Student experiences of ChatGPT-supported engagement, relational interaction, and confidence in higher education

Abstract

In the rapidly evolving landscape of higher education, the integration of AI tools like ChatGPT into classroom practices has raised critical pedagogical questions. This study examines how undergraduate students experience ChatGPT as a peer-like presence within a Professional English course. Drawing on focus group interview with four students who interacted with ChatGPT during course activities, the research employs a reflexive thematic analysis to investigate how learners construct meaning around this AI-supported experience. Findings indicate that students frequently interpreted ChatGPT’s responses in relational terms, describing it as a supportive peer, group member, or teacher-like presence. Its immediate, non-judgmental feedback was seen to reduce anxiety, encourage participation, and scaffold experimentation with professional English. At the same time, role fluidity created moments of uncertainty and raised concerns about overreliance, diminished ownership, and “illusion of mastery.” Engagement was fostered through performative and collaborative tasks such as role-play and debates, which positioned ChatGPT as a co-actor rather than a mere tool. Confidence gains were strongest in structured tasks like vocabulary building and translation, while trust weakened in interpretive or research-oriented domains, underscoring the importance of pedagogical framing. These findings suggest that generative AI can provide pedagogical value beyond functionality, supporting relational meaning-making, scaffolding student confidence, and sustaining engagement when embedded in guided, collaborative practices. The study highlights the need for critical design of AI-integrated learning environments that balance innovation with reflective awareness of agency, trust, and ethical use.

Keywords

• ChatGPT
• student engagement
• relational interaction
• confidence
• higher education teaching and learning.

References

1. Ahmed, M. A. (2023). ChatGPT and the EFL classroom: Supplement or substitute in Saudi Arabia’s eastern region. Information Sciences Letters, 12(7), 2727-2734.
2. Akar, B., & Akçay, S. (2024). Nitel araştirmalarda çevrimiçi odak grup görüşmeleri. Ufkun Ötesi Bilim Dergisi, 24(1), 55-72.
3. Alqahtani, T., Badreldin, H. A., Alrashed, M., Alshaya, A. I., Alghamdi, S. S., Bin Saleh, K., ... & Albekairy, A. M. (2023). The emergent role of artificial intelligence, natural learning processing, and large language models in higher education and research. Research in social and administrative pharmacy, 19(8), 1236-1242.
4. Alsaiari, O., Baghaei, N., Lahza, H., Lodge, J., Boden, M., & Khosravi, H. (2024). Emotionally enriched feedback via generative AI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.15077. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.15077
5. Anjarani, S., Furqon, M., & Rakhmawati, F. (2024). ChatGPT to foster students’ engagement in writing class: An intervention study. Voices of English Language Education Society, 8(3), 633–645. https://doi.org/10.33021/velea.v8i3.
6. Ansari, A. N., Ahmad, S., & Bhutta, S. M. (2024). Mapping the global evidence around the use of ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic scoping review. Education and Information Technologies, 29(9), 11281-11321.
7. Archibald, M. M., Ambagtsheer, R. C., Casey, M. G., & Lawless, M. (2019). Using zoom videoconferencing for qualitative data collection: perceptions and experiences of researchers and participants. International journal of qualitative methods, 18, 1609406919874596.
8. Bannister, P., Urbieta, A. S., & Peñalver, E. A. (2023). A systematic review of generative AI and (English medium instruction) higher education. Aula Abierta, 52(4), 401-409.

9. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International journal of educational technology in higher education, 17(1), 2.
10. Bozkurt, A., Junhong, X., Lambert, S., Pazurek, A., Crompton, H., Koseoglu, S., Farrow, R., Bond, M., Nerantzi, C., Honeychurch, S., Bali, M., Dron, J., Mir, K., Stewart, B., Costello, E., Mason, J., Stracke, C. M., & Romero-Hall, E. (2023). Speculative futures on ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence (AI): A collective reflection from the educational landscape. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 53–130. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7636568
11. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
12. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications.
13. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
14. Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56, 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
15. Chang, C. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2025). ChatGPT-facilitated professional development: evidence from professional trainers’ learning achievements, self-worth, and self-confidence. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(1), 883-900. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2362798.
16. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2018). Using thematic analysis in counselling and psychotherapy research: A critical reflection. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 18(2), 107–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12165
17. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research. Sage Publications.
18. Cui, G., Lockee, B., & Meng, C. (2013). Building modern online social presence: A review of social presence theory and its instructional design implications for future trends. Education and Information Technologies, 18(4), 661–685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9192-1
19. Dempere, J., Modugu, K., Hesham, A., & Ramasamy, L. K. (2023, September). The impact of ChatGPT on higher education. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 8, p. 1206936).
20. Fan, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., Shen, K., Tan, S., Zhao, Y., ... & Gašević, D. (2025). Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(2), 489-530. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544
21. Farrelly, T., & Baker, N. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence: Implications and considerations for higher education practice. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111109
22. Farazouli, A., Cerratto Pargman, T., Bolander Laksov, K., & McGrath, C. (2025). Navigating uncertainty: university teachers’ experiences and perceptions of generative artificial intelligence in teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 1-16.
23. Felipe, A. L., Azuela, L., Eleazar, M., Azuela, H., Shrestha Khwakhali, U., Aragoncillo, A., & Ricafort, R. (2024). Exploring ChatGPT integration in classrooms: Impact on student engagement and personalized learning support. Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Innovation and Intelligence for Informatics, Computing, and Technologies (3ICT). IEEE Xplore.
24. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
25. Gray, L. M., Wong-Wylie, G., Rempel, G. R., & Cook, K. (2020). Expanding qualitative research interviewing strategies: Zoom video communications. The qualitative report, 25(5), 1292-1301.
26. Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International journal of educational telecommunications, 1(2), 147-166.
27. Guo, Y., & Lee, D. (2023). Leveraging ChatGPT for enhancing critical thinking skills. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(12), 4876-4883.
28. Heilporn, G., Lakhal, S., & Bélisle, M. (2021). An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00260-3
29. Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
30. Heung, Y. M. E., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2025). How ChatGPT impacts student engagement: A systematic review and meta-analysis study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100361
31. Hew, K. F., Huang, W., Du, J., & Jia, C. (2023). Using chatbots to support student goal setting and social presence in fully online activities: Learner engagement and perceptions. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 35(1), 40-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-022-09338-x
32. Huang, H. W., & Chang, J. (2024, October). Human-AI Interactions in Teacher Education: Examining Social Presence and Friendship. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Teacher Education (pp. 64-69).
33. Jin, S. H. (2025). Measures of Learner-Generative AI Relationships. Computers and Education Open, 100258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100258
34. Karamuk, E. (2025). The Automation Trap: Unpacking the Consequences of Over-Reliance on AI in Education and Its Hidden Costs. In Pitfalls of AI Integration in Education: Skill Obsolescence, Misuse, and Bias (pp. 151-174). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
35. Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and individual differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
36. Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). Exploring generative artificial intelligence preparedness among university language instructors: A case study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100156.
37. Kong, S.-C., & Yang, Y. (2024). A human-centered learning and teaching framework using generative artificial intelligence for self-regulated learning development through domain knowledge learning in K–12 settings. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 1562–1573. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3392830
38. Kostka, I., & Toncelli, R. (2023). Exploring applications of ChatGPT to English language teaching: Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations. Tesl-Ej, 27(3), 1-19.
39. Lee, E., & Hannafin, M. J. (2016). A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centered learning: Own it, learn it, and share it. Educational technology research and development, 64(4), 707-734.
40. Lee, K. M., Jung, Y., Kim, J., & Kim, S. R. (2006). Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents?: The effects of physical embodiment, tactile interaction, and people’s loneliness in human–robot interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(10), 962–973.
41. Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., Lekkas, D., & Palmer, E. (2024). The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’ perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
42. Li, Y., Wu, Y., & Chiu, T. K. (2025). How teacher presence affects student engagement with a generative artificial intelligence chatbot in learning designed with first principles of instruction. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2025.2493942
43. Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Jong, M. S.-y. (2024). The influence of ChatGPT on student engagement: A systematic review and future research agenda. Computers & Education, 219, 105100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105100
44. Liu, Q., Hu, A., Gladman, T., & Gallagher, S. (2025). Eight months into reality: A scoping review of the application of ChatGPT in higher education teaching and learning. Innovative Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-025-09790-4
45. Ma, T. (2025). Systematically visualizing ChatGPT used in higher education: Publication trend, disciplinary domains, research themes, adoption and acceptance. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100336
46. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
47. Meşe, E., Kuru, Ö., & Atay, D. (2025). Facilitating student engagement through ChatGPT. The Journal of Educational Research, 1-11.
48. Muniandy, J., & Selvanathan, M. (2025). ChatGPT, a partnering tool to improve ESL learners’ speaking skills: Case study in a Public University, Malaysia. Teaching Public Administration, 43(1), 4-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/01447394241230152
49. Nugroho, A., Putro, N. H. P. S., & Syamsi, K. (2023). The potentials of ChatGPT for language learning: Unpacking its benefits and limitations. Register Journal, 16(2), 224-247.Oh, C. S., Bailenson, J. N., & Welch, G. F. (2018). A systematic review of social presence: Definition, antecedents, and implications. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5, 114. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2018.00114
50. Oh, C. S., Bailenson, J. N., & Welch, G. F. (2018). A systematic review of social presence: Definition, antecedents, and implications. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5, 114.
51. Payne, L. (2019). Student engagement: Three models for its investigation. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(5), 641–657. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1391186
52. Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students' satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402-417.
53. Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary educational psychology, 36(4), 257-267.
54. Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied qualitative research design: A total quality framework approach. Guilford Press.
55. Shin, D., & Lee, J. H. (2023). Can ChatGPT make reading comprehension testing items on par with human experts. Language Learning & Technology, 27(3), 27-40
56. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books.
57. Sonderegger, S., & Seufert, S. (2022). Chatbot-mediated Learning: Conceptual Framework for the Design of Chatbot Use Cases in Education. In CSEDU (1) (pp. 207-215).
58. Songsiengchai, S., Sereerat, B. O., & Watananimitgul, W. (2023). Leveraging artificial intelligence (AI): Chat GPT for effective English language learning among Thai students. English Language Teaching, 16(11), 1-68.
59. Stojanov, A. (2023). Learning with ChatGPT 3.5 as a more knowledgeable other: An autoethnographic study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 35.
60. Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
61. Van Horn, K. R. (2024). ChatGPT in English Language Learning: Exploring Perceptions and Promoting Autonomy in a University EFL Context. TESL-EJ, 28(1), n1.
62. Vilhunen, E., Vesterinen, V. M., Äijälä, M., Salovaara, J., Siponen, J., Lavonen, J., ... & Riuttanen, L. (2025). Promoting university students' situational engagement in online learning for climate education. The Internet and Higher Education, 65, 100987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2024.100987
63. Wang, T., Lund, B. D., Marengo, A., Pagano, A., Mannuru, N. R., Teel, Z. A., et al. (2023). Exploring the potential impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on international students in higher education: Generative AI, chatbots, analytics, and international student success. Applied Sciences-Basel, 13(11), 6716. https://doi.org/10.3390/
64. Wang, T., Wu, T., Liu, H., Brown, C., & Chen, Y. (2025). Generative co-Learners: enhancing cognitive and social presence of students in asynchronous learning with generative AI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 9(1), 1-24.
65. Warschauer, M., Tseng, W., Yim, S., Webster, T., Jacob, S., Du, Q., & Tate, T. (2023). The affordances and contradictions of AI-generated text for writers of English as a second or foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 62.
66. You, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Developing AI literacies and negotiating professional identities: a study of pre-service English teachers in a ChatGPT-facilitated pedagogy. Journal of China Computer-Assisted Language Learning, (Preprint).
67. 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
68. Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
69. Zhan, Y., & Yan, Z. (2025). Students’ engagement with ChatGPT feedback: Implications for student feedback literacy in the context of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2471821
70. Zhang, A., & Rau, P. L. P. (2023). Tools or peers? Impacts of anthropomorphism level and social role on emotional attachment and disclosure tendency towards intelligent agents. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107415.