Challenges of integrating ChatGPT into EFL writing: an Activity Theory framework

This study explores the challenges EFL learners face when using ChatGPT for English writing tasks, applying Activity Theory to assess the limitations and potential of AI tools. Thirteen university students in South Korea completed two argumentative writing tasks and participated in semi-structured interviews. The findings reveal multiple contradictions in AI-assisted writing. Primary contradictions involved technical inconsistencies across different versions of ChatGPT. Secondary contradictions emerged across several dimensions of the activity system. Subject–Tool contradictions included mismatches between AI-generated feedback and learners’ expectations, culturally irrelevant examples, lack of trust in responses, difficulties in adopting suggestions among students with limited English proficiency, and declining self-efficacy triggered by comparisons with ChatGPT’s advanced output. Tool–Object contradictions reflected ChatGPT’s limited support for writing skill development, its misalignment with students’ actual writing needs, and the resulting need to supplement the tool with additional resources. Additional contradictions involved ethical ambiguity (Subject–Rules), over-reliance on ChatGPT (Subject–Division of Labor), and dissatisfaction compared to human feedback (Tool–Community). A quaternary contradiction arose from the absence of structured AI literacy education, leaving students uncertain about appropriate and ethical use. These findings underscore the need for balanced AI integration that fosters independent writing development while leveraging AI’s strengths. Educators should implement structured AI literacy training, refine instructional strategies to incorporate AI tools responsibly, and emphasize the irreplaceable role of human feedback. Ultimately, this study highlights the importance of adapting writing curricula to the evolving technological landscape while maintaining pedagogical principles that support critical thinking and academic integrity.