From Grammar to Strategy: Two Perspectives on Language Education and AI from FLEAT 8

By Petra Juna Jennings (University of Ostrava, the Czech Technical University in Prague) and Christina Thunstedt (Technical University of Munich)

DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.69732/LJYY3571

Europe goes to Hawaii

When we first met on Oahu at FLEAT 8, after long flights from Germany (Christina) and the Czech Republic (Petra), two things were clear: our homes were distant, but our community was close, united by a passion for language education. 

FLEAT 8 (the Eighth Foreign Language Education and Technology conference) is a major international gathering held approximately every five years, jointly organized by IALLT (International Association for Language Learning Technology) and J-LET (the Japan Association for Language Education & Technology). It brings together educators, researchers, language center staff, and technology specialists from around the world to explore the intersection of technology and language teaching. The 2025 edition took place on the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa campus in June.

It did not take us long to realize, between coffee breaks and exciting conversations in the well-organized events set in exotic Hawaii, that we are tackling many of the same questions:

How can language educators make AI meaningful?
How do we support both learners and teachers through the change?
How can we make sure language education remains not only relevant but truly engaging?

Petra’s talk brought us into the classroom, where students are taught grammar with the help of AI, while Christina presented best practices on the strategic and institutional role of language centers in the age of digital transformation. 

Together, these two perspectives: classroom-level innovation and institution-wide strategy, reflect how the two sides of IALLT (language learning and technology, and the role of language centers in language learning) can work together.

The conference also brought a wide range of practical presentations from different countries and schools, demonstrating how technology is being used in classrooms with various technical tools and approaches. Importantly, it revealed the broader impact when such practices are implemented within language centers: how embracing new technologies not only meets today’s educational needs but also makes language centers more visible, relevant, and valued. In some cases, this visibility and innovation can even prevent centers from closing, strengthening their position within institutions. Each of us arrived with our own focus: Petra on implementing AI in the classroom, Christina on expanding the role of the language center, but the conference made it clear how closely these areas are connected and how much they can benefit from each other.

Together, the talks provided a comprehensive view stretching from hands-on insight into using AI in English grammar lessons to broader strategies for implementing it across institutions, along with all the benefits and challenges that come with it.

This is a reflection on our two presentations and what we learned from each other and from the inspiring global community we found at FLEAT 8.

Teaching Grammar with AI and a Smile

By Petra Juna Jennings (University of Ostrava, the Czech Republic, Czech Technical University in Prague)

This summer, I had the opportunity to travel from Europe to Hawaii to attend the FLEAT 8 conference. As a graduate student, I was honored to receive an IALLT conference attendance grant that enabled me to participate in this remarkable event. What I encountered exceeded all my expectations, from the warm hospitality and collegial atmosphere to the inspiring presentations and rich conversations about the future of language education and technology.

I presented findings from my research on integrating ChatGPT into English grammar teaching for technical university students. At our institution, we work with engineering, IT, and robotics students, who are naturally logical and analytical. While they are comfortable solving complex coding tasks, they often find language tasks more challenging. My goal has been to make grammar, which is usually seen as dry or difficult, more engaging and accessible through AI tools.

The study I presented combined quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the effects of ChatGPT on students’ grammar acquisition and motivation. Three groups were involved: one used only AI, another used AI with teacher support, and a control group worked only with teacher instruction. We focused specifically on mastering English tenses. The results showed that the group using AI with teacher support achieved the highest normalized gains. Students reported greater engagement and appreciated the personalized, 24/7 feedback offered by the AI. However, it also became clear that less motivated or lower-level students required significant teacher intervention to benefit fully from the technology. Varying levels of student engagement with the tool were observed, and those who went beyond simply completing the task, asking follow-up questions, or seeking clarification, tended to achieve better results. In contrast, students who engaged only minimally often needed teacher guidance to prompt this kind of deeper inquiry and help them make effective use of the technology.

Some of the most engaging activities have included AI-assisted storytelling, where students and ChatGPT take turns extending a narrative. Students are encouraged to write the next part of the story, receive feedback from ChatGPT, and then continue. This creates a cycle of input, output, and reflection. The activity not only makes grammar more meaningful but also fosters creativity and critical thinking. We have also experimented with lesson plans based on sitcoms such as ‘How I Met Your Mother,’ where ChatGPT helps generate warm-up questions, grammar-focused tasks, and even listening comprehension questions tailored to the chosen video clip. The part of the sitcom was also chosen with the help of AI, based on the grammar that needed to be practiced. To select a suitable listening activity, ChatGPT was used to suggest scenes from the sitcom where a specific grammar structure was used. It provided several options, which were then reviewed by the teacher to check their length, confirm the target grammar was present, and ensure they were suitable for classroom use. Once the clip was chosen, ChatGPT was asked for a transcript and a draft lesson plan. The teacher then applied critical thinking to refine the plan, adjust activities, and finalize the materials, ensuring both accuracy and pedagogical fit.

One particularly memorable session involved speaking activities where students discussed assigned topics in pairs while being recorded. These recordings were later transcribed using AI, and students themselves were asked to identify and correct grammar issues. All the recordings were compiled into a single document; only certain segments where mistakes occurred were selected and presented as short stretches of anonymized conversations. Every student received the same document, so while some might recognize their own words, no one else could tell who had said what. This reflection not only improved their awareness of language use but also gave them a sense of ownership over their learning process.

At the Czech Technical University in Prague, where I work as Head of the Department of Languages, I have been exploring how AI can be meaningfully integrated into the English grammar classes I teach. These regular university courses are designed to strengthen students’ knowledge of grammar, help them improve their overall English proficiency, and prepare them to pass a compulsory English exam, enabling them to use the language effectively in academic contexts. The implementation of these AI-based activities is also part of my doctoral research at the University of Ostrava, which focuses on integrating AI into language learning in higher education.

These classroom experiments have sparked rich discussions, high engagement, and challenged me and my students to think differently about grammar. In anonymous reflections, several students mentioned feeling more confident and motivated when working with AI, especially when it came to experimenting with new sentence structures and getting immediate feedback.

Numerous sessions at FLEAT 8 discussed the challenges and opportunities I have seen in my work. There is still a significant gap in how educators and students are supported in using AI effectively. Many teachers remain resistant to its adoption, and both groups often lack the training or guidance needed to use these tools purposefully. More open dialogue, hands-on training, and practical examples are essential to bridge this gap and build confidence in using AI in meaningful ways. Several presenters highlighted the importance of open dialogues and continuous discussions about the purposeful use of AI. Others discussed the need to move beyond writing and explore how AI can support listening, speaking, and even emotional and prosodic dimensions of communication. For teachers considering AI integration, it is necessary to focus on critical thinking, combining AI with pedagogical support, and encouraging students to share not just answers but their learning journey, and to do so thoughtfully and ethically. 

Many language centers face an uncertain future, not only in the US but globally. In several conference presentations, including the Henderson Plenary by Carol Goss from the Language and Intercultural Learning Center (LINC) at Valparaiso University, speakers highlighted how strategic and creative integration of new approaches, including AI, can help centers remain relevant. Goss described how her small center, initially forced to downsize staff, undertook a strategic reset, modernized its approach, and expanded its services to include intercultural learning alongside language learning. This reinvention aligned with institutional priorities, strengthened relationships with stakeholders, and ultimately enhanced the center’s standing on campus.

Based on our own experience, we see similar challenges in Europe. Being a part of technical universities, language centers often have to prove their value in institutions where technology-focused departments dominate. By adopting well-structured uses of AI, language centers can showcase innovation, meet current student needs, and offer services that directly support both learners and faculty. This, in turn, can secure funding, expand their role, and in some cases, prevent closure.

One of the most memorable takeaways from the conference for me came from a session by G. Cory Duclos (Colgate University), who emphasized how crucial it is for teachers to define clear learning objectives for a lesson to prevent misuse, over-reliance, and plagiarism. Often, teachers focus on what is required for the exam without truly considering why a certain skill or topic is meaningful in real life. The session highlighted that when students clearly understand the purpose of what they are learning, they are less likely to misuse AI tools for plagiarism. Instead, they begin to use the tools as a support for their learning. This idea was a powerful reminder to be intentional in the way we design and explain our lessons.

This focus on purpose and meaningful use of technology naturally extends to the role of language centers, which can serve as hubs where such intentional practices are modeled and shared. Insights from sessions like the one on defining clear learning objectives and preventing misuse of AI can be brought back to the language center, where staff can help both teachers and students explore how AI can be used effectively, for what purposes, and with what boundaries. These centers provide a space to discuss practical strategies, share best practices, and offer support so that AI becomes a meaningful tool rather than a shortcut. Even simple things like offering tea or coffee can become useful tools for inviting discussion and welcoming people into the space of the language center; after all, human connections are what language centers excel at.

These moments are not just social; they offer opportunities to initiate conversations about AI and the future of language education. Ideas shared at the conference included transforming language centers into intercultural spaces, expanding their role, and highlighting the teacher as a facilitator who helps diverse groups of students navigate multiple languages at once. Creating stronger connections with the community, providing adaptable learning formats, and using technology creatively were all named as ways to bring new life and recognition to language centers.

Presenting at FLEAT 8 was an unforgettable experience. It deepened my commitment to researching and experimenting with AI in language learning. It also gave me the chance to see how our work compares internationally, to reflect on where we stand in the broader research landscape. What made the conference truly special was the opportunity to openly discuss challenges, exchange practical ideas, and connect with like-minded professionals from around the world. It reminded me that even grammar can be exciting with the right tools, thoughtful design, and a touch of creativity.

Language Centers as Strategic Hubs: Reflections from TUM

By Christina Thunstedt (Technical University of Munich, Germany)

At the Technical University of Munich (TUM), our Language Center is much more than a place for classes. It is a hub for internationalization, interdisciplinary learning, and the soft skills that make students (and staff) globally ready.

In my FLEAT 8 talk, I shared how we have aligned our structure and services with the university’s larger mission and how we are constantly adapting to the fast-changing realities of AI, digital transformation, and diverse student needs.

We support over 16 languages and offer programs like German for Engineers, Gateway to Master’s, and the China Competence Program. We also run peer mentoring for international students and professional development for our instructors. Our in-house innovations include an AI-focused newsletter, our own AI teaching guide, and student e-Scouts who help test and implement emerging tools.

In summary, what we consistently aim for is this: staying relevant by embracing trends (not fearing them), empowering our language instructors through continuous training, creating impactful, student-centered, and interdisciplinary formats that prepare students for professional life, and overall making a strong contribution to shaping higher education by developing global competence in graduates.

AI Policy in Language Education: A Shared Responsibility

From my dual perspective—as Vice Director of the TUM Language Center and as an active member of AKS (Arbeitskreis der Sprachenzentren an Hochschulen e. V. in Germany, a sister organization of IALLT) – the discussions on AI at FLEAT 8 were particularly valuable. On the one hand, I joined the Board Meeting and was reminded of our own commission meetings within AKS; on the other, I saw clear opportunities for collaboration between organizations such as IALLT and AKS, which are natural partners in shaping the conversation on AI in language education.

At TUM, a university-wide AI strategy provides a strong foundation for promoting responsible and future-oriented use of AI in teaching and learning. Alongside such institutional frameworks, AKS is focusing on how language centers can support instructors in developing meaningful and ethical AI policies for their classrooms.

To answer this, several members from different language centers are meeting every three months in an online working group dedicated to AI, providing a regular forum for exchange and joint reflection, currently discussing dimensions such as: 

1. Authenticity – What kind of AI use is meaningful and relevant within language teaching, especially in preparing students for professional contexts?
2. Learning Objectives and Assessment – How can we prevent AI from hindering learning? What role should it play in assessments?
3. Equal Access – How can we ensure that all students have fair and equal access to approved AI tools? Which tools are actually available at our institutions?
4. Students’ AI Literacy – What AI-related knowledge can we assume? What needs to be taught, and how?
5. Transparency and Disclosure – How should students label or document use of AI-generated content in their tasks?
6. Feasibility and Compliance – How can we ensure that policies are not only realistic but also enforceable?
7. Institutional Alignment – How do classroom-level policies fit within broader AI policies at the language center or university level?
8. Academic Integrity and Trust – How can we foster a culture of trust, responsibility, and academic honesty?
9. Instructors as Role Models – What example do instructors set through their own AI use?

Instructors looking to develop or refine their own classroom policies can benefit from practical tools like the worksheet “Creating Your Course Policy on AI” from the Stanford Teaching Commons. It provides customizable sample language that can be adapted to different teaching contexts and aligned with institutional strategies, such as the TUM AI strategy.

Within organizations like IALLT and AKS, we are in a strong position to lead this evolving discussion across institutions, not only by setting our own policies but by helping build capacity, foster critical reflection, and promote ethical and empowering uses of AI in multilingual learning environments.

Where Strategy Meets Pedagogy: What We Learned at FLEAT 8

One of the most inspiring aspects of the conference was seeing that many educators were not just experimenting with tools, they were rethinking pedagogy itself.

Several participants shared that they are moving away from a purely content-driven approach and toward fostering learner autonomy. In this context, AI becomes a partner in exploration, not just a source of answers. This shift aligns closely with project- and task-based learning approaches, where the process is just as valuable as the product.

During informal conversations at FLEAT 8, we had the chance to connect with educators from all over the world working under very different conditions when it comes to AI. Some had institutional support and access to cutting-edge tools, while others operated under strict limitations but still found creative ways to use freely available resources. These conversations reminded us how important it is to share knowledge across national and institutional boundaries and how similar our challenges often are, despite very different systems.

Looking ahead, we see great potential in developing shared repositories of prompts, lesson ideas, and AI task templates tailored to language learning. Such resources could make it easier for teachers to get started and encourage low-risk experimentation. By sharing our knowledge and examples, we can help grow and strengthen the community of practice around AI in language education.

Our sessions covered very different ground, one zoomed out, the other zoomed in; however, in the end, we kept getting back to the same theme: the current landscape requires language centers and educators to demonstrate a readiness to explore new methods and technologies with confidence and critical reflection, to engage meaningfully with innovation.

The conference reminded us:

• AI is here, and it is only as good as the questions we ask it.
• Teachers need support, not just tools. Training, examples, space to experiment.
• Students thrive on meaning, whether they are decoding modal verbs or discussing global sustainability in Swedish.
• Language centres should not be seen as a service department. At technical universities, they are sometimes viewed mainly as support for science and engineering, but in reality, they are innovation labs, intercultural bridges, and strategic partners in higher education.
• To make the integration of AI truly successful, institutions must invest in teacher training and ongoing support. Workshops, peer mentoring, and sharing practical examples can all help overcome initial resistance and turn AI into a useful tool rather than a threat.
• Language learning can be exciting with the right tools, thoughtful design, and a touch of creativity.

Final Thoughts: Our Message to Colleagues Worldwide

If you are thinking about implementing AI in your own context:

1. Start small. Pick one activity and explore how AI can support it. Maintain a balance between structure and freedom, let students explore, just guide them in how to evaluate and improve what AI provides. You may be surprised how creative they can be, and you can learn from each other.
2. Be reflective. Use AI not just for answers but always combine it with explicit reflection on the content and process to support critical thinking, self-correction, and awareness.
3. Position your work. Whether you are in a classroom or a leadership role, make the value of language education visible across disciplines, departments, and decision-makers.

And a final takeaway, perhaps the most unexpected and exciting: back in Europe, we are already planning to continue our exchange. Since our institutions are connected through the EuroTeQ Alliance, we are now exploring the idea of an Erasmus-based partnership focused on AI in language education.

Maybe this conference sparked a future collaboration?

Mahalo!

References

Moore, S., & Lookadoo, K. (2024). Communicating clear guidance: Advice for generative AI policy development in higher education. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 87(4), 610–629. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23294906241254786

Kureth, S. C., & Paliot, E. (2025, June 20). Teaching languages today: Fostering our students’ GenAI literacy through AI course policies [Keynote presentation]. 8th SSH-CHES Teacher Training Conference, Neuchâtel, Switzerland.

Stanford Teaching Commons. (n.d.). Creating your course policy on AI. Stanford University. Retrieved March 12, 2025, from https://teachingcommons.stanford.edu/teaching-guides/artificial-intelligence-teaching-guide/creating-your-course-policy-ai