Qualitative analysis reveals how generative AI impacts motivation in EFL learners, suggesting a need for rethinking instructional approaches.
Introduction The integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) into English as a Foreign Language (EFL) pedagogy entails both potentials and pitfalls. This study investigates a newly observed phenomenon: the “Engaged but Amotivated” (EBA) learners, who demonstrate behavioral participation yet experience a profound lack of motivation. Grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and multidimensional engagement framework, the study investigates how GenAI tools subtly influence EFL learners’ motivation and engagement, particularly in low-proficiency vocational contexts. Methods This study adopted a qualitative research design within a Chinese higher vocational college, spanning two academic semesters. A rich tapestry of data was meticulously gathered through immersive classroom observations, in-depth semi-structured interviews with 39 first-year EFL students, and trace-based learning management system logs. Thematic analysis was employed to identify nuanced patterns and emergent themes, illuminating the participants’ lived experiences and their intricate interactions with GenAI-enhanced EFL instruction. Results The analysis identified three core themes defining the EBA learner dynamic: ① Performative participation: engagement as institutional compliance; ② Motivational stagnation: cognitive overload as an obstacle; and ③ Identity ambivalence: GenAI as enabler and eroder. Discussion This study interrogates the prevailing assumption that visible engagement signifies meaningful learning, cautioning against an overreliance on behavioral indicators in AI-mediated instructional settings, particularly in low-proficiency contexts. It further challenges the widespread optimism surrounding AI’s purported motivational benefits. The findings yield critical implications for pedagogical design, AI system development, and teacher education—particularly within underexplored vocational education contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cao et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: