Integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into Primary School Students’ Writing Skills: The Impact of ChatGPT on Creative Writing and Writing Self-Efficacy
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2025
Integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into Primary School Students’ Writing Skills: The Impact of ChatGPT on Creative Writing and Writing Self-Efficacy
Rapid developments in artificial intelligence can impact numerous individuals, fields, and sectors in diverse ways. ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, is one of the prominent models of artificial intelligence. The current study aims to examine the effect of ChatGPT on the creative writing skills and writing self-efficacy of fourth-grade primary school students. ChatGPT’s feedback mechanism was used with students at the primary education level under teacher guidance. This research adopted a quasi-experimental design with pre-test and post-test control groups, conducted within a quantitative research method framework. The participants included 10-year-old students in the experimental group (n = 31) and the control group (n = 31). Data were collected using the Creative Writing Self-Efficacy Scale and a Creative Writing Product Evaluation Scale. According to the results of a study conducted in Van, Türkiye, in early 2025, ChatGPT is effective in developing creative writing and writing self-efficacy skills with its feedback feature. Based on these results, it is recommended that ChatGPT be integrated into primary school teaching practices and curricula.
AlkamelM. A.AlwagiehN. A. (2024). Utilizing an adaptable artificial intelligence writing tool (ChatGPT) to enhance academic writing skills among Yemeni university EFL students. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 10(1), 101095–101099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101095
2.
Al ShloulT.MazharT.AbbasQ.IqbalM.GhadiY. Y.ShahzadT.MallekD.HamamH. (2024). The role of activity-based learning and ChatGPT on students‘ performance in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100219
3.
AminR. M.KühleO. H.BuschekD.ButzA. (2025). Composable prompting workspaces for creative writing: Exploration and iteration using dynamic widgets. In Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’25), 26 April–1 May 2025, Yokohama, Japan, pp. 1–11. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706599.3720243chi2025.acm.org+15
4.
AndersonJ. A.AyaawanA. E. (2023). Formative feedback in a writing programme at the university of Ghana (Eds.). EsimajeA.van RooyB.JolayemiD.NkemlekeD.KluE. In: African perspectives on the teaching and learning of English in higher education (pp. 197–213). Routledge.
5.
AprianiE.CardosoL.ObaidA. J.SupardanD.WijayantiE.WijayantiE.EsmiantiF. (2024). Impact of AI-POWERED CHATBots on EFL students’ writing skills, self-efficacy, and self-regulation: A mixed-methods study. Global Educational Research Review, 1(2), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.71380/GERR-08-2024-8
6.
ArbiA. P. (2024). The role of ChatGPT in writing performance: A review of recent studies. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 1(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.59613/y0y95v73
7.
AudichyaM. K.SainiJ. R. (2023). ChatGPT for Creative Writing and Natural Language Generation in Poetry and Prose. In: Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Advanced Computing Technologies and Applications (ICACTA 2023), October 2023,Hyderabad, India, (pp. 1–7). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACTA58201.2023.10392805
BerningerV. (1999). Coordinating transcription and text generation in working memory during composing: Automatic and constructive processes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511269
BoubkerO. (2024). From chatting to self-educating: Can AI tools boost student learning outcomes?Expert Systems with Applications, 238, 121820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121820
14.
BouzarA.IdrissiK. E.GhourdouT. (2024). ChatGPT and academic writing self-efficacy: Unveiling correlations and technological dependency among postgraduate students. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), Special Issue on ChatGPT, 1(1), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/ChatGPT.15
15.
BrookesI.MarshallM. (2004). Good writing guide. Harap Publishers Ltd.
16.
BruningR.DempseyM.KauffmanD. F.McKimC.ZumbrunnS. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029692
17.
BüyüköztürkŞ. (2025). Deneysel desenler: Öntest-sontest kontrol grubu desen ve veri analizi (11. Baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
18.
BüyüköztürkŞ.Kılıç ÇakmakE.AkgünÖ. E.KaradenizŞ.DemirelF. (2022). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem akademi.
ChenR.ZhaoH. (2024). ChatGPT in creative writing courses in Chinese universities: Application and research. In 12th international conference on information and education technology, Yamaguchi, Japan, 18–20 March 2024 (pp. 243–247). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/Iciet60671.2024.10542824
21.
ChenY. T.LiM.CukurovaM. (2023). Unleashing imagination: An effective pedagogical approach to integrate into spherical video-based virtual reality to improve students' creative writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29(6), 6499–6523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639.023.12115.7
22.
ChungH. Q.ChenV.OlsonC. (2021). The impact of self-assessment, planning and goal setting, and reflection before and after revision on student self-efficacy and writing performance. Reading and Writing, 34(7), 1885–1913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10186-x
23.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge.
24.
CreswellJ. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
25.
DaiW.LinJ.JinH.LiT.TsaiY. S.GaševićD.ChenG. (2023). Can large language models provide feedback to students? A case study onChatGPT. In: IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT), Orem, UT, USA, (pp. 10323–13325) July 2023, IEEE. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/hcgzj
26.
DarniM.MurdiyantoM.Anas AhmadiM. P. (2018). Menulis kreatif: Teori dan praktik. Penerbit Graniti.
27.
DemirT. (2013). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin yaratıcı yazma becerileri ile yazma öz yeterlik algısı ilişki üzerine bir çalışma. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi,2(1), 84-114. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/136805
28.
Demirbaşİ.ŞahinA. (2023). The effect of digital stories on primary school students’ creative writing skills. Education and Information Technologies, 28(4), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11440-7
29.
ElkatmisM. (2024). Chat GPT and creative writing: Experiences of master's students in enhancing. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 11(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.52380/ijcer.2024.11.3.597
30.
FarhiF.JeljeliR.AburezeqI.DweikatF. F.Al-shamiS. A.SlameneR. (2023). Analyzing the students' views, concerns, and perceived ethics about chat GPT usage. Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence, 5(4), 100180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100180
31.
FieldA. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
32.
GhasemiA.ZahediaslS. (2012). Normality tests for statistical analysis: A guide for non-statisticians. International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, 10(2), 486–489. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijem.3505
33.
GirardiT. A. (2014). T can be acquired and learned: Building a writer-centered pedagogical unpublished doctoral dissertation. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
34.
GüneşF.KuşdemirY.BulutP. (2017). Yazma öz yeterlik ölçeğinin psikometrik özellikleri. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 58(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS7109
35.
GuptaB. B.GauravA.PanigrahiP. K.AryaV. (2023). Analysis of artificial intelligence-based technologies and approaches on sustainable entrepreneurship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 186(1), 122152–122159. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2022.122152
HarmerJ. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Longman.
38.
HuangJ.MizumotoA. (2024). Examining the effect of generative AI on students’ motivation. Digital Applied Linguistics, 1(102324), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.29140/daL.v1.102324
39.
HuangJ.SalehS.LiuY. (2021). A review on artificial intelligence in education. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 10(3), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis2021-0077
40.
KalaycıŞ. (2018). Spss uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
41.
KangJ. G. (2024). College students' writing self-efficacy in reflective writing classes utilizing ChatGPT. Journal of Practical Engineering Education, 16(4), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.14702/JPEE.2024.471
42.
LevineS.BeckS. W.MahC.PhalenL.PittmanJ. (2025). How do students use ChatGPT as a writing support?Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 68(5), 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1373
43.
LiM.ChenY. T.HuangC. Q.HwangG. J.CukurovaM. (2023). From motivational experience to creative writing: A motivational AR-based learning approach to promoting Chinese writing performance and positive writing behaviors. Computers & Education, 202(3), 104844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104844
44.
LopezM.BernalC. (2022). Long-term effects of feedback on EFL student writing. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 310–328.
45.
LutzkerP. (2015). Practising creative writing in high school foreign language classes. (Eds.) MaleyA.PeacheyN. In: Creativity in the English language classroom (pp. 134–141). British Council.
46.
MahapatraS. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT on ESL students’ academic writing skills: A mixed methods intervention study. Impact of ChatGPT on ESL students’ academic writing skills: A Mixed Methods Intervention Study. Smart Learn. Environ, 11(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00295-9
47.
MeiP.BrewisD. N.NwaiwuF.SumanathilakaD.Alva-ManchegoF.Demaree-CottonJ. (2025). ‘‘If ChatGPT can do it, where is my creativity?’’ generative AI boosts performance but diminishes experience in a creative writing task. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, Journal Pre-proof, (in press),1–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100140
48.
Montenegro-RuedaM.Fernández-CereroJ.Fernández-BataneroJ. M.López-MenesesE. (2023). Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers, 12(8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers12080153
49.
NiloyA. C.AkterS.SultanaN.SultanaJ.RahmanS. I. U. (2024). Is chatgpt a menace for creative writing ability? An experiment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(2), 919–930. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12929
50.
NugrohoA.AndriyantiE.WidodoP.MutiaraningrumI. (2024). Students’ appraisals post-ChatGPT use: Students’ narrative after using ChatGPT for writing. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 62(2), 499–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2319184
OubibiM.HryshayevaK.HuangR. (2025). Enhancing postgraduate digital academic writing proficiency: The interplay of artificial intelligence tools and ChatGPT. Interactive Learning Environments, (in press), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2454445
53.
PaganoR. R. (2012). Understanding statistics in the behavioral sciences (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
54.
PajaresF.ValianteG. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: A function of gender orientation?Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(3), 366–381. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1069
55.
PellasN. (2023). The effects of generative AI platforms on undergraduates’ narrative intelligence and writing self-efficacy. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1155. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111155
RahmanM. M.WatanobeY. (2023). ChatGPT for education and research: Opportunities, threats, and strategies. Applied Sciences,13(9), 5783. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783
58.
RaoI. S.JeevanS.AhmadA. (2023). Impact of metacognitive strategies on creative writing of ESL students at college level in district lahore. Global Language Review, 8(1), 315–324. https://doi.org/10.31703/glr.2023(VIII-I).29
59.
SchunkD. H. (2013). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19(2), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308219
60.
SongC.SongY. (2023). Enhancing academic writing skills and motivation: Assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted language learning for EFL students. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1260843
61.
SteissJ.TateT.GrahamS.CruzJ.HebertM.WangJ.MoonY.TsengW.WarschauerM.OlsonC. B. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91(1), 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894
62.
SunT.WangC.LambertR. G.LiuL. (2021). Relationship between second language English writing self-efficacy and achievement: A meta-regression analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53(1), 100817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100817
63.
SusantiL. Y.ZulaehaI.SupriyantoT.PristiwatiR. (2025). The effectiveness of interactive digital learning media to improve writing skills in tembang and geguritan. International Journal of Educational Reform, (in press), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879241302835
64.
Susar KırmızıF.BeydemirA. (2012). İlköğretim 5. Sınıf türkçe dersinde yaratıcı yazma yaklaşımının yazmaya yönelik tutumlara etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD),13(3), 319-337. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1491712, Retrieved March 18, 2025.
65.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
66.
TengL. S.SunP.XuL. (2018). Conceptualizing writing self‐efficacy in English as a foreign language contexts: Scale validation through structural equation modeling. Tesol Quarterly, 52(4), 911–942. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.432
67.
TengM. F. (2024). “ChatGPT is the companion, not enemies”: EFL learners’ perceptions and experiences in using ChatGPT for feedback in writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7(1), 100270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100270
68.
TengM. F.WangC. (2022). Assessing academic writing self-efficacy belief and writing performance in a foreign language context. Foreign Language Annals, 56(1), 144–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12638
69.
Vazquez-CanoE.Ramirez-HurtadoJ. M.Saez-LopezJ. M.Lopez-MenesesE. (2023). ChatGPT: The brightest student in the class. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49(1), 101380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101380
70.
VicolM.-I.GavriliuțM.-L.MățăL. (2024). A quasi-experimental study on the development of creative writing skills in primary school students. Education Sciences, 14(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14010091
71.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). (Eds.) ColeM.John-SteinerV.ScribnerS.SoubermanE. ,In: Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
72.
WahabA.SidikA. S.NingsihF.RahimR. (2024). Exploring the use of digital writing tools to enhance creative writing in the second semester of the English department, qamarul huda badaruddin university. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajaran (PENA), 12(1), 1–5. https://ejournal.hamjahdiha.org/index.php/pena/article/view/77/77
73.
WardatY.TashtoushM. A.AliR.JarrahA. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272
WilliamsJ. D.TakakuS. (2011). Help seeking and writing performance among college students: A longitudinal study. Journal of Writing Research, 3(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2011.03.01.1
76.
WollnyS.SchneiderJ.Di MitriD.WeidlichJ.RittbergerM.DrachslerH. A. (2021). Are we there yet? A systematic literature review on chatbots in education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 4(654924), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.654924
77.
WooD. J.WangD.GuoK.SusantoH. (2024). Teaching EFL students to write with ChatGPT: Students' motivation to learn, cognitive load, and satisfaction with the learning process. Education and Information Technologies, 29(18), 24963–24990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12819-4
78.
WuY. (2023). Study on the impact of utilizing ChatGPT and other AI tools for feedback in EAP writing classrooms on the discursive writing performance of English major students. Transactions on Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research, 4, 143–150. https://doi.org/10.62051/4se95x52
79.
YoonC. (2011). Concordancing in L2 writing class: An overview of research and issues. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(3), 130–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.03.003
80.
ZhangP.TurG. (2023). A systematic review of ChatGPT use in K‐12 education. European Journal of Education, 59(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12599
81.
ZimmermanB.KitsantasA. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal, 94(4), 660–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.660
82.
ZimmermanB. J.BanduraA. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on development of writing proficiency. American Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 845–862. https://doi.org/10.3102/000283120310048
