Keywords
L2 writing feedback
Co-agency
EFL instructors
How to Cite
Abstract
Generative AI, especially ChatGPT, is increasingly used for writing feedback in higher education EFL classrooms. Although previous studies have noted its immediacy and comprehensiveness, concerns about accuracy and alignment have also been raised. Existing studies often emphasize technological capability over how AI feedback is managed in instruction. This study examined how ChatGPT can be positioned as a feedback agent in EFL writing and how co-agency is negotiated within the network of teachers, students, and ChatGPT. Thematic analysis was conducted on written interviews of 11 EFL teachers. The findings revealed that ChatGPT was not positioned as an author in its own right. Instead, it was described as a conditional co-agent. ChatGPT is most useful when integrated into teacher-led practice and aligned with task criteria. Because co-agency develops through classroom routines, whether ChatGPT supports writing or creates friction depends on how instructors position and regulate its use.
References
Baidoo-anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023). Education in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): Understanding the Potential Benefits of ChatGPT in Promoting Teaching and Learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52– 62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
Bao, Y., & Li, B. (2023). A preliminary study on graduate student instructors’ exploration, perception, and use of ChatGPT. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 13(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.332873
Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage.
Cengiz, B. C., Bilki, Z., Ataş, A. H., & Celik, B. (2025). Exploring second language writers’ engagement with ChatGPT feedback: Revision behaviors and perceptions. System, 134, Article 103837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103837
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Sage.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gaggioli, A., Casaburi, G., Ercolani, L., Collovà, F., Torre, P., & Davide, F. (2025). Assessing the reliability and validity of large language models for automated assessment of student essays in higher education. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.02442
Guo, K., & Wang, D. (2024). To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29(7), 8435–8463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0
Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hossain, M. K., & Al Younus, M. A. (2025). Teachers' perspectives on integrating ChatGPT into EFL writing instruction. TESOL Communications, 41, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.58304/tc.20250103
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. MIT Press.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Karagoz, I. (2025). AI-generated feedback in English writing instruction for language learners: A systematic review. The Reading Matrix, 25(1), 51–67.
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., . . . Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10- 3924-9
Lee, I. (2020). Utility of focused/comprehensive written corrective feedback research for authentic L2 writing classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 49, 100734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100734
Li, M. (2024). Leveraging ChatGPT for Second Language Writing Feedback and Assessment. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 14(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.360382
Li, S. (2025). Generative AI and second language writing. Digital Studies in Language and Literature, 2(1), 122–152. https://doi.org/10.1515/dsll-2025-0007
Li, Z., Link, S., & Hegelheimer, V. (2015). Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.10.004
Mi, Y., Rong, M., & Chen, X. W. (2025). Exploring the affordances and challenges of GenAI feedback in L2 writing instruction: A comparative analysis with peer feedback. ECNU Review of Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311241310883
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder Reliability in Qualitative Research: Debates and Practical Guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
Ranalli, J., Link, S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2016). Automated writing evaluation for formative assessment of second language writing: Investigating accuracy and usefulness of feedback as part of argument-based validation. Educational Psychology, 37(1), 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1136407
Ratislavová, K., & Ratislav, J. (2014). Asynchronous email interview as a qualitative research method in the humanities. Human Affairs, 24(4), 452–460. https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-014-0240-y
Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning: Vol. 2 (pp. 593–610). Routledge.
Steiss, J., Tate, T., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., Warschauer, M., & Olson, C. B. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, Article 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894
Teng, M. F. (2024). “ChatGPT is the companion, not enemies”: EFL learners’ perceptions and experiences in using ChatGPT for feedback in writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100270
Zhan, Y., & Yan, Z. (2025). Students’ engagement with ChatGPT feedback: Implications for student feedback literacy in the context of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2471821
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.