The Role of ChatGPT in Providing Written Corrective Feedback for EFL Academic Writing: A Literature Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54855/ijaile.26313Keywords:
ChatGPT, Written Corrective Feedback, EFL Academic WritingAbstract
This literature review examines the effect of ChatGPT on the delivery of written corrective feedback (WCF) in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) academic writing, drawing on studies published from 2022 to 2025. Research indicates that ChatGPT feedback offers considerable benefits in formative contexts, including immediacy, personalization, and clarity that improve learners' revisions and confidence. Unlike other automated writing evaluation tools, ChatGPT offers more contextually informed and interactive feedback, making it a valuable asset in the writing process. However, limitations arise in feedback concerning advanced writing abilities, rhetorical components, and cultural nuances, underscoring the need for teacher feedback. Equity and ethical issues, such as learner dependency and disparate access, underscore the need for careful integration. The review asserts that ChatGPT ought to be integrated into educational frameworks to enhance instructor and peer feedback, facilitating effective assessment and genuine skill development.
References
Alharbi, W. (2023). AI in the Foreign Language Classroom: A Pedagogical Overview of Automated Writing Assistance Tools. Education Research International. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4253331
Aziz, B., Zehra, S. L., & Shafiq, M. H. (2026). Over-Reliance on ChatGPT and Its Psychological Impact on Critical Thinking and Writing Skills among University Students. ACADEMIA International Journal for Social Sciences, 5(2), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.63056/academia.5.2.2026.1508
Barrot, J.S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203832400
Cao, S., & Zhong, L. (2023). Exploring the effectiveness of ChatGPT-based feedback compared with teacher feedback and self-feedback: Evidence from Chinese to English translation. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2309.01645
Chance, P. (1986). Teaching thinking. Curriculum Report, 15(5), 1-8.
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
Chen, B., Bao, L., Zhang, R., Zhang, J., Liu, F., Wang, S., & Li, M. (2024). A multi-strategy computer-assisted EFL writing learning system with deep learning incorporated and its effects on learning: A writing feedback perspective. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(8), 1596–1638. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231189294
Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3), 257–276. https://doi. org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90019-1
Dai, W., Lin, J., Jin, H., Li, T., Tsai, Y. S., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2023). Can large language Models provide feedback to students? A case study on ChatGPT. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 323–325), Orem, UT, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT58122.2023.00100.
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., ... & Williams, M. D. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges, and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice, and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, Article 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Ferretti, R. P., Andrews-Weckerly, S., & Lewis, W. E. (2007). Improving the argumentative writing of students with learning disabilities: Descriptive and normative considerations. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23, 267-285.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09950-x
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184, https://doi.org/10.1016/ S1060- 3743(01)00039-X.
Firat, M. (2023). What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1). Article 22 https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22
Godwin-Jones, R. (2024). Distributed agency in second language learning and teaching through generative AI. Language Learning & Technology, 28 (2), 5–30. https://doi.org/10125/73570
Gonscherowski, P., & Rott, B. (2025). A systematic review of the literature on TPACK instruments used with pre-service teachers from 2017 to 2023 focused on selecting digital resources. Journal of Computers in Education, 12, 973–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-025-00379-6
Hewett, B. L. (2000). Characteristics of interactive oral and computer-mediated peer group talk and its influence on revision. Computers and Composition, 17(3), 265–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S8755-4615(00)00035-9
Hmoud, M. et al. 2024. “Rubric Development and Validation for Assessing Tasks' Solving via AI Chatbots”, Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 22(6), (1-17), https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.22.6.3292
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing: State of the art. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Jiao W, Wang W, Huang J et al. (2023) Is ChatGPT a good translator? Yes with GPT-4 as the engine. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.08745
Kim, J., Yu, S., Detrick, R. et al. Exploring students’ perspectives on Generative AI-assisted academic writing. Educational Information Technology 30, 1265–1300 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12878-7
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
Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868
Kuhail, M. A., Alturki, N., Alramlawi, S., et al. (2023). Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review. Educational Information Technology, 28, 973–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11177-3
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in a second language classroom. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9361097
Li, Z. (2021). Teachers in automated writing evaluation (AWE) system-supported ESL writing classes: Perception, implementation, and influence. System, 99, Article 102505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102505
Lloyd-Jones, N., & Masterton, A. (2010). Writing skills and developing an argument. In Bailliere's study skills for nurses and midwives. Edinburgh Bailliere Tindall.
Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), 51–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226319800103X
Mizumoto, A., Shintani, N., Sasaki, M., & Teng, M. F. (2024). Testing the viability of ChatGPT as a companion in L2 writing accuracy assessment. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3(2), Article 100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal. 2024.100116
Mun, C. Y. (2024). EFL learners’ English writing feedback and their perception of using ChatGPT. Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media, 25(2), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.16875/stem.2024.25.2.26
Muñoz Muñoz, B. C., Nassaji, H., & Bello Carrillo, F. I. (2025). ChatGPT-generated versus human direct corrective feedback on L2 writing. System, 126, Article 103359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103805
OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT: Optimizing language models for dialogue. https://openai.com/blog/ chatgpt/
Özdere, M. (2025). AI in academic writing: Assessing the effectiveness, grading consistency, and student perspectives of ChatGPT and You.com for EFL students. International Journal of Technology in Education, 8(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.1001
Peterson, S. S., & Portier, C. (2014). Grade one peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Education 3–13, 42(3), 237–257, https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2012.670256.
Rahman, N. A. A., Zulkornain, L. H., & Hamzah, N. H. (2022). Exploring artificial intelligence using automated writing evaluation for writing skills. Environment - Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 7 (SI9), 547-553. https://doi.org/10.21834/ebpj.v7iSI9.4304
Rahimi, M., Fathi, J. & Zou, D. (2025). Exploring the impact of automated written corrective feedback on the academic writing skills of EFL learners: An activity theory perspective. Educ Inf Technol 30, 2691–2735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12896-5
Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4781.2013.12035.x
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591–626. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000356
Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L., & McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing Performance Feedback to Teachers: A Review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(4), 396-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640402700407 (Original work published 2004)
Sheen, Y. (2010a). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 203–234. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0272263109990507
Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37(4), 556–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.002
Sippel, L., & Jackson, C. N. (2015). Teacher vs. peer oral corrective feedback in the German language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 688–705. https://doi.org/10.1111/ flan.12164
Steiss, J., Tate, T., 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 of students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, Article 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
Thai, T. T. A., Nguyen, H. H. G., & Nguyen, N. C.(2025). English-major of Using Grammarly for Thesis Writing at Seniors' Perceptions IUH. International Journal of AI in Language Education, 2(2), 55-78. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijaile.25224
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170598
Tran, T. T. P., Dang, T. N., & Nguyen, V. L. P.(2025). Master Students’ Perceptions of How ChatGPT Influenced Critical Thinking in Academic Writing at The Industrial University of Ho Chi Minh City. International Journal of AI in Language Education, 2(2), 20-39. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijaile.25222
Wenzlaff, K., & Spaeth, S. (2022). Smarter than Humans? Validating how OpenAI’s ChatGPT model explains Crowdfunding, Alternative Finance and Community Finance. SSRN Scholarly Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4302443
Widyastuti, S. (2018). Fostering critical thinking skills through argumentative writing. Yogyakarta State University. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v37i2.20157
Wu, Y. (2024). Study on the impact of utilizing ChatGPT and other AI tools for feedback in EAP writing classrooms on the discursive writing performance of English major students. Transactions on Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 4, 143–150. https://doi.org/10.62051/4se95x52
Üstünbaş, Ü. (2024). EFL learners’ views about the use of artificial intelligence in giving corrective feedback on writing: A case study. In Z. Ç. Köroğlu & A. Çakır (Eds.), Fostering Foreign Language Teaching and Learning Environments with Contemporary Technologies (pp. 115–133). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-0353-5.ch006
Xiao, Y., & Lucking, R. (2008). The impact of two types of peer assessment on students’ performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.005
Yan, D., & Zhang, S. (2024). L2 writer engagement with automated written corrective feedback provided by ChatGPT: A mixed-method multiple case study. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03543-y
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nguyen Duong Minh Quyen (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
