Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics: Online-First Articles

Generative AI’s recolonization of EFL classrooms

The case of continuation writing

ORCID logo | Griffith University
 | Griffith University
Continuation writing was recently introduced as a new element of China’s English as a Foreign Language (EFL) assessment. The assessment task requires students to complete the story within a set word limit. Preparing students for this task is challenging for Chinese EFL teachers, as little pedagogical guidance is supplied. Given the recent trend of incorporating Digital Multimodal Composing (DMC) in Chinese EFL classrooms, using generative AI to provide sample writings presents a potential option.. This process could be viewed as students creating mentor texts to inform their writing development. We argue that AI-generated continuation writing samples are predominantly built with complex but culturally hollow sentences. Particularly, AI-generated samples may prioritize “native-speakerism” in which local cultures are under-represented. Integrating AI-generated continuation writing samples without cultural awareness risks unintended recolonization of EFL classrooms. We illustrate our argument with data generated via AI chatbots. We mobilize Hallidayan systemic functional linguistics (SFL) to identify patterns in complex AI-generated sample texts. This study highlights potential risks when the dominant power reproduced by the language patterns in AI-generated texts is not critically considered.
Keywords: generative AI, cultural recolonization, systemic functional linguistics, continuation writing, native-speakerism
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Decolonization and recolonization in EFL classrooms
  • 3.Co-producing continuation writing samples with Generative AI
  • 4.Using SFL to analyse writing samples
  • 5.Comparing AI-generated continuation writing samples
    • 5.1Lexical density
    • 5.2Verb processes
    • 5.3Describing circumstances
    • 5.4About participant phrases
    • 5.5Conjunctions
    • 5.6Figurative language for affect
    • 5.7Breaking the rules of grammar
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1Establishing limitations to expressive power
    • 6.2(Re)constructing language norms
    • 6.3Appearing outdated
    • 6.4Under-representation of local cultures and values
    • 6.5Raising awareness of the recolonizing agenda
  • Statement on the use of AI
  • Acknowledgments
  • References
Published online: 16 December 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.24091.ste
References (47)
References
2021 New College Entrance Examination Paper I English Subject Real Questions and Answers. (2021). [URL]
Ainsworth, S., & Bell, H. (2020). Affective knowledge versus affective pedagogy: the case of native grammar learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50 (5), 597–614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andrews, S., & Veldre, A. (2020). Wrapping up Sentence Comprehension: The Role of Task Demands and Individual Differences. Scientific Studies of Reading, 25 (2), 123–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H. (2007). Post-colonial studies: The key concepts. Routledge.Google Scholar
Boroditsky, L. (2020). First-language thinking for second-language understanding: Mandarin and English speakers’ conceptions of time. In M. Hahn & S. C. Stoness (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-first Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 84–89). Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briganti, G. (2024, Mar). How ChatGPT works: a mini review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 281 (3), 1565–1569. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canagarajah, S. (1999). Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2006). Changing Communicative Needs, Revised Assessment Objectives: Testing English as an International Language. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3 (3), 229–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). The Ecology of Global English. International Multilingual Research Journal, 1 (2), 89–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2023). Decolonizing Academic Writing Pedagogies for Multilingual Students. TESOL quarterly, 58 (1), 280–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carter, J. (2022). Stories that matter: engaging students for a complex world through the English curriculum. Curriculum Perspectives, 42 (2), 195–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, A., Hamp-Lyons, L., & Kemp, C. (2003). Whose Norms? International Proficiency Tests in English. World Englishes, 22 (4), 571–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derewianka, B. (2012). Knowledge about Language in the Australian Curriculum: English. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 35 (2), 127–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmott, C., Sanford, A. J., & Morrow, L. I. (2006). Capturing the attention of readers? Stylistic and psychological perspectives on the use and effect of text fragmentation in narratives. Journal of Literary Semantics, 35 (1), 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gannon, S., & Dove, J. (2021). Artefacts, practices and pedagogies: teaching writing in English in the NAPLAN era. The Australian Educational Researcher, 48 (4), 657–679. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goh, C. C. M., & Vandergrift, L. (2012). Teaching and Learning Second Language Listening: Metacognition in Action. Taylor & Francis. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gómez-Rodríguez, C., & Williams, P. (2023). A Confederacy of Models: a Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs on Creative Writing. arXiv, abs/2310.08433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, L. R. (2014). Disciplinary decadence and the decolonisation of knowledge. Africa Development, 39 (1), 81–92.Google Scholar
Guo, K., & Li, D. (2024). Understanding EFL students’ use of self-made AI chatbots as personalized writing assistance tools: A mixed methods study. System, 124 1, 103362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd, Ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Systemic Background. In J. D. Benson & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic Perspectives on Discourse (Vol. 11). Ablex.Google Scholar
(1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5 (2), 93–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (2014). Cohesion in english. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herbold, S., Hautli-Janisz, A., Heuer, U., Kikteva, Z., & Trautsch, A. (2023). A large-scale comparison of human-written versus ChatGPT-generated essays. Scientific reports, 13 (1), 18617. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holliday, A. (2005). The struggle to teach English as an international language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2008). Standards of English and politics of inclusion. Language Teaching, 41 (1), 119–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2017). Is academic writing becoming more informal? English for Specific Purposes, 45 1, 40–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hynninen, N., & Solin, A. (2018). Language norms in ELF. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker, & M. Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English As a Lingua Franca (pp. 267–278). Routledge.Google Scholar
Jiang, L. (2017). The affordances of digital multimodal composing for EFL learning. ELT Journal, 71(4), 413–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021). Facilitating EFL students’ civic participation through digital multimodal composing. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 35(1), 102–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, F., & Hyland, K. (2020). “There are significant differences…”: The secret life of existential there in academic writing. Lingua, 233 1, 102758. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johansson, V. (2008). Lexical diversity and lexical density in speech and writing: A developmental perspective. Working papers/Lund University, Department of Linguistics and Phonetics, 53 1, 61–79. [URL]
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In Randolph Quirk, H. G. Widdowson, & Y. Cantù (Eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the language and the literature (pp. 241–270). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leroux, W., & Kendall, T. (2018). English article acquisition by Chinese learners of English: An analysis of two corpora. System, 76 1, 13–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liesenfeld, A. M. (2019). Action formation with janwai in Cantonese Chinese conversation [Doctoral thesis,, Nanyang Technological University]. [URL]. DOI logo
Liu, Y., & Lu, X. (2020). Chinese EFL learners’ misconceptions of noun countability and article use. System, 90 1, 102222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & McCarthy, P. M. (2009). Linguistic Features of Writing Quality. Written Communication, 27 (1), 57–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Education. (2020). Putong gaozhong yingyu kecheng biaozhun (2017nian ban 2020nian xiuding) [Ordinary senior secondary school English subject course standards] (2020 revised ed.). People’s Education Press.Google Scholar
Mohamed, S., Png, M.-T., & Isaac, W. (2020). Decolonial AI: Decolonial Theory as Sociotechnical Foresight in Artificial Intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 33 (4), 659–684. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Núñez Pardo, A. (2020). Inquiring into the Coloniality of Knowledge, Power, and Being in EFL Textbooks. HOW, 27 (2), 113–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2022). Indelible Coloniality and Emergent Decoloniality in Colombian-Authored EFL Textbooks: A Critical Content Analysis. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 27 (3), 702–724. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Núñez Pardo, A., & Téllez Téllez, M. F. (2021). Tracing the cultural component in teacher generated EFL materials.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A., & Makoni, S. (2019). Innovations and Challenges in Applied Linguistics from the Global South. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, P. A. (2023). Transnational education: Risking ‘recolonisation’ [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Bath].
Tan, D. N. L., & Mante-Estacio, M. J. (2021). Reader-Text Connection: Reporting the Engagement of High School Students with Culturally Relevant Texts. TEFLIN Journal, 32 (2), 342–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Y., & Stewart, N. (2024). Improving EFL students’ cultural awareness: Reframing moral dilemmatic stories with ChatGPT. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6 1, 100223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhou, T., Cao, S., Zhou, S., Zhang, Y., & He, A. (2023). Chinese intermediate English learners outdid ChatGPT in deep cohesion: Evidence from English narrative writing. System, 118 1, 103141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar