Enhancing or Deteriorating? The Influence of ChatGPT on University Students’ Academic Writing Skills in Türkiye

Abstract

This study examined the impacts of ChatGPT on the academic writing skills of students who are taking English courses at a university in Türkiye. A qualitative research design was followed, during which a semi-structured interview with 12 active users of ChatGPT for academic writing was conducted. Thematic analysis reveals that students mostly benefited from improved writing fluency, organization, and grammatical accuracy due to ChatGPT. A lot of participants highly regarded it for prompt feedback, coherence, and help with brainstorming. Some of the drawbacks included over-reliance on AI, inability to provide subject-specific accuracy in many cases, and financial accessibility concerns, since premium features were often too expensive for students. While useful, research highlighted the need for ChatGPT to function in conjunction with traditional writing instruction to maintain integrity and develop autonomous writing skills. The study underscores how fundamental AI literacy and institutional support are for affording the most benefits from AI-assisted learning in academic writing.

Keywords

• academic writing
• AI-assisted writing
• ChatGBT
• qualitative research

Geliştiren mi Körelten mi? ChatGPT'nin Türkiye'deki Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Akademik Yazma Becerileri Üzerindeki Etkisi

Abstract

Bu çalışma, ChatGPT'nin Türkiye'deki bir üniversitede İngilizce dersi alan öğrencilerin akademik yazma becerileri üzerindeki etkilerini incelemiştir. Nitel bir araştırma deseni benimsenmiş ve akademik yazma amacıyla ChatGPT’yi aktif olarak kullanan 12 öğrenciyle yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Tematik analiz sonuçları, öğrencilerin ChatGPT aracılığıyla yazma akıcılığı, metin organizasyonu ve dilbilgisel doğruluk gibi alanlarda önemli gelişmeler kaydettiklerini ortaya koymuştur. Katılımcıların çoğu, ChatGPT’yi hızlı geri bildirim sunması, fikir üretme süreçlerini desteklemesi ve tutarlı metinler oluşturulmasına yardımcı olması nedeniyle faydalı bulmuştur. Bununla birlikte, yapay zekâya aşırı bağımlılık, içeriklerin konuya özgü doğruluk içermemesi ve premium özelliklerin yüksek maliyeti nedeniyle finansal erişim sorunları gibi bazı dezavantajlar da dile getirilmiştir. Araştırma bulguları, ChatGPT’nin akademik yazma süreçlerinde faydalı olmakla birlikte, bütünlüğü korumak ve öğrencilerin özerk yazma becerilerini geliştirmek amacıyla geleneksel yazma eğitimiyle birlikte kullanılmasının gerekliliğine dikkat çekmektedir. Sonuç olarak, çalışma, yapay zekâ destekli akademik yazma süreçlerinden en üst düzeyde yarar sağlanabilmesi için yapay zekâ okuryazarlığının artırılmasının ve kurumsal desteğin sağlanmasının önemini vurgulamaktadır.

Keywords

• akademik yazma
• yapay zeka destekli yazma
• ChatGBT
• nitel araştırma

References

1. Akinwalere, S., & Ivanov, V. (2022). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. Border Crossing, 12, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.33182/bc.v12i1.2015
2. Algerafi, M. A. M., Zhou, Y., Alfadda, H., & Wijaya, T. T. (2023). Understanding the factorsinfluencing higher education students’ intention to adopt artificial intelligence-based robots. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 11, 99752–99764. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2023.3314499
3. Amirjalili, F., Neysani, M., & Nikbakht, A. (2024). Exploring the boundaries of authorship: A comparative analysis of AI-generated text and human academic writing in English literature. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1347421
4. Bearman, M., Ryan, J., & Ajjawi, R. (2023). Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: A critical literature review. Higher Education, 86(2), 369–385. https://-doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2
5. Bissessar, C. (2023). To use or not to use ChatGPT and assistive artificial intelligence tools in higher education institutions? The modern-day conundrum—students' and faculty's perspectives. Equity in Education & Society, 1(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/-27526461231215083
6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
7. Chen, L., Chen, P., and Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review, IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510
8. Chen, J., & Lin, J. (2024). Artificial intelligence as a double-edged sword: Wielding the POWER principles to maximize its positive effects and minimize its negative effects. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 25(1), 146–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/-14639491231169813

9. Chen, C., & Gong, Y. (2025). The role of AI-assisted learning in academic writing: A mixed-methods study on Chinese as a second language students. Education Sciences, 15(2), 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020141
10. Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Żmijewski, P., & Saad, H. B. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://doi.org/10.5114/-biolsport.2023.125623
11. Dubey, S., & Mishra, S. (2024). Revolutionizing education: The impact of AI-enhanced teaching strategies. International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology, 12(9), 9-32. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2024.64127
12. Ferris, D. (2013). Responding to student writing: Teachers' philosophies and practices. Assessing Writing, 19, 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.09.004
13. Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds & Machines, 30(4), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1
14. Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300104
15. Hancock, B. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research. Nottingham, UK: Trent Focus
16. Group.Hassani, H., & Silva, E. S. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in data science: How AI-assisted conversational ınterfaces are revolutionizing the field. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 7(2), 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc7020062
17. Hyland, K. (2021). Second Language Writing Instruction. In: Mohebbi, H.& Coombe, C. (Eds.), Research questions in language education and applied linguistics (pp. 129-132). Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79143-8_24
18. Holmes, W. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education. In: Tatnall, A. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies (pp. 88–103). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10576-1_107
19. Hooda, M., Rana, C., Dahiya, O., Rizwan, A., & Hossain, M. S. (2022). Artificial intelligence for assessment and feedback to enhance student success in higher education. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 1, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5215722
20. Hwang, W.-Y. & Nurtantyana, R. (2022). The integration of multiple recognition technologies and artificial intelligence to facilitate EFL writing in authentic contexts. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Information Technology (InCIT) (pp. 379–383). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/InCIT56086.2022.10067490
21. Kelly, S. (2010). Qualitative interviewing techniques and styles. In I. Bourgeault, R. Dingwall, & R. de Vries (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative methods in health research (pp. 307-326). Sage Publications.
22. Kim, N. J., & Kim, M. K. (2022). Teacher’s perceptions of using an artificial intelligence-based educational tool for scientific writing. Frontiers in education, 7(3), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.755914
23. Kim, J., Lee, H., & Cho, Y. H. (2022). Learning design to support student-AI collaboration: Perspectives of leading teachers for AI in education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 6069–6104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10831-6
24. Klimova, B., Pikhart, M., & Al-Obaydi, L. H. (2024). Exploring the potential of ChatGPT for foreign language education at the university level. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1269319
25. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
26. Lee, A. V. Y., Luco, A. C., & Tan, S. C. (2023). A human-centric automated essay scoring and feedback system for the development of ethical reasoning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 26(1), 147–159. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48707973
27. Luckin, R., & Holmes, W. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. UCL Knowledge Lab.
28. 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, 30-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
29. Mananay, J. (2024). Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) in language teaching: Effectiveness, challenges, and strategies. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(9), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.9.19
30. Mun, C. (2024). Efl learners’ english writing feedback and their perception of using chatgpt. STEM Journal, 25(2), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.16875/stem.2024.25.2.26
31. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
32. Paulus, T., & Lester, J. (2015). ATLAS.ti for conversation and discourse analysis studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(1),1–24. https://-doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1021949
33. Rahman, M. A., Terano, H. J., Rahman, N., Salamzadeh, A., & Rahaman, M. S. (2023). Chatgpt and academic research: a review and recommendations based on practical examples. Journal of Education, Management and Development Studies, 3(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.52631/jemds.v3i1.175
34. Sallam M. (2023). ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns. Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 11(6), 887. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11060887
35. Xi, M. (2024). The role and impact of artificial intelligence in the learning of English writing skills in second language acquisition. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 38(1), 59–63. https://doi.org/10.54097/685ecs63
36. Yuan, Y., Li, H. & Sawaengdist, A. (2024). The impact of ChatGPT on learners in English academic writing: opportunities and challenges in education. Language Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2023-0006
37. Zhai, X., and Nehm, R. H. (2023). AI and formative assessment: the train has left the station. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 60, 1390–1398. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21885
38. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1),1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0