研究中学生如何编辑AI生成的作文文本,发现其互动远比简单复制粘贴复杂。
Exploring EFL Secondary Students' AI-generated Text Editing While Composition Writing
- 通过屏幕录制分析29名中学生写作时对AI文本的15类修改行为
- 发现iOS和Google Docs的自动编辑也产生可被使用的AI文本
- 揭示学生存在四种不同认知策略,需针对性教学指导
生成式人工智能正在改变外语学习者的写作方式,但学生在写作过程中如何操作AI生成内容仍不清楚。本研究探究香港29名中学英语学习者在完成说明文写作任务时,如何整合与修改AI生成文本。采用探索性混合方法设计,收集了参与AI辅助写作工作坊的学生屏幕录制,通过分层编码与多案例主题分析法进行研究。从记录中识别出七类共15种AI生成文本编辑类型,其中iOS与Google Docs的自动编辑成为意外的AI文本来源。主题分析揭示四种基于规划与草稿方向的编辑行为模式:自上而下的规划与修订;无规划的自上而下草稿与修订;自下而上的规划与修订;无规划的自下而上草稿与修订。网络图展示各模式案例,表明学生与AI文本的互动涉及更复杂的认知过程。研究挑战了学生被动、简单使用AI工具的假设,对在英语作为外语(EFL)写作教学中发展显性教学策略具有启示意义。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Generative Artificial Intelligence is transforming how English as a foreign language students write. Still, little is known about how students manipulate text generated by generative AI during the writing process. This study investigates how EFL secondary school students integrate and modify AI-generated text when completing an expository writing task. The study employed an exploratory mixed-methods design. Screen recordings were collected from 29 Hong Kong secondary school students who attended an AI-assisted writing workshop and recorded their screens while using generative AI to write an article. Content analysis with hierarchical coding and thematic analysis with a multiple case study approach were adopted to analyze the recordings. 15 types of AI-generated text edits across seven categories were identified from the recordings. Notably, AI-initiated edits from iOS and Google Docs emerged as unanticipated sources of AI-generated text. A thematic analysis revealed four patterns of students' editing behaviors based on planning and drafting direction: planning with top-down drafting and revising; top-down drafting and revising without planning; planning with bottom-up drafting and revising; and bottom-up drafting and revising without planning. Network graphs illustrate cases of each pattern, demonstrating that students' interactions with AI-generated text involve more complex cognitive processes than simple text insertion. The findings challenge assumptions about students' passive, simplistic use of generative AI tools and have implications for developing explicit instructional approaches to teaching AI-generated text editing strategies in the AFL writing pedagogy.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。