Generative AI in University EFL Writing: Tensions among Efficiency, Language Proficiency, and Learner Agency
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70088/z2gy0q63Keywords:
generative artificial intelligence, university EFL writing, writing efficiency, language proficiency, learner agency, human-AI collaborationAbstract
The rapid diffusion of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is reshaping university-level English writing by lowering the linguistic and cognitive costs of text production. Large language models can generate and revise prose, suggest vocabulary, explain grammatical problems, reorganize paragraphs, and provide immediate feedback. These affordances can improve writing efficiency and the surface quality of students' texts, particularly when learners face linguistic constraints or limited access to individualized feedback. Yet the educational value of GenAI cannot be reduced to technological empowerment. When AI performs ideation, language production, organization, and revision on behalf of learners, opportunities for language output and cognitive engagement may be reduced. This paper examines the resulting tension among writing efficiency, language proficiency, and learner agency through the lenses of second language acquisition, cognitive load, constructivist learning, and self-regulated learning. It argues that the central issue is not whether students use AI, but how responsibility for thinking and decision-making is distributed between students and AI. The paper proposes a conceptual model in which the depth of AI involvement interacts with learner agency to shape learning outcomes. The most productive condition is a collaborative development zone in which students retain ownership of goals, arguments, and final judgments while using AI as a linguistic and cognitive scaffold. The paper further argues for process-based assessment, critical AI literacy, staged AI access, and a redefinition of EFL writing competence. In an AI-mediated environment, effective writing competence extends beyond language generation to include evaluation, strategic collaboration, and meaning reconstruction.References
A. Tlili, B. Shehata, M. A. Adarkwah, A. Bozkurt, D. T. Hickey, R. Huang, and B. Agyemang, “What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education,” Smart Learning Environments, vol. 10, p. 15, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x.
Y. Zhang, “Research on practical approaches to generative artificial intelligence in college English writing instruction,” Journal of Taiyuan Urban Vocational College, no. 7, pp. 102–104, 2026, doi: 10.16227/j.cnki.tycs.2026.0394.
A. Zhou, “An exploration of a college EFL writing instruction model integrating generative artificial intelligence with the O-AMAS teaching model,” Journal of Higher Education, vol. 11, no. 36, pp. 1–4, 2025, doi: 10.19980/j.CN23-1593/G4.2025.36.001.
H. Pan and B. Niu, “ChatGPT-assisted writing feedback for foreign language teachers: An exploratory case study,” Journal of Beijing International Studies University, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 74–90, 137, 2026.
C. Xu, “A study of foreign language learners’ human–AI collaborative writing engagement based on generative artificial intelligence,” Foreign Languages and Foreign Language Teaching, no. 2, pp. 61–73, 147, 2025, doi: 10.13458/j.cnki.flatt.005096.
Y. Wang, “Construction of an artificial intelligence feedback model for English writing instruction,” Journal of Hubei Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 120–127, 2025.
J. Wei and Z. Nie, “Exploring pathways for generative artificial intelligence to empower English learning from the perspective of intersubjectivity,” Journal of Tonghua Normal University, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 125–131, 2025, doi: 10.13877/j.cnki.cn22-1284.2025.05.18.
L. Fang and Y. Tang, “An exploration of the deconstruction and reconstruction of human subjectivity in the context of artificial intelligence development,” Journal of Qinghai Normal University (Social Sciences), vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 86–93, 2025, doi: 10.16229/j.cnki.issn1000-5102.20250801.004.
O. Zawacki-Richter, V. I. Marín, M. Bond, and F. Gouverneur, “Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—Where are the educators?,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, p. 39, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0.
E. M. Bender, T. Gebru, A. McMillan-Major, and S. Shmitchell, “On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?,” in Proc. 2021 ACM Conf. Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 2021, pp. 610–623, doi: 10.1145/3442188.3445922.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Zihui Jiang, Zhao Ke (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.









