CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Theoretical Framework

2.1.1 Writing

[Link] The Definition of Writing

Writing, by all means, is known as an intricate thinking process that requires an

individual’s awareness of several factors. Nunan (2003, p. 88) states that writing is
defined as both a mentally as well as physically demanding activity.

Observation is the first step in writing, as it involves noticing something and

deciding to write about it. It also includes descriptive elements, such as conveying
detailed information in the learners' own words. (Sun, 2014, p. 181). Writing is
thought to be an effective and productive skill through

At a ground understanding, it’s understood as putting words or ideas into an

instrument of expression, but it can also be understood as the thinking process that
generates the ideas, the arrangement of those ideas into clear and logical
paragraphs or statements and the delivery of words in the most effective way. It is a
method of communication with others in which a writer conveys their ideas and
thoughts to readers in written form. It is a cognitive process in which the writer
discovers, organizes, and expresses his or her ideas to the reader (Wingersky, 1999,
p. 4). Furthermore, it is about transmitting meaning via the use of well-chosen and
written or printed words (Farbrain & Whinch, 1996, p. 32). Overall, writing entails
communicating information and expressing ideas through written formats. In
summary, writing is a medium for communication in written form.
Writing can also be defined as a systematic arrangement of written symbols that
represent the language syllables, vocabulary and their sound through several means
such as capitalisation, spelling, punctuation, syntax and meaning. It is an active
creation of text that involves basic transcription skills such as handwriting and
more complex skills like competent thinking that requires planning, logical
sequencing and expressing materials, which is the basic requirement of a writer’s
expression of content by considering the context that readers should be able to
understand.

It’s also considered to be an essential means of communication, far exceeding other

forms of communication in terms of conveying information while communicating.
Understandably why students, especially those who are undergraduates, require
strong writing abilities for academic and professional success in their future

[Link] Why is writing a challenge for students?

As aforementioned by Hyland (2003) writing by itself is hard to master and acquire

and for English learners, this is especially hard when considering the amount of
hidden context behind grasping the narrative of a foreign language, this is painfully
taken when it’s come to writing because of its complexity in grammatical structure,
vocabulary and spelling. Negari (2012) asserts that mastering writing in a primary,
secondary, or foreign language appears to be the most challenging ability for
language learners to develop in academic settings. Richards (2008) asserts that
mastering writing in either the primary or secondary language is among the most
challenging tasks learners face, and few individuals achieve complete proficiency.

The data above indicate that writing is a complicated expertise that requires much
practice to master. Grammar, vocabulary, mechanics, substance, and structure are
all important parts of good writing (Hartfiel, Hughey, Wormuth, & Jacobs, 1985,
p.89). Grammar is a collection of principles that assist students in forming
sentences that make sense and are written in acceptable English (Farbrain &
Whinch, 1996, p. 108). Vocabulary refers to the English words that students use to
communicate their thoughts in writing. Furthermore, organisation refers to learners'
capacity to arrange their thoughts logically and cohesively to form a whole
paragraph (Hartfiel, Hughey, Wormuth, & Jacobs, 1985, p. 93).

[Link] The Importance of Writing

Harmer (2004, pp. 31-33) stressed the importance of writing by stating that writing
encourages students to focus on correct language use since they think while
writing, and it can aid in personal growth by allowing individuals to address issues
that arise. This skill has long been used to reinforce previously taught language
skills. Employing writing skills has been proven to help keep track of recently
learned grammar in the learning process.

Writing is crucial for both academic and professional settings. Students who lack
writing abilities fail to interact properly with teachers, employers, peers, and
others. It is intended for communicating ideas, opinions and facts simply and
understandably. To write well, students must establish an understandable objective,
consider layout and organisation, and rewrite. Writing requires cognitive abilities,
including analysing information and arranging it into a concise piece of writing.
According to Maley (2009), writing benefits language development at all levels,
requires learners to manipulate language in unique ways, requires a willingness to
play with language, and focuses on the right side of the brain (e.g., feelings,
physical sensations).

Writing is also an incredibly versatile technique that may be utilised to accomplish

a wide range of objectives (Graham, 2006). It allows us to retain intimate
connections with family, friends, and coworkers even when we are unable to be
physically there with them. Writing allows people to construct fictitious worlds,
communicate narratives, discover themselves, overcome loneliness, and document
their experiences. Writing about one's emotions and experiences might be good
both mentally and therapeutically (Smyth, 1998). Writing is also a valuable
technique for learning. We utilise it to collect, store, and share information
globally. Writing's permanence allows for easy review and feedback while its clear
character encourages connecting ideas and exploring unresolved ideas.

[Link] Characteristics of Writing

[Link].1 Grammar

The first and most important factor when it comes to successful writing is
grammatical efficiency. The Oxford Dictionary defines grammar as "the entire
system and structure of a language or languages, often comprising syntax and
morphology (including inflexions), and occasionally encompassing phonology and
semantics."

Baleghizadeh and Gordani (2012) recognise grammar as essential in writing and

emphasise that even native speakers occasionally write incorrectly in terms of
grammar. As a result, English learners should attempt to steadily improve their
writing correctness to make their work as understandable and proficient as
possible. Johnson (2016) entirely endorses this viewpoint, arguing that instructors
should educate their students to be conversant with grammatical principles and
train them to employ a wide and exact variety of grammatical structures since
language promotes and preserves correctness as it looks at grammar and
correctness as one aspect of academic writing, with the assumption that a solid
fundamental understanding of English grammar can assist students to avoid errors,
problems, and misunderstanding while keeping the accuracy and intellectual
components of their writing in mind.

[Link].2 Coherence and Cohesion

Language analysis uses the terms coherence and cohesion to describe the
consistency of written discourses. In writing, sentences might be significant in a
logical flow of ideas or useful in connecting concepts at the sentence and
paragraph levels (Louwerse & Graesser, 2005).

Halliday and Hassan (1976) developed the concept of cohesiveness in their book
"Cohesion in English," describing it as the various strategies available for linking a
section of text to what has previously been discussed. Furthermore, some experts
define cohesiveness as terms interconnected in a way that makes the discourse
intelligible and presentable to readers (Bailey, 2003; Renkema, 2004). When
employing cohesiveness, the user is "tying" or connecting their words to establish a
clear and logical meaning for the reader, resulting in the text's "flow" (Moxley,
2015).
Coherence, like cohesiveness, is essential for writing. It involves organising ideas
logically in a text so that readers can easily understand and find meaning. If each
sentence is well-crafted but lacks context from the preceding phrases, readers may
feel confused (Halliday & Hasan, 1989), particularly if a sentence begins abruptly.
Additionally, Kuo (1995) explores how coherence can be achieved through
contextual links, such as shared information between the writer and the reader.
[Link].3 Vocabulary

Vocabulary is one of the English components that must be acquired before learning
to write. According to Alqahtani (2015, p. 22), "In English as a second language
(ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL), memorising vocabulary items
plays a critical role in all language skills, i.e., listening, speaking, reading, and
writing." It implies that vocabulary is required to acquire English abilities. Solati-
Dehkordi and Dehkardi (2016) also contend that vocabulary refers to a word's
written form. Writing in sentences and paragraphs requires proper word formation.

According to Osmond (2024), understanding academic vocabulary enables authors

to create clear and relevant content for educated readers within their sector.
Writing, of course, demands that writers select and apply genre-appropriate
academic terminology for meaning to work in the world of academic discourse.
Chauhan (2022) tells you it is something to mention, using "big words" when
writing correctly, and avoiding using slang and abbreviations. Overuse of high-
level vocabulary can add a little length to the reading process and unknowingly
confuse us without providing clear ideas.

[Link] Learning Writing in the Era of Artificial Intelligence

The art of writing is an ability that higher education students often engage with,
and it is typically regarded as the most difficult of the four fundamental language
skills (Yundayani, 2018). Students' challenges include not just the technical aspects
of writing but also the ability to express their thoughts effectively. Proficiency in
vocabulary and comprehension of sentence structure are fundamental elements of
effective writing abilities (Yundayani, 2018). Writing is facilitated by a
comprehensive knowledge foundation, which may be cultivated by substantial
reading of research papers and Advancements to education over the recent period
have introduced major changes to pedagogy and student study behaviour. Batanero
et al. According to (2021), technology has now replaced the regular printed
material and writing utensils with electronic shows and input tools such as
keyboards, mouse and touchpads. According to Mullammaa (2010), today's
technology and digital learning solutions deliver to the learners more challenging
and exciting education experiences.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its usages are the peak of technological
specialisation. This revolutionarily changes language learning and understanding
with the usage of virtual language educators and chatbots that can assist students in
improving their skills within natural and engaging environments. AI systems, as
demonstrated by the works of Brown et al. (2020), Geitgey (2018), and Heaven
(2020), utilise sophisticated algorithms and natural language processing techniques
to provide automated writing assistance, recommendations, and revisions. There is
an inextricable relation between the rapid transformation and development of
writing instruction in the Contemporary Age of technological proliferation. Even
Haleem et al. (2022) state that this shift is fueled by the increasing uptake of digital
tools in education and transition from the traditional pen-and-paper approach to
more modern, meaningful learning experiences. As users type in their questions, AI
quickly generates solutions. AI is increasingly being used in educational settings,
with a particular focus on language acquisition. Especially in language-related
subjects, students from middle school to higher education use AI to solve their
queries. While AI gives students a significant advantage in overcoming academic
obstacles, it has also raised different views. Some advocate for its implementation,
claiming that it can improve learning efficiency and knowledge acquisition in
students (Yu, 2023). These systems have functionalities like immediate feedback,
co-editing and also for detecting plagiarism. These will not only enhance the
writing skills of students but moreover drive them towards critical thinking and
free, logical thinking. However, some have expressed concerns about the potential
risks associated with developing students’ critical thinking skills, including ethical
dilemmas, data authenticity, and potential negative impacts (Fuchs, 2023). Many
students choose shortcuts by using AI to finish their projects instead of dedicating
the necessary time to develop these abilities. This pattern provokes major debates
about the relationship between technology use and the development of basic
learning capabilities.

2.1.2. Gemini

[Link] What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)?

As technology advances, new instruments arrive. AI is an innovative and

developed technology. There are many different concepts of AI. McCarthy (2007)
created one of the first and most significant definitions of AI:" the science and
engineering of making intelligent machines". Shneiderman (2020) expressed AI as
a type of system that could be automated, including technologies such as machine
learning, neural networks, and statistical methods. These technologies could also
help us do things faster and more accurately than humans can. AI usage is in many
parts of our lives, even if we do not realise it. AI's usage in education began in the
1990s, when computers were initially introduced (Salas-Pilco & Yang, 2022).
Recently, AI has grown substantially as a research field (Crompton & Burke,
2023). A lot of literature has identified the ways to use AI in education. Crompton
et al. (2022) reported that incorporating AI could be a way of assessing students'
writings and providing remedial feedback or personalising instructional practices
to meet the unique needs of specific learners. Zhan et al. (2022) performed a
systematic review of learning studies on AI education and their impact on future
work. The research indicates evidence that AI integration into learning increases
creativity, increases motivation and attention, and benefits students in terms of
academic outcomes and learning experience.

[Link] What is a Chatbot?

Chatbot refers to an advanced AI technology — it is a computer program, using

voice or text conversation (Haristiani, 2019). A lot of information-driven websites
and messaging applications (e.g., colleges, libraries, museums) have online
chatbots as well (Fryer et al., 2020). A chatbot is a software application engineered
to replicate human dialogue and persona, capable of participating in simple
discussions with human users (Rice & Gregor, 2016). Chatbots are a form of AI
created to interact in conversation with human users (Guo et al., 2022).

Haristiani's (2019) study involved chatbots that have great potential for language
learning and can operate as an independent learning resource as well as teachers
for language practice. Chatbots for language learners, the research pointed out that
language learners love chatbots because of their utility anytime and anywhere.
Chatbots — Moons and Bulk (2023) automated content generation and AI
language understanding have been defined as a Chatbot, which is a hardware that
can simulate individual-to-individual interactions (in text or speech) and is
powered by AI. The chatbot can autonomously communicate, based on stored
knowledge and provide answers to students' questions. We have a vast range of
chatbots developed at the very beginning of this decade by Molnár & Szüts in
2018.

Rapidly, interactive technology, frequently combined with AI, has invaded and
dominated the online conversation world. Huang et al. (2021) identified three
technological advantages of chatbots for language learning from a review of
research: timeliness, easy use and personalisation. It further established that
chatbots increase students' social presence with emotive and realistic, non-polite
conversational speech.

[Link] What is Gemini?

Released on December 6, 2023 — Gemini, the latest AI tool with multimodal

abilities, is a Google DeepMind AI playing fast and loose with Visual Language
Model (VLM) (Perera & Lankathilaka 2023). This AI tool merges multiple LLMS
and a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm (Farrokhnia et al., 2023).
Gemini solves the issues of reinforcement learning, deep learning and computing.
Cross-section uses will scale the amalgamation of all AI technologies in several
branches to the future technological consistency, co-operation and combinative
genius, especially among academics and educators, digital content providers. (Ali
et al., 2023 ;Imran & Almusharraf, 2023).

[Link] Gemini features

On the AI scale, the most advanced and capable of GenAI referred to as Gemini,
has a wide range of capabilities that distinguish it from other AI tools. It has the
broadest general capabilities over modalities, along with deeper understanding and
reasoning ability in all domains (Team et al., 2023).

[Link].1 Multimodal capabilities

One of the most remarkable traits of Gemini is its capability to process and work
with diverse data types as text, photos, audio, PDFs, and videos. — This flexibility
is what allows Gemini to formulate longer responses fitting the situation, making it
useful for many scenarios and purposes. Google Gemini can take multiple forms of
inputs (e.g., audio, visual and video) and produce the output accordingly (Koubaa
et al., 2023).

[Link].2. Advanced performance

The latest Gemini version has been widely recognised for its high performance in a
lot of areas. It's diverse to individuals with limited availability of educational
instruments and AI sites, in some ways engaging you in a diverse, educative,
entertaining environment. An individual can take advantage of improving a
language, identifying object recognition, multitasking response capabilities and
live conversations on many topics (Nyaaba, 2023). This shows that Gemini was
good at multiple tasks, such as text-tuning, idea generation, and other tasks (e.g.
programming assistance, previous reading comprehension, doing math problems
and creating code). Research from Google demonstrates that Gemini is
constructed to minimise risk factors in generating negative replies. Every week, the
Google DeepMind Team finds a little more as they delve into 20 kinds of adverse
signals and verbiage such as requests for illegal activities, hate speech, security-
related issues, medical-level advice, and so on. Hence, the answers provided by
Gemini arise from a relatable dataset that is clean of what could have been harmful
inputs or queries (Team et al., 2023).

[Link].3. Versatility in communication

One additional characteristic of Gemini involves aiding a variety of

communication tasks and styles, perhaps changing its replies to educational and
informative choices, complete or unusual, if the required situation. At this point, it
gives interactive simulations for learning. Using audio, video, image and text,
Gemini is generating rich educational content that allows for more engaging stories
to be told about inherently abstract things (Team et al., 2023). From its competitor
AI educational tools (Copilot-former known as Bing Chat, Claude 2.0, ChatGPT
etc.) in all of the competitive landscape in order nutshell, to address the pain point
personalized, accessible and dynamic learning experience demanded an innovation
(Perera & Lankathilaka 2023) Gemini stands out because it provides targeted
feedbacks and explanations for different jobs and instructions (Saeidnia, 2023). It
evaluates the students' replies and gives specific feedback, containing ideas in
visuals, conversation in nature and context examples.

[Link].4. Feedback and assessment

Gemini uses its sophisticated language understanding and logic to provide more
methodical assessment, feedback, and consistent grading for coding and writing
assignments and activities (Team et al., 2023). It benefits educators, learners, and
professionals alike. Gemini can generate stimulating prompts and scenarios for
instructors, promoting critical thinking, logical analysis, hypothesis development,
and solution discovery in students. Saeidnia (2023) asserts that Google Gemini
enhances information exchange and communication between different learning
communities, promoting a collaborative learning environment. The technology
aims to provide a contextual conversational experience, providing customised,
accurate, and relevant responses in an accessible manner.

2.1.3 The Benefit of Using Gemini as a Writing Assistant

AI has pervasively impacted students' writing using which. What seems to be fairly
recent data indicates that machine learning can be a big help to students through
writing assistance, in recommending sentence-level structure, grammar assistance
and style to all users but particularly ones who are non-native speakers (Godwin-
Jones, 2020). These systems might work as writing tutors to provide students with
feedback on the iterative improvement of their skills, aiming for better academic
success (Luckin, 2017).

Students can benefit from using these features of Gemini; for instance, it can be a
study buddy for personalised instruction. It can change depending on the
peculiarities of each individual and the purpose to give precise answers to any
query regarding the topic. It could even adjust its explanations to student learning
style and expertise level, as well as course material (Saeidnia, 2023; Team et al.,
2023). Gemini can help if a student is getting stumped by or falling behind in any
concept. It could offer alternative visualisation, diagrams, simulations, as well as
stories/narratives of the topic under consideration to assist students in seeing the
concepts differently. Generally speaking, people under the sign of Gemini are more
kinesthetic and visual learners. For students doing research at the higher level,
Gemini is pretty useful. Another great research assistant for scholars and students
in all fields is Gemini; It provides materials, generates ideas, synthesises data,
highlights trends and patterns.

[Link]. Improvement of learners' grammar capability

The use of artificial intelligence in essay writing has generated significant attention
in higher education. AI-driven writing tools have become essential aids for
students and writers, offering a range of functionalities to facilitate the writing
process. A multitude of research has examined the efficacy of AI writing tools in
higher education environments. Miranty and Widiati (2021) and Almusharraf and
Alotaibi (2023) examined the impact of Grammarly, an AI-driven grammar and
style checker, on the writing proficiency of undergraduate students. Research
indicates that students who use Grammarly surpassed the control group in
grammatical accuracy and writing quality. AI language models, such as Gemini,
have been examined for their potential to assist students in content creation and
grammatical improvement.
These programs use sophisticated algorithms to detect prevalent problems in
grammar, punctuation, and syntax, offering recommendations to enhance clarity
and style. They provide distinctive functionalities, like paraphrasing and modifying
phrases for improved efficacy. Research conducted by Tambunan et al. (2022)
showed that the use of AI enhanced students' grammar and punctuation skills. AI
evaluates the user's content and offers immediate recommendations for improving
grammar, spelling, punctuation, clarity, engagement, and presentation. This
transforms the writing process into a learning opportunity for paraphrasing,
assisting students in evading plagiarism while preserving the original meaning of
their text. Kurniati and Fithriani (2022) discovered that AI assisted students in
enhancing their paraphrasing abilities, an essential ability in academic writing. AI
may concentrate on enhancing and perfecting the tone and style of the writing.
Research conducted by Lam and Moorhouse (2022) shows that AI proficiently
assisted students in recognising their writing deficiencies, thereby facilitating self-
evaluation and learning. This program transcends basic grammatical correction and
explores the stylistic aspects of writing. AI may provide predictive text ideas to
assist users in composing emails, reports, articles, and many other documents with
more efficiency.

[Link]. Enhancing learners’ coherence and cohesion skills.

AI can produce coherent and contextually appropriate sentences, enhancing

students' creative and critical thinking skills (Mhlanga, 2023). This resource serves
as an effective instrument for students to explore various writing styles and
concepts. These studies underscore the potential of AI tools in improving students'
writing skills. Brown (2018) posits that AI tools can significantly improve the
readability and clarity of academic writing in different ways. Particularly, the
algorithms used by AI can offer suggestions for improving the quality by
suggesting alternative phrasing or sentence structures, and can also evaluate the
cohesiveness of the text. Furthermore, AI can simplify intricate language, proving
to be invaluable for authors targeting a non-expert or interdisciplinary audience. AI
tools are capable of identifying ambiguous areas within a writing by flagging
sentences or phrases that may lack clarity. This encourages learners to refine their
language and enhance the overall clarity of their work. Using AI tools in this
context can yield manuscripts characterised by enhanced consistency, clarity, and
continuity compared to those produced without such assistance, especially for
learners.

[Link]. Enhancing learners’ vocabulary usage.

Recent advancements in technology have significantly enhanced accessibility in

schools for learners (Yildiz, 2021). As a result, the introduction of virtual assistants
or e-learning can efficiently reduce the shortcomings in interaction between
learners and educators and offer consistent feedback to learners. The advent of AI
chatbots has fostered learner engagement, enhanced linguistic proficiency, and
sustained interest among students (Kohnke, 2023; Smutny & Schreiberova, 2020).
Chatbots, particularly in the context of AI, have contributed significantly to
alleviating social anxiety among language learners (Fryer & Carpenter, 2006)
while simultaneously facilitating the acquisition of incidental vocabulary. In
addition to functioning as a valuable tool for dialogue acquisition, AI has
demonstrated positive impacts on vocabulary enhancement (Legault et al., 2019),
cultural education (Cheng et al., 2017), and increasing students' preparedness for
engagement (Ayedoun et al., 2015). Furthermore, these instruments have
demonstrated the capacity to enhance vocabulary acquisition and facilitate
exposure to novel linguistic characteristics (Gallacher et al., 2018). Hassani et al.
(2016) demonstrated that by providing students with access to real-world resources
for learning and opportunities for experiential engagement, they could significantly
boost students' motivation.

Kim et al. (2020) demonstrated that students' engagement in vocabulary acquisition

for writing skills could be significantly enhanced before and after the utilisation of
AI. In the interim, research undertaken by Cheng et al. (2017), Gallacher,
Thompson, and Howarth (2018), Coniam (2008), and Huang et al. (2017) has
explored the influence of AI on cognitive engagement within the realm of language
acquisition, resulting in increased student involvement and autonomy in their
learning processes. Moreover, a number of studies, such as those conducted by
Fryer and Carpenter (2006), Hassani et al. (2016), Kim et al. (2020), and Alm and
Nkomo (2022), have examined the impact of AI on emotional engagement within
the context of language acquisition. Their findings indicate that AI has the potential
to significantly alleviate anxiety, enhance enjoyment and motivation, and cultivate
a deeper sense of accomplishment in learners as they acquire new vocabulary.

2.1.4 Limitations surrounding the usage of Gemini in Writing

[Link] Plagiarism

[Link].1a Definition of Plagiarism

The act of displaying as one's original work the creative efforts of another
individual without providing adequate attribution of the author or source is
considered to be plagiarism (University of Melbourne, 2025). It is possible to
interpret it as the act of stealing the thoughts and efforts of another person.
According to Harvard University Extension School (2025), the act of plagiarism is
the same regardless of whether a student directly takes the ideas of another person
or merely rephrases them without giving adequate credit to the source. According
to the University of Oxford (2025), plagiarism may be described as the imitation or
paraphrasing of the ideas or works of other individuals into one's work without
giving full credit to the original author.

2.1.4.1b Why is Using Gemini causing Plagiarism

The utilisation of AI tools to compose a paper in any academic or professional

context constitutes plagiarism (Gao et al., 2022). When utilising tools like Gemini,
users have a responsibility to exercise caution so as not to violate copyright laws or
create plagiarism problems. Since the application is trained on publicly accessible
materials on the internet (Biswas, 2023; Kitamura, 2023), there is an increased
possibility of copyright or plagiarism concerns occurring, since AI may give texts
that are comparable to work that has previously been published. Another
significant challenge will be determining how artificial intelligence will handle
limited usage of resources like databases and materials that are not available to the
public (Arif et al., 2023). As a consequence of this, AI might automatically avoid
including such databases and literature in their search, which would ultimately
result in a restricted preference for references given to the user. Plagiarism may
also result in a significant issue for writers in the long term, since it may occur
many years after the original occurrence of plagiarism. On account of this, it is of
utmost importance to prevent plagiarism and inaccurate data in the future while
doing academic research.
Research indicates that the rise of journals without stringent quality controls has
raised concerns regarding the potential influx of AI-generated articles within the
scientific community, as prominent plagiarism detection tools have proven
inadequate in effectively identifying violations (Dehouche, 2021; Francke &
Bennett, 2019). De Angelis et al. (2023) identified that the emergence of journals
lacking fundamental quality controls, such as plagiarism verification and
adherence to ethical standards, could lead to a substantial increase in AI-generated
articles in the scientific domain. This trend may significantly compromise the
credibility of scientific studies and diminish the prestige of scholarly publications.
Khalil and Er (2023) report that prevalent plagiarism detection tools, including
Turnitin and iThenticate, exhibit a notable limitation in detecting plagiarism in
essays derived from existing literature. Their studies indicate that these tools can
detect plagiarism in fewer than 15%. The low detection rate presents significant
concerns regarding students' potential misuse of these platforms for academic
purposes. This underscores a significant concern about the opacity of the
algorithms utilised in plagiarism detection processes (Ventayen, 2023).

[Link] Over-reliance on Gemini

2.1.4.2a Definition of Over-reliance on AI

Over-reliance on AI refers to people endorsing erroneous AI advice, resulting in

errors of commission. Dependence excessively often occurs when consumers
cannot ascertain the degree of confidence they should place in the AI. Users
struggle to establish suitable levels of confidence due to a lack of understanding
about the AI's capabilities, performance efficacy, and operational mechanisms. The
over-reliance of users on AI is not always apparent. Consider an AI system that
does things more proficiently than humans. Users exhibit enhanced decision-
making accuracy when they excessively depend on this system rather than
operating independently. When the human-AI team outperforms the individual
human, the scenario seems reasonable and uncontroversial. Nonetheless, all AI
systems are prone to errors. Occasionally, AI systems commit errors that vary from
those made by humans. Occasionally, AI systems begin to exhibit novel errors after
model upgrades (Bansal et al. 2019). Consequently, even when humans excel with
AI, the unpredictability of AI errors necessitates vigilance against excessive
dependence.

2.1.4.2b Why does relying on Gemini lead to over-dependence?

AI writing tools could cause students to become too dependent on them, because
they might rely too much on them to fix their mistakes without fully knowing what
they did wrong. This dependence could make it harder for them to learn new things
on their own and improve their skills for self-improvement. Concerns about over-
reliance have been accompanied by questions regarding the impact of AI writing
tools on creativity. Certain instructors worry that learners might use these tools not
only to enhance their language skills but also for idea generation, potentially
stifling their creative thinking and originality (Johinke et al., 2023). Furthermore,
Farrokhnia et al. (2023) indicated that while AI tools may improve certain writing
abilities, they might be less effective in addressing higher-order writing
components, such as argument structure and coherence. These elements require a
deep understanding of the subject, logical reasoning, and the ability to interconnect
concepts, which currently exceed the capabilities of AI tools. AI technologies may
also fall short in terms of tone and context. These tools may not fully grasp the
intricacies and complexities of human language and emotion, which could result in
suggestions that are inappropriate or inaccurate in specific contexts (Haleem et al.,
2022). Concerns regarding digital equity have also been raised. Unequal access to
these technologies among learners might lead to disparities in educational
outcomes. Mozumder et al. (2023) noted that students without high-speed internet
or modern digital devices may be unable to utilise AI techniques, thereby
exacerbating the educational attainment gap.

Consequently, while the integration of AI in writing education has prospective

advantages, educators must be aware of these viable limitations and anticipate
them within their approaches to instruction.

2.3 Previous studies

AI writing aids have gained significant prominence in language acquisition,

especially among university-level English majors. Recent research has investigated
the incorporation of AI-powered tools, like Gemini, ChatGPT, and other generative
language models, into writing activities for this group. These technologies include
instantaneous grammatical correction, vocabulary augmentation, individualised
feedback, and assistance in organising and polishing written compositions. This
literature review consolidates significant results from current research about using
AI writing assistants by English majors to enhance their writing abilities,
emphasising both the educational advantages and the problems, such as over-
reliance and plagiarism.

Research by Nguyen (2024) emphasises that AI technologies such as Gemini may

provide personalised learning experiences, enhance linguistic engagement, and
give quick feedback. Gemini is selected for its complimentary access, Vietnamese
interface, and compatibility for more than 40 languages. This research illustrates
that Gemini serves as an effective instrument for undergraduate students,
especially those in Food Technology with limited English proficiency, to enhance
their English abilities. They surveyed 59 students majoring in Food Technology
using the questionnaire approach, as seen by their responses. mastering English
grammar, vocabulary, and other micro-skills might be challenging. Gemini
enhances vocabulary, grammar, speaking, listening, pronunciation, reading, and
writing skills. It suggests many techniques for using Gemini to enhance the
efficacy of English learning in vocabulary, grammar, listening, speaking, reading,
writing, and fostering an enjoyable atmosphere for learning.

Another study was conducted by Marzuki et al. (2023). The investigation used a
qualitative methodology within a case study framework. The data was gathered via
informal interviews, focusing on the range of artificially intelligent writers and
their influence on students' writing quality. The research collected data from four
EFL educators at various universities in Indonesia, highlighting the range of AI
writing tools used in their lessons. Moreover, the teachers involved collectively
acknowledged that the AI writing tools significantly enhanced their students'
writing quality, especially in terms of material and structure. The results of this
research suggest that using AI writing tools may enhance the quality of student
writing.

Written work by Imran and Almusharraf (2023) talks about different points of view
and situations related to using AI as a writing aid and how to work with it. The
results show that using AI in schooling is a part of the process of progress. By this
reasoning, using AI as a writing helper in education, especially for academic
writing, comes with both positive and negative aspects. We need to understand
how it can help and guide students and teachers, because robots are pretty useful
tools for making the learning process easier and more effective. But universities
should look at their training, rules, and ways of grading students and teachers' work
in writing classes again and make sure they are up-to-date on problems like
plagiarism and over-reliance.

In a different study from 2024, Imran and Almusharraf talk about new
observational studies, technology in the real world, and how Gemini innovation
changes schooling. This study looks into Gemini's usefulness for future training
projects and real-world uses in new technologies in more depth. It also talks about
the big problems and moral issues that need to be dealt with to make sure that it is
properly and responsibly integrated into the school system.

Ananda (2024) investigated how students felt about Gemini, an AI writing helper
tool. The goal of this study is to find out how students feel about using Gemini as
an extra tool for writing in English. Using semi-structured interviews to gather
data, this study was qualitative. There were major questions and follow-up
questions in the interview. The answers to the main questions provided a
foundation for the follow-up questions. Nine out of thirty EFL students were
chosen to take part in this study. Most students had already used their own AI apps,
so they did not want to use Gemini or other AI apps that were new to them.
However, in contrast, the students thought that Gemini had a lot of qualities that
helped them write well. AI apps that students had used before were more popular
with students than Gemini at the moment. However, based on what students said,
experts think Gemini will be used as a writing tool in the future. Through this
study, students may be able to find another way to speed up the writing process
besides the AI apps they have been using.

To sum up, Nguyen (2024) showed that Gemini could help Food Technology
students who did not speak English very well by showing big gains in small skills
like language and grammar; Ananda (2024) said that students liked how easy it was
to use and how flexible it was. Concerns about over-reliance, ethical issues, and
copying risks still exist, even with these benefits. This is because AI-generated
material often goes unnoticed by traditional tools like Turnitin, which raises
concerns about academic ethics. There is also a need for a fair combination with
traditional teaching methods because Gemini is great at giving technical feedback
but not so good at developing higher-order skills like reasoning and innovation.
Previous study by Imran and Almusharraf (2023, 2024) and Marzuki et al. (2023)
supports the two-sided effects of AI in education. They call for updated
institutional policies to lower risks while taking advantage of AI's ability to
improve writing quality and student interaction. This review shows that there are
not enough ongoing studies that look at how AI affects writing skills over time. It
also suggests that tools like Gemini should be optimised for different types of
educational settings.
1. Alexander, P. A., & Winne, P. H. (2012). Handbook of educational psychology. Routledge.
2. Ali, A. H., Alajanbi, M., Yaseen, M. G., & Abed, S. A. (2023). Chatgpt4, DALL· E, Bard,
Claude, BERT: Open Possibilities. Babylonian Journal of Machine Learning, 2023, 17-18
3. Alm, A., & Nkomo, L. M. (2022). Chatbot experiences of informal language learners: A
sentiment analysis. In Research anthology on implementing sentiment analysis across
multiple disciplines (pp. 933-948). Igi Global.
4. Almusharraf, N., & Alotaibi, H. (2023). An error-analysis study from an EFL writing
context: Human and automated essay scoring approaches. Technology, Knowledge and
Learning, 28(3), 1015-1031.
5. Alqahtani, M. (2015). The importance of vocabulary in language learning and how to is
taught. International journal of teaching and education, 3(3), 21-34.
6. Arif, T. B., Munaf, U., & Ul-Haque, I. (2023). The future of medical education and
research: Is ChatGPT a blessing or blight in disguise?. Medical education online, 28(1),
2181052.
7. Ayedoun, E., Hayashi, Y., & Seta, K. (2015). A conversational agent to encourage
willingness to communicate in the context of English as a foreign language. Procedia
Computer Science, 60, 1433-1442.
8. Bailey, S. (2003). Academic Writing: A Practical Guide for Students. New York: Routledge.
9. Baleghizadeh, S., & Gordani, Y. (2012). Academic writing and grammatical accuracy: The
role of corrective feedback. Gist: Education and Learning Research Journal, (6), 159-176.
10. Batanero, J. M. F., Rueda, M. M., Cerero, J. F., & Gravan, P. R. (2021). Impact of ICT on
writing and reading skills: a systematic review (2010-2020). Texto Livre, 14(2), e34055.
11. Biswas, S. (2023). Chatgpt and the future of medical writing. Radiology, 307(2), e223312.
12. Brown, J. (2018). The role of AI in science writing. Journal of Science Writing, 27(4), 23–
27.
13. Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., ... & Amodei, D.
(2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information
processing systems, 33, 1877-1901..,
14. Cambridge Dictionary. (n.d.). Grammar. In the Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved from s
15. Chauhan, P. (2022). Fundamentals of academic writing: A literature review. Journal of
NELTA, 27(1-2), 161-180.
16. Cheng, A., Yang, L., & Andersen, E. (2017, May). Teaching language and culture with a
virtual reality game. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in
computing systems (pp. 541-549).
17. Cheng, A., Yang, L., & Andersen, E. (2017, May). Teaching language and culture with a
virtual reality game. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in
computing systems (pp. 541-549).
18. Coniam, D. (2008). Evaluating the language resources of chatbots for their potential in
English as a second language. ReCALL, 20(1), 98-116.
19. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of
the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 1–22.
[Link]
20. Crompton, H., Jones, M. V., & Burke, D. (2022). Affordances and challenges of artificial
intelligence in K-12 education: A systematic review. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education. [Link]
21. Farbrain, G., & Whinch. (1996). Reading, Writing and Reasoning. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company
22. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2024). A SWOT analysis of
ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in education
and teaching international, 61(3), 460-474.
23. Fryer, L., & Carpenter, R. (2006). Bots as language learning tools.
24. Fryer, L., Coniam, D., Carpenter, R., & Lăpușneanu, D. (2020). Bots for language learning
now: Current and future directions.
25. Fuchs, K. (2023, May). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of NLP models in
higher education: is Chat GPT a blessing or a curse?. In Frontiers in education (Vol. 8, p.
1166682). Frontiers Media SA.
26. Geitgey, A. (2020, September 24). Natural Language Processing is Fun! How computers
27. Godwin-Jones, R. (2020). Emerging technologies: AI and natural language processing in
CALL. Language Learning & Technology, 24(1), 6–
22. [Link]
28. Guo, K., Wang, J., & Chu, S. K. W. (2022). Using chatbots to scaffold EFL students’
argumentative writing. Assessing Writing, 54, 100666.
29. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., & Singh, R. P. (2022). An era of Chatgpt as a significant futuristic
support tool: A study on features, abilities, and challenges. Bench Council Transactions
on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 2(4), 100089.
[Link]
30. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English(No. 9). Routledge.
31. Halliday, Μ. Α. Κ., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language
in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 21(2), 353.
32. Haristiani, N. (2019, November). Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbot as a language learning
medium: An inquiry. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1387, No. 1, p.
012020). IOP Publishing.
33. Harmer, J. (2004). How to teach writing. Pearson Education Limited.
34. Hartfiel, Hughey, Wormuth, & Jacobs. (1985). Learning ESL Composition. Rowley:
Newbury House Publisher, Inc.
35. Harvard Extension School. (2025). Academic integrity. Harvard University. Retrieved April
30, 2025, from [Link]
student-policies-conduct/academic-integrity/
36. Hassani, K., Nahvi, A., & Ahmadi, A. (2016). Design and implementation of an intelligent
virtual environment for improving speaking and listening skills. Interactive Learning
Environments, 24(1), 252-271.
37. Heaven, W. D. (2020). Open AI's new language generator GPT-3 is shockingly good and
completely mindless.
38. [Link]
39. Huang¹, J. X., Lee, K. S., & Kwon, O. W. (2017). A chatbot for a dialogue-based second
language learning system. CALL in a climate of change: adapting to turbulent global
conditions–short papers from EUROCALL 2017, 151.
40. Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press
41. Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023). Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant
at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. Contemporary
Educational Technology, 15(4), ep464..
42. Johnson, A. (2016). Academic writing: Process and product. Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers
43. Kim, H. S., & Kim, N. Y. (2020). Impact of mobile interactions with AI on writing
performance. 현대영어교육, 21(2), 1-13.
44. Kitamura, F. C. (2023). ChatGPT is shaping the future of medical writing but still requires
human judgment. Radiology, 307(2), e230171.
45. Kohnke, L. (2023). L2 learners' perceptions of a chatbot as a potential independent
language learning tool. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 17(1-
2), 214-226.
46. Koubaa, A., Boulila, W., Ghouti, L., Alzahem, A., & Latif, S. (2023). Exploring ChatGPT
capabilities and limitations: a survey. IEEE Access, 11, 118698-118721.
47. Kuo, C. (1995). Cohesion and coherence in Academic writing: From lexical choice to
organisation. RELC Journal, 26(1), 47–62.
48. Kurniati, E. Y., & Fithriani, R. (2022). Post-graduate students’ perceptions of QuillBot
utilisation in English academic writing class. Journal of English Language Teaching and
Linguistics, 7(3), 437–451.
49. Lam, R., & Moorhouse, B. L. (2022). Using digital portfolios to develop students’ writing:
A practical guide for language teachers. Taylor & Francis.
50. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv. Computer Science, Computation and
51. Language.
52. Legault, J., Zhao, J., Chi, Y. A., Chen, W., Klippel, A., & Li, P. (2019). Immersive virtual
reality as an effective tool for second language vocabulary learning. Languages, 4(1), 13.
53. Louwerse, M. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2005). Coherence in discourse. In Encyclopedia of
linguistics (pp. 216-218). Fitzroy Dearborn.
54. Luckin, R. (2018). Machine Learning and Human Intelligence. The future of education for
the 21st century. UCL institute of education press.
55. Maley, A. (2009). Creative writing for language learners (and teachers). TeachingEnglish.
Retrieved from
[Link]
learners/articles/creative-writing-language
56. McCarthy, J. (2007). What is artificial intelligence?. Retrieved from [Link]
[Link]/jmc/[Link]
57. Mhlanga, D. (2023). Open AI in education, the responsible and ethical use of ChatGPT
towards lifelong learning. SSRN Electronic
Journal. [Link]
58. Miranty, D., & Widiati, U. (2021). An automated writing evaluation (AWE) in higher
education. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 11(4), 126-137.
59. Molnár, G., & Szüts, Z. (2018, September). The role of chatbots in formal education. In
2018 IEEE 16th international symposium on intelligent systems and informatics (SISY)
(pp. 000197-000202). IEEE.
60. Moons, P., & Van Bulck, L. (2023). ChatGPT: can artificial intelligence language models be
of value for cardiovascular nurses and allied health professionals. European journal of
cardiovascular nursing, 22(7), e55-e59.
61. Moxley, K. (2015). Cohesion in Writing. FHS Writing Lab.
[Link]
files/[Link]
62. Mullamaa, K. (2010). ICT in Language Learning--Benefits and Methodological
Implications. International education studies, 3(1), 38-44.
63. Negari, G. M. (2011). A study on strategy instruction and EFL learners' writing
skills. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(2), 299.
64. Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. McGraw-Hill.
65. Nyaaba, M. (2024, March). Generative AI conception of the nature of science. In Society
for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1818-
1827). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
66. Osmond, A. (2024). Academic writing and grammar for students. SAGE Publications
Limited.
67. Pankin, J. (2013). Schema theory. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
68. Perera, P. (2023). Preparing to revolutionise education with the multi-model GenAI tool
Google Gemini? A journey towards effective policy making.
69. Perera, P. (2023). Preparing to revolutionize education with the multi-model GenAI tool
Google Gemini? A journey towards effective policy making.
70. Renkema, J. (2004). Introduction to Discourse Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Publishing Company. 1-469
71. Rice, S., & Gregor, M. N. (Eds.). (2016). E-Learning and the academic library: Essays on
innovative initiatives. McFarland.
72. Richard, J. C. (1990). The Language Teaching Matrix. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
73. Rumelhart, D. E. (2017). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In Theoretical issues
in reading comprehension (pp. 33-58). Routledge.
74. Saeidnia, H. R. (2023). Welcome to the Gemini era: Google DeepMind and the
information industry. Library Hi Tech News, (ahead-of-print).
75. Salas-Pilco, S. Z., & Yang, Y. (2022). Artificial intelligence applications in Latin American
higher education: a systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in
Higher Education, 19(1), 21.
76. Sedaghat, S. (2023). Early applications of ChatGPT in medical practice, education and
research. Clinical Medicine, 23(3), 278-279.
77. Sedaghat, S. (2023). Success through simplicity: what other artificial intelligence
applications in medicine should learn from history and ChatGPT. Annals of Biomedical
Engineering, 51(12), 2657-2658.
78. Sedaghat, S. (2024). Future potential challenges of using large language models like
ChatGPT in daily medical practice. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 21(2),
344-345.
79. Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centred artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe &
trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 495-504.
80. Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Agarwal, S., Herbert-Voss, A., Krueger, G., Henighan,
81. Smutny, P., & Schreiberova, P. (2020). Chatbots for learning: A review of educational
chatbots for the Facebook Messenger. Computers & Education, 151, 103862.
82. Smyth, J. M. (1998). Written emotional expression: effect sizes, outcome types, and
moderating variables. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 66(1), 174.
83. Solati-Dehkordi, S. A., & Salehi, H. (2016). Impact of explicit vocabulary instruction on
writing achievement of upper-intermediate EFL learners. International Education
Studies, 9(4), 141-154.
84. Sun, F. (2014). The Application of Schema Theory in Teaching College English Writing.
Theory & Practice in Language Studies (TPLS), 4(7).
85. T., Child, R., Ramesh, A., Ziegler, D. M., Wu, J., Winter, C. & Amodei, D. (2005).
86. Tambunan, A. R. S., Andayani, W., Sari, W. S., & Lubis, F. K.(2022). Investigating EFL
students’ linguistic problems using Grammarly as automated writing evaluation
feedback. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 16–27
87. Team, G., Anil, R., Borgeaud, S., Alayrac, J. B., Yu, J., Soricut, R., ... & Blanco, L. (2023).
Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805.
88. Understand Human Language.
89. University of Melbourne. (2025). Plagiarism and collusion. Academic Integrity. Retrieved
April 30, 2025, from [Link]
90. University of Oxford. (2025). Plagiarism. Retrieved April 30, 2025,
from [Link]
policies/plagiarism
91. Wingersky. (1999). Writing Paragraphs and Essays: Integrating Reading, Writing and
Grammar Skills. London: Wadsworth Publishing Company
92. Yildiz, Y. (2021). Teaching English as a foreign language to 4th grade students by using
technology. Canadian Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 1(2), 38-54.+
93. Yu, H. (2023). Reflection on whether Chat GPT should be banned by academia from the
perspective of education and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1181712.
94. Yundayani, A. (2017). English Writing Needs for Academic Purposes in Formal Higher
Education. JELL (Journal of English Language and Literature) STIBA-IEC Jakarta, 2(01), 1-8.
95. Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T.
(2022). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to original abstracts using
an artificial intelligence output detector, plagiarism detector, and blinded human
reviewers. BioRxiv, 2022-12.
96. Dehouche, N. (2021). Plagiarism in the age of massive Generative Pre-trained
Transformers (GPT-3). Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 21, 17-23.
97. Francke, E., & Bennett, A. (2019, October). The potential influence of artificial
intelligence on plagiarism: A higher education perspective. In European conference on
the impact of artificial intelligence and robotics (ECIAIR 2019) (Vol. 31, pp. 131-140).
98. De Angelis, L., Baglivo, F., Arzilli, G., Privitera, G. P., Ferragina, P., Tozzi, A. E., & Rizzo, C.
(2023). ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic
threat in public health. Frontiers in public health, 11, 1166120.
99. Khalil, M., & Er, E. (2023, June). Will Chatgpt get you caught? rethinking of plagiarism
detection. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 475-487).
Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
100. Ventayen, R. J. M. (2023, April). OpenAI ChatGPT-generated results: Similarity
index of artificial intelligence-based contents. In International Conference on Soft
Computing for Security Applications (pp. 215-226). Singapore: Springer Nature
Singapore.
101. Bansal, G., Nushi, B., Kamar, E., Lasecki, W. S., Weld, D. S., & Horvitz, E. (2019,
October). Beyond accuracy: The role of mental models in human-AI team performance.
 In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on human computation and crowdsourcing (Vol.
7, pp. 2-11).
102. Iskender, A. (2023). Holy or unholy? Interview with openAI’s ChatGPT. European
Journal of Tourism Research,34, 3414.
103. Johinke, R., Cummings, R., DiLauro, F., Johinke, R.,Cummings, R., & DiLaurao, F.
(2023). Reclaiming the technology of higher education for teaching digital writing in a
post—pandemic world. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2), 01.
104. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A.(2023). A SWOT
analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 1–15
105. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., & Singh, R. P. (2022). An era of ChatGPT as a significant
futuristic support tool: A study on features, abilities, and challenges. Bench Council
Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 2(4), 100089.
106. Mozumder, M. A. I., Athar, A., Armand, T. P. T.,Sheeraz, M. M., Uddin, S. M. I., &
Kim, H. C. (2023,February). Technological roadmap of the future trend of metaverse
based on IoT, blockchain, and AI techniques in metaverse education. In 2023 25th
International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT) (pp. 1414–
1423).
107. Nguyen, P. D. A. (2024). Gemini Google: A potential tool for English learning. Thu
Dau Mot University Journal of Science, 6(3), 386–
396. [Link]
108. Marzuki, Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI
writing tools on the content and organization of students’ writing: EFL teachers’
perspective. Cogent Education, 10(2), Article
2236469. [Link]
109. Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023). Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing
assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. Contemporary
Educational Technology, 15(4), Article ep464. [Link]
110. Ananda, D. R. (2024). Students’ perception on AI technology: Gemini as a writing
assistant tool. Linguistics and English Language Teaching Journal,
12(1). [Link]
111. Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2024). Google Gemini as a next generation AI
educational tool: A review of emerging educational technology. Smart Learning
Environments, 11(1), Article 7. [Link]
112. Kammer, M. N., Gomila, P., Vumbaco, D. J., & Maldonado, F. (2023). The
role of artificial intelligence in scientific writing. Journal of Clinical Case
Reports, Medical Images and Health
Sciences, 3(3). [Link]
113. Kim, A., Yang, M., & Zhang, J. (2020). When Algorithms Err: Differential
Impact of Early vs. Late Errors on Users’ Reliance on Algorithms (SSRN
Scholarly Paper ID 3691575). Social Science Research Network.
[Link]
114. Holton, E. F., III, & Burnett, M. F. (2005). The basics of quantitative research. In R.
A. Swanson & E. F. Holton, III (Eds.), Research in organizations: Foundations and methods
of inquiry (pp. 29–41). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
115. Bhandari, P. (2020). What is quantitative research? | Definition, uses & methods.
Scribbr. Revised June 22, 2023. [Link]
research/
116. McCombes, S. (2019). Sampling methods | Types, techniques & examples.
Scribbr. Revised June 22, 2023. [Link]
methods/
117. Nguyen, P. D. A., & Nguyen, T. H. N. (2023). An investigation into difficulties in
listening and speaking English as a foreign language. Thu Dau Mot University Journal of
Science, 5(2), 241–250. [Link]
118. Yagiz, O., Yigiter, K., & Genc, G. (2009). Academic writing in English:
Approaches, processes and challenges in higher education. IBU Repository.
[Link]
119. Cheung, Y. L. (2016). Teaching Writing. In W. A. Renandya & H. P.
Widodo (Eds.), English language teaching today: Building a closer link between
theory and practice. Springer
120. Chen, W., & Wei, H. (2021). Effect of an AI-powered writing assistant on
writing quality and idea generation. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
24(3), 84–97
121. Moore, J. L., Rosinski, P., Peeples, T., Pigg, S., Rife, M. C., Brunk-Chavez,
B., Lackey, D., Kesler Rumsey, S., Tasaka, R., Curran, P., & Grabill, J. T. (2016).
Revisualizing composition: How first-year writers use composing technologies.
Computers and Composition. 39. 1-13.
[Link]
122. Nguyen, T. C. (2024). University Teachers’ Perceptions of Using ChatGPT
in Language Teaching and Assessment. Proceedings of the AsiaCALL
International Conference, 4,116-128. ISSN: 2833-6836; ISBN: 979-8-9870112-4-
9. DOI: [Link]
123. Thet, H., & Htay, H. (2021). The Effectiveness of AI writing tools on
developing EFL university students’ academic writing skills. Journal of NELTA,
26 (1), 53–[Link]://[Link]/10.3126/nelta.v26i1.37162.

124. Kornfeld, L., & Roy, D. (2021). Educational implications of AI writing

tools for academic writing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52 (1),
248–262.
[Link]
125. Krajcik, Z., & Kim, K. (2020). To what extent do AI writing tools improve
writing quality? A case study of master’s level students. Educational Sciences, 10
(11), 3-21.
126. Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press
127. Fitria, T. N. (2023, March). Artificial intelligence (AI) technology in
OpenAI ChatGPT application: A review of ChatGPT in writing English essay. In
ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(1), 44-58).