1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. TASK
  4. Volume 3, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 3, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2666-1748
  • E-ISSN: 2666-1756
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

With the release of ChatGPT, the use of AI in language teaching has become an issue that we cannot ignore. In this commentary, we argue that AI tools, including ChatGPT, are now among the digital resources available to students and teachers. We therefore need to be aware of the challenges and affordances of their uses in teaching and learning and that helping students understand these issues is part of the language teacher’s role in promoting digital literacy. We first discuss the history of AI in teaching writing and then highlight three issues related to its use: authorship, authenticity and accuracy, and digital literacies. Next, we provide examples of three tasks illustrating how AI can be used to promote language learning, genre awareness, and digital literacy. We conclude by suggesting some areas for further exploration.

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/task.00022.poo
2024-03-11
2024-10-06

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/task.00022.poo
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adamopoulou, E., & Moussiades, L.
    (2020) Chatbots: History, technology, and applications. Machine Learning with Applications, 21, 100006. 10.1016/j.mlwa.2020.100006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mlwa.2020.100006 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alemi, M., Meghdari, A., & Ghazisaedy, M.
    (2015) The impact of social robotics on L2 learners’ anxiety and attitude in English vocabulary acquisition. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(4), 523–535. 10.1007/s12369‑015‑0286‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0286-y [Google Scholar]
  3. Atkinson, D.
    (2010) Extended, embodied cognition and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 31(5), 599–622. 10.1093/applin/amq009
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq009 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S.
    (2021) On the dangers of stochastic parrots. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 10.1145/3442188.3445922
     https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bibauw, S., François, T., & Desmet, P.
    (2022) Dialogue systems for language learning. InN. Ziegler & M. González-Lloret, The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and technology (1st ed., pp.121–135). Routledge. 10.4324/9781351117586‑12
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351117586-12 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Agarwal, S., Herbert-Voss, A., Krueger, G., Henighan, T., Child, R., Ramesh, A., Ziegler, D., Wu, J., Winter, C., Hesse, C.,… & Amodei, D.
    (2020) Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 331, 1877–1901.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Buendgens-Kosten, J.
    (2013) Authenticity in CALL: Three domains of ‘realness.’ ReCALL, 25(2), 272–285. 10.1017/S0958344013000037
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000037 [Google Scholar]
  8. Byrd, A., Flores, L., Green, D., Hassel, H., Johnson, S., Kirschenbaum, M., Lockett, A., Losh, E., & Mills, A.
    (2023, July). MLA-CCCC Joint Task Force on Writing and AI Working Paper: Overview of the issues, statement of principles, and recommendations. MLA-CCCC Working Paper #1. https://hcommons.org/app/uploads/sites/1003160/2023/07/MLA-CCCC-Joint-Task-Force-on-Writing-and-AI-Working-Paper-1.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Caplan, N.
    (2023, April30). Why I’m not excited by (or even using) generative AI. Nigel Caplan. Retrieved5 July 2023from: https://nigelcaplan.com/2023/04/30/why-im-not-excited-by-or-even-using-generative-ai/
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Caplan, N., & Johns, A. M.
    (2019) Introduction. InN. Caplan & A. M. Johns (Eds.). Changing practices for the L2 writing classroom: Moving beyond the five-paragraph essay, (pp.v – ix). University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.10000663
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.10000663 [Google Scholar]
  11. Casal, J. E., & Kessler, M.
    (2023) Can linguists distinguish between ChatGPT/AI and human writing?: A study of research ethics and academic publishing. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 2(3), 100068. 10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100068
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100068 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M.
    (2023) Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 41, 100118. 10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chung, E. S.
    (2020) The effect of L2 proficiency on post-editing machine translated texts. Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(1), 182. 10.18823/asiatefl.2020.17.1.11.182
     https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2020.17.1.11.182 [Google Scholar]
  14. Committee on Publication Ethics
    Committee on Publication Ethics (2023) Authorship and AI tools. https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Cumming, A.
    (1990) Expertise in evaluating second language compositions. Language Testing, 71, 31–51. 10.1177/026553229000700104
     https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229000700104 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dixon, D. H.
    (2022) A methodological framework for analyzing the language in digital games. InD. H. Dixon, Digital Games in Language Learning (pp.52–73). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003240075‑4
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003240075-4 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dizon, G.
    (2017) Using intelligent personal assistants for second language learning: A case study of Alexa. TESOL Journal, 8(4), 811–830. 10.1002/tesj.353
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.353 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C.
    (2019) Task-based Language Teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108643689
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108643689 [Google Scholar]
  19. Frances, C., & Zimotti, G.
    (2023, January17). Robots vs. humans: Does ChatGPT pose a challenge to second language writing?FLTMag. https://fltmag.com/chatgpt-second-language-writing/
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Godwin-Jones, R.
    (2023) Emerging spaces for language learning: AI bots, ambient intelligence, and the metaverse. Language Learning & Teaching, 27(2), 6–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Hafner, C. A., Chik, A., & Jones, R. H.
    (2013) Engaging with digital literacies in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 47(4), 812–815. 10.1002/tesq.136
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.136 [Google Scholar]
  22. Harklau, L.
    (2002) The role of writing in classroom second language acquisition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 111, 329–350. 10.1016/S1060‑3743(02)00091‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00091-7 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hartmann, J., Schwenzow, J., & Witte, M.
    (2023) The political ideology of conversational AI: Converging evidence on ChatGPT’s pro-environmental, left-libertarian orientation. SRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.4316084
     https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4316084 [Google Scholar]
  24. Jones, R. H.
    (2022) Digital literacies and language learning. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Practical Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp.184–194). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003106609‑15
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003106609-15 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kessler, M.
    (2020) A text analysis and gatekeepers’ perspectives of a promotional genre: Understanding the rhetoric of Fulbright grant statements. English for Specific Purposes, 601, 182–192. 10.1016/j.esp.2020.07.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D.
    (2023) ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, l, 54(2), 537–550. 10.1177/00336882231162868
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868 [Google Scholar]
  27. Koltovskaia, S.
    (2020) Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 441, 100450. 10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kurzweil, R.
    (1990) The age of intelligent machines. The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Kyle, K.
    (2022) Writing and vocabulary learning. InR. M. Manchón & C. Polio (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Lantolf, J. P.
    (2011) The sociocultural approach to second language acquisition: Sociocultural theory, second language acquisition, and artificial L2 development. InD. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp.24–47). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Levene, A.
    (2023, February23). Artificial intelligence and authorship. COPE. Retrieved5 July 2023from: https://publicationethics.org/news/artificial-intelligence-and-authorship
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Lin, P.
    (2023) ChatGPT: Friend or foe (to corpus linguists)?Applied Corpus Linguistics, 3(3), 100065. 10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100065
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100065 [Google Scholar]
  33. Long, M. H.
    (1985) A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. InK. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language development (pp.77–99). Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. (2015) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. (2020) Optimal input for language learning: Genuine, simplified, elaborated, or modified elaborated?Language Teaching, 53 (2), 169–182. 10.1017/S0261444819000466
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000466 [Google Scholar]
  36. Manchón, R. M.
    (2017) The potential impact of multimodal composition on language learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 381, 94–95. 10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  37. McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E.
    (1955) A proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence. AI Magazine, 27(4), 12–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. McKenna, N., Li, T., Cheng, L., Hosseini, M. J., Johnson, M., & Steedman, M.
    (2023) Sources of hallucination by large language models on inference tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14552.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Miller, C. R.
    (1984) Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167. 10.1080/00335638409383686
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638409383686 [Google Scholar]
  40. Mitrović, S., Andreoletti, D., & Ayoub, O.
    (2023) Chatgpt or human? detect and explain. explaining decisions of machine learning model for detecting short chatgpt-generated text. arXiv preprintarXiv:2301.13852.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Ohashi, L.
    (2022) The use of machine translation in L2 education: Japanese university teachers’ views and practices. InB. Arnbjörnsdóttir, B. Bédi, L. Bradley, K. Friðriksdóttir, H. Garðarsdóttir, S. Thouësny, & M. J. Whelpton (Eds), Intelligent CALL, granular systems, and learner data: short papers from EUROCALL 2022 (pp.308–314). 10.14705/rpnet.2022.61.1476
     https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2022.61.1476 [Google Scholar]
  42. Orenstrakh, M. S., Karnalim, O., Suarez, C. A., & Liut, M.
    (2023) Detecting LLM-generated text in computing education: A comparative study for ChatGPT cases. arXiv preprintarXiv:2307.07411.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Overstreet, M.
    (2022) Writing as extended mind: Recentering cognition, rethinking tool use. Computers and Composition, 631, 102700. 10.1016/j.compcom.2022.102700
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2022.102700 [Google Scholar]
  44. Overstreet, M., Akhmedjanova, D., & Vaccino-Salvadore, S.
    (2023) Brain-bound vs. extended: Contrasting approaches to second-language research writing in digital environments. Journal of Second Language Writing, 611, 101019. 10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101019
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101019 [Google Scholar]
  45. Park, S., Jeon, J., & Shim, E.
    (2021) Exploring request emails in English for business purposes: A move analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 631, 137–150. 10.1016/j.esp.2021.03.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  46. Pfau, A., Polio, C., & Xu, Y.
    (2023) Using an AI program to assess L2 writing accuracy for research purposes. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 2(3). 10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100083
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100083 [Google Scholar]
  47. Phelps, L. W.
    (1990) Audience and authorship: The disappearing boundary. InG. Kirsch & D. Roen (Eds.), A sense of audience in written communication (pp.153–174). Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Polio, C.
    (2022) Writing and grammar development. InR. M. Manchón & C. Polio (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and writing (pp.169–182). Routledge. 10.4324/9780429199691‑20
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429199691-20 [Google Scholar]
  49. Poole, F.
    (2022, December13). Using ChatGPT to design language material and exercises. FLTMag. https://fltmag.com/chatgpt-design-material-exercises/
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Prince, P.
    (2013) Listening, remembering, writing: Exploring the dictogloss task. Language Teaching Research, 17(4), 486–500. 10.1177/1362168813494123
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813494123 [Google Scholar]
  51. Qin, J.
    (2008) The effect of processing instruction and dictogloss tasks on acquisition of the English passive voice. Language teaching research, 12(1), 61–82. 10.1177/1362168807084494
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807084494 [Google Scholar]
  52. Qu, W.
    (2017) For L2 writers, it is always the problem of the language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 381, 92–93. 10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.10.007 [Google Scholar]
  53. Rawte, V., Priya, P., Tonmoy, S. M., Zaman, S. M., Sheth, A., & Das, A.
    (2023) Exploring the relationship between LLM hallucinations and prompt linguistic nuances: Readability, formality, and concreteness. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.11064
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Reinhardt, J., & Thorne, S.
    (2019) Digital literacies as emergent multifarious repertoires. InN. Arnold & L. Ducate (Eds.), Engaging language learners in CALL: From theory and research to informed practice (pp.208–239). Equinox.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Roscoe, R. D., Allen, L. K., Weston, J. L., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S.
    (2014) The Writing Pal intelligent tutoring system: Usability testing and development. Computers and Composition, 341, 39–59. 10.1016/j.compcom.2014.09.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2014.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  56. Rudnick, P.
    (2023, May27). What would happen if a robot tried to write ‘Law & Order’? The New York Times. Retrieved5 July 2023from: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/27/opinion/ai-screenplays-scripts.html
  57. Sauro, S.
    (2020) Fan fiction and informal language learning. InM. Dressman & R. W. Sadler (Eds.), The handbook of informal language learning (pp.139–151). John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119472384.ch9
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119472384.ch9 [Google Scholar]
  58. Schafer, V., & Warhol, T.
    (2019) There ain’t no doubt about it: Teaching EAL learners to recognize variation and switch/shift between varieties and registers is crucial to communicative competence. TESOL Journal, 11(3). 10.1002/tesj.504
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.504 [Google Scholar]
  59. Stevenson, M., & Phakiti, A.
    (2014) The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing. Assessing Writing, 191, 51–65. 10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.007 [Google Scholar]
  60. Swales, J. M.
    (1990) Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press
     [Google Scholar]
  61. (2004) Research genres. Exploration and applications. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524827
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827 [Google Scholar]
  62. Tai, T.-Y., & Chen, H. H.-J.
    (2020) The impact of Google Assistant on adolescent EFL learners’ willingness to communicate. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(3), 1485–1502. 10.1080/10494820.2020.1841801
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1841801 [Google Scholar]
  63. Tardy, C.
    (2019) Genre-based writing: What every ESL teacher needs to know. University of Michigan Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Tavakoli, P.
    (2014) Storyline complexity and syntactic complexity in writing and speaking tasks. InH. Byrnes & R. Manchon (eds.). Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp.217–236). John Benjamins. 10.1075/tblt.7.09tav
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.7.09tav [Google Scholar]
  65. Urlaub, P., & Dessein, E.
    (2022) Machine translation and foreign language education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 51, 936111. 10.3389/frai.2022.936111
     https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.936111 [Google Scholar]
  66. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I.
    (2017) Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 301, 5998–6008.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Wang, C., & Wang, M.
    (2015) Effect of alignment on L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 36(5), 503–526. 10.1093/applin/amt051
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt051 [Google Scholar]
  68. Wang, P.
    (2019) On defining artificial intelligence. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence, 10(2), 1–37. 10.2478/jagi‑2019‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.2478/jagi-2019-0002 [Google Scholar]
  69. Warschauer, M.
    (1998) Electronic literacies: Language, culture, and power in online education. Routledge. 10.4324/9781410604682
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604682 [Google Scholar]
  70. Williams, J.
    (2012) The potential role (s) of writing in second language development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(4), 321–331. 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  71. Yeo, M. A.
    (2023) Academic integrity in the age of Artificial Intelligence (AI) authoring apps. TESOL Journal, 001, e716. 10.1002/tesj.716
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.716 [Google Scholar]
  72. Zyzik, E., & Polio, C.
    (2017) Authentic materials myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.7892433
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.7892433 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/task.00022.poo
Loading
From sci-fi to the classroom
task 3, 243 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/task.00022.poo
/content/journals/10.1075/task.00022.poo
/content/journals/10.1075/task.00022.poo
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Artificial intelligence; ChatGPT; task-based writing

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error