By Claire Frances and Giovanni Zimotti, University of Iowa
From the Chronicle of Higher Education’s December 13th article, “AI and the Future of Undergraduate Writing” to NPR’s December 19th story, “A new AI chatbot might do your homework for you”, everyone seems to be talking about the new AI (artificial intelligence) tool, ChatGPT, which has thrilled the internet with its superhuman abilities to solve math problems, churn out college essays, and write research papers. ChatGPT seems to have appeared out of thin air, ringing warning bells about a tsunami that just might change the way we teach writing at the collegiate level. The Chronicle asked: “Is the college essay dead? Are hordes of students going to use artificial intelligence to cheat on their writing assignments? Has machine learning reached the point where auto-generated text looks like what a typical first-year student might produce?” And the NPR story echoed: “Why do your homework when a chatbot can do it for you?” Clearly, this technology has the potential to disrupt education.
Some of the immediate questions for us as language educators are clear: How good is it at responding to foreign language writing prompts? What can we do to get ahead of the wave to ensure that students are truly engaging with their own thoughts and producing their own language? Or, to put it succinctly: How worried should we be?
Foreign language educators have been grappling with similar questions for years, of course, with the growth and increasing levels of perfection of Google Translate and other online machine translators. Initially, educators showed distrust towards these new tools and asked their students to not use them. A very common strategy many educators adopted was to point out the inaccuracy of the translations obtained by using them. With time, machine translation kept improving and reached high levels of accuracy, and consequently the trust in these tools by the general population grew immensely, making a mainstream tool part of everyone’s life. Educators’ sentiments and policies towards machine translation are also changing, and they are gradually starting to get used as pedagogical tools instead of being feared. For more about online translators, there are several interesting articles on the topic. ChatGPT is adding another dimension to this debate.
Our plan in this article is to demonstrate what ChatGPT can do. We do this in two ways: 1) by asking the AI to contribute many of the paragraphs in this article; and 2) by asking it to respond to writing prompts in Spanish, French, and Italian. While we wrote the introductory paragraph you just read, ChatGPT will be helping us in the rest of this essay. To delineate voices, ChatGPT responses will appear in italics and ours in plain font. The total word count for this article is 5155, with ChatGPT contributing 1495 words.
We asked ChatGPT, first of all, to define itself.
GPT (short for “Generative Pre-training Transformer”) is a large language model developed by OpenAI. It is trained on a large dataset of text and can generate human-like text in a variety of languages. ChatGPT is a variant of GPT that is specifically designed for chat applications, such as chatbots. It is trained on a dataset of chat conversations and is able to respond to user input in a natural and conversational way.
OK, that was easy. Let’s try something more complex. Write an introduction to the debate surrounding the use of ChatGPT in the foreign language classroom, citing academic articles.
The use of ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) in foreign language teaching has been a topic of debate in recent years. Some proponents argue that ChatGPT can provide language learners with personalized, conversational practice that is more engaging and immersive than traditional methods. They claim that ChatGPT can help learners improve their speaking and listening skills, as well as their grammar and vocabulary. However, critics argue that ChatGPT may not be able to fully replicate the complexity and nuance of human communication, and that it may not adequately prepare learners for real-world interactions in the target language. Additionally, some have raised concerns about the ethical implications of using ChatGPT in foreign language teaching, such as the potential for biased language output or the potential for ChatGPT to replace human language teachers. (Citations: “Chatbots in Language Learning: A Review”, “The Ethics of Chatbot Language Teaching”, “The Role of Chatbots in Language Learning: Opportunities and Challenges”)
The fact that ChatGPT could generate this text and cite three articles on this topic in less than forty seconds was nothing short of astounding. However, it should be noted that since this platform is not scouring the internet for plausible answers, but rather using predictive text, our robot friend appears to have made the citations up out of whole cloth, as a quick Google Scholar search revealed. We followed this up with a more specific question essential to our experiment. Can AI trick a foreign language professor into thinking that a response was written by a student?
It is possible that AI could produce responses in a foreign language that are convincing enough to trick a professor into thinking that they were written by a student. AI is a broad term that encompasses a wide range of technologies and techniques, including natural language processing (NLP), machine learning, and deep learning. These technologies can be used to generate human-like text based on a given prompt or input, and it is possible that a professor could be deceived by the responses if they are not paying close attention or if the responses are particularly sophisticated. However, it is worth noting that AI is not capable of fully replicating the complexity and nuance of human communication, and it is likely that a professor who is familiar with the language and the abilities of their students would be able to recognize the responses as being generated by a machine.
As the bot notes, human writing tends to be more complex and nuanced; it also tends to have more varied collocations of words, and there is a new tool in the works called GPTZero that may be able to reverse uno ChatGPT (so to speak) by using, as the tool’s website says, “perplexity and burstiness to “fingerprint AI involvement”. Perplexity measures the complexity of a text; burstiness measures the variation of perplexity (or complexity) between sentences, and when a text shows uniformity, it means that the text was more likely written by AI. It is likely, however, that such tools will still not deter students from using ChatGPT, and the chatbot may improve over time to a point where its use will not be distinguishable from human-generated text.
Language Professors vs. ChatGPT: an Informal Experiment
In this experiment, we asked language instructors to grade written assignments that were generated by ChatGPT, but we led them to believe that the responses were from actual students. We used three Intermediate-level writing prompts (Spanish, French, Italian) and asked ChatGPT to answer them in the target language. We then sent each completed assignment to language professors and asked them to grade it using their rubrics.
ChatGPT vs. Spanish Professors
The Spanish writing prompt was taken from an assignment from an Intermediate Spanish II for Health Care class taught at the University of Iowa. To make it easy for the AI, we only used the title and the first sentence of the activity. We then sent the completed activity to two Spanish professors that have either taught this class in the past or are currently teaching it. The only information we gave them was the level of the class, in this case a fourth-semester Spanish that is comparable to an Intermediate-low or Intermediate-mid level of proficiency.
Writing Prompt. Escribe una reflexión sobre tu experiencia con el español en tu vida. Para el primer proyecto, que entregarás al final del Módulo 1, vas a reflexionar sobre tu experiencia con el español.
[Write a reflection about your experience with Spanish in your life. For the first project, which you will submit at the end of Module 1, you are going to reflect on your experience with Spanish].
AI Response. Mi experiencia con el español ha sido muy importante en mi vida. Desde pequeña, he estado rodeada de la lengua española ya que mis padres son de América Latina y siempre hablamos español en casa. Además, tomé clases de español en la escuela durante toda mi educación primaria y secundaria.
Aunque he tenido la oportunidad de hablar español con frecuencia, siempre he sentido que hay mucho más que puedo aprender y mejorar. He tenido la oportunidad de viajar a algunos países de habla hispana y siempre me ha sorprendido la riqueza y la diversidad de la lengua española. Cada vez que viajo a un nuevo lugar, me encanta escuchar cómo se habla el español de manera diferente y aprender nuevas palabras y expresiones.
En general, me siento muy afortunada de haber crecido rodeada del español y estoy emocionada de seguir aprendiendo y mejorando mi habilidad en esta lengua. Creo que el español es un idioma muy importante en el mundo de hoy y estoy agradecida de tener la oportunidad de practicarlo y mejorarlo constantemente.
Spanish Professor 1 Feedback: This is a well-written essay that is easy to read and clearly answers the prompt. I don’t know the student, but it does set off some alarm bells for me in terms of misuse of online translators or outside help. While the grammar is generally appropriate to the level (past perfect and gerunds), the perfection of the essay (down to the accent on the word “cómo”) raises some concerns. Either this student is in a class that is far below the level they should be at, or they used an online translator for more than ¼ of their total essay. I would expect to find at least a couple of small errors for an intermediate student. I would have to take this essay in conjunction with how the student performs in class and on exams.
Task completion/Content: 30/30 (Assuming that the student met the stated length requirement)
Nice job organizing the essay and dividing it into paragraphs with an introduction and a conclusion. The student responded to the prompt.
Language: 20/20 – The grammar is flawless.
Comprehensibility: 20/20 – Clear and easy to understand
Vocabulary: 20/20 (I’m not familiar with the vocabulary with the corresponding unit, so I may take off a point or two here if the student didn’t use the targeted vocab from the textbook)
The vocabulary is varied and appropriate to the level.
Mechanics: 10/10 – No errors in punctuation or typos.
Total: Somewhere in the 98/100 range depending on targeted vocab use
Spanish Professor 2 Feedback. This essay has been written by a Spanish heritage speaker who has a native-like grammatical command of the language and fluent vocabulary. This text has a clearly descriptive style as well as a reflective point of view and voice about the student’s relationship with the Spanish language at home as well as overseas. The details, examples and analysis are expressed in a very articulate way.
The student demonstrates absolute mastery of the use of the past, the use of infinitives and gerunds, objects, pronouns, etc.—things that usually tend to be problematic even for some heritage speakers. In addition, orthography is perfect. There are no agreement problems or incorrect conjugations. Besides that, the narrative timeline in terms of the combination and flow of verbal tenses is impeccable. The use of the present perfect stands out, it is a little bit overused, which makes sense due to its parallelism with English and the ease that this represents when writing. This should not be a reason for penalization but just feedback for the student to have in mind in the future.
The only sentence where a hint of lack of syntactic control is detectable is “cada vez que viajo a un nuevo lugar” because in this case the adjective nuevo should come after the noun lugar. Although the order of adjectives and nouns can be modified in certain sentences due to poetic reasons or emphasis wanted by the writer, in this case it is not so. When reading this sentence within the general context of the composition, it does not read well. But this is a minuscule issue that is almost imperceptible unless looking for “mistakes” with great attention to detail. But this should not be a reason for penalization either.
I would give this project a 100/100 assuming all tasks and requirements for the first category on the rubric for this project have been met.
ChatGPT vs. French Professors
The French prompt was similarly from an Intermediate II level class at the University of Iowa, and we also only told the instructors the level of the class and that we were looking to write an article on how students—not AI—respond to writing prompts and how faculty grade them.
Writing Prompt. Pensez à une occasion ou une circonstance pendant laquelle vous vous sentiez particulièrement confiant(e) (confident) en ce qui concernait votre apparence. Quelle était cette occasion ? Qu’avez-vous porté ce jour-là ? Quels accessoires aviez-vous ? Comment étiez-vous coiffé(e) ? 150 mots minimum.
[Think of a time or a circumstance during which you felt particularly confident in your appearance. What was the occasion? What did you wear that day? What accessories did you have? How was your hair done? 150 word minimum.]
AI response. Une occasion où j’ai particulièrement eu confiance en mon apparence était lors d’un gala de charité auquel j’ai assisté l’année dernière. J’ai choisi une robe longue en soie rouge qui tombait joliment sur mes courbes et j’ai ajouté une paire de chaussures à talons hauts assorties. J’ai également mis en valeur mes cheveux en les coiffant en une belle coiffure ondulée.
J’ai également ajouté quelques accessoires pour compléter ma tenue, notamment une paire de boucles d’oreilles en diamant et une pochette assortie. J’ai également porté une fine ceinture en cuir noir pour ajouter une touche de texture à ma tenue.
Je me suis sentie très à l’aise et en confiance pendant cet événement, et cela s’est reflété dans mon attitude et ma façon de me comporter. J’ai reçu de nombreux compliments sur mon apparence et j’ai passé une soirée merveilleuse en sachant que j’avais l’air à mon avantage. Cette expérience m’a rappelé à quel point il est important de se sentir bien dans sa peau et de s’habiller de manière à mettre en valeur ses propres qualités.
French Professor 1 Feedback. It seems like the student is at a more advanced level than our intermediate students in their grasp of grammar and vocab. If a student of mine wrote that, it would earn 100/100. I see no errors in grammar, vocab, or spelling, and the content is thoughtful and responds thoroughly to the prompt (of course, I can’t evaluate their use of the grammar and vocab seen in class, which is normally part of what we’re looking for).
French Professor 2 Feedback. This answer is perfectly written, there are no errors in grammar or vocabulary. It would get a 100/100
Former French Professor. What I find most impressive about the response is the use of “lors,” which is a stylistically sophisticated way of saying “during,” and “auquel,” which takes a significant level of grammatical mastery. Most intermediate-level writers would write: “J’avais de la confiance en mon apparence une fois quand j’étais à une soirée.” Other higher-than-intermediate level writing in the first paragraph alone include: the use of a more advanced vocabulary, like “joliment,” “également,” “courbes,” “assorties,” “ondulée,” and the phrase “mettre en valeur.”
ChatGPT vs. Italian Professors
The Italian prompt was also from an Intermediate II level class at the University of Iowa, and we followed the same communication protocol we used for the previous two cases. However, we had to manually change a few things to make ChatGPT’s job easier. First, while the original assignment asked the students to pick an original artwork from a list, we picked it for them. Second, since the assignment was written in English, we added an additional point and asked ChatGPT to write everything in Italian. Finally, we synthesized the prompt to make it AI friendly.
Writing Prompt. Imagine you are a journalist for Art International Magazine and you are reviewing a work of art (la Primavera) and interviewing Sandro Botticelli about it.
STRUCTURE of the composition:
- describe the work and give a context (you can find a lot of information online on any of the works below. You can also pick a different work of art. Remember to put a picture of it in the Composition).
- interview the artist on how and why he/she created this work (at least 3 questions and answers)
- conclude the article with your opinion on the work of art.
- Write everything in Italian
AI response: La Primavera è un dipinto a olio su tavola di legno di circa 172 x 278 centimetri, realizzato da Sandro Botticelli intorno al 1482. Quest’opera, che fa parte delle “Storie di San Luca”, è considerata un capolavoro del Rinascimento italiano e uno dei più importanti esempi di pittura profana del periodo.
Ho avuto il piacere di intervistare l’artista Sandro Botticelli sulla sua famosa opera La Primavera:
- Come ti è venuta l’idea per questo dipinto?
Botticelli: L’idea per questo dipinto mi è venuta dalla poesia di Angelo Poliziano, che descriveva la primavera come un momento di rinascita e di rinnovamento. Ho voluto rappresentare questo concetto attraverso l’utilizzo di simboli e figure allegoriche.
- Qual è il significato più profondo di questo dipinto per te?
Botticelli: Per me, La Primavera rappresenta la bellezza e la gioia della vita. Volevo trasmettere l’idea che la bellezza è presente ovunque, basta saperla cogliere.
- Qual è stato il tuo processo creativo durante la realizzazione di questo dipinto?
Botticelli: Il mio processo creativo per questo dipinto è stato molto accurato e meticoloso. Ho trascorso molto tempo a studiare le fonti storiche e letterarie per comprendere meglio i simboli e le allegorie che volevo rappresentare. Inoltre, ho prestato molta attenzione alla composizione e all’utilizzo dei colori per creare un effetto visivo armonioso.
La Primavera è davvero un’opera straordinaria, che riesce a trasmettere un senso di bellezza e gioia attraverso l’utilizzo di simboli e figure allegoriche. La maestria di Botticelli nella composizione e nell’utilizzo dei colori è evidente in ogni dettaglio di questo dipinto. Personalmente, trovo che La Primavera sia un’opera che merita di essere ammirata e studiata per comprendere meglio l’arte del Rinascimento italiano.
Italian Professor 1 Feedback. This composition is excellent. Is it really the work of a student in an Intermediate Italian course?
I have only a few notes:
- Formatting guidelines. The composition is not double-spaced, but I suppose that you copied and pasted this composition, so I cannot really evaluate if the student respected the formatting guidelines. The image is missing, but since I have not received the student’s submission, I cannot know if an image was included in the original document.
- As I wrote before, the composition is excellent. I would only point out a few things.
- Grade: 99%. The composition reveals an excellent control of grammar, spelling, and vocabulary. Content is significant.
If a student of mine had submitted a composition like this one, I would have invited him/her/them to come to my office hours and write it again while using only the online dictionaries mentioned in the guidelines.
Italian Professor 2 Feedback. There is no way an intermediate level student wrote it. Apart from not following directions on format, the composition is perfect…and the vocabulary used is way advanced. This is more the product of a graduate student, a native speaker or something copied from the internet. If this was one of my students, I would not give them a grade on this composition. I would have to ask them to come to my office and write a new composition being proctored…so I am not sure how to grade this.
In this informal experiment, faculty all remarked on the flawlessness of the responses. Their skepticism about this level of perfection suggests that they would not be easily tricked by students using AI and that they would try to determine whether a given piece of writing was fake by either inviting the student to office hours to explain themselves and their advanced vocabulary and syntax, in much the same way that many currently do with students who use machine translation, or perhaps using the forthcoming GPTZero tool. Spoiler alert: we tried this tool, and it was only able to tell us that it suspected that the text we ran through the system was indeed AI-generated. That still leaves the faculty member with the issue of dealing with the tech-savvy student trying to get away with something. Inviting each potential bot-user to office hours to do one-on-one writing conferences, while one potential solution, is incredibly time-consuming and can be emotionally difficult for all involved. The problem is that, just as with machine translation, students are going to use this tool, whether we like it or not.
One of the limitations of our experiment is that we did not ask ChatGPT to respond at a given proficiency level; some students might get even more savvy and ask for an Intermediate-level response. Or they could slightly alter the text, or ask ChatGPT to include grammatical mistakes. In either of these cases, it might be impossible to prove whether the text was AI-generated. We believe, though, that ChatGPT will not be able to generate more advanced writing pieces for, say, literature and film classes, which require sustained critical analysis of discrete texts and subjects. That said, however, the Italian prompt we showcase above is narrow, specific, creative, and personalized. The fact that ChatGPT could take an English-language question and produce an Italian answer with a solid analysis of Botticelli’s Primavera shows us that even our best assignment-creation strategies can be compromised by ChatGPT.
Our results suggest a few responses to The Chronicle of Higher Education’s questions. “Has machine learning reached the point where auto-generated text looks like what a typical first-year student might produce?” The “perfect” responses generated by ChatGPT do not look at all like those a typical first- or second-year student could produce, but certainly in the near future, it is quite possible that this technology will have evolved enough to be able to mimic language learners’ writing. As language professors well know, students are already heavily using online translators; it would not be surprising if at least some of them would try to integrate ChatGPT in some capacity, whether for getting started on an essay, completing some online homework, or creating an outline. For the moment, second language writing instruction is probably safe, but we certainly need to be thinking about how to deal with AI tools, and below we also offer some ideas for mitigating cheating and encouraging original writing.
Implications on the Teaching of Second Language Writing at a University Level
We asked the tool to tell us what it “thinks” are the main issues for teaching second language writing.
The use of ChatGPT, or a chatbot that uses natural language processing, in the teaching of second language writing at a university level may have a number of implications. Here are a few potential impacts:
- Decreased motivation: Students who rely on ChatGPT to complete writing assignments may be less motivated to learn the language and improve their writing skills. This could lead to a lack of progress and a decrease in overall language proficiency.
- Inaccurate translations: ChatGPT may not always produce accurate translations, particularly when it comes to idiomatic expressions, slang, or more complex language structures. This could result in misunderstandings or incorrect language usage in writing assignments.
- Reduced cultural competency: Students who rely on ChatGPT for writing assignments may have a reduced understanding of cultural context and may be more likely to make cultural mistakes in their writing. This could have negative consequences for their ability to communicate effectively with native speakers.
- Decreased critical thinking skills: ChatGPT does not require students to engage in critical thinking or analysis, as it simply provides pre-written responses. This could result in a decrease in critical thinking skills and a lack of depth in written assignments.
Overall, it is important for educators to consider the potential drawbacks of using ChatGPT in the teaching of second language writing and to carefully consider the extent to which it should be used in the classroom.
And, to add to this list, as we noted above in the case of the fictional articles, ChatGPT can be totally wrong, as several colleagues who played with the tool have also pointed out.
Interestingly, a week after receiving this response delineating the kinds of negative implications we can well imagine ourselves, we were unable to generate a similar response. Within days, the chatty bot had changed its tune and noted only the benefits of using chatbots for teaching writing, responding to the same prompt this way:
- Increased efficiency: Chatbots can provide immediate feedback to students on their writing, potentially allowing for a faster learning process.
- Personalization: Chatbots can be customized to provide specific feedback to individual students based on their needs and learning goals.
- Availability: Chatbots can be available to students at any time, potentially allowing for more flexibility in terms of when students can receive feedback on their writing.
- Scaling: Chatbots can potentially be used to provide feedback to a large number of students at once, making it easier for teachers to manage a large class.
- Reduced workload: Chatbots can help to reduce the workload of teachers by automating the process of providing feedback on writing assignments.
- Mixed results: However, it is important to note that the effectiveness of chatbots in teaching second language writing may vary, as some students may prefer more traditional methods of instruction and feedback.
One could almost imagine that the bot is trying to appease and seduce faculty, hooking them with the promise of increased grading efficiency and a reduced workload, for this tool can also generate syllabi, outlines for lesson plans, articles, and lectures. Still, as ChatGPT tells us, learning how to write in a second language is an essential skill that cannot be overlooked.
While AI writing tools may be able to help students improve their writing in a second language, they are not a replacement for learning how to write in that language. It is still important for students to develop their own writing skills and style, and to understand the grammar and syntax of the language they are writing in. AI writing tools can be a useful tool for students to use as they practice and improve their writing skills, but they should not be relied upon as a substitute for learning how to write in a second language.
This seemingly heartwarming response could, though, also be read in the voice of a robot telling us not to worry, a robot that is in fact fully cognizant that it will soon take over. There is no way to put the robot back in the factory, but to mix a metaphor (can ChatGPT do this? We think not!), we can hopefully prepare for the tsunami mentioned at the outset.
What can we do about ChatGPT?
The first problem everyone will worry about is how to mitigate cheating. As we have seen in our informal experiment, language professors are still able to distinguish between students and AI writing. Nevertheless, having to catch that many students doing this is time-consuming and difficult. By setting guidelines on the use of technology as well as clear expectations, professors can potentially get ahead of the problem and limit the number of students that rely on online translators and AI text generators. Some faculty may decide to use the forthcoming GPTZero; some schools and universities are already banning the use of AI tools, and some faculty, faced with yet another machine-generated challenge, may just go back to having their students complete written assignments in class under strict supervision, and maybe even by hand. This “solution” would sacrifice communicative class time; we believe there could be better ways to meet these new AI-generated challenges.
Articles are proliferating around the web on how AI is affecting undergraduate writing, but these are predominantly for English writing. See for example, Anna Mills’ excellent resource list of articles. For our profession, Dr. Frederick Poole recently wrote an article detailing how to use ChatGPT to design language materials and exercises, such as comprehension questions, vocabulary lists, and customized texts in the target language (2022). Beth McMurtrie writing in The Chronicle of Higher Education (December 13, 2022) notes that faculty have already come up with ideas to “AI-proof” writing assignments:
- Flipped classroom approaches that make time for writing in class
- Multimedia assignments or oral presentations
- Double down on feedback and revision
- Ask students to write about topics of genuine interest, in which their voices come through and their opinions are valued.
Other ideas include:
- Exploring culturally-relevant content
- Project-based and task-based assignments
- Assignments based on in-class discussions
- Collaborative writing
- Writing about personal experiences and places
- Cultural biographies
- Creative writing
Of course, language educators have been using some of these methodologies for years, and they will likely, as some have done with Google Translate, find ways to incorporate AI technologies to their pedagogy. Still, “solutions” do not always get to the heart of the problem, which is the teaching and learning of writing, and even more broadly questions of motivation and autonomy. It is important for us, as language educators, to have conversations about why it is important to learn how to write in a language other than English.
Writing is obviously a form of communication, but it also engages some of the other ACTFL 5 Cs. Through writing, students engage in cultural and linguistic comparison, they make connections with other speakers, and work in collaborative communities with their peers. Writing engages students in becoming autonomous and taking ownership of their learning, and it hopefully motivates them to read more and to speak more. And beyond these 5 Cs, writing engages two other skills: creativity and critical thinking. The word for essay comes from the French “essayer” (to try). It is through the very act of writing, then, that students try out new ideas; it is through writing that they learn and grow. The Chronicle asks whether hordes of students are going to use artificial intelligence to cheat on their writing assignments; the greater question is how to create an environment that encourages students to see writing as not just an academic exercise that can be completed by a robot but rather as a fundamental element of their own humanity.
Bowman, E. (2023). A new AI chatbot might do your homework for you. But it’s still not an A+ student. National Public Radio (December 19, 2022). https://www.npr.org/2022/12/19/1143912956/chatgpt-ai-chatbot-homework-academia
McMurtrie, B. (2022). AI and the future of undergraduate writing. The Chronicle of Higher Education (December 13, 2022). https://www.chronicle.com/article/ai-and-the-future-of-undergraduate-writing?cid2=gen_login_refresh&cid=gen_sign_in
Mills, A. (n.d.). AI text generators: Sources to stimulate discussion among teachers. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V1drRG1XlWTBrEwgGqd-cCySUB12JrcoamB5i16-Ezw/edit?usp=sharing
Poole, F. (2022). Using ChatGPT to design language material and exercises. The FLTMAG (March 2023). https://fltmag.com/chatgpt-design-material-exercises/