AI Corrective Feedback and Thai EFL Writing: A Literature-Based Review
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Aim: The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) has introduced new possibilities for providing corrective feedback in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing instruction. In Thai higher education contexts, EFL learners continue to experience persistent difficulties in academic writing, while teachers face time and workload constraints in delivering detailed and individualized feedback. This study aims to review existing literature on Thai EFL writing difficulties, corrective feedback, and AI-assisted feedback in order to explore the pedagogical potential of AI-generated corrective feedback in EFL writing development.
Materials and Methods: This study adopts a literature-based review approach. Relevant studies were retrieved from major academic databases, including Scopus, ERIC, and Google Scholar. The selection criteria focused on peer-reviewed publications addressing EFL writing, corrective feedback, and AI-assisted feedback, with particular attention to studies involving Thai or comparable EFL contexts. The selected literature was analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns in writing challenges and feedback practices.
Results: The review reveals that Thai EFL university students commonly encounter difficulties related to grammatical accuracy, lexical choice, coherence, and academic writing conventions. The thematic analysis indicates that AI-generated corrective feedback is particularly effective in addressing surface-level language errors and providing immediate and consistent feedback, while it remains limited in offering context-sensitive and discourse-level guidance. Studies also highlight the need for teacher mediation when integrating AI feedback into writing instruction.
Conclusion: This review concludes that AI-assisted corrective feedback can function as a valuable complement to teacher feedback in Thai EFL writing classrooms. When used alongside human guidance, AI tools have the potential to enhance writing development by supporting frequent revision and individualized learning. Future research is encouraged to conduct empirical studies examining the combined use of AI-generated and teacher-provided feedback in Thai higher education contexts.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright on any article in the Journal of Education and Learning Reviews is retained by the author(s) under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permission to use text, content, images, etc. of publication. Any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose. But do not use it for commercial use or with the intent to benefit any business.
References
Abas, I. R., & Bakir, A. (2013). Investigating Saudi EFL learners’ writing problems: A case study in a Saudi university. English Language Teaching, 6(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n3p1
Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition/culture/power. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.08.001
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
Chi, F. (1999). Teacher commentary on student writing: Developing a dialogue. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 1–21.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Longman.
Creswell, J. W. (2000). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Prentice Hall.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339–368. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060141
Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ghabool, N. (2012). Investigating writing difficulties among Iranian EFL learners (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Tabriz.
Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 187–207). Guilford Press.
Grimes, D., & Warschauer, M. (2010). Automated writing evaluation: Past, present, and future. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(1), 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2009.10.001
Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). The scope of the writing assessment. In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing writing (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hedge, T. (1988). Writing. Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Longman.
Jaehnig, W. B., & Miller, M. L. (2007). Feedback types and student performance: Positive and negative feedback in educational contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 327–341.
Kao, S. M., & Reynolds, R. (2017). The effects of explicit instruction on Taiwanese EFL students’ writing revision. TESOL Journal, 8(1), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.292
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
Leite, A., & Blanco, S. A. (2020). Effects of human vs. automatic feedback on students’ understanding of AI concepts and programming style. In Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 44–50). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3366921
Moore, N. S., & MacArthur, C. A. (2016). Student use of automated essay evaluation feedback. Journal of Writing Research, 8(1), 149–177. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.08.01.06
Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto).
O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Newbury House.
Pawapatcharaudom, P. (2007). An investigation of Thai students’ English language writing difficulties in international programs (Master’s thesis, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi).
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge University Press.
Roscoe, R. D., Allen, L. K., Weston, J. L., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2017). The writing pal: Natural language processing for automated writing instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000127
Rostanti Toba, R., Noor, W. N., & Sanu, L. O. (2019). The current issues of Indonesian EFL students’ writing skills: Ability, problem, and reason in writing comparison and contrast essay. Dinamika Ilmu, 19(1), 57–73. https://doi.org/10.21093/di.v19i1.1506
Rostanti Toba, R., Noor, W. N., & Sanu, L. O. (2019). Students’ writing difficulties and the teaching of writing in EFL classrooms. Journal of English Education, 4(2), 103–115.
Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2020). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Shafiee Rad, H., Alipour, R., & Jafarpour, A. (2023). Using artificial intelligence to foster students’ writing feedback literacy, engagement, and outcome: A case of Wordtune application. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5020–5040. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2208170
Steiss, J., Tate, T. P., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., Warschauer, M., & Olson, C. B. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback on students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894
Straub, R. (1997). Students’ reactions to teacher comments: An exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 91–119.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
VanPatten, B. (2003). From input to output: A teacher’s guide to second language acquisition. McGraw-Hill.
Walsh, A. (2010). Writing skills: The importance of writing in education. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 45–54.
Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 157–180. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr190oa
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
Wenden, A., & Rubin, J. (Eds.). (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. Prentice Hall.
Wilson, J., & Roscoe, R. D. (2020). Automated writing evaluation and feedback: Multiple metrics of efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(1), 87–125.
Yang, H., Gao, C., & Shen, H. (2023). Learner interaction with, and response to, AI-programmed automated writing evaluation feedback in EFL writing: An exploratory study. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 3837–3858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11991-3
