AI Integration in Writing Skills of MUET Students: A Quasi-Experimental Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24191/jca.v2i2.5886Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, writing skills, MUET, ESL education, quasi-experimental designAbstract
This study explored the potential of AI feedback in MUET writing skills. The research was designed as a quasi-experimental with 80 Form 6 students from two secondary schools. Participants were purposively selected from a pool of students based on an agreement that all had achieved similar scores on their Lower 6 final exams. Once identified, participants were randomly divided into an experimental (n=40) group who received AI feedback on their writing and a control (n=40) group who received face-to-face or traditional feedback. Both groups received instruction over a four week period. The pre-testing and intervention began with all students experiencing classroom instruction without any prior exposure to integrated writing instruction that would assist and facilitate the writing process through AI. A pre/post-test design was employed and data analyzed using independent samples t-test. The findings indicated that students receiving AI-assisted feedback to improve their writing outcomes had a statistically significant positive improvement in post-test writing scores. Overall, these findings show that the use of AI tools positively contribute to improve writing skills for students. Further studies should investigate students’ perceptions of using AI and explore the sustainability of ongoing use of AI tools in the ESL context.
References
Abdul Razak, N., & Md Yunus, M. (2021). A systematic review of literature on the use of technology for writing skills. Creative Education, 12(7), 1505–1518. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.127115
Alharbi, S. (2019). Effect of teachers' written corrective feedback on Saudi EFL university students' writing achievements. International Journal of Linguistics, 8(5), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v8i5.10197
Baker, P., & Potts, A. (2013). 'Why do white people have thin lips?' Google and the perpetuation of stereotypes via auto-complete search forms. Critical Discourse Studies, 10(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2012.744320
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2024). Two decades of artificial intelligence in education: Contributors, collaborations, research topics, challenges, and future directions. Educational Technology & Society, 27(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202401_27(1).0003
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dimitrov, D. M., & Rumrill, P. D. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, 20(2), 159–165.
Escalante, J., Pack, A., & Barrett, A. (2023). AI-generated feedback on writing: Insights into efficacy and ENL student preference. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00425-2
Ferris, D. R. (2021). Treatment of error in second language student writing (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press.
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English writing assistant: Students' alternative for writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.31002/metathesis.v5i1.3519
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2019). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
Lam, R. (2022). Teacher assessment literacy development: A narrative inquiry of writing teachers' concurrent beliefs and practices. TESOL Quarterly, 56(2), 558–590. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3088
Lee, I. (2020). Utility of focused/comprehensive written corrective feedback research: Building theory, research and practice links. Journal of Second Language Writing, 49, Article 100724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100724
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.
Makwana, V. (2025). A comparative analysis of AI-powered and teacher-led feedback: Investigating student perceptions and writing performance. Journal of English Language Teaching, 67(1), 3–12. https://journals.eltai.in/jelt/article/view/JELT670102
Malaysian Examinations Council. (2021). Malaysian University English Test (MUET): Regulations, test specifications, and test format. Malaysian Examinations Council.
Pratama, A., & Sulistiyo, U. (2024). A systematic review of artificial intelligence in enhancing English foreign learners' writing skill. PPSDP International Journal of Education, 3(2), 170–181. https://doi.org/10.59175/pijed.v3i2.299
Quratulain, Maqbool, S., & Bilal, S. (2025). The effectiveness of AI-powered writing assistants in enhancing essay writing skills at undergraduate level. Journal for Social Science Archives, 3(1), 845–855. https://doi.org/10.59075/jssa.v3i1.166
Rethinasamy, S., & Chuah, K. M. (2016). The Malaysian University English Test (MUET) and its use for placement purposes: A predictive validity study. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 13(1), 85–101.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Shang, H.-F. (2024). Effectiveness of automated corrective feedback on EFL learners' writing proficiency and perception. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2347318
Shermis, M. D., & Burstein, J. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of automated essay evaluation: Current applications and new directions. Routledge.
Stevenson, M., & Phakiti, A. (2019). The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing. Assessing Writing, 19, 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.007
Taskiran, A., Yazici, M., & Aydin, I. E. (2024). Contribution of automated feedback to the English writing competence of distance foreign language learners. E-Learning and Digital Media, 21(3), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530221139579
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wang, Y., Liu, C., & Tu, Y. F. (2023). Factors affecting the adoption of AI-based applications in higher education. Educational Technology & Society, 26(4), 116–129. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202310_26(4).0009
Warschauer, M., & Grimes, D. (2008). Automated writing assessment in the classroom. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 3(1), 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800701771580
Wilson, J., & Roscoe, R. (2020). Automated writing evaluation and feedback: Multiple metrics of efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(1), 87–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119830764
Zhang, Z. V., & Hyland, K. (2023). Fostering student engagement with feedback: An integrated approach. Assessing Writing, 55, Article 100658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2022.100658
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Peter Ong
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
