1

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM

This chapter includes the background of the study, the statement of the

problem, the study's significance, and the study's scope and delimitations.

This chapter also explored to emphasize the potential contributions to the

field.

Background of the Study

Writing is a fundamental skill that plays a vital role in effective

communication and expression of ideas. It is a valuable literacy activity that

has been observed to demonstrate various offers like cognitive, physiological,

and emotional benefits, empowering individuals to achieve personal,

academic, and professional goals.

Regular writing practice has been shown to enhance cognitive functions

such as focus, planning, organization, and self-reflection, leading to improved

cognitive performance. Additionally, writing is associated with physiological

benefits, including reduced stress and anxiety, better mood, and enhanced

emotional regulation (Carr, 2016; Zapata & Gallardo, 2017).

In academic and professional settings, writing is indispensable for tasks

like journaling, note-taking, and completing assignments. In workplaces,

effective writing plays a vital role in producing clear communications, detailed

reports, and professional documentation. This signifies that writing is an

 2

essential skill that every individual should possess as having strong writing

skills is highly beneficial for personal, and academic pursuits, and for securing

employment. Thus, developing academic writing skills is crucial for all

students, as it equips them with the ability to communicate effectively and

efficiently in their chosen profession.

Academic writing is a unique form of evaluation that requires an

individual to exhibit their knowledge and expertise in specific disciplinary skills

of thinking, interpreting, and presenting (Ahmad et., 2019). The goal is to

convey ideas in a clear, concise, logical, and convincing manner. In academia,

there are numerous types of academic writing, each with its distinct purpose.

These include book reviews, argumentative essays, literature reviews, theses,

journals, dissertations, and numerous other text types (Tran, 2024). Thus,

academic writing is far from simple and rather requires a complex process that

involves synthesizing various perspectives, integrating diverse ideas, and

extending theory. This requires strong writing skills, a unique perspective, and

careful attention to accuracy, tone, and audience (Jones, 2023).

Unlike everyday writing, academic writing is usually more formal,

complex, abstract, objective, and well-organized (Tran, 2024). To write

successfully in an academic context, one must master several key aspects

that form the basis of good academic writing (Al Badi, 2015). Therefore,

producing academic writing papers is extremely challenging for students.

 3

According to Ratnawati et al. (2018), learners often struggle with

producing proficient academic writing, citing issues related to language

structure, coherence, and cohesion as common challenges. This limitation

was also explored by Gorospe et al., (2022), who noted that students not only

face challenges generating and organizing ideas but also translating them into

well-written text. Toba, Noor, and Sanu (2019) further support this statement,

pointing out that students frequently encounter problems with grammar and

appropriate vocabulary when writing academically. As a result, many students

have turned to artificial intelligence (AI) as a tool for resolving these

challenges (Herzberg, 2020; Fithriani & Kurniati et al., 2022; Khusniyah et al.,

2023; Marzuki et al., 2023).

Artificial intelligence, commonly abbreviated as AI, comprises computer

systems capable of performing tasks that traditionally require human

intelligence. AI is essentially a blend of technologies that enable machines to

simulate cognitive functions associated with the human mind, such as learning

and problem-solving (Malik et al., 2023).

In the context of language education, AI is responsible for the development of

intelligent tutoring systems, which is a significant advancement in the field

(Chen et al., 2020; Cotton et al., 2023; Ali, 2020). By making use of AI tools,

they can meticulously monitor student performance and provide them with

precise feedback, thereby facilitating a streamlined and effective language

acquisition process (Song & Song, 2023). In addition, AI has also played a

critical role in the development of language learning chatbots and virtual

 4

conversational partners, which are changing the way learners practice and

improve their language proficiency (Malik et al., 2023).

In recent years, AI-powered tools like QuillBot, Grammarly, and

ChatGPT have become essential assets for enhancing the efficiency,

accuracy, and overall quality of English academic writing (Ghafar, 2023).

Comparative analyses of QuillBott and Grammarly highlight their unique

features and functionalities in supporting writing tasks (Yan, 2023) while

ChatGPT has also emerged as one of the most commonly used AI tools for

assessing students' academic papers due to its ability to enhance user

satisfaction, writing quality, and the overall writing process (Ghafar, 2023).

Numerous studies have shown the effectiveness of AI tools, including

QuillBott, Grammarly, and ChatGPT, in assessing students' academic writing.

However, Iskender (2023) provided a critical perspective, talking about

this matter and saying that an overreliance on these tools could potentially

undermine students' critical thinking skills. Additionally, the influence of AI

writing tools on creativity has been a subject of debate. Some educators have

expressed concerns that students may rely too heavily on language

enhancement tools but also for overall idea generation. This, in turn, could

potentially hinder their ability to think creatively and produce original work

(Johanke et al., 2023). As the use of AI in academic writing continues to

evolve, according to Marzuki et al. (2023), it is important to understand its

effects on users.
 5

In this study, the researchers aimed to explore the respondents'

perceptions of artificial intelligence as a writing tool and its effect on the

academic writing performance of Pre-service English teachers at Pangasinan

State University. The purpose of this study is to determine whether these AI

tools have a positive or negative effect on students' academic writing

performance. Additionally, the findings of this study were used to raise

awareness about the potential drawbacks of AI and highlight its advantageous

features based on the data gathered from the respondents.

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to explore the perception of the pre-service English

teachers on the use of artificial intelligence as writing tools at Pangasinan

State University Alaminos City Campus. Specifically, this study seeks to

answer the following problems:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents at Pangasinan

State University, Alaminos City Campus in terms of the following:

a. age;

b. sex;

c. year level;

d. frequency of using artificial intelligence tools in writing

technology;
 6

e. subject considered interesting; and

f. commonly used artificial intelligence tools;

2. What is the level of performance of the respondents in their writing

activities?

3. What are the reasons of the respondents towards the use of artificial

intelligence tools?

4. What are the respondents’ perceptions toward the use of artificial

intelligence tools?

5. Is there a significant relationship between the demographic profile of

the pre-service English Teachers and their reasons toward the use of

artificial intelligence tools?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the demographic profile

and the perceptions of the respondents towards the use of artificial

intelligence tools?

7. Is there a significant relationship between the level of performance of

the respondents and their reasons toward the use of artificial

intelligence tools?

8. Is there a significant relationship between the level of performance of

the respondents and their perception towards the use of artificial

intelligence tools?
 7

Research Hypotheses

The study tested the following hypotheses at the .05 level of the significance:

1. There is no significant relationship between the demographic profile

of the students and the reasons of the respondents toward the use of

artificial intelligence tools.

2. There is no significant relationship between the demographic profile

of the respondents and their perceptions towards the use of artificial

intelligence tools.

3. There is no significant relationship between the level of performance

of the respondents and their reasons towards the use of artificial tools.

4. There is no significant relationship between the level of performance

and the perception of the respondents towards the use of Artificial

Intelligence tools.

Significance of the Study

This research study was conducted in the belief that the results would

be of great help to the following people:

For students. This study will offer valuable insights to both

respondents and student readers regarding their perceptions of using AI tools

to enhance their writing skills. It highlights the potential benefits and

 8

drawbacks that may arise from utilizing these tools. In particular, this research

is highly relevant to students, as it provides a balanced view on the role of AI

in academic writing.

For teachers. This research will be useful to teachers who teach

writing courses as it provides them with further information about the timely

usage of Artificial Intelligence. Specifically, this study will help the teachers be

aware of the potential benefits and drawbacks of using AI tools so they can

understand the possible reasons why students’ behavior towards writing has

changed.

For future researchers. This research will be an addition to existing

knowledge and a useful reference for anyone planning to study the perception

of these AI tools on the writing performance of students.

For IT Developers. This study can be used by the IT developers as a

basis for the development of AI tools that are user-friendly to students.

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

This study focused on the 120 students using stratified random

sampling under the program of Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in

English (BSE English) at Pangasinan State University, Alaminos City Campus

School, of academic year 2023-2024, second semester. Three AI tools were

included in this research, it includes QuillBot, Grammarly, and ChatGPT. No

 9

other applications were included in this research to avoid misleading

information.

The study was conducted over a predetermined period, and after that,

the perception of using AI tools on writing skills were assessed. The findings

and conclusions of this study was limited to the group of respondents and the

academic context of Pangasinan State University. Additionally, the study may

not account for all the long-term outcome of using AI tools beyond the study’s

duration.

Definition of Terms

Academic writing skills. Academic writing skills, according to Scribbr

(n.d.), follow a specialized writing process with precise material and

organization in academia. Writing an essay, school news, or even research

papers are examples.

Artificial Intelligence (AI). Artificial intelligence, according to

Laskowski (n.d.), is the imitation of human intellectual processes by machines,

particularly computer systems. Expert systems, natural language processing,

speech recognition, and machine vision are some of the specific uses of AI.

Artificial Intelligence is the tool referring to QuillBot, Grammarly, and ChatGPT.

QuillBot. It is a paraphrasing and summarizing tool that helps millions

of students and professionals cut their writing time by more than half using
 10

state-of-the-art AI to rewrite any sentence, paragraph, or article. It is the

Artificial Intelligence used in this research to see the difference between the

output of students with and without the intervention of QuillBot.

Grammarly. Grammarly is a digital writing tool that provides grammar

and spell checking, plagiarism detection services, and suggestions about

writing clarity, concision, vocabulary, style, and tone. It is one of the variables

used in this research.

ChatGPT. The "Chat" in ChatGPT indicates its suitability for

conversational interactions. This model is trained on diverse internet text and

can generate human-like responses to prompts. It has been designed to

understand context, provide coherent and contextually relevant replies, and

handle a wide range of natural language queries.

Perception. It explores the respondents' insights regarding the use of

artificial intelligence (AI) tools in their writing activities, focusing on their

motivations for incorporating these technologies. It examines whether

respondents perceive AI as a valuable resource that enhances their writing

process by providing support, improving clarity, and ensuring accuracy.

Additionally, offering a deeper understanding of the respondents' perspectives

and the role AI plays in their activities.

Writing tool. Three AI tools are prominently featured: QuillBot,

Grammarly, and ChatGPT. These tools are widely used by the respondents,

serving as valuable aids in their writing activities. From the respondents’

 11

perspective, they act as reliable assistants, helping them to produce high-

quality outputs by enhancing overall effectiveness in their work.

Writing performance. This refers to the respondents' level of

performance in writing activities, evaluated based on the adopted rubrics

provided by the researchers. These rubrics serve as a guide to assess and

measure the respondents' writing abilities, providing a clear and structured

evaluation of their writing activities.

 12

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents an overview of the literature of gathered

information taken from various resources, studies, research, and theses that

have significance to the research being taken. It also includes the research

paradigm that serves as the guide of the overall process to be taken to finish

this study.

Review of Related Literature

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in education has

become a significant area of research, particularly in enhancing the teaching

and learning process. Various research has shown that writing tools powered

by AI, such as Grammarly, ChatGPT, and Quillbot, are increasingly utilized to

assist learners in improving writing skills.

These Artificial Intelligence technologies have revolutionized various

facets of education by offering personalized learning experiences, automating

repetitive tasks, and facilitating skill development. In writing, AI tools provide

grammar checking, stylistic suggestions, and coherence enhancement,

 13

allowing users to refine their drafts with minimal intervention from instructors

(Gultekin, 2023). Research indicates that these tools can significantly improve

students' writing quality and confidence, particularly for those learning English

as a second language (ESL) (Tran, 2024).

The inclusion of AI writing tools in pedagogy is aligned with

constructivist learning theories, which emphasize active learner engagement

and scaffolded support (Vygotsky, 1978). Studies have shown that such tools

encourage self-directed learning, as students receive immediate feedback and

are guided through revisions (Huang, 2021). For pre-service English teachers,

AI tools present opportunities to model effective writing instruction and

integrate technology into their teaching strategies.

However, some concerns remain. Critics argue that over-reliance on AI

tools might hinder the development of critical thinking and writing proficiency,

as students may depend excessively on automated corrections without

understanding the underlying rules (Green & Walker, 2021). Therefore,

teacher education programs must emphasize the balanced use of AI tools to

complement, rather than replace, traditional writing instruction.

Teachers often hold diverse views on the adoption of technology in

classrooms, influenced by their prior experiences, digital literacy levels, and

pedagogical beliefs (Strydom et al., 2021). Research highlights a positive

correlation between pre-service teachers’ technology acceptance and their

intention to integrate it into future practices (Davis, 1989). Specifically, studies

on English educators reveal a growing recognition of AI tools as valuable aids

 14

in teaching complex writing concepts and providing individualized support

(Brown, 2022).

Despite the benefits, teachers express concerns about ethical

implications, such as plagiarism risks, academic dishonesty, and the potential

misuse of AI-generated content (Turner et al., 2020). Additionally, accessibility

and affordability of advanced AI tools pose challenges, especially in under-

resourced educational settings (Smith et al., 2021).

AI tools have been shown to significantly influence students' ability to

organize and articulate ideas effectively. Research by Campbell et al. (2022)

indicates that students using AI writing assistants demonstrate marked

improvement in the clarity and logical flow of their essays compared to those

relying solely on traditional writing instruction. This impact is particularly

notable in argumentative and expository writing, where coherence and

structure are essential.

In addition to improving technical aspects of writing, AI tools also play a

role in fostering creativity. According to Zhang and Lin (2023), these tools

provide prompts and suggestions that encourage learners to explore

innovative ideas and perspectives in their writing. For instance, features like

brainstorming assistance and thesaurus integration inspire students to expand

their vocabulary and experiment with different styles.

Another advantage of AI tools lies in their ability to support collaborative

writing. Platforms such as Google Docs integrated with AI-powered writing

 15

suggestions allow students to work collectively on projects while receiving

real-time feedback. This collaborative approach not only enhances writing

skills but also develops teamwork and communication abilities (Hernandez &

Silva, 2021).

However, effective implementation of AI tools requires careful planning

and teacher involvement. Teachers must guide students in using these tools

as aids rather than crutches, ensuring that the learning objectives remain

focused on skill acquisition and understanding (Peterson, 2022). Regular

assessments, combined with reflective writing tasks, can help students

internalize the feedback provided by AI and apply it independently.

Related Studies

Foreign

Artificial Intelligence

Based on the study conducted by Yang (2021), Artificial Intelligence

was first introduced by John McCarthy in 1956. Artificial Intelligence

characterizes a brand-new area of computer science that seeks to emulate

human behavior in machines. And today, Artificial Intelligence tools such as

QuillBot, Grammarly, and ChatGPT has already infiltrated the education

sector, specifically in language teaching and learning as tutors, discussion,

stimuli, and research tools which are a strategic and critical factor in education

development (Ghafar, 2017; Fitria, 2023; Marzuki et al., 2023).

 16

QuillBot

QuillBot, an innovative tool, has gained immense popularity in recent

years as an efficient paraphrasing application. It incorporates advanced

artificial intelligence (AI) to help users with grammar checks, summarization,

and even plagiarism detection (Williams & Davis, 2017). Founded by Rohan

Gupta, Anil Jason, and David Silin in 2017, QuillBot utilizes cutting-edge AI

technology to automatically reconstruct users' content for enhanced clarity and

precision of the intended message (Nur Fitria, 2023).

This writing tool has been widely adopted by both professionals and

students due to its remarkable ability to enhance the quality of their work.

Users find it incredibly valuable as it helps them improve their text through

editing, rewording, and other features that enable them to produce high-quality

content effortlessly. Its versatile features, including grammar checking,

plagiarism detection, and content summarization, which caters to a diverse

range of users, offering students various writing assistant (Hamid, 2023).

One of the key features that make this program popular among users is

its grammar checker. This function enables you to quickly identify any

grammar mistakes or broken sentences in your content by simply copying and

pasting it. With just a single click, you can easily correct these errors. The

program has several other user-friendly features as well.

For instance, the Summarizer is a great tool for summarizing lengthy content

or essays. Just copy and paste the material, and it will provide you with a
 17

summary of the main ideas. Additionally, to ensure the uniqueness of your

work, the program also includes a plagiarism detector that helps you locate

and remove any copied text. Quillbot's AI-powered functionality works by

learning from datasets that accumulate knowledge on grammar, spelling,

punctuation, tone, sentence structure, and readability. This enables the

program to suggest contextually relevant alternatives to users when they

disregard a specific suggestion.

The positive feedback from different users is clear in the different

research findings conducted by previous researchers. According to Chapelle

and Sauro (2017), this application has earned the trust of students, writers,

bloggers, and educators alike. This valuable tool, though powered by AI, has

particularly helped undergraduate students grappling with writing academic

papers.

According to Ratnawati et al. (2023) most users utilize these tool to deal

with the challenges they face when writing. Ratnawati et al. (2023) also

highlighted challenges faced by English language learners such as issues with

language structure, coherence, and cohesion when engaging in academic

writing. Toba et al. (2019) also conducted a study that revealed students often

struggle with grammar, generating ideas, and selecting appropriate vocabulary

when writing academic papers in English.

To mend this issue, AI-powered tools like QuillBott have been widely

adopted and proven to be beneficial. Khusniyah et al. (2023) revealed that a

 18

significant number of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students use

online paraphrasing tools to overcome challenges in paraphrasing, such as

finding synonyms, combining sentences, changing sentence structures, and

fixing grammar errors. Students highly value the convenience and time-saving

benefits of this tool, leading to increased confidence in their writing (Khusniyah

et al., 2023). Those who struggle with grammar, spelling, word choices, and

other aspects of writing can use this tool to improve their writing quality and

gain proficiency in English academic writing (Fitria, 2021).

Additionally, in a study conducted by Fithriani et al. (2022), they

discovered that utilizing QuillBot has a multitude of advantages, including

improving students' writing confidence, providing an array of user-friendly

writing tools, and fostering language development. As a result, QuillBott plays

a crucial role in producing exceptional academic writing for students.

Grammarly

Grammarly is also one of the most popular online programs available

today. This advanced tool utilizes artificial intelligence and sophisticated

algorithms to assist users in improving their writing skills and creating high-

quality written content for a variety of purposes (Fahmi & Cahyono, 2021).

Created in 2009 by Lytvyn and Shevchenko, Grammarly has quickly become

known as a leading online grammar checker. With its user-friendly interface,

Grammarly allows individuals to scan their documents for spelling, grammar,

and mechanical errors (Ghufron & Rosyida, 2018).

 19

In addition to identifying common writing mistakes, Grammarly's advanced

features also recognize sentence fragments and make suggestions for correct

verb usage (Daniels & Leslie, 2013). This empowers students to boost their

confidence, motivation, and engagement in academic pursuits. By providing

the tools to identify and correct writing errors, students are better equipped to

express themselves with clarity and precision (Jayavalan & Razali, 2018).

Grammarly offers two versions – free and premium – for personal use,

while the business option is designed for groups of three to 149 users, offering

spelling and punctuation error detection. The premium upgrade offers

additional functionality, including over 400 kinds of grammatical error checks,

vocabulary enhancement, citation ideas, and plagiarism detection. Businesses

can access all premium features, plus priority email support, brand tones,

account roles and permissions, analytics, and a dashboard.

According to Daniels and Leslie's (2013) study, serves as an effective

tool for teaching and learning English as a foreign language writing correction.

The software's strength lies in its capacity to identify spelling and punctuation

errors, including missing spaces after periods, and offer a range of alternatives

and advice on verb tenses.

ChatGPT

As the field of artificial intelligence continues to rapidly expand,

ChatGPT has also emerged as one of the most widely utilized AI tools for

developing human-like conversations in response to user input (Radford et al.,

 20

2019). This sophisticated program is equipped with the ability to identify

textual patterns, grasp context, and generate natural-sounding responses

through advanced machine learning and deep learning techniques. It has

been employed to create a range of conversational interfaces, from virtual

assistants to customer care bots (Brown, 2022). Operating on the OpenAI

GPT-2 natural language processing framework (Radford et al., 2019),

ChatGPT represents a cutting-edge conversational AI system. In fact, as

explains, GPT stands for Generative Pre-Training Transformer, which is

essentially a form of artificial intelligence capable of comprehending and

producing human language. Think of it as an expert linguist.

Additionally, this AI-powered assistant is designed to be helpful, fair,

and safe, and is equipped to respond to user inquiries in plain language using

advanced machine-learning techniques (Radford et al., 2019). By analyzing

vast datasets of conversations and other text sources, it has been trained to

understand natural language patterns and generate replies through an

encoder-decoder architecture. Its responses are influenced by the context of

the conversation and the user's question, ensuring highly conversational and

spontaneous interactions. Additionally, it can remember previous discussions

and adjust to the user's preferences (Brown, 2022).

This technology has proven to have a positive impact on education,

with students showing support for the use of chatbots for instructional

purposes both in and out of the classroom. Artificial intelligence in education

 21

offers benefits such as individualized learning, promoting student

engagement, and boosting student interest (Gok, et., 2023 as cited by Ryu &

Han, 2017). Therefore, it is important to consider the potential negative impact

on children when developing artificial intelligence programs. According to Zhai

(2022), emphasized the benefits of using chatbots in education from a

student's perspective. For instance, ChatGPT provides precise,

understandable, concise, and straightforward responses thanks to its effective,

efficient, systematic, and informative processing of information.

Academic Writing Skills

Academic writing is a critical skill for learners, especially in higher

education, as it is essential for effective communication of ideas and research

findings. Various studies have explored the challenges learners face in

academic writing, which often lead them to seek assistance from artificial

intelligence (AI) tools such as Quillbot, Grammarly, and ChatGPT.

One of the primary challenges in academic writing is the lack of

proficiency in grammar and syntax. Many learners struggle with sentence

structure, punctuation, and vocabulary, which can significantly impact the

clarity and coherence of their writing (Chen & Zhang, 2020). This challenge is

particularly evident among non-native English speakers, who often find it

difficult to adhere to the conventions of academic English. AI tools like

Grammarly have been widely adopted to address these issues by providing

real-time grammar and syntax corrections (Smith, 2021).

 22

Another common challenge is the difficulty in organizing and structuring

research papers. Learners often find it challenging to maintain a logical flow of

ideas, resulting in poorly structured essays and research papers (Johnson &

Green, 2019). AI tools such as Quillbot offer paraphrasing and summarization

features that help learners reorganize their content and present their ideas

more coherently (Brown, 2022). Plagiarism is another significant issue in

academic writing. Unintentional plagiarism can occur due to a lack of

understanding of proper citation practices or an inability to paraphrase

effectively (Jones, 2023). Tools like Quillbot and Grammarly assist in detecting

plagiarism and providing suggestions for proper paraphrasing and citation,

helping learners produce original content (Williams, 2021).

Time management and productivity are also critical challenges faced by

learners. Academic writing often requires substantial time investment, and

learners may struggle to balance their writing tasks with other academic

responsibilities (Alostath, 2021). AI tools like ChatGPT can help streamline the

writing process by generating ideas, providing outlines, and assisting with

initial drafts, thus saving time and enhancing productivity (Jones, 2023).

The effectiveness of AI tools in improving academic writing skills has

been a subject of various studies. For instance, a study by Harris (2021) found

that learners who used Grammarly showed significant improvement in their

writing quality, particularly in grammar and punctuation. Similarly, a study by

Liu et al. (2022) revealed that the use of Quillbot enhanced learners'

paraphrasing skills and reduced instances of plagiarism.

 23

However, along with its positive impacts, there are negative implications

that must be acknowledged. As Khusniyah et al. (2023), Anderson, (2020)

highlighted, students may develop an overreliance on these tools, diminishing

their ability to think independently. further underscores the risk that AI writing

tools could undermine critical thinking skills, potentially reducing students'

engagement with the material. Additionally, concerns about the impact on

creativity have surfaced. Educators mentioned that students might use AI tools

not only to polish their language but also to generate ideas, which could stifle

their creative thinking and originality (Johanke et al., 2023; Jones, 2023).

Local

Recent studies in the Philippines have explored the impact of artificial

intelligence (AI) tools on students' writing skills, particularly among those

facing challenges in writing. A study by Fabro et al. (2024) examined Filipino

students' perceptions and utilization of generative AI in academic writing. The

research found that students held neutral attitudes towards AI tools, with a

strong positive correlation between favorable attitudes and their usage.

Preferred tools included Grammarly, Quillbot, and Grammarly, which were

valued for features like grammar checking, content generation, and

collaborative writing. The study highlighted the need for AI literacy programs in

curricula and for developers to tailor AI tools to Filipino students' needs.

Similarly, a phenomenological study by Dalan (2024) explored the lived

experiences of tertiary students using AI-powered writing tools. The research

 24

aimed to comprehensively understand how these tools affected students'

writing abilities and learning experiences. The findings emphasized the

transformative potential of AI tools in enhancing writing skills, suggesting that

such tools can serve as indispensable companions for students seeking to

improve their writing proficiency. This is further supported by a recent study in

PSU Lingayen by Austria, et al. (2022) which revealed that AI chatbots can

significantly improve the learners’ writing skills by identifying and correcting

their errors in their written activities.

Additionally, educators can also benefit from using AI tools, as they

can monitor student progress over time and gather data on their skills,

performance patterns, and trends (Austria et al., 2022). However, Alammar

and Amin (2023) also found that overreliance on these tools can also

developed, such as plagiarism and loss of original meaning. This concern

underscores the importance of maintaining a balanced approach to using AI

tools, ensuring that students continue to engage with the writing process in a

meaningful way.

While AI can offer valuable support, it should not replace the critical and

creative thinking required to develop authentic, original work. Educators,

therefore, play a crucial role in guiding students to use AI responsibly,

fostering both skill development and intellectual integrity (Alammar & Amin,

2023; Austria et al., 2022).

Synthesis of Related Literature and Studies

 25

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in education has

significantly transformed how writing skills are taught and acquired. AI tools

such as Grammarly, Quillbot, and ChatGPT are widely recognized for their

ability to provide grammar correction, coherence enhancement, and stylistic

suggestions. These tools empower learners to refine their writing

independently, fostering self-directed learning and confidence, especially

among English as a Second Language (ESL) students (Srikant & Chandran,

2022). Grounded in constructivist learning theories, AI tools support scaffolded

learning by providing immediate feedback, which pre-service English teachers

can leverage to model effective instruction and integrate technology into their

teaching strategies (Huang, 2021; Vygotsky, 1978). However, concerns arise

about over-reliance on these tools, which could hinder critical thinking and

writing proficiency development (Green & Walker, 2021). Furthermore, ethical

issues such as plagiarism and accessibility challenges in under-resourced

settings underscore the need for responsible use (Turner et al., 2020; Smith et

al., 2021).

Quillbot and Grammarly have been particularly noted for their impact.

Quillbot aids in paraphrasing, grammar checking, and plagiarism detection,

addressing challenges in language structure and coherence (Hamid, 2023;

Khusniyah et al., 2023). Grammarly, on the other hand, provides real-time

corrections and advanced features like citation ideas, making it a valuable tool

for academic writing improvement (Fahmi & Cahyono, 2021; Daniels & Leslie,

2021). ChatGPT has also emerged as a powerful AI tool, facilitating idea

 26

generation and drafting while offering personalized interactions that support

student engagement and productivity (Zhai, 2022).

Despite these advancements, research highlights potential downsides, such

as diminished independent learning and creativity, which educators must

address through balanced AI tool usage (Khusniya et al., 2023; Anderson,

2020).

While the studies mentioned above have explored the effects of

Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools on learners' writing skills in other countries, their

impact on users in the Philippines remains underexplored. With the increasing

popularity and widespread adoption of AI tools in recent years, the number of

users continues to grow. Therefore, this study aims to explore the perceptions

of pre-service English teachers on the use of AI as writing tools.

Research Paradigm

In this study, the dependent variable is the demographic profile of the

students, which includes factors such as age, gender, academic year level,

and socio-economic status. The independent variables are the reasons for

utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) tools, the level of performance of the

respondents in writing activities, and their perceptions of AI tools. Specifically,

the reasons and perceptions of respondents regarding the use of AI tools in

writing performance among pre-service English teachers may or may not be

significantly influenced by their demographic profile.

 27

The study employed a survey questionnaire to gather data on

respondents' perceptions and reasons for using AI tools. These responses

were analyzed to determine their influence on writing performance. The

findings provided insights into how demographic factors, alongside reasons for

usage and perceptions of AI tools, shape the writing capabilities and attitudes

of pre-service English teachers towards AI integration in their academic

practices.

Dependent Variable Independent Variables

Reasons of the
Respondents in
Utilizing Artificial
Demographic Profile Intelligence Tools
of the Respondents
a. age;
b. sex;
c. year level;
d. frequency of Level of Performance
using AI of the Respondents in
Tools; Writing Activities
e. subject
considered
interesting;
and
f. f. commonly
used artificial Perceptions of the
tools Respondents in
Artificial Intelligence
Tools
 28

Figure 1: Research Paradigm

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter reveals the steps in research to be employed by the

researcher in conducting the study which includes the research design,

respondents of the study, data-gathering instruments, and procedure, together

with the appropriate statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

The researcher employed quantitative method with descriptive design

to determine the Perceptions of Pre-service English Teacher in Artificial

Intelligence as Writing Tools in their Writing Performance. Descriptive

quantitative design involves writing tests, and surveys to describe the status or

characteristics of a phenomenon or situation (Eggen & Kauchak, 2010). In this

 29

study, the researchers used writing discourse test and survey, as the purpose

of this research is to describe the respondents’ perception about AI tools.

Respondents of the Research

This research study took place at Pangasinan State University,

Alaminos City Campus. The respondents were the students in the program of

Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in English (BSE English). This diverse

group is representative of the progression of writing performance development

within the campus. The selection of respondents is done using a stratified

random sampling method. From the total population of 172, the respondents

were 120 via stratified random sampling. It was divided by year level,

excluding the five (5) researchers. The focus of the study was to evaluate the

perception of the respondents about AI tools on the writing performance of the

respondents at Pangasinan State University.

Table 1:
Table of the Officially Enrolled Students Under the Program of BSE
English Students per Year Level.
 30

Year level Total number Percent Final

of Enrolled survey
Students
First-year 18 10% 13

Second-year 55 32% 37

Third-year 46 27% 32

Fourth-year 53 31% 38

Total Population 172 100% 120

167

Data Gathering Instrument

The research questionnaire used in this study has been adapted and

modified from several sources, which includes Petricini et al. (n.d.), Lazic et al.

(n.d.), Naher et al. (2023), and Kurniati and Fithriani (2022).

To evaluate the student's performance level, respondents were

required to write an essay on two topics: (1) "Where do they see themselves

in the next five years, and how can their skills contribute to the evolving needs

of learners?", and (2) "What is the significance of technology in today's

generation?" An English expert in the campus evaluated the essays using

analytical rubrics to ensure that the data collected is valid. The data were

interpreted in an unbiased manner, following strict guidelines, to ensure that

the analysis is objective. The data was subjected to statistical treatment to

 31

ensure proper interpretation. This process guarantees that the findings are

valid and reliable.

Data-Gathering Procedure

Prior to initiating data collection, the researchers commenced by

sending a formal letter to the registrar's office seeking information regarding

the overall number of students currently enrolled in the English department.

Once the total number of students is ascertained, further letters were sent to

the offices of the department chairperson, the College Dean of Teacher

Education, and the Campus Executive Director.

Subsequently, two (2) campus English teachers received an additional

letter requesting their assistance in evaluating the students' output in essay

writing on a specific given topic, thereby ensuring the authenticity of the

scores of the respondents with respect to writing activities. The two qualified

experts are teaching Technical Writing, Campus Journalism and were

considered as the writers of the campus for more than three (3) years. This

approach was implemented to ensure that all actions taken within the

university are legally sanctioned and approved by the gatekeepers (i.e,

Registrar, Campus Executive Director, College Dean, Department

Chairperson and Instructor) before the researchers approach the respondents.

Furthermore, the researchers undertook the rigorous process of

validating the survey questionnaires by consulting with four (4) experts outside

the campus and one (1) validator inside the campus. These validators
 32

possess exceptional skills in content validation and have certified that the

survey is appropriate for distribution among the chosen respondents. Their

signatures and comments had authenticated the questionnaire as a valid tool

for gathering data from the respondents.

Before the final distribution of the survey questionnaire, the

researchers conducted a pilot test to ensure its validity. Thirty percent of the

total population participated in this test, with the remaining respondents being

part of the final survey.

For data collection, the researchers gathered information from

respondents during their available time and categorized them according to

their respective year levels. Given the diverse and ever-changing

circumstances, two methods were employed by the researchers for this

purpose: face-to-face distribution and the integration of technology using

Google Forms.

After identifying the available time of respondents per year level, the

researchers collected the data from them. The questionnaire comprised both

survey questions and writing activities. The respondents answered the two (2)

questions subjectively based on their perspective. The topics that need to be

answered were: (1) How do you see yourself five years from now? (2) What

are your best attributes that can contribute to the changing needs of learners?

(2) What is the significance of the integration of technology in today's

generation?
 33

Afterward, the researchers collected all the necessary data for the

research paper. The data were tabulated and analyzed by the research

statistician in a fair and unbiased manner to ensure the validity and relevance

of the gathered information.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The responses made by the respondents were statistically analyzed

with the data requirements of the study. Descriptive tools such as frequency

counts and percentage, average weighted mean, and inferential statistics

were utilized.

In problem number 1, which dealt with the demographic profile of the

respondents, there are sex, age, year, program, subject interest, and

frequency of using AI tools, frequency counts and percentage distribution were

used.

For problem number 2, which dealt with the level of performance of the

students in their writing activities, the average weighted mean and ranking

were used.

For problems number 3 and 4, which dealt with the reasons and

perceptions toward the use of Artificial Intelligence tools, frequency,

percentage, and ranking were used.

For problems number 5 and 6, which allocated the significant

relationship between the demographic profile of the students and the reasons
 34

and perceptions of the respondents towards the use of Artificial Intelligence

tools, the partial eta squared value was used.

For problems number 7 and 8, which allocated the significant

relationship between the level of performance of the respondents, reasons,

and perceptions toward the use of Artificial Intelligence tools, Pearson r was

used.

CHAPTER 4
 35

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter is dedicated to thoroughly present and analyze the data

collected from surveys administered to the Pre-service English Teachers at

Pangasinan State University, Alaminos City Campus. The collected data

underwent interpretation and analysis through statistical methods such as

Frequency & Percentage and Average Weighted Mean. Findings are carefully

discussed and visually represented in tables for a comprehensive

understanding.

Demographic Profile of the Respondents

The table below showed the respondents’ age, sex, year level,

utilization of Artificial Intelligence, subject considered interesting and most

used AI tools.

Table 1.1:
Demographic Profile of the Respondents
(N=120)
VARIABLE
FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
CATEGORY

19 18 15.10
20 32 26.7
21 34 28.3
Age 22 30 25.0
23 5 4.2
24 1 0.8
Sex Female 98 81.7
Male 22 18.3
First Year 13 10.8
Year Level Second Year 37 30.8
Third Year 32 26.7
Fourth Year 38 31.7
 36

Age. Some of respondents (f-34, 28.3%) fell within the aged of 21; (f-

32, 26.7%) were aged 20 years old; (f-30, 25.0%) were aged 22 years old; and

18.10% were aged 19.

Lastly, a few of the respondents were aged 23 (f = 5, 4.2%), and the last was

aged 24 and above (f = 0.8%). This implies that respondents across all

academic years are comprised of individuals classified as youth, a category

defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as those aged between 15

and 24 years old.

Moreover, it is supported by the 2013 data from the Philippine Statistics

Authority, indicating that these respondents were currently enrolled in college

within the appropriate age range specified by the Philippine education system.

Sex. Out of 120 respondents, almost all or 98 (81.7%) were females,

and only 22 (18.3%) were males. This reveals that a higher proportion of

female profiles were observed compared to male profiles. This gender

disparity may suggest that females are more interested in learning the English

language than men. It is supported by the study of Dashela and Mustika

(2022), the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center reported that

women made up almost 60% of all college students at the end of the

academic year 2021-2022.

Year level. Thirteen (13) or 10.8% of the respondents were first-year

students, thirty-seven (37) or 30.8% were second-year students, thirty-two (32)

or 36.7% were third-year students, and thirty-eight (38), or 31.7 were fourth-
 37

year students. The findings revealed that fourth-year students have the

highest number of respondents among other year levels. This could be

explained that in terms of the enrollment trends, there could be a higher

number of students enrolling as fourth-year students compared to other years.

It is perhaps due to quota released by the university every year to the

campuses.

Table 2 presents the respondents' engagement with artificial

intelligence (AI) tools, highlighting their usage, subject areas of interest, and

the most frequently utilized AI tools. This table provides results of how

respondents incorporate AI into their activities.

Table 2:
Engagement of the Respondents in Relation to Artificial Tools
N=120
VARIABLE SCALE FREQUENCY
PERCENTAGE
Utilization of Always 3 2.5%
Artificial Sometimes 40 33.3%
Intelligence Tools Often 39 32.5%
Rarely 26 21.7%
Never 12 10.0%
Math related 2 1.7
Subjects Science 8 6.7%
interested with related 105 87.5%
English related 1 .8%
Filipino related 4 3.3
Others
Artificial Quillbot 50 41.7%
Intelligence Tools Grammarly 44 36.7%
Used ChatGPT 12 10.0%
Others 14 11.7%
 38

Utilization of AI tools. Table 2 shows the utilization of the respondents

in artificial intelligence tools, the subjects considered interesting, and the most

used artificial intelligence tools. Three (3) or 2.5%, of the respondents always

rely on artificial intelligence every time they have an activity. As highlighted in

a study conducted by Ratnawati in 2018, numerous English language learners

encounter challenges while attempting to produce proper academic writing.

These challenges typically stem from issues related to language

structure, coherence, and cohesion that students face when engaging in

English academic writing which led them to use artificial intelligence writing

tools as assistance in writing.

Forty (40) or 33.3% of the respondents sometimes rely on AI tools to

accomplish their homework activities. Thirty-nine (39) or 32.5% of the sample

often relies on artificial tools when they are not prepared. Twenty-six (26) or

21.7% of the language students rarely rely on artificial tools in crafting their

essay activities, and twelve (12) or 10.0 have never used AI tools in their

academic coursework.

The findings revealed that AI tools varied across different contexts. In

some cases, AI was employed to some students as efficient and accurate,

while for others, this were underutilized. In fact, based on the findings of Slimi,

(2023), AI has a positive impact on the learning experience by facilitating new

knowledge and skills.

 39

This is corroborated by the study of Suharyat and Lusiana (2023) which

found that AI improves schooling. In fact, based on the study, artificial tools

provide innovative learning process and speed in organizing and managing

learning activities and increasing quality of student’s work.

Subject considered interesting. The table shows that almost all (f =

105, 87.5%) of the respondents are interested in English-related subjects,

followed by science-related subjects (f = 8, or 6.7%). It reveals that the

language students were more engaged in English subjects than mathematics-

related subjects (f-2, or 1.7%), and Filipino-related subjects (F = 1, or.8%).

This shows that the respondents are inclined toward English-related subjects,

which could be the reason why they are using AI tools to enhance their

English capabilities. This result was corroborated by the study of Zulfikar,

Dahliana & Sari (2019), they found out that students believe that English is an

important asset in the future.

Most commonly used AI Tools. The table shows that less than half of

the respondents are using QuillBott (F = 50, or 41.7%) as their helping hand in

writing activities. Moreover, many of the respondents used Grammarly (F = 44,

or 36.7%); few of the pre-service English teachers are utilizing ChatGPT (F =

12 or 10.0%); together with the combination of non-users of AI and other

applications of AI tools it manifests as (F = 14 or 11.7%), this means that few

of them are not using AI in their writing activities. In addition, this indicates that

QuillBot is the most used AI tool among pre-service English teachers.

 40

The research findings revealed that QuillBot was selected as a

frequently used AI tool among the available options. This could suggest that

the findings may be more user-friendly than other AI tools because of their

accessibility and reliability. This result is supported by the study by Fitria

(2021). QuillBot's goal is to improve the students' grammar skills and make

their work look professional and original. Student performance improved in

English as a Language of Learning and Teaching (LOLT) in teacher pre-

service education and their specialized teaching subjects.

Table 3:
Level of Performance of the Respondents in Writing
Essay Questions Indicator AVM DR Rank
1. Clarity- supported by 2.33 A 2
1. How do you see relevant information and ideas.
yourself five years
from now, what are 2. Organization- sequencing 2.41 A 1
your best attributes of elements /ideas.
which can contribute 3. Mechanics- correctness of 2.08 A 3
to the changing needs grammar and spelling.
among learners?
1.
Clarity- supported by 2.34 A 2
relevant information and
2. What is the ideas.
significance of the 2. Organization- sequencing of 2.35 A 1
integration of elements /ideas.
technology in
today's generation? 3. Mechanics- correctness of 1.95 A 3
grammar and spelling.
OA 2.24 A
WM =
Legend: 1.0 – 1.75 (Beginning); 1.76 – 2.50 (Approaching); 2.51 – 3.25 (Proficient); 3.26 – 4.00 (Highly Proficient)

The table 3 showed that the respondents excelled most in the

“organization” criteria according to the rubrics for both writing activities. In the
 41

first essay, they achieved an average weighted mean of 2.41 (approaching),

and in the second essay, they scored 2.35 (approaching). Similarly, they

scored lowest in the mechanics criteria with an average mean of 2.08 and

1.95, and their writing discourse was ranked third for mechanics, described as

Approaching

This outcome indicated that pre-service English students have reached

a consistent writing performance categorized as “approaching.” In terms of

organization, the pre-service English students present their information and

ideas in a sequence that their audience can easily follow. However, their

mechanics, particularly grammar and spelling, show weaknesses, suggesting

that pre-service English students were at a foundational level in grammar and

efforts should focus on improving this area. While overall writing performance

is good, there are specific areas needing enhancement to attain a higher

scholarly standard.

These findings suggested some weaknesses and shortcomings in the

respondents' writing performance as per the gathered and interpreted results,

indicating a need for improvement to reach proficient and highly proficient

levels in writing tasks. Both students and teachers should dedicate serious

attention to addressing this issue and enhancing respondents writing

performance. The study emphasized the importance of addressing academic

writing aspects for ESL students and teachers to overcome challenges and

prepare for future writing tasks.

 42

According to Moses' (2019) study, the implementation of various writing

strategies among ESL students aims to enhance their writing proficiency. To

further advance their skills, educators should emphasize the significance of

writing abilities to motivate students to engage in the learning process.

REASONS OF THE RESPONDENTS IN USING ARTFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

TOOLS

Table 4 showed the reasons of the respondents toward the use of

Quillbot as a helping hand in their writing activities. The table discussed the

different functions of AI tools that are presented per item. Moreover, the total

mean of this table is (3.41, Sometimes), and it dispensed the result of near

dependency of the respondents towards utilizing it. However, the results do

not guarantee full dependency on this AI tool.

The item “I am utilizing this AI tool to identify grammatical or usage

errors in writing my paper” has the highest mean (3.52, sometimes); this

indicator deals with identifying grammatical errors and usage inside the writing

coursework.

The table shown on page 42 implied that Quillbott greatly contributes to

the overall writing performance of the respondents as per the result of this

table this supports the study of Alammar and Amin (2023) who have found

that EFL students' perceptions towards AI are favorable; they view them as

useful tools that have a significant impact on their academic writing process.
 43

The second highest Average Weighted Mean is 3.44 with verbal

descriptor of sometimes or 3.44 in average weighted mean. This result is from

the item of expanding vocabulary through the use of Quillbot. According to

Baron, G., Lorenzo, C. and Benoît, D. (2023) Quillbot is effective for

respondents in increasing the vocabulary of the respondents. This helps them

simplify difficult words that can be found in the different sources they have and

also cite them properly using this tool.

Table 4:
Reasons towards the use of AI Tools (Quillbot)
N=120
Response
Indicator 1 2 3 4 5 AWM DR Rank
1. I am utilizing this AI tool to identify 17 9 22 39 33 3.52 S 1
grammatical or usage errors in writing 14.2 7.5 18.3 32.5 27.5
my paper.
2. I am utilizing this AI tool to check 23 19 28 32 18 3.03 O 7
proper punctuation marks in my 19.2 15.8 23.3 26.7 15.0
paper.
3. I am utilizing this AI tool to identify 15 26 32 22 25 2.87 O 11
unintentional misspelled words. 12.5 21.7 26.7 18.3 20.8
4. I am utilizing this AI tool to detect if 25 20 21 31 23 3.04 O 6
there is any plagiarism committed. 20.8 16.7 17.5 25.8 19.2
5. I am utilizing this AI tool to determine 23 18 27 28 24 3.1 O 8
accurate and appropriate 19.2 15.8 23.3 26.7 15.0
terminologies for my paper.
6. I am utilizing this AI tool to expand my 25 13 20 38 24 3.44 S 2
vocabulary. 20.8 10.8 16.7 31.7 20
7. I am utilizing this AI tool to simplify 25 19 18 42 16 3.04 O 6
difficult texts from the source. 20.8 15.8 15.0 35.0 13.3
8. I am utilizing this AI tool to enhance 23 17 22 36 22 3.14 O 3
my sentence structure such as unity 19. 14.2 18.3 30.0 18.3
and coherence in writing. `2
9. I am utilizing this AI tool to evaluate 28 25 26 29 12 2.77 O 12
my tone in writing, and to ensure it is 23.3 20.8 21.7 24.2 10.0
intended to my target audience.
10. I am utilizing this AI tool to integrate its 23 18 23 35 21 3.10 O 5
suggestions to employ quality and 19.2 15.0 19/2 29.2 17.5
better output.
11. I am utilizing this AI tool to translate 35 27 15 28 15 2.68 O 13
text from different languages. 29.2 22.5 12.5 23.3 12.5
12. I am utilizing this AI tool to paraphrase 30 11 17 39 23 3.11 O 4
my composition to avoid plagiarism. 25.0 9.2 14.2 32.5 19.2
13. I am utilizing this AI tool to apply 29 17 26 30 18 2.92 O 9
paraphrasing from the text I borrowed 24.2 14.2 21.7 25.0 15.0
from other references/ sources.
14. I am utilizing this AI tool for citation 32 15 26 29 18 2.89 O 10
and acknowledgement from writers 26.7 12.5 21.7 24.2 15.0
and others sources/ reference used in
my paper.
15. I am utilizing this AI tool to help me 29 14 33 30 14 2.89 O 10
 44

condensed lengthy texts to get the 24.2 11.7 27.5 25.0 11.7
main idea.
OAWM = 3.41 S
Legend: 1.0– 1.80 (Never); 1.81 – 2.60 (Rarely); 2.61 – 3.40 (Often) 3.41 – 4.20 (Sometimes); 4.21 – 5.0 (Always)

However, the indicator “I am utilizing this AI tool to translate text from

different languages” has the lowest mean which falls under the level of (2.68,

Often). This feature of Quillbot is considered less useful to the respondents.

Quillbot offers only limited language to translate and it is not beneficial for the

respondents in using this feature. The reasons for the respondents employing

Quillbot is due to the free online access of this platform online at the same

time it benefits them in their overall writing competence.

This implies that the result of this table has proven that QuillBot is

effective in improving the writing skills of the students (Nuryamanti & Suryadi,

2023). It is corroborated by the study of Malik et al. (2023), who found out that

Quillbot is a positive reception of AI-powered writing tools, with students

acknowledging their benefits in grammar checks, plagiarism detection,

language translation, and essay outlines.

The table 5 below presents a clear illustration of the reasons why

respondents frequently use Grammarly, as an artificial intelligence writing tool.

The data collected from the survey responses indicate that Grammarly, is

"often" utilized for various purposes in writing academic papers. The highest

mean score was obtained for “identifying grammatical or usage errors” (mean

= 3.20), followed closely by “checking proper punctuation marks” (mean =

 45

2.99). This shows that Grammarly is predominantly used for identifying

grammatical errors and ensuring the proper use of punctuation in the users'

writing activities for immediate correction.

These results were in line with suggestion that students find

Grammarly's grammar and spell-check features highly beneficial (Smith, 2018;

Johnson, 2020). Moreover, the tool is frequently utilized "to enhance sentence

structure, such as unity and coherence in writing." This highlights that

Grammarly is a valuable tool for improving the quality of writing, ensuring that

the content is on point and organized.

Table 5:
Reasons Towards the Use of AI Tools (Grammarly)
N=120
Response
Indicator AWM DR Rank
1 2 3 4 5
1. I am utilizing this AI tool to identify 30 8 18 35 29 3.21 O 1
grammatical or usage errors in writing my 25.0 6.7 15.0 29.2 24.2
paper.
2. I am utilizing this AI tool to check proper 33 13 21 28 25 2.99 O 2
punctuation marks in my paper 27.5 10.8 17.5 23.3 20.8
3. I am utilizing this AI tool to identify 37 13 21 28 21 2.85 O 7
unintentional misspelled words.
30.8 10.8 17.5 23.3 17.5

4. I am utilizing this AI tool to detect if there is 31 19 17 29 24 2.96 O 4

any plagiarism committed. 25.8 15.8 14.2 24.2 20.0
5. I am utilizing this AI tool to determine 33 12 26 26 23 2.95 O 5
accurate and appropriate terminologies for
my paper. 27.5 10.0 21.7 21.7 19.2

6. I am utilizing this AI tool to expand my 34 9 21 38 18 2.97 O 3

vocabulary. 28.3 7.5 17.5 31.7 15.0
33 14 28 32 13 2.81 O 6
7. I am utilizing this AI tool to simplify difficult
texts from the source. 27.5 11.7 23.3 26.7 10.8

8. I am utilizing this AI tool to enhance my 32 11 23 37 17 2.96 O 4

sentence structure such as unity and
26.7 9.2 19.2 30.8 14.2
coherence in writing.
9. I am utilizing this AI tool to evaluate my 33 24 20 31 12 2.70 O 8
tone in writing, and to ensure it is intended to
27.5 20.0 16.7 25.8 10.0
my target audience.
10. I am utilizing this AI tool to integrate its 35 10 19 38 18 2.95 O 5
suggestions to employ quality and better
output. 29.2 8.3 15.8 31.7 15.0
43 20 18 29 10 2.52 R 13
11. I am utilizing this AI tool to translate text
from different languages. 35.8 16.7 15.0 24.2 8.3

41 12 25 31 11 2.65 O 10
12. I am utilizing this AI tool to generate
creative content.
34.2 10.0 20.8 25.8 9.2
13. I am utilizing this AI tool to apply 41 14 25 30 10 2.61 O 12
 46

paraphrasing from the text I borrowed from 34.2 11.7 20.8 25.0 8.3
other references/ sources.
14. I am utilizing this AI tool for citation and 45 11 20 32 12 2.62 O 11
acknowledgement from writers and others
sources/ reference used in my paper. 37.5 9.2 16.7 26.7 10.0
42 13 22 29 14 2.66 O 9
15. I am utilizing this AI tool to help me 35.0 10.8 18.3 24.2 11.7
condensed lengthy texts to get the main idea.

OAWM = 2.86 O
Legend: 1.0– 1.80 (Never); 1.81 – 2.60 (Rarely); 2.61 – 3.40 (Often) 3.41 – 4.20 (Sometimes); 4.21 – 5.0 (Always)

In this process, Grammarly was used to analyze the user's text in real

time and provided suggestions for enhancing grammar, spelling, punctuation,

clarity, engagement, and delivery. According to Tambunan et al. (2022), the

utilization of Grammarly can be an effective way of improving the students'

grammar and punctuation knowledge, turning the writing process into a

learning opportunity.

Furthermore, the tool received slightly lower scores for "paraphrasing

text borrowed from other sources." This indicates that while some respondents

use Grammarly for paraphrasing content, the tool is not always used for this

purpose, as users may prefer other AI tools like Quillbot, which is known for its

paraphrasing feature.

However, Grammarly remains the go-to tool for grammar checking,

applying proper punctuation marks, and improving the overall quality of

writing. Consequently, it is widely recognized as a valuable writing assistance

tool for enhancing users' writing skills (Smith, 2019).

On the other hand, the table on page 46 showed the reasons of the

respondents towards the use of Artificial Intelligence tools. Based on the

results obtained in ChatGPT, the overall reasons were identified by

 47

respondents as "Disagree," as indicated by their mean score of 2.34. The

reason “why I am using this AI tool to identify grammatical or usage errors in

my paper” has the highest mean score of 2.53, which also falls under

the "rarely" category.

These findings suggest that while respondents see some value in using

AI tools for identifying grammatical or usage errors, some do not agree with

the broader reasons for using AI tools in general as because the category is

still under “rarely” result. This could indicate a need for further exploration of

the benefits of AI tools in context of the respondents’ experiences and

preferences. This is actually supported by Jarrah, Wardat and Fidalgo (2023)

that ChatGPT can be a valuable writing tool in grammar.

Table 6:
Reasons towards the use of AI Tools (ChatGPT)
N=120
Response

D Rank
Indicator AWM
1 2 3 4 5 R
1. I am utilizing this AI tool to 48 12 24 21 15 2.53 R 1
identify grammatical or usage 40.0 10.0 20.0 17.5 12.5
errors in writing my paper.
2. I am utilizing this AI tool to check 54 11 26 19 10 2.33 R 8
proper punctuation marks in my
paper. 45.0 9.2 21.7 15.8 8.3
3. I am utilizing this AI tool to identify 59 13 22 18 8 2.19 R 9
unintentional misspelled words.
49.2 10.8 18.3 15.0 6.7
4. I am utilizing this AI tool to detect 60 14 24 15 7 2.12 R 10
if there is any plagiarism
committed. 50.0 11.7 20.0 12.5 5.8
5. I am utilizing this AI tool to 53 14 19 20 14 2.4 R 3
determine accurate and
appropriate terminologies for my 44.2 11.7 15.8 16.7 11.7
paper.
52 13 25 14 16 2.40 R 3
6. I am utilizing this AI tool to
summarize my lengthy ideas. 43.3 10.8 20.8 11.7 13.3
50 13 22 27 8 2.41 R 2
7. I am utilizing this AI tool to
organize my ideas.
41.7 10.8 18.3 22.5 6.7
 48

8. I am utilizing this AI tool to 51 17 18 24 10 2.37 R 6

enhance my sentence structure
such as unity and coherence in 42.5 14.2 15.0 20.0 8.3
writing.
9. I am utilizing this AI tool evaluate 55 18 19 19 9 2.4 R 3
my tone in writing, and to ensure it
is intended to my target audience. 45.8 15.0 15.8 15.8 7.5
54 12 20 26 8 2.35 R 7
10. I am utilizing this AI tool to
45.0 10.0 16.7 21.7 6.7
integrate its suggestions to employ
quality and better output.
OAWM = 2.34 D
Legend: 1.00– 1.80 (Strongly Disagree); 1.81 – 2.60 (Disagree); 2.61 – 3.40 (Moderately Agree); 3.41 – 4.20 (Agree);
4.21 – 5.0 (Strongly Agree

Further, the lowest rank is the indicator “I am utilizing this AI tool to

detect if there is any plagiarism committed.” with an average weighted mean

of 2.12. This result reflects some concerns about the credibility or reliability of

ChatGPT in performing task effectively. In fact, according to Samala et al.

(2024) there are risk to possible manipulations in educational-related topics

when incorporating ChatGPT in writing activities.

PERCEPTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS TOWARDS THE USE OF

ARTFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS

The following table presented the perceptions of respondents towards

the use of Quillbot as Artificial Intelligence tool. The table below highlighted

and discussed the highest and the lowest average weighted mean. The item

“QuillBott is a convenient and user-friendly AI tool” that has a total average

weighted mean of (3.39, moderate) and lands as the highest mean of the

results in this table. The result is corroborated by the study of Kurniati and

Fithriani (2022), the use of QuillBot was found to have three benefits:
 49

enhancing students' positive attitudes toward writing, providing a variety of

user-friendly writing features, and aiding students' language development.

This study implies that AI-powered technology like QuillBot in writing,

particularly in academic writing, has a significant role in creating high-quality

writing for students. Moreover, the item with the lowest average mean of 2.85

(indicating a moderate level of agreement) pertains to respondents' preference

for using QuillBot among other AI tools. This contrasts with the highest-rated

result, which is that QuillBot is seen as convenient and user-friendly. However,

in the verbal description, both of the items have a moderate result, yet as of

the margin of the percentage, QuillBot is still regarded as effective and

positively influenced individuals in improving their writing skills. This implies

that respondents find Quillbot as accessible. However, this cannot be the first

option of the respondents as a tool in their activity (Fithriani, 2022).

Table 7:
Perceptions towards the use of AI Tools (Quillbot)
N=120
Response
Indicator 1 AWM DR Rank
2 3 4 5
1. Quillbot is convenient and user- 22 4 26 41 27 3.39 M 1
friendly AI tool. 18.33 3.33 21.66 34.16 22.5
2. Quilbot's features greatly assist 22 8 42 25 23 3.15 M 3
me in academic writing.
18.33 6.66 35 20.83 23
3. Quillbot is effective AI tool because 21 10 34 34 21 3.2 M 6
it provides several features that
17.5 8.33 28.33 28.33 17.5
can help me improve the quality
of my writing.
4. Quillbot encourages me to write 19 9 41 35 16 3.16 M 2
and reduces my writing
difficulties. 15.83 7.5 34.16 29.16 13.33
5. Utilizing Quillbot boosts my 21 17 28 40 14 3.07 M 5
confidence in my writing 17.5 14.16 23.33 33.33 11.66
expressions.
6. By using the Quillbot, this 21 12 36 33 18 3.12 M 4
improved my writing skills in
sentence structure and 17.5 10 30 27.5 15
organization.
7. Unconsciously, my vocabulary 20 13 46 28 13 3.00 M 7
 50

skills particularly the terms that are

16.66 13.3 38.0 23.0 10.0
used in academic writing has
improved.
8. By utilizing Quillbot, my academic 21 11 35 38 15 3.12 M 4
essays have improved specially my
grammatical competence. 17.5 9.16 2.91 31.66 12.5
26 14 42 22 15 2.85 M 9
9. I prefer Quillbot among other AI
tools.
21.66 11.66 35 18.33 12.5
22 11 46 28 13 2.99 M 8
10. I can write competently and my
writing have better outputs every
18.33 9.16 38.33 23.33 10.83
time I utilize the Quillbot tool.

OAWM = 3.10 M
Legend: 1.00– 1.80 (Strongly Disagree); 1.81 – 2.60 (Disagree); 2.61 – 3.40 (Moderately Agree); 3.41 – 4.20 (Agree);
4.21 – 5.0 (Strongly Agree)

The next table presented the perception of pre-service English teachers

about the utilization of Grammarly as Artificial Intelligence tools. Based on the

result, respondents answered ' moderately agreed' with the performance of

Grammarly in assisting respondents in their writing, which resulted in an

overall mean of 2.87.

Most of the respondents "moderately agreed" that Grammarly

assessed them well in "editing, after receiving Grammarly feedback, which

enhanced their competence and confidence to write." The table illustrates

that a great majority of the respondents also find Grammarly helpful in

"understanding, applying, and practicing English grammar rules”, which they

"moderately agreed" upon.

This corroborates to the statement of Fitriana and Nurazni (2022),

whose research findings show that "Grammarly has many benefits and uses

for students, such as correcting grammatical errors in their writing.

In addition, it is known that Grammarly is easy to use and has quite

complete features." This also corroborates the statement of Muhamad et al.

(2022), stating that "Grammarly content is considered very beneficial for

 51

English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in the process of writing,

particularly in writing articles. Since the EFL students mostly made many

errors in grammar, word spelling, or punctuation, they required those

features."

This is further supported by the statement of the respondents to

Muhamad (2022), who argued that "we could easily check our grammar

while writing an article using Grammarly." This resulted in the unanticipated

finding of Muhamad (2022) that Grammarly definitely could improve

students' writing skills by providing feedback.

Table 8:
Perceptions Towards the Use of AI Tools (Grammarly)
N=120
Response

Indicator 1 2 3 4 5 AWM DR Rank

1. Grammarly helps me 27 11 26 36 20 3.09 M 3
understand, apply, and 22.5 9.16 21.66 30 16.66
practice English
grammar rules.
2. Using Grammarly 33 24 32 18 13 2.61 M 8
encourages cheating
among students. 27.5 20 26.66 15 10.83
3. Grammarly helped me 27 15 34 24 20 2.95 M 6
improve my
competence and
22.5 12.5 28.33 20 16.66
confidence in
academic writing and
other school activities.

4. Editing, after receiving 24 12 31 28 25 3.15 M 2

Grammarly feedback,
enhanced my
competence and 20 10 25.83 23.33 20.83
confidence to write
academically.

5. Grammarly assists me 24 9 32 37 18 2.29 D 10

to enhance my
paraphrasing,
summarizing, and 20 7.5 26.66 30.83 15
synthesizing
competence
24 9 38 29 20 3.1 M 4
6. Grammarly is a user-
friendly AI tool.
20 7.5 31.66 24.16 16.66
23 9 30 23 35 2.48 D 9
7. Grammarly cannot be
utilized offline.
19.16 7.5 25 19.16 29.16
 52

8. Grammarly requires a 24 9 25 35 27 3.26 M 1

strong internet
connection to be able 20 7.5 20.83 29.16 22.5
use. It is not
accessible to non-
internet users.
26 18 40 21 15 2.84 M 7
9. Grammarly must be
restricted to use in
every given activity. 21.66 15 33.33 17.5 12.5
27 13 36 25 19 2.96 M 5
10. I prefer Grammarly
22.5 10.83 30 20.83 15.83
among other AI tools.

OAWM = 2.87 M
Legend: 1.0– 1.80 (Strongly Disagree); 1.81 – 2.60 (Disagree); 2.61 – 3.40 (Moderately Agree); 3.41 – 4.20 (Agree); 4.21 – 5.0
(Strongly Agree)
Students utilize this tool to ensure and be confident in their writing as grammar

and spelling become necessary things in writing that should be considered

(Chandrasekhar in Lailika, 2019).

Based on the statement of Pratama, (2020), grammar is the most

crucial part of writing because Grammar can change the meaning of the

language if it is incorrect. The problem that usually students face in writing is

grammar because of the lack of grammar knowledge. Therefore, students

use grammar checkers to help them solve their problems in writing. Various

online grammar and spelling checker platforms arrange grammar correction

and spelling check options online facilities (Rao et al., 2019). “In giving

feedback, Grammarly provides clear and easy-to-understand explanations

that do not confuse students” (Pratama, 2020), which helps them produce

better writing quality output.

However, despite the positive feedback on the performance of

Grammarly in assisting the respondents to produce a great quality writing

output when it comes to identifying grammatical errors and understanding its

suggestion for alternative construction when editing, almost all of the

 53

respondents "moderately agreed" that "Grammarly requires a strong internet

connection to be able to use" and "it cannot be utilized offline."

This simply means that Grammarly is not accessible to non-internet

users and those who live in places with poor internet connections, which

gave the highest weighted mean of 3.26 in the survey. This statement

appears to confirm Fitria's (2021) and Patrama's (2020), as cited in

Muhamad et al. (2022) statement in their study that using Grammarly's

application to evaluate English grammar and its other features requires a

strong internet connection.

Furthermore, despite its helpful features, many respondents are

aware and "moderately agreed" that "using Grammarly encourages cheating

among students." Because there are still students who do not use any of

these AI tools to write. These students rely on their knowledge and put all

their time and effort into writing a well-written output, and the use of AI tools

to improve the papers of others is found to be unfair to those who do not use

any of this for their papers (Muhamad et al., 2022).

These findings show that most of the respondents found Grammarly

had a helpful in editing, improving their writing skills, and understanding

grammar rules. This is consistent with previous research results that

highlight the advantages of using Grammarly for students. However, the

study also revealed some issues, like the requirement of a strong internet

connection to use Grammarly efficiently and worries about encouraging

cheating among students who do not use such tools.

 54

The following table presented the perception of respondents towards

the utilization of Artificial Intelligence tools. The table below showed that the

majority of 120 respondents answered 'moderately agree’ (2.61 – 3.40) and

few answered ‘disagree’ (1.81 – 2.60) with the usage of ChatGPT as an

artificial intelligence.

In addition to this number, the highest mean, which is 2.99 (moderately

agree), is a response that ChatGPT is questionable in its reliability and

accuracy regarding the contents’ interpretation. There is also a study by

Weaver (2023) that says that the latest project demonstration has proven

ChatGPT to be an unreliable tool. The study results assertively indicate that

the tool delivered false or incomplete information. And contained both correct

and incorrect information. Following that is the mean of 2.97 (moderately

agree) that respondents agree that using this artificial intelligence, ChatGPT is

beneficial for students as well as helpful.

Table 9:
Perceptions towards the use of AI Tools (ChatGPT)
(N=120)
Response
1 2 3 4 5 AWM DR Rank
1. ChatGPT is helpful and 28 10 37 27 18 2.97 M 2
beneficial in students to use. 23.33 8.33 30.83 22.5 15

2. ChatGPT is convenient and 29 12 43 24 12 2.81 M 6

user- friendly AI tool.
24.16 10 35.83 20 10
3. I found satisfaction, ChatGPT is 33 16 39 21 11 2.67 M 8
conversational, allowing me to
continue with prompts without
providing context every time I 27.5 13.33 32.5 17.5 9.16
am using the AI tool.
4. Instructors must teach students 35 18 39 17 11 2.59 D 9
to integrate the utilization of
ChatGPT in their academic
29.16 15 32.5 14.16 9.16
writing activities.
5. I prefer ChatGPT among any 33 25 33 16 13 2.59 D 9
other AI tools. 27.5 20.83 27.5 13.13 10.13
 55

6. Dependency on ChatGPT has 32 12 33 20 23 2.91 M 3

unfavorable impacts among
students. 26.66 10 27.5 16.66 19.16
7. ChatGPT is questionable in its 32 4 39 23 22 2.99 M 1
reliability and accuracy with
regards to contents’ interpretation. 26.66 3.33 32.5 19.16 18.33
8. The use of ChatGPT is 29 14 35 27 15 2.87 M 4
inevitable. 24.16 11.66 29.16 22.5 12.5
32 8 42 25 13 2.82 M 5
9. Using ChatGPT encourages
cheating among students.
26.66 6.66 35 20.83 10.83
30 16 39 28 7 2.71 M 7
10. Students should stop the 25 13.33 32.5 23.33 5.83
utilization of ChatGPT.
OAWM = 2.79 M
Legend: 1.00– 1.80 (Strongly Disagree); 1.81 – 2.60 (Disagree); 2.61 – 3.40 (Moderately Agree); 3.41 – 4.20 (Agree); 4.21 – 5.0
(Strongly Agree)
The ChatGPT tool can help students improve their writing skills and try

new writing styles. It can also offer feedback and suggestions on their work,

which can be especially helpful when students are unable to access their

teachers for feedback. According to Berlin School Business & Innovation, or

BSBI (2023), ChatGPT is also useful for students to get ideas for assignments.

This AI tool can help students improve their grammar and writing, making it a

valuable resource for students of all levels.

The data presented in rank 3 of the table indicates that students are

aware of the detrimental perception of their dependency on ChatGPT, with a

mean result of 2.91 (moderately agree). This finding is consistent with Abbas'

(2023) assertion that relying too heavily on ChatGPT can impede students'

ability to think critically and solve problems, ultimately harming their academic

performance. Given these concerns, educators and students alike need to

recognize the limitations of AI-powered tools and prioritize the development of

genuine understanding and skills.

For sequence, both indicators are as follows: Instructors must teach

students to integrate the utilization of ChatGPT in their academic writing

 56

activities, and I prefer ChatGPT among any other AI tools, which have a mean

result of 2.59 (Disagree). There has been a considerable amount of opposition

to the integration of AI or ChatGPT in education. Despite claims that ChatGPT

has a large user base, there are still a significant number of people who have

not yet adopted AI or prefer alternative AI-powered tools. It is important to note

that the needs and preferences of users vary greatly, and there is no one-size-

fits-all approach. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate and compare all

available options to determine the most effective and inclusive approach to

incorporating technology in education.

Table 10:
Relationship between the Demographic Profile of the Respondents and
their Reason Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
Quillbot
Partial Eta
Demographic Profile Df F-value Squared p-value Remarks
Value

Age 5 0.531 0.027 0.753 Not Significant

Sex 2 0.093 0.002 0.912 Not Significant

Year Level 3 0.538 0.017 0.657 Not Significant

Grammarly
Partial Eta
Demographic Profile Df F-value Squared p-value Remarks
Value

Age 5 .641 .032 .669 Not Significant

Sex 2 .384 .008 .682 Not Significant

Year Level 3 1.404 .042 .246 Not Significant

ChatGPT
Partial Eta
Demographic Profile Df F-value Squared p-value Remarks
Value

Age 5 .959 .048 .447 Not Significant

Sex 2 1.106 .023 .335 Not Significant

Year Level 3 .195 .006 .899 Not Significant

 57

Moreover, table 10 showcased the results of tabulated data in

hypothesis “There is no significant relationship between the demographic

profile of the students and the reasons of the respondents toward the use of

artificial intelligence tools” Partial Eta Squared value was computed to

determine whether a significant relationship exists between the demographic

profile and the reasons of the respondents towards the use of Quillbot. With p-

values considerably higher than the significance level of 0.05, these findings

suggest that demographic characteristics (age, sex, year level) do not

significantly influence respondents’ teachers' reasons for using Quillbot.

Therefore, in this context, demographic profiles do not play a substantial role

in shaping the motivations for employing Quillbott as an AI tool in academic

writing-related tasks.

Table 11:
Relationship between Engagement and the Reasons of the
Respondents Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
Quillbot
Partial Eta
Other Variables Df F-value Squared p-value Remarks
Value
Utilization of AI 4 3.138 .116 .018 Significant
Tools

Subject Interest 4 .524 .021 .718 Not Significant

Grammarly
Partial Eta
Other Variables Df F-value Squared p-value Remarks
Value
Utilization of AI 4 1.611 .063 .178 Not Significant
Tools

Subject Interest 4 1.213 .048 .310 Not Significant

ChatGPT
Partial Eta
Other Variables Df F-value Squared p-value Remarks
Value
Utilization of AI 4 .872 .035 .484 Not Significant
 58

Tools

Subject Interest 4 .658 .027 .622 Not Significant

For Table 11, Partial Eta Squared value was also computed to

determine whether a significant relationship exists between the engagement

and the reasons of the respondents towards the use of Artificial Intelligence

tools. With p-values considerably higher than the significance level of 0.05,

these findings suggest that the engagement do not significantly influence

respondents’ teachers' reasons for using Grammarly and ChatGPT. However,

under Quillbot it can be gleaned that there is a significant relationship between

the engagement and the utilization of AI tools. Hence, engagement affects the

use of the AI tools particularly under Quillbot.

Table 12:
Relationship between the Demographic Profile of the Respondents and
their Perceptions toward the use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
Quillbot
Partial Eta
Demographic p-
df F-value Squared Remarks
Profile value
Value

Age 5 0.253 0.034 0.936 Not Significant

Sex 1 1.197 0.032 0.281 Not Significant
Year Level 3 1.506 0.111 0.230 Not Significant

Grammarly
Partial Eta
Demographic p-
df F-value Squared Remarks
Profile value
Value
 59

Age 5 .360 .048 .872 Not Significant

Sex 1 1.306 .035 .261 Not Significant
Year Level 3 1.654 .121 .194 Not Significant

ChatGPT
Partial Eta
Demographic p-
df F-value Squared Remarks
Profile value
Value

Age 5 .778 .098 .572 Not Significant

Sex 1 .488 .013 .489 Not Significant
Year Level 3 1.619 .119 .202 Not Significant

In table 12, Partial Eta Squared value was computed to determine

whether a significant relationship exists between the demographic profile and

the perceptions of the respondents towards the use of Quillbot. Thus, there is

no significant relationships between the demographic profile of the

respondents and their perceptions towards the use of Artificial Intelligence

tools.

Table 13:
Relationship between the Engagement and the Perceptions of the
Respondents toward the use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
QuillBot
Partial
Other Eta p-
df F-value Remarks
Variables Squared value
Value
Utilization of AI 4 .060 .007 .062 Not
Tools Significant
Subject 3 .787 .063 .813 Not
Interest Significant
Grammarly
Partial
Other Eta p-
df F-value Remarks
Variables Squared value
Value
 60

Utilization of AI 4 .518 .063 .723 Not

Tools Significant
Subject 3 .600 .048 .619 Not
Interest Significant
ChatGPT
Partial
Other Eta p-
df F-value Remarks
Variables Squared value
Value
Utilization of AI 3 .233 .025 .918 Not
Tools Significant
Subject 4 1.565 .115 .215 Not
Interest Significant

Aside from that, Table 13 was also computed via Partial Eta Squared to

determine whether a significant relationship exists between the engagement of

the respondents in Artificial tools and the perceptions of the respondents

towards the use of Artificial Intelligence tools. demographic profile and the

perceptions of the respondents towards the use of Quillbot. Thus, there is no

significant relationships between engagement of the respondents in Artificial

Intelligence tools and their perceptions towards the use of Artificial Intelligence

tools.

Table 14:
Relationship between the Level of Performance of the Pre-service
English Teachers and their Reasons toward the Use of AI Tools
 61

Level of Performance
r - value p - value Remarks
Reasons toward the
-.088 .339 Not Significant
Use of Quillbot
Reasons toward the Significant
.488 .000
Use of Grammarly

Reasons toward the Significant

.559 .000
Use of ChatGPT

To determine whether the level of performance of the respondents is

related to the reasons towards the use of AI tools, correlation analysis using

Pearson – r was computed. The table revealed that while there's no significant

correlation between performance level and the reasons for using Quillbott,

there is a statistically significant positive correlation between performance

level and the reasons for utilizing Grammarly and ChatGPT.

These findings suggest that pre-service English teachers with higher

performance levels are more likely to find Grammarly and ChatGPT beneficial,

potentially indicating their effectiveness in aiding academic writing-related

tasks or the alignment of these tools with higher academic standards.

As stated by Marzuki et al. (2023), AI tools such as Grammarly and ChatGPT

significantly improve students’ writing skills. These tools help the users to

identify common errors in grammar punctuation, and syntax, and provide

suggestions to improve clarity and style. They also offer unique capabilities

such as grammar correction, paraphrasing, and refining sentences for

enhance effectiveness. Therefore, due to the lower mean of the level of

 62

performance of the respondents, specifically in grammar, it drives them to

utilize Grammarly and ChatGPT to achieve quality written output.

Table 15:
Relationship between the Level of Performance of the Respondents and
their Perceptions Toward the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
Level of Performance
r -value p-value Remarks

Reasons toward the

-.039 .672 Not Significant
Use of Quillbot

Reasons toward the Not Significant

-.031 .736
Use of Grammarly

Reasons toward the Not Significant

.022 .809
Use of ChatGPT

The table above aimed to determine whether the level of performance

of the respondents was related to the perceptions towards the use of AI tools,

correlation analysis using Pearson – r was computed. The results indicate that

there are no significant correlations between performance level and

perceptions toward the use of Quillbot, Grammarly, or ChatGPT. In other

words, regardless of their performance levels, respondent’s teachers'

perceptions of these AI tools remain consistent and are not influenced by their

performance.

Limitations of the study

1. This research has a short-listed Artificial Intelligence Tools. It only

covers three Artificial Intelligence Tools

 63

2. The research only focused on the level of performance of the

respondents in writing activities and the reasons and perceptions

towards the use of Artificial Intelligence tools.

[Link] study only covers the Bachelor of Secondary Education major in

English students.

4. Lastly, this study does not incorporate the perspectives of the English

department teachers regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence in

student assignments. Addressing these limitations could further enrich

the study.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the findings of the study, including the results,

analysis, and interpretation of the data gathered from the questionnaires

distributed in the field. To complete this study properly, it was necessary to

analyze the collected data to test the hypothesis and answer the research

questions. As indicated in the preceding chapter, the data is interpreted in a

descriptive form.
 64

Summary

This study determined the perceptions of the students in Bachelor of

Secondary Education Major in English at Pangasinan State University,

Alaminos City Campus Academic Year 2023-2024 in utilizing Artificial

Intelligence as writing tools.

Specifically, the following problems were answered:

Problem 1 focused on the demographic profile of the respondents in

terms of the age, sex, year level, frequency of using artificial intelligence tools

in writing technology, subjects considered interesting, and most commonly

used artificial intelligence tools.

Problem 2 determined the level of performance of the respondents in

writing activities.

Problem 3 dealt on the reasons of the respondents in utilizing Artificial

Intelligence tools.

Problem 4 dealt on the perceptions of the respondents in utilizing

artificial intelligence tools.

Problem 5 determined the significant relationship between the

demographic profile of the respondents and their perceptions towards the

used of Artificial intelligence tools.

Problem 6 determined the significant relationship between the

demographic profile and the perceptions of the respondents towards the used

of Artificial intelligence tools.

 65

Problem 7 determined the significant relationship between the level of

performance of the respondents and their reasons towards the use of Artificial

Intelligence tools.

Problem 8 determined the significant relationship between the level of

performance of the respondents and their perceptions towards the use of

Artificial Intelligence tools.

The descriptive design was used in this study. The research

instruments which were used in gathering the data are the questionnaire and

the essay writing activities.

The data gathered were analyzed and interpreted using frequency

counts and percentages, mean, partial eta value, and pearson-r.

Summary of Findings

Thorough analysis of data revealed the following findings:

1. Demographic Profile of the College Students

a. Age. Ninety-three or 56.7% of the student-respondents were 19

years old. Thirty-four or 28.3% of the respondents were 21 years

old.

b. Sex. 98 or 81.7% were females while 22 or 18.3 were males.

c. Year level. Thirty-eight or 31.7% were fourth-year students.

 66

d. Utilization of Artificial Intelligence Tools. Forty or 33.3% of the

respondents answered “sometimes” and referred as the highest

response in the questionnaire.

e. Subject considered interesting. One hundred five or 87.5%

answered that English is an interesting subject.

f. Year Level. One hundred nineteen or 72.6 percent were second

year and 45 or 27.4 percent were first year.

g. Most commonly used Artificial Intelligence Tools. Fifty or 41.7%

of the respondents answered Quillbot as the most commonly used

AI tools.

2. Level of Performance of the Respondents in their Writing Activities.

The outcome indicated that the respondents had reached a consistent

writing performance categorized as approaching.

3. Reasons Of the Respondents Towards the Use of Artificial

Intelligence Tools.

The respondents’ main reason for utilizing Artificial Intelligence Tools

was to check the grammatical errors in their papers.

4. Perceptions of the Respondent Toward the Use of Artificial

Intelligence Tools.

Respondents’ perceptions toward Artificial Intelligence is to have

additional tools to make a quality output.

5. Significant Relationship Between the Demographic Profile of the

Respondents and Their Reasons Toward the Use of Artificial
Intelligence Tools.
 67

There is no significant relationship exist between the two. This means that

the demographic profile do not play a crucial role in shaping the motivation

for utilizing Quillbot in any academic writing-related tasks.

6. Significant Relationships Between the Demographic Profile of the

Respondents and their Perceptions Towards the Use of Artificial
Intelligence Tools.
There is no significant relationships between the demographic profile of the

respondents and their perceptions towards the use of Artificial Intelligence

tools.

7. Significant relationship between the level of Performance of the

respondents and their reasons Toward the Use of Artificial
Intelligence Tools.

There is no significant relationship between the two. However, there is

statistically significant positive correlation between the performance level

and the reasons for utilizing Grammarly and ChatGPT. In this, it can be

found that Grammarly and ChatGPT is beneficial in the effectiveness of

achieving quality and standard academic-related writings.

8. Significant Relationship Between the Level of Performance of the

Respondents and their Perception Towards the Use of Artificial
Intelligence Tools.

There is no significant correlations between the level of performance and

perceptions toward the use of Quillbot, Grammarly and ChatGPT. As a result,

the perception of the respondents in term s AI tools is consistent regardless of

their level of performance.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn.
 68

1. The total number of respondents was dominated by female respondents

aged 21 years old, with the highest frequency. Fourth-year students have

the highest total number of respondents. Many of the respondents are

utilizing AI tools during their homework activities. In fact, the respondents

are more engaged and interested in English-related courses, and the

most commonly used AI tool was QuillBott.

2. The level of performance of the respondents indicates that the

respondents are good in terms of their writing activities, which indicates

the scores gathered from their written output. The proficient criteria

dominate among the other criteria in the rubrics. However, students and

teachers must exert serious attention to become highly proficient in the

written activities of the respondents.

3. The main reasons respondents employ artificial intelligence tools are to

check for grammatical errors and achieve better and more educational

writing activities.

4. Respondents view Artificial Intelligence as an extra learning tool that will

help them enhance their writing skills and overcome any deficiencies they

may have in writing.

5. The significant relationship between the demographic profile and the

reasons of the respondents in using Artificial Intelligence indicates that

there is no significant relationship exist between the two. This means that

the demographic profile do not play a crucial role in shaping the

motivation for utilizing Quillbot in any academic writing-related tasks.

 69

6. There is no significant relationships between the demographic profile of

the respondents and their perceptions towards the use of Artificial

Intelligence tools.

7. The level of performance and the reasons towards the use of AI tools

indicates that there is no significant relationship between the two.

However, there is statistically significant positive correlation between the

performance level and the reasons for utilizing Grammarly and ChatGPT.

In this, it can be found that Grammarly and ChatGPT is beneficial in the

effectiveness of achieving quality and standard academic-related writings.

8. The findings in the relationship between the level of performance and the

perception towards the use of AI tools found out that there is no

significant correlations between the level of performance and perceptions

toward the use of Quillbott, Grammarly and ChatGPT. As a result, the

perception of the respondents in terms AI tools is consistent regardless of

their level of performance.

Recommendation

Based on the results and conclusions of the study, the following

recommendations are offered.

1. To gather the effects of AI tools, future researchers may undergo Pre-test

and Post-test to the respondents. The pre-test is the pure human intelligence

of the respondents, and the post-test will have the intervention of Artificial

Intelligence tools.
 70

2. Future researcher may also consider administering pre-survey

questionnaire to the target respondents to identify the user of Artificial

Intelligence and to separate the non-user of AI.

3. Future researchers may also consider including all CTE students to

broaden the scope of the study.

4. Future researchers may choose to consider studying more AI tools.

5. Teachers may integrate more writing activities to improve the writing skills of

the respondents.

References

Abbas, M., Jam, F. A., & Khan, T. (2024, February 16). Is it harmful or helpful?

Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage

among university students. International Journal of Educational

Technology in Higher Education. [Link]

00444-7

Abdullah Sharadgah, T., & Abdulatif Sa’di, R. (2022). A systematic review

of research on the use of artificial intelligence in English language

teaching and learning (2015-2021): What are the current effects?

 71

Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 21, 337–377.

[Link]

Ahmad, Muhammad & Mahmood, Muhammad & Raza, Ali. (2019).

Organisational Skills in Academic Writing: A Study on Coherence and

Cohesion in Pakistani Research Abstracts. 4. 1-25.

10.3390/languages4040092.

Akkaya, A. & Aydin, G. (2018). Academics' Views on the Characteristics of

Academic Writing. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research,

13(2), 128-160. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2018.143.7

Alammar, A. and Abdel-Reheem Amin, E. (2023) ‘EFL students’ perception of

using AI paraphrasing tools in English language research projects’, Arab

World English Journal, 14(3), pp. 166–181.

doi:10.24093/awej/vol14no3.11.

Albesher K.B. (2022). Teachers’ Views on Using the Writing Process

Approach to Improve ESL Learners’ Writing [Link],76-92.

Amyatum, RL.,&Kholis A., (2023)Can Artificial Intelligence (AI) like QuillBot AI

Assist Students' Writing Skills? Assisting Learning to Write Texts using

AI. Department of English Education, Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama

Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Ananda, M., Nisa, R. and Safura, S. (2021) ‘Students’ perceptions toward the

use of grammarly in checking grammar in assignments’, ACCENTIA:

 72

Journal of English Language and Education, 1(2), pp. 72–77.

doi:10.37598/accentia. v1i2.1144.

Ariyanti & Syafi’ul Anam (2021). Technology-Enhanced Paraphrasing Tool to

Improve EFL Students’ Writing Achievement and Enjoyment. Vol.6(3)

DOI: [Link]/10.21462/jeltl.v6i3.698.

Baron, G., Lorenzo, C. and Benoît, D. (2023) ‘Students’ perception on the use

of quillbot to improve grammar’, Lingeduca: Journal of Language and

Education Studies, 2(3), pp. 250–265. doi:10.55849/lingeduca.v2i3.547.

Brown, L. (2022). The role of paraphrasing tools in improving academic

writing. International Journal of Learning Technology, 18(2), 101-115.

Bulqiyah, S., Mahbub, Moh.A. and Nugraheni, D.A. (2021) ‘Investigating

writing difficulties in essay writing: Tertiary students’ perspectives’,

English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(1), p. 61.

doi:10.12928/eltej.v4i1.2371.

Campbell, J., Roberts, E., & Thomas, M. (2022). Enhancing coherence and

clarity in student writing through AI tools. Journal of Educational

Technology and Writing, 17(4), 89-102.

Carr, N. (2016). The writing cure: How expressive writing boosts mental health

and cognitive performance. Harvard University Press.

 73

Caveleri, M., & Dianati, S. (2016). You Want Me to Check Your Grammar

Again? The Usefulness of an Online Grammar Checker as Perceived

by Students. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, A223-A236.

Chapelle, Carol & Sauro (2017). Introduction to the Handbook of Technology

and Second Language Teaching and Learning.

10.1002/9781118914069.ch1.

Chen, Y., & Zhang, X. (2020). Challenges in academic writing for non-native

English speakers. English Language Teaching Journal, 13(4), 89-98.

Dalan, R. T. (2024). Experience of tertiary students using AI-powered writing

tools: A phenomenological study. Asian Journal of Educational

Research, 34(2), 215-230. [Link]

Daniels, P., & Leslie, D. (2013). Grammar software ready for EFL writers?

OnCue Journal, 9(4), 391–401.

Dashela, T., & Mustika, Y. (2022). Gender Differences In English Language

Learning. Jurnal Ilmiah Spectral, 8(2),

0105. [Link]

Davis, F. (1989) Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User

Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.

[Link]
 74

Defazio, J. et al. (2010) ‘Academic literacy: The importance and impact of

writing across the curriculum – a case stud’, Journal of the Scholarship

of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), pp. 34–47.

Fabro, M. A., De La Cruz, N. S., & Villanueva, L. T. (2024). Filipino students’

perceptions and use of AI tools in academic writing. International

Journal of Education and Research, 12(7), 45-58.

[Link]

Fahmi, M.A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of

Grammarly and teacher feedback. JESS (Journal of English Educators

Society), 6(1), 18-25

Fahmi, Mohammad & Cahyono, Bambang. (2021). EFL students' perception

on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of

English Educators Society). 6. 18-25. 10.21070/jees.v6i1.849.

Fithriani, Rahmah. (2022). Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions of Quillbot

Utilization in English Academic Writing Class. Journal of English

Language Teaching and Linguistics. 7. 437. 10.21462/jeltl.v7i3.852.

Fitria, T. N. (2021). Quillbot as an online tool: Students’ alternative in

paraphrasing and rewriting of English Writing. 9(1). DOI: 10.22373/eh.

v9il.10233. Getty (2020) 'Can computers ever replace the classroom.

DOI:[Link]

computers-ever-replace-the-classroom
 75

Ghafar, Z. N. et al (2023). The Role of Artificial Intelligence Technology on

English Language Learning: A Literature Review, pp, 17-31. DOI:

10.53103/cjlls. v3i2.87.

Ghufron, M. A., & Rosyida, F. (2018). The role of Grammarly in assessing

English as a foreign language (EFL) writing. Lingua Culture, 12(4), 395-

403.

Ghufron, M.A. and Rosyida, F. (2018) ‘The role of Grammarly in assessing

English as a foreign language (EFL) writing’, Lingua Cultura, 12(4), p.

395. doi:10.21512/lc. v12i4.4582.

Gok, Aktay, Sayim, Seçkin & Uzunoğlu, Dilşat. (2023). ChatGPT in education.

Türk Akademik Yayınlar Dergisi. 7. 378-406.

10.29329/tayjournal.2023.543.03.

Gorospe, Joanne & Rayton, Ma. (2022). "I can't write": problems, factors, and

recommendations. Technium Social Sciences Journal. 31. 280-288.

10.47577/tssj.v31i1.6433.

Gültekin, Özgül. (2023). The Influence of AI Writing Tools on the Content and

Organization of Students’ Writing: A Focus on EFL Instructors'

Perceptions. JOURNAL OF CURRENT DEBATES IN SOCIAL

SCIENCES. 2. 83-93. 10.29228/cudes.71701.

 76

Hamid, F. (2023, October 23). Quillbot AI Review: Everything You Need to

Know (2023). Elegant Themes Blog.

[Link]

Harris, J. (2021). The effectiveness of Grammarly in enhancing writing skills.

Journal of Educational Research, 34(1), 12-20.

Hernandez, M., & Silva, R. (2021). Collaborative writing in the digital age: AI-

powered tools in classroom practice. International Journal of

Educational Research, 15(3), 56-70.

Ho Chui Chui. (2021). The Quillbot Grammar Checker: Friend or Foe of ESL

Student Writers? pp, 10-31.

How ChatGPT can be a useful tool for students - BSBI. (2023, August 3).

BSBI. [Link]

for-students

[Link]

Huang, Jiahui & Saleh, Salmiza & Liu, Yufei. (2021). A Review on Artificial

Intelligence in Education. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies.

10. 206. 10.36941/ajis-2021-0077.

Idris Samarinda, S.A.M. (no date) ‘Students’ Perception Towards The Use Of

Grammarly In English Writing Skill Of Fourth Semester English

Eeducation Department At Uinsi Samarinda In The Academic Year

 77

2021/2022 Sephia Oktaviani’, Jurnal Sultan Idris Pendidikan Profesis

Guru [Preprint].

Iskender, Ali. (2023). Holy or Unholy? Interview with Open AI's ChatGPT.

European Journal of Tourism Research. 3414. 10.54055/ejtr.v34i.3169.

Jayavalan, K., & Razali, A. B. (2018). Effectiveness of Online Grammar

Checker to Improve Secondary Students’ English Narrative Essay

Writing. International Research Journal of Education and Sciences

(IRJES), 2(1), 1-6

Johnson, K., & Green, P. (2019). Structuring research papers: Common

challenges and solutions. Higher Education Journal, 22(5), 67-78.

Khusniyah, Zalfa & Shahrom, Syahreena & Elfiyanto, Sonny & Hidayanti, Ika.

(2023). Challenges and Coping Strategies of EFL Trainee Teachers in

International Teaching Practicum. VELES (Voices of English Language

Education Society). 7. 471-482. 10.29408/veles.v7i3.2125

Kurnita, E.Y. & Fithriani, R. (2022). Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions of

Quillbot Utilization in English Academic Writing Class. 7(3). DOI:

https;//[Link]/10.21462/jeltl. v7i3.

Liu, Y., Chen, H., & Yu, W. (2023). Long-term impacts of AI tools on student

writing proficiency: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational

Innovation, 10(2), 34-49.

 78

Malik, A. R., Pratiwi, Y., Andajani, K., Numertayasa, I. W., Suharti, S., Darwis,

A., & Marzuki, M. (2023, December 1). Exploring Artificial Intelligence in

Academic Essay: Higher Education Student’s Perspective. International

Journal of Educational Research Open.

[Link]

Malik, A.R. et al. (2023) ‘Exploring artificial intelligence in academic essay:

Higher Education Student’s perspective’, International Journal of

Educational Research Open, 5, p. 100296. doi:

10.1016/[Link].2023.100296.

Mohamed A. Okasha, Sami A. Hamdi (2014) 'Using Strategic Writing

Techniques for Promoting EFL Writing Skills and Attitudes', 5 (18), 674-

681. DOI:10.4304/jltr.5.3.674-681. The Use of AI and Technology Tools

in Developing Students’ English Academic Writing Skills.

Mohammed Abdulmalik Ali (2018) 'The Human Intelligence vs. Artificial

Intelligence: Issues and Challenges in Computer Assisted Language

Learning'. DOI:10.5539/ijel. v8n5p259.

Moses, R. N., & Mohamad, M. (2019, January 1). Challenges Faced by

Students and Teachers on Writing Skills in ESL Contexts: A Literature

Review. Creative Education. [Link]

Nahed, M. M. & Jawaher A. (2022). Effectiveness of Learning Management

Systems in Developing Essay Writing Skills as a Form of Creative

 79

Writing for Undergraduate Students in Saudi Arabia, pp, 393-410. DOI:

10.18488/61. v10i4.3229.

Nguyen Thi Xuyen (2023) 'Using Online Paraphrasing Tool Quillbot to Assist

Students in Paraphrasing the Source Information: English-majored

Students' Perceptions'. DOI: [Link]

Nur Fitria, Tira. (2021). QuillBot as an online tool: Students’ alternative in

paraphrasing and rewriting of English writing. Englisia Journal. 9. 183.

10.22373/ej.v9i1.10233.

Nurmayanti, N. & Duryadi. (2023). The ffectiveness of Using Quillbot in

Improving Writing for Students Of English Study Program: Jurnal

Penelitian dan Pemgembangan pembelajaran, 8(1), 32-40. DOI;

[Link]

Nurmayanti, N. & Suryadi. (2023). The Effectiveness of Using QuillBot In

Improving Writing For Students of English Study Program. Jurnal

Teknologi Pendidikan : Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan

Pembelajaran, 8(1), 32-40. DOI: https:/[Link]/10.33394/jtp.v8i1.6392

Parajuli, M. and Thapa, A. (2017) ‘Gender differences in the academic

performance of students’, Journal of Development and Social

Engineering, 3(1), pp. 39–47. doi:10.3126/jdse.v3i1.27958.

 80

Peterson, G. (2022). Balancing guidance and independence: The role of

teachers in AI-assisted writing. Teaching and Learning with

Technology, 14(5), 123-139.

Petricini, T., Wu, C. and Zipf, S.T. (2023) Perceptions about generative AI and

CHATGPT use by faculty and college students [Preprint].

doi:10.35542/[Link]/jyma4.

Radford, A., Wu, J., Child, R., et al. (2019) Language Models Are

Unsupervised Multitask Learners. OpenAI Blog, 1.

Rahma, A., & Fithriani, R. (2024). The potential impact of using Chat GPT on

EFL students' writing: Teachers' perspective. Indonesian EFL Journal,

10(1), 11-22. [Link]

Rakhmanina & Serasi, nd. "Utilizing QuillBot Paraphraser to Minimize

Plagiarism in Students' Scientific Writing,"Novateur Publication, India.

Ratnawati, & Faridah, Didih & Anam, Syafiul & Retnaningdyah, Pratiwi.

(2018). Exploring Academic Writing Needs of Indonesian EFL

Undergraduate Students. Arab World English Journal. 9. 420-432.

10.24093/awej/vol9no4.31.

Saavedra, A. and Barredo, C. (2020) ‘Factors that Contribute to the Poor

Writing Skills in Filipino and English of the Elementary Pupils’,

International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 14(5), pp.

1090–1106.
 81

Samala, A.D., Zhai, X., Aoki, K., Bojic, L., Zikic, S. (2024). An In-Depth Review

of ChatGPT’s Pros and Cons for Learning and Teaching in Education

International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (Ijim), 18(2) pp.

96-117. 10.3991/ijim.v18i02.46509

Seo, K. et al. (2021). The impact of intelligent on learner- instructor interaction

in online learning, pp, 2-23. DIO: 10.1186/s41239-021-00292-9.

Shahriar, A. & Laboni, F. B. (2023). Potential Success in English Writing Skills

Using Artificial Intelligence “Grammarly”. Vol 10.

Slimi, Z. (2023) ‘The impact of artificial intelligence on Higher Education: An

empirical study’, European Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(1).

doi:10.19044/ejes.v10no1a17.

Smith, T. (2021). Grammar and syntax correction tools in academic writing.

Educational Technology & Society, 24(1), 30-45.

Smith, T., & Jones, R. (2023). Balancing AI and personal writing skills. Journal

of Academic Writing, 16(2), 89-103.

Song, Cuiping & Song, Yanping. (2023). Enhancing academic writing skills

and motivation: assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted

language learning for EFL students. Frontiers in Psychology. 14.

10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1260843. ong

Strydom, Sonja & Wessels, Helena & Anley, Casey. (2021). Moving beyond

the tools: Pre-service teachers’ views on what they value in a digital

 82

literacy short course. South African Journal of Childhood Education. 11.

10.4102/sajce.v11i1.929.

Suharyat, Y., & Lusiana. (2023). Artificial Intelligent: Positive And Negative

Role in Education Management. International Conference on Education,

349–357. Retrieved

Sulfa, S., Dewi, RS., Hidayat, DN., Hamid, F., Defiantly,.(2023). "The use of AI

and Technology Tools in Developing Students' English Academic

Writing" Faculty of Tarbiyah IAIN Kediri.

Sumakul, D., Hamied, F., & Sukyadi, D. (2022a). Students’ perceptions of

the use of AI in a writing class. Proceedings of the 67th TEFLIN

International Virtual Conference & amp; the 9th ICOELT 2021

(TEFLIN ICOELT 2021). [Link]

Syahnaz M. & Rahmah F (2023) 'Utilizing Artificial Intelligence-base

[Link] Tool in EFL Writing Class: A Focus on Indonesian

University Students' Perceptions'. DOI:

[Link]

Toba, Rostanti & Noor, Widya & Sanu, La Ode. (2019). The Current Issues of

Indonesian EFL Students’ Writing Skills: Ability, Problem, and Reason

in Writing Comparison and Contrast Essay. Dinamika Ilmu. 19. 57-73.

10.21093/di.v19i1.1506.
 83

Tran, Thi. (2024). AI Tools in Teaching and Learning English Academic

Writing Skills. Proceedings of the AsiaCALL International Conference.

4. 170-187. 10.54855/paic.23413.

Ummah, L. K., & Bisriyah, M. (2022). EFL students’ perception of Grammarly’s

feedback and how they deal with the inaccuracy. JEES (Journal of

English Educators Society), 7(2), 163– 172.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher

psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Weaver, C.H. (2023). ChatGPT Inaccurate and Unreliable for Providing

Medical Information for Now. CancerConnect.

What is Academic Writing? (and Other Burning Questions About It). (n.d.).

[Link]

other-burning-questions-about-

Williams, K., & Davis, L. (2017). Enhancing academic integrity using AI-

powered paraphrasing tools. Journal of Educational Technology, 14(3),

45–56.

Williams, L. (2021). AI tools in academic integrity: A review. Academic Integrity

Journal, 10(2), 58-73.

Yang, S. (2007). Artificial Intelligence for Integrating English Oral Practice and

Writing Skills. Vol 4, No. 4.s

 84

Zapata, A., & Gallardo, M. (2017). Writing as a tool for emotional and cognitive

development: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review,

29(4), 587–610.

Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C.S., Jong, M.S.Y., et al. (2021) A review of Artificial

Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020, Complexity. Available

at: [Link] (Accessed: 08 December

2023).

Zhai, Xiaoming. (2022). ChatGPT User Experience: Implications for Education.

SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.4312418.

Zhang, X., & Lin, T. (2023). Encouraging creativity in student writing through

artificial intelligence. Contemporary Perspectives in Education, 20(1),

45-67.

Zulfikar, T., Dahliana S., & Sari, R. A. (2019). An Exploration of English

Students’ Attitude towards English Learning. English Language Teaching

Educational Journal, 2 (1), 1-12.