Eurokd
European KnowledgeDevelopment Institute
Language Teaching Research Quarterly

e‐ISSN

    

2667-6753

CiteScore

  exclamation mark

1.2

ICV

  exclamation mark

124.94

SNIP

  exclamation mark

0.604

SJR

  exclamation mark

0.283

CiteScore

  exclamation mark

1.2

ICV

  exclamation mark

124.94

SNIP

  exclamation mark

0.604

SJR

  exclamation mark

0.283

SCOPUSEBSCOProQuestCrossrefIndex CopernicusMIAR

Scoping Review

The Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in English Academic Writing among University Students: A Scoping Review

Language Teaching Research Quarterly, Volume 53, Pages 95-114, https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2025.53.05

As artificial intelligence (AI) use in English academic writing instruction has increased, this scoping review reviews empirical studies in higher education. However, the studies differ in theory use and teaching practice. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) protocol and the Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework, a systematic Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection search yielded 20 eligible peer-reviewed studies published post-2020. Most studies were carried out in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts, aiming to improve writing performance and learner motivation via AI-assisted tools. Common platforms encompass automated writing assessment systems. Theoretical frameworks were frequently limited to self-efficacy and scaffolding, with scant consideration for cognitive load, sociocultural adaptation, or ethical governance. Methodologically, most studies relied on short-term experimental designs, lacking longitudinal or classroom-based rigor. Future research should employ mixed-methods and longitudinal designs, include diverse learner demographics, and prioritize teacher preparation and ethical AI literacy to guarantee sustainable and equitable implementation.

Loading PDF…
next

Page 1 of

next

Download Count : 84

Visit Count : 190

Publisher’s Note

The claims, arguments, and counter-arguments made in this article are exclusively those of the contributing authors. Hence, they do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the authors’ affiliated institutions, or EUROKD as the publisher, the editors and the reviewers of the article.

 

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

 

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

 

CRediT Authorship Contribution Statement

Zhou Bo: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal Analysis, Data Curation, Writing–Original Draft

Lim Seong Pek: Conceptualization, Writing-Review & Editing, Supervision

Li Jian: Data Curation

Wang Cong: Data Curation

Lu Tian Nan: Data Curation

 

Generative AI Use Disclosure Statement

ChatGPT and Grammarly were used only for language editing and grammatical refinement. All ideas, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and conclusions were developed and verified by the authors.

 

Ethics Declarations

World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki–Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Participants

This study adhered to the ethical principles of the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki. As a scoping review based on previously published studies and publicly available data, it did not involve human participants. Ethical approval and informed consent were therefore not required.

 

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

 

Data Availability

All data analyzed in this study were sourced from the Web of Science database.