AI literacy and mediated learner autonomy in ChatGPT-supported EFL writing: a qualitative study at a Palestinian university

Hamamra, Abdullah, and Alawi study a question that is becoming central to AI-supported language learning: how do students move from simply using ChatGPT to becoming more autonomous, critical, and literate users of AI in writing? The paper is useful for AIEDHK because it treats ChatGPT-supported writing as a mediated learning process rather than a simple productivity tool. The study follows 37 third-year English majors at a Palestinian university in a blended English-as-a-foreign-language writing course, using student journals, writing samples, semi-structured interviews, and thematic analysis to understand what changed during the intervention.

The paper's strongest contribution is its connection between AI literacy and learner autonomy. Students did not automatically become independent because ChatGPT was available. Instead, autonomy developed through guided practice, reflection, and teacher mediation. The authors show students learning how to ask better prompts, compare suggestions with their own intentions, revise rather than copy, and judge when AI feedback was useful or insufficient. That distinction matters because many education discussions treat AI use as either cheating or assistance. This article offers a more productive middle position: ChatGPT can support writing development when students learn to use it as a scaffold for thinking and revision.

The qualitative design is also important. Student journals and interviews make visible the learning process behind final texts. Early use can involve dependence on AI output, especially when learners are uncertain about grammar, vocabulary, organization, or academic style. Over time, with structured classroom mediation, some students begin to treat ChatGPT as a dialogic partner: they ask for alternatives, evaluate explanations, refine drafts, and make final choices themselves. For AIEDHK, that process is directly relevant to product design. A writing tool should not only produce fluent English. It should help learners notice patterns, compare revisions, explain choices, and gradually take more responsibility for the text.

The article also gives a useful warning. AI literacy is not just a technical skill such as writing prompts. It includes awareness of reliability, overreliance, authorship, critical evaluation, and the student's own learning goals. In multilingual and EFL settings, the temptation to accept polished AI text can be strong because the output may look more academically confident than the learner's draft. That means teachers need visible routines for attribution, reflection, oral defense, draft history, and metacognitive explanation. Without those routines, AI-supported writing may improve surface quality while weakening durable language development.

For Hong Kong, the paper is especially relevant because English writing, multilingual identity, assessment pressure, and AI access intersect in everyday classrooms. AIEDHK can use this study to evaluate student-facing writing assistants through a clear lens: does the system make learners more capable writers over time, or does it merely make better-looking text easier to submit? The practical direction is a mediated model of AI writing support, where students learn prompt strategy, evidence checking, self-revision, and responsible authorship under teacher guidance.