Survey study reveals perceived gains in English speaking and writing fluency among undergraduate students using ChatGPT, indicating strong pedagogical utility alongside risks of overreliance.
The increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots, especially ChatGPT, has transformed language learning into higher education by providing students with instant academic support and personalized learning experiences. This study aimed to examine the usage patterns of AI ChatGPT among Malaysian university students and examine its impact on students’ speaking and writing fluency. Specifically, this study aimed to identify how often and for what purposes students use ChatGPT, as well as to determine the relationship between the use of ChatGPT and perceived improvement in English fluency. This study used a quantitative research design using a structured questionnaire distributed to undergraduate students from public and private universities throughout Malaysia. Convenience sampling techniques were adopted, and the collected data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) through descriptive and inferential statistical analysis. The findings indicated that ChatGPT was widely used for academic purposes, especially for brainstorming ideas, grammar checking, content generation, paraphrasing, and preparation of presentation scripts. Students reported that using ChatGPT contributed positively to speaking confidence, vocabulary development, writing accuracy, grammatical competence, and overall fluency. However, the study also raised concerns about students’ overreliance on AI-generated content, which could reduce critical thinking, originality, and independent language development if used without proper assessment. Overall, the study findings suggest that ChatGPT has great potential to enhance English language learning when responsibly integrated into higher education. The study concludes that educators and higher education institutions should promote responsible AI literacy and set clear guidelines for the ethical use of AI tools, ensuring that ChatGPT serves as a learning aid rather than a substitute for independent learning and critical thinking.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ngadni et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: