilities of their
students are influenced by the methods they employ in their teaching. This emphasizes the
undeniable importance of utilizing effective and innovative strategies that cater to the needs of
the learners and provide them with engaging instruction. The researchers chose to use AI to
enhance writing skill instruction, creating an innovative approach that serves as a pedagogical
tool to improve critical writing skills. In the field of education, AI, particularly ChatGPT, has
demonstrated its effectiveness in enhancing learners' critical thinking and writing abilities,
offering a more engaging and enjoyable learning experience. Learners are empowered to take
an active role in their education, engaging with the material in a way that resonates with the
characteristics of the GEN Z generation. The research has allowed for an in-depth exploration
of ChatGPT's potential as a teaching aid in EFL classrooms, providing avenues for a
constructivist approach to writing instruction. The findings from the structured observation
and questionnaire suggest a favorable reception to integrating AI into EFL teaching to
improve students' critical writing skills. Likewise, Results from the checklists ,ustructured
observation and the test emphasize the potential positive impact of this tool on the critical
thinking and writing skills of learners. The revealed findings confirm our hypotheses that
ChatGPT can indeed scaffold the learner’s to write critically, enhancing their critical thinking
skills . Additionally, educators provided valuable insights through structured interviews about
integrating ChatGPT into their writing classes. While many are open to using AI in their
teaching, some teachers express uncertainty about implementing such unconventional
material into their EFL classrooms. Integration of AI in writing instruction is a gradual
process that should commence with a high-quality training program for EFL educators on AI
tools, such as ChatGPT. This aims to provide a comprehensive and rigorous learning
experience. The incorporation of AI is no longer a matter of choice but a necessity. Despite
potential resistance to change, the truth is that AI's presence in EFL classrooms is
unavoidable. However, by embracing AI technologies, educators have the potential to

67
transform the learning experience, enabling students to deeply engage with language
acquisition and benefit from personalized, adaptive instruction.

Limitations

While this research has been approached with a commendable commitment to

methodological rigor, it is important to acknowledge that it also has a set of limitations that
ought to be acknowledged. One limitation we encountered was the inability to schedule
multiple sessions due to time constraints. Even though we managed to conduct 4 sessions,
conducting more sessions would have provided us with data over a longer period. During our
classroom sessions, we faced a few technical challenges. These included intermittent internet
connectivity in the classroom and an unexpected issue with the functioning of ChatGPT.
However, the ChatGPT issue was quickly resolved after a short while. Additionally, there was
a lack of equipment, particularly smartphones, which caused some delays before being
resolved. The learners also encountered confusion with ChatGPT outputs when not prompted
accurately, leading to irrelevant results for the learners. Due to the unavailability of the
participants, we faced a shortage of volunteers for our case study, which led to the
postponement of our classroom sessions.

68
List of bibliography

 Aberšek, B. Flogie, A (2019). The impact of innovative ICT education and AI on the
pedagogical paradigm. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

 Aberšek, B., Barle Lakota, A., Borstner, B., Bregant, J., Dolenc, K., Flogie, A.,
Gartner, S., Kordigel Aberšek, M., Rutar Leban, T., Šverc,A., Štraus, M., Ploj Virti􀃾,
M. (2017). Cognitive science in education and alternative teaching strategies.
Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.

 Alharbi, W. (2023). AI in the Foreign Language Classroom: A Pedagogical Overview

of Automated Writing Assistance Tools. Education Research International, 2023, 1–
15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4253331

 Ataç, B. A. (2015). From Descriptive to Critical Writing: A study on the effectiveness

of advanced reading and writing instruction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 199, 620–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.588

 Alagozlu, N. (2007). Critical thinking and voice in EFL writing. Asian EFL Journal,
9(3), 118-136.

 Anderson, J. A. (1995). An introduction to neural networks. MIT Press.

 Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An Interactive Approach to Language

Pedagogy. Pearson PTR Interactive.

 Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., ... & Amodei, D.
(2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing
systems, 33, 1877-1901.

 Božić, V., & Poola, I. (2023). Chat GPT and education. Preprint.

 Ceres, P. (2023). ChatGPT is coming for classrooms. Don't panic. Wired. Retrieved February
2, 2023.

 Crossley, S. A., Muldner, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Idea generation in student writing:
Computational assessments and links to successful writing. Written Communication, 33(3),
328-354.

 Collins Dictionary (1987) Available from https://www.amazon.com

 Clark, E., Ross, A. S., Tan, C., Ji, Y., & Smith, N. A. (2018). Creative writing with a
machine in the loop: Case studies on slogans and stories. 23rd International

69
 Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Sydney, Australia, 329–340.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3172944.3172983.

 Cuiping. S; Yanping.S.(2023) Enhancing academic writing skills and motivation:

assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted language learning for EFL students.
Available from https://www.frontiersin.org/

 Chen T. J. (2023). ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence applications speed up

scientific writing. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 86, 351–353. doi:
10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000900, PMID: [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

 Diana Oblinger, E. D. U. C. A. U. S. E., Oblinger, J., Roberts, G., McNeely, B., Windham, C.,
Hartman, J., ... & Kvavik, R. (2005). Educating the Net Generation (Vol. 272). Brockport
Bookshelf, Book.

 David James Woo is a secondary school teacher. His research interests are in artificial

intelligence, natural language processing, digital literacy, and educational technology

innovations. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4417-3686.

 Eager, B., & Brunton, R. (2023). Prompting higher education towards AI-Augmented
Teaching and Learning practice. Journal of University Teaching and Learning
Practice, 20(5). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.5.02

 Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2007). Critical thinking.

 Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. Oxford University Press.

 Flower and Hayes,(1980). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing.p.3.

https://www.researchgate.net/

 Flower, L. and J. R. Hayes, 1980a.The dynamic of composing: Making plans and juggling
constraints. In L.

 W. Gregg and E. R. Steinberg (eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp.31-50). Hillsdale, NJ:
ErlbaumGoatly, A., & Hiradhar, P. (2016). Critical reading and writing in the digital
age: An Introductory Coursebook. Routledge.

 Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. B. 1996.Theory and practice of writing. London: Longman.

 Guo, Y., & Lee, D. (2023). Leveraging ChatGPT for enhancing critical thinking skills.
Journal of Chemical Education, 100(12), 4876–4883.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00505

70
 Harunasari, S. Y. (2023). Examining the effectiveness of AI-integrated approach in
EFL Writing: A case of ChatGPT. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and
Technologies, 39(2), 357. https://doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v39.2.5516

 Han, J., Yoo, H., Kim, Y., Myung, J., Kim, M., Lim, H. B., Kim, J., Lee, T. Y., Hong,
H., Ahn, S., & Oh, A. (2023). RECIPE: How to Integrate ChatGPT into EFL Writing
Education. CCS Concepts. https://doi.org/10.1145/3573051.3596200

 Holstein, K., McLaren, B. M., & Aleven, V. (2017, March). Intelligent tutors as
teachers' aides: exploring teacher needs for real-time analytics in blended classrooms.
In Proceedings of the seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge
Conference (pp. 257-266).

 Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (2016). Identifying the organization of writing processes.
In Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Routledge.

 Harword ,P.G.,& Asal,V.(2009).Educating the First Digital Generation.New York:

Rowman & Littlefield Education.

 Halimah, A. M. 2001. Rhetorical duality and Arabic-speaking leaders.English for

Specific Purposes,20 (2)111-139

 Ingram, B. & C. King, 1988.From Writing to Composition: An Introductory

Composition Course for Students of English. C.U.P

 Kennedy, M., Fisher, M. B., & Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: Literature
review and needed research. Educational values and cognitive instruction:
Implications for reform, 2, 11-40.

 Kazazoğlu, S. (2022). Critical reading and writing in the 21st century.

 Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Gray, K., Waycott, J., Judd, T., ... & Chang,
R. (2009).

 Educating theNet Generation: Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review.

Pearson's Research Reports, 6(1), 40-41.A Handbook of Findings for Practice and
Policy. University of Melbourne Press.

 Kraples, A. 1990.An overview of second language writing process studies research. In

B. Kroll (ed.) Second language writing. pp. 37-56

71
 Krashen, S. 1984.Writing: Research, theory, and applications. Pergamon Institute of
English, Oxford.

 Krashen, S. 1992.Fundamentals of Language Education. Torrence: Laredo.

 Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2023). Pre-train, prompt, and
predict: A systematic survey of prompting methods in natural language processing. ACM
Computing Surveys, 55(9), 1-35.

 Luckin, R. (2018). Machine Learning and Human Intelligence: The future of

education for the 21st century. UCL IOE Press. UCL Institute of Education,
University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AL.

 Leki,1.1990.Coaching from the Margins: Issues in Written Response.In B. Kroll, (ed.).

Second Language Writing C.U.P.

 Lee I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts.

Singapore: Springer Singapore[Google Scholar]

 Liu G. Z., Rahimi M., Fathi J. (2022). Flipping writing metacognitive strategies and
writing skills in English as a foreign language collaborative writing context: a mixed-

methods study.[Google Scholar]

 Liu Z. (2021). Sociological perspectives on artificial intelligence: a typological

reading. Social. Compass 15:e1Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., &
Neubig, G. (2021). Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting
Methods in Natural Language Processing (arXiv:2107.13586). arXiv.
http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.135862851. doi: 10.1111/soc4.12851.

 Marzuki, Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, D., & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of
AI writing tools on the content and organization of students’ writing: EFL teachers’
perspective. Cogent Education, 10(2).
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2023.2236469

 Mainzer, K., & Mainzer, K. (2020). A Short History of the AI. Artificial intelligence
do machines take over? 7-13.

 Manju, A., & Nigam, M. J. (2014). Applications of quantum inspired computational

intelligence: a survey. Artificial Intelligence Review, 42, 79-156.

72
 Mohammed H. Masoud and Bedoor Sharaf Al- Deen2, (2021) Analyzing the Use of
Punctuation, Capitalization, and Spelling Errors: A Case Study of Yemeni University EFL
Learner at Sana'a University Mohammed

 Montague, N. 1995.The process-oriented approach to teaching writing to second

language learners.

 National Centre for Education Statistics.1996.Can Students benefit from the process of
Writing? Availablle from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs96/web/96845.asp.

 Nunan, D. 1995. Closing the gap between learning and instruction. TESOL Quarterly.

 Proekt, Y., Kosheleva, A., Lugovaya, V., & Khoroshikh, V. (2017). Developing social competence of
preschoolers in the digital era: Gender dimensions. In Digital Transformation and Global Society:
Second International Conference, DTGS 2017, St. Petersburg, Russia, June 21–23, 2017, Revised
Selected Papers 2 (pp. 87-101). Springer International Publishing.

 Plebe, A., & Perconti, P. (2022). The future of the artificial mind. CRC Press.

 Pirtošek, Z. (2017). Možgani, nevrotehnologija in etika. Kazalo, 91.

 Pinar Saygin, A., Cicekli, I., & Akman, V. (2000). Turing test: 50 years later. Minds and
Machines, 10(4), 463-518.

 Raimes, A. 1991.Out of the woods: emerging traditions in the teaching of writing.

TESOLQuarterly.

 Richard, J. & T. Rodgers. 1993.Approaches and Methods in LanguageTeaching: A

Description and Analysis, C.U.P.
Roger, K., Bunting. (1999). Precise Writing for a Precise Science. Journal of Chemical
Education, 10.1021/ED076P1407

 Shabbir, J., & Anwer, T. (2018). Artificial intelligence and its role in the near future. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1804.01396.

 Stobaugh, R. (2013). Assessing critical thinking in middle and high schools: Meeting the
Common Core. Routledge.

 Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing
classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, 100752.

 Stapleton, P. (2002). Critical thinking in Japanese L2 writing: Rethinking tired constructs. Elt
journal, 56(3), 250-257.

73
 Salvagno M., Taccone F. S., Gerli A. G. (2023). Can artificial intelligence help with
scientific writing? Crit. Care 27:75 doi: 10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2, PMID: [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar].

 Silva, T. 1990.Second language composition instruction: Development, issues, and

directions in ESL. In B.

 Kroll (ed.) Second language writing. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ting
Sun, Chuang Wang, & Stella Yun Kim, “Psychometric properties of an English
Writing Self-Efficacy scale,” Reading and Writing, September 6, 2021. 3:
SpringerLink, “Writing Skills,” SpringerLink.

 Ting Sun, Chuang Wang & Stella Yun Kim Indeed Editorial Team, “Writing Skills:
Definition, Types and How to Improve Them,” Indeed.com, updated March 25, 2023.
2

 Vassileva, J. (2008). Social learning environments: new challenges for AI in education.

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5091, 8-8.

 Verma, S., & Tomar, P. (2021). Impact of AI Technologies on Teaching, Learning,

and Research in Higher Education. IGI Global.

 Woo, D. J., Guo, K., & Susanto, H. (2023). Cases of EFL Secondary Students’ Prompt
Engineering Pathways to Complete a Writing Task with ChatGPT. arXiv (Cornell
University). https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.31464.85762

 White, J., Fu, Q., Hays, S., Sandborn, M., Olea, C., Gilbert, H., ... & Schmidt, D. C. (2023). A
prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with chatgpt. arXiv preprint
arXiv:2302.11382.

 Walker, A., & Kettler, T. (2020). Developing critical thinking skills in high ability
adolescents: effects of a debate and argument analysis curriculum. Talent, 10(1), 21-39.luck

 Writing A High-Quality Literature Review David Phair (PhD) and Amy Murdock
(PhD) | May( 2022)

 Xia, P. (2020). Application scenario of artificial intelligence technology in higher education.

In International Conference on Applications and Techniques in Cyber Intelligence ATCI
2019: Applications and Techniques in Cyber Intelligence 7 (pp. 221-226). Springer
International Publishing.https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v22n02a02

74
 Yan D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in an L2 writing practicum: an
exploratory investigation. Educ. Inf. Technol. 28, 13943–13967. doi: 10.1007/s10639-
023-11742-4.

 Zhao X. (2022). Leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) technology for English writing:
introducing Wordtune as a digital writing assistant for EFL writers. RELC J.
89:10940. doi:10.1177/00336882221094089 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar].

75
Appendices
 Appendix A
Pre-Test T1 Pre-Test T2 Post-Test T1 Post-
Observational items Test
T2
Excited to
Their write
attitude Bored of
towards writing
writing Tired of
writing
Excited to use
it
Their Already
attitude familiar with it
towards (showing a
ChatGPT neutral
attitude)
Not interested
in it
Their Having an easy
interaction interaction
with with it
ChatGPT Facing
difficulties
while
interacting
with it
Their Writing in a
performanc short time
e Span Writing in a
long time
An average
writing time
Challenges Asking for
faced in vocabulary
both stages Long time
writing
Technical
problems (No
Net,
smartphones...)
Their final Showing
attitude hesitation
towards Showing
their writing confidence

77
Appendix B
Teachers: Zeddek Elalia / Belkacem Yousra Kamar Ezamane
School: Marah Abdelkader secondary school
Class: Third year students (Math class and foreign languages class)
Unit: Ethics in Business
Lesson: writing
Topic (1): Nepotism (part 2)
Time (2hours and 30 minutes)
Materials Needed: The session ‘s objectives:

 Promoting critical thinking of the students

while synthesizing their written productions
A whiteboard
related to nepotism with the assistance of
Smartphones
ChatGPT)
ChatGPT
 Producing a synthetic written composition
about nepotism

Time Stages Procedures

(1 hour and 30 First part At first, the teachers ensure that the students set up
minutes) ChatGPT account online so that they can input their
first time writing related to nepotism to it.
Next, after they input their first time writing related to
nepotism to ChatGPT, they are instructed to prompt
ChatGPT to spot their mistakes in their drafts. After
that, they will be asked to prompt ChatGPT to edit
their original drafts without those mistakes so that they
learn from them. At last, they prompt ChatGPT to
provide them with another paragraph covering the
same targeted points to synthesize some ideas in their
final writings after analysing and evaluating the
feedback suggested by ChatGPT.
(1 hour) Second part
After the students are provide with new ideas
suggested by ChatGPT and an edited version of their
drafts without mistakes, they are asked to synthesize
their final writings related to nepotism but following
the feedback they get from ChatGPT.

78
Appendix C
Teachers: Zeddek Elalia / Belkacem Yousra Kamar Ezamane
School: Marah Abdelkader secondary school
Class: Third year students (Math class and foreign languages class)
unit: Ethics in Business
Lesson: writing
Topic (1): Nepotism (part 2)
Time (2hours and 30 minutes)

Materials Needed: The session ‘s objectives:

 Promoting critical thinking of the

students while synthesizing their
A whiteboard
written productions related to nepotism
Smartphones
with the assistance of ChatGPT)
ChatGPT
 Producing a synthetic written
composition about nepotism

Time Stages Procedures

(1 hour and 30 First part

minutes) At first, the teachers ensure that the students set up
ChatGPT account online so that they can input their first
time writing related to nepotism to it.
Next, after they input their first time writing related to
nepotism to ChatGPT, they are instructed to prompt
ChatGPT to spot their mistakes in their drafts .After
that, they will be asked to prompt ChatGPT to edit their
original drafts without those mistakes so that they learn
from them .At last, they prompt ChatGPT to provide
them with another paragraph covering the same
targeted points to synthesize some ideas in their final
writings after analysing and evaluating the feedback
suggested by ChatGPT.
(1 hour) Second part
After the students are provide with new ideas
suggested by ChatGPT and an edited version of their
drafts without mistakes, they are asked to synthesize
their final writings related to nepotism but following the
feedback they get from ChatGPT.

79
 Appendix D
Teachers: Zeddek Elalia / Belkacem Yousra Kamar Ezamane
School: Marah Abdelkader secondary school
Class: Third year students (Math class and foreign languages class)
unit: Ethics in Business
Lesson: writing
Topic smuggling (part 1)
Time (3 hours)

Materials Needed: The session ‘s objectives:

 Promoting critical thinking of the

students while brainstorming idea
A whiteboard related to smuggling
 Producing a written composition about
smuggling

Time Stages Procedures

(45 minutes) First part the students are asked to brainstorm the causes,
negative impact of smuggling, suggesting solutions to
eliminate (human trafficking).
Causes:
1.joblessness of the smuggler himself and the ones
who want to migrate.
2. A strong need for illegal migration (because of
corruption and low quality of life in a country)
Consequences:
1.loss of human capitals
2.Death of some illegals
3.Illigals may face difficulties while being caught by
coast guards
4. Smuggling nurtures illegal migration
How to eradicate it:
1.That government should provide the youth with
jobs to stop joblessness push individuals to migrate
illegally.
Second part
(45 minutes) 2.Strict laws should be enacted against smugglers.
3.The coast guards should also be skilful enough to
detect any illegal movements crossing the borders.
After the students brainstorm the targeted ideas
related to smuggling, they start drafting their
works .Once the work is ready , they submit it .

80
 Appendix E
Teachers: Zeddek Elalia / Belkacem Yousra Kamar Ezamane
School: Marah Abdelkader secondary school
Class: Third year students (Math class and foreign languages class)
unit: Ethics in Business
Lesson: writing
Topic smuggling (part 2)
Time:(1hour and 30 minutes)

Materials Needed: The session objectives:

 Promoting critical thinking of the student

A whiteboard while brainstorming idea related to
Smartphones smuggling
ChatGPT  Producing a synthetic written
composition about smuggling

Stages Procedures
Time

(45 minutes) First part

At first, the students are asked to input their drafts
to ChatGPT asking it to:

1/spot their mistakes one by one.

2/Edit their draft version (with correction)
3/suggest another paragraph containing new ideas
so that they synthesize them in their final drafts.

(45 minutes) Second part

Later on, after, analysing and evaluating ChatGPT
feedback and suggestions, they are asked to
synthesize their final works.

81
 Appendix F
Criteria

Not at all

extent
small
To a
extent
large
To a
extent
large
very
To a
Section A: critical thinking skills
To what extent did you understand the topic you
wrote about?
Have you shown a strong understanding of the topic
in your draft?
Have you broken down the topic's ideas into simple
parts before writing your draft?
Have you thought of synonyms for the keywords
presented in the topic's instructions?
Does your draft effectively bring together
information from various sources?
Did you deconstruct the topic's ideas by reconstruct
them again for a final effective production?
To what extent did you blend /combine the topic's
ideas with your own ideas while writing?
Did you carefully assess /evaluate the content you
wrote in your draft?
To what extent did you find the topic informative?
Section B: Writing skills
Is your use of grammar correct in your draft?
Is your use of punctuation correct in your draft?
Is your use of spelling correct in your draft?
To what extent is your draft brief and straight to the
point?
Have you minimized unnecessary words, phrases,
and sentences in your draft?
Is the writing in your draft clear and
understandable?
Does your draft present ideas in a logically
connected and well-organized manner
To what extent were your sentences structurally
connected?
After revising, did you make any adjustments to
enhance the overall quality of your draft?

82
 Appendix G
Criteria

all
Not at
extent
small
To a
extent
large
To a
large
very
To a
Section A: critical thinking skills with the use of
ChatGPT
Have you understood the topic?
Does your writing show your understanding of the
topic?
Did you analyze changes made, identifying areas of
improvement?
Have you broken down the content provided by
ChatGPT and then put it back together to create your
final work?
To what extent Does the synthesized version
successfully combine strengths from both sources
(draft version and edited version)?
Does your synthesized version effectively combine
information from various sources?
To what extent did you evaluate the content in your
synthesized version?
Did you carefully assess ideas in your final
synthesized version?
Section B: Writing skills with the use of ChatGPT
To what extent is your grammar correct in the
synthesized version?
Is your punctuation correct in the synthesized
version?
Are the words correctly spelled in your synthesized
version?
Is the writing in the synthesized version clear and
understandable?
To what extent is the synthesized version brief and
straight to the point?
Have you minimized unnecessary words, phrases,
and sentences in your synthesized version
Is your synthesized version logically organized and
well-connected?
To what extent were your sentences structurally
connected?
After revising, did you make any changes to improve
the overall quality of the synthesized version?

83
 Appendix H
A questionnaire related to the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL writing education to improve
the critical thinking and writing skills.
1. Section A: Demographic questions
1. Age *Check all that apply.
16
17
18
More
2. Gender *Mark only one oval.
Female
Male

3. Stream *
Mark only one oval.
Math Class
Technical Math Class
Experimental Sciences Class
Foreign Languages Class
Literature and Philosophy Class
4. Your English level *
Mark only one oval.
Low
Good
Very good
Excellent

2. Section B: Critical thinking Skills

5. 1.To what extent do you show a good understanding of any given topic you write
about?

Mark only one oval.

Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent

6. 2.To what extent is your understanding demonstrated in your writing? *

Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
7. 3.To what extent do you break down any topic ideas while writing? *
Mark only one oval.

84
 Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
8. 4.To what extent do you think of synonyms to replace the key words of the
writing question?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
9. 5.To what extent do you take information from different sources while writing
your written productions?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
10. 6.To what extent do you combine the ideas of the topic with your own ideas while
writing?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
11. 7.To what extent do you usually deconstruct the topic ideas and construct them
again for your final writing?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
12. 8. To what extent do you usually evaluate the ideas in your written expression? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
13. 9. Do you generally evaluate the topics of your written expression? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
3. Section C: ChatGPT

85
 14. 10. Have you ever used any Artificial intelligence tools to help you in your
writing?
Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
15. 11. Have you heard about ChatGPT? *
Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
16. 12. Have you used ChatGPT? *
Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
13. What do you think of it ( ChatGPT)?
Mark only one oval.
It is helpful
It is troubling
It is helpful only if it is smartly used
17. 14. Which task did you use ChatGPT for? *
Mark only one oval.
English
Written tasks
Math quizzes
General research
Translating words
Explaining difficult points(lessons) for you
Suggesting for you lists of books or websites to study from
Other:
4. Section D: Writing skills
18. 15.Do you enjoy the writing class? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
16.What are the challenges you usually face while writing? *
Mark only one oval.
Lack of vocabulary
Lack of ideas
Translation
Punctuation
Structuring written response
Spelling
Other:
19. 17. To what extent is your writing (sentences) well connected (cohesion) ? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
86
 To a large extent
To a very large extent
20. 18.To what extent are your ideas written in a connected manner (coherence)? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
to a very large extent
21. 19. To what extent do you minimize unnecessary words in your draft (precision)?
Mark only one oval.
not at all To a small extent TO a large extent TO a very
large extent
22. 20. Do you use brief ideas in your writing without details (concision)? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
23. 21. To what extent is the content of your writing clear? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
24. 22. Is the punctuation in your writing correct? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
23.To what extent do you use correct grammar in your writing? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
25. 24.Are your words spelt correctly in your writing? *
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
26. 25.How would you rate your writing in a scale out of 10? *
Mark only one oval.
0
1-4
5
6-9
10
27. 26. Does the integration of ChatGPT in writing help you develop your critical
thinking skills (mentioned before)?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
28. 27.Does the integration of ChatGPT in writing help you develop your writing
skills?
Mark only one oval.

87
 Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
29. 28.Woud you like to have a writing class with the use of ChatGPT?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent
30. 29. How likely would you encourage your friends to use ChatGPT in their writing?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all To a small extent To a large extent To a very
large extent

88
 Appendix I
A questionnaire prevailing to the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL writing education to
enhance the student's critical thinking and writing skills.
A. Section A: Teachers' profile
1. Gender *Mark only one oval.
Female
Male
2. How long have you been teaching English for? Mark only one oval.
1 - 5 years
6 - 10 years
10 - 15 years
15 - 20 years
Above 20 years
3. Where do you teach? (mention the region & the name of the lycée you work at)
2.Section B: Critical thinking skills
4. 1.To what extent do your students show their understanding of any given
topic during the written expression? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
5. 2.To what extent is the understanding of your students demonstrated in
their writings? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
6. 3.To what extent do your students analyze (making links & breaking down
the given topic's ideas into pieces) during the written expression? Mark only
one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent

7. 4.To what extent do your students think of synonyms to the topic's

instruction keywords? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent

8. 5.To what extent do your students deconstruct the topic's ideas by

reconstructing them again to form their final written production? Mark only one
oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
9. 6.To what extent do your pupils synthesize (create their own point of view as
89
 a result of combining different perspectives about a given topic while
writing? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
submitting it? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To some extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
11. 8.Do your students usually comment on the suggested topics for them related
to the written production? (commenting To which extent they find a given
topic boring or interestingly informative). Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
3.Section C: ChatGPT
12. 9.Have you heard about ChatGPT? Mark only one oval.
Yes
No
13. 10. What are your expectations about ChatGPT? Mark only one oval.
It is helpful
It is troubling
It can be helpful only if it is responsibly used
14. 11. Have you used ChatGPT
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
15. 12. What did you use ChatGPT for? Mark only one oval.
Lesson planning
General research
Designing instructional material
Suggesting Educational games for your teaching
Other:
16. 13. Would you allow your students to use ChatGPT in the writing
task responsibly? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent?
4.Section D: writing skills
17. 14, Do you think the students find your writing class enjoyable?
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
18. 15. What are the challenges you believe are mostly impeding your students

90
 from performing their writing task? Mark only one oval.
Vocabulary
Writer's block
Translation
Grammar
Spelling
Punctuation
Structuring written responses
Other:
19. 16. Is your students' writing coherent? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
20. 17. Is your students' writing cohesive? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
21. 18.To what extent does your students' writing show clarity? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To large extent
To a very large extent
22. 19.To what extent is the writing of your students concise? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent?
To a very large extent
23. 20.To what extent is the writing of your students precise? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
24. 21. To what extent does your students’ writing reflect a correct use of grammar?
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
25. 22.To what extent does the writing of your students reflect a correct use
of punctuation? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
26. 23.To what extent does the problem of misspelling is present in your
students' writing? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent

91
 To a very large extent
27. 24. How would you rate the writings of your learners in a scale out of ten? Mark
only one oval.
0
1-4
5
6-9
10
28. 25. Do you think your students would like to use ChatGPT in the writing class?
Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
29. 26.Would you trust the information, suggestions and answers provided
by ChatGPT? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
30. 27. Do you think the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL education can
enhance the previously mentioned critical thinking skills (understanding,
analyzing, evaluation, and synthesis) of students while writing? Mark only
one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
Other:
31. 28. Do you think the incorporation of ChatGPT in EFL education can enhance
the writing skill (cohesion, coherence, clarity and the sound use of Mechanic)
of students? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent
Other:
32. 29. How likely would you recommend the use of ChatGPT in the writing class
in EFL education? Mark only one oval.
Not at all
To a small extent
To a large extent
To a very large extent

92