arXiv:2507.21073cs.CLcs.HC2025-07被引 4

研究学生如何修改AI生成的英文说明文,发现改得多不等于写得好。

Product vs. Process: Exploring EFL Students' Editing of AI-Generated Text for Expository Writing

  • 通过屏幕记录分析39名中学生修改AI文本的行为模式。
  • 修改次数多但对内容、结构等评分影响不大,仅AI原文词数有正向作用。
  • 适合关注AI辅助写作教学的教师和教育研究者参考。

人工智能聊天机器人生成的文本在英语作为外语(EFL)写作中日益普遍,但其对学生说明文写作过程与成果的影响仍缺乏研究。本研究考察了香港39名中学生成绩在工作坊中使用AI聊天机器人撰写说明文时的修改行为,分析其写作过程中的编辑模式及对内容、组织、语言和整体质量的人工评分的影响。采用混合研究设计,结合屏幕录制与作文分析,运用定性编码、描述统计、时间序列分析、人工评分和多元线性回归(MLR)等方法。每份数据集分析超过260次编辑,识别出两种典型模式:一是反复精修引言部分后才推进;二是快速转向正文大段修改(如主题句和支持句)。MLR结果显示,生成词数显著正向预测所有评分维度,而多数编辑变量影响微弱。结果表明,学生投入大量修改精力却未带来明显质量提升,说明AI虽能支持写作但无法替代技能训练。研究强调需开展针对文体的写作过程指导,并在引入AI前加强过程教学。教育者应设计兼顾过程与成果的评估体系,以促进学生对AI文本的批判性使用。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Text generated by artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots is increasingly used in English as a foreign language (EFL) writing contexts, yet its impact on students' expository writing process and compositions remains understudied. This research examines how EFL secondary students edit AI-generated text. Exploring editing behaviors in their expository writing process and in expository compositions, and their effect on human-rated scores for content, organization, language, and overall quality. Participants were 39 Hong Kong secondary students who wrote an expository composition with AI chatbots in a workshop. A convergent design was employed to analyze their screen recordings and compositions to examine students' editing behaviors and writing qualities. Analytical methods included qualitative coding, descriptive statistics, temporal sequence analysis, human-rated scoring, and multiple linear regression analysis. We analyzed over 260 edits per dataset, and identified two editing patterns: one where students refined introductory units repeatedly before progressing, and another where they quickly shifted to extensive edits in body units (e.g., topic and supporting sentences). MLR analyses revealed that the number of AI-generated words positively predicted all score dimensions, while most editing variables showed minimal impact. These results suggest a disconnect between students' significant editing effort and improved composition quality, indicating AI supports but does not replace writing skills. The findings highlight the importance of genre-specific instruction and process-focused writing before AI integration. Educators should also develop assessments valuing both process and product to encourage critical engagement with AI text.

AI写作英语教学过程写作教育研究

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。