Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 26, No. 0, pp.1028-1052
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Aug 2026
Received 23 Jun 2026 Revised 12 Jul 2026 Accepted 12 Aug 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.26..202608.1028

Generative AI as a Task-Oriented Resource: English Learning Motivation and Sense of Ownership Among Korean Secondary School Students

Tae-Young Kim ; Somi Hong
(First author, Corresponding author) Professor, Department of English Education Chung-Ang University 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea, Tel: +82-2-820-5392 tykim@cau.ac.kr
(Second author) Ph.D. Student, Department of English Education Chung-Ang University hsomi0906@naver.com


© 2026 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This qualitative study examines how secondary school students perceive and use generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools in English learning and how these experiences shape their task engagement, sense of achievement, and motivation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 Korean EFL students who had used GenAI for English-related tasks. Thematic analysis showed that students rarely experienced GenAI as a continuous learning environment. Instead, they used it selectively as a task-oriented resource, especially for performance assessment, translation, writing, idea generation, revision, and information checking. GenAI increased students’ efficiency, reduced anxiety, and helped students initiate or complete tasks that might otherwise have been burdensome. However, the same support sometimes weakened students’ sense of ownership and achievement when they felt that GenAI had completed the task on their behalf. Students also differed in how they reworked and verified GenAI-supported output, indicating that GenAI-mediated task performance involved different ways of engaging with AI assistance. The findings suggest that GenAI does not automatically strengthen English learning motivation. Rather, it reorganizes task performance by creating a tension between efficiency and ownership. The educational significance of GenAI depends not only on its technological capabilities but also on how it is situated within learning tasks and how students engage with and interpret the resulting work.

Keywords:

generative AI (GenAI), English learning motivation, task performance, learner agency, psychological ownership

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2025S1A5A2A01005873).

References

  • Al-Hoorie, A. H., P. Hiver, M. Liu and A. Alshlowiy. 2026. GenAI and language learning motivation: Fundamental questions and a research agenda. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, Online first, 1-26. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190526100282]
  • Al-Obaydi, L. H., M. Pikhart and M. K. Hossain. 2025. ChatGPT and the development of core language skills: An exploratory study of EFL college students. Contemporary Educational Technology 17(4), Article ep591. [https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17242]
  • Avey, J. B., B. J. Avolio, C. D. Crossley and F. Luthans. 2009. Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement, and relation to work outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior 30(2), 173-191. [https://doi.org/10.1002/job.583]
  • Bandura, A. 2001. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 52, 1-26. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1]
  • Braun, V. and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2), 77-101. [https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
  • Cotton, D. R. E., P. A. Cotton and J. R. Shipway. 2024. Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 61(2), 228-239. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148]
  • Dizon, G., J. Gold and R. Barnes. 2025. ChatGPT for self-regulated language learning: University English as a foreign language students’ practices and perceptions. Digital Applied Linguistics 3, Article 102510. [https://doi.org/10.29140/dal.v3.102510]
  • Dörnyei, Z. 2005. The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Routledge.
  • Dörnyei, Z. 2007. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Dörnyei, Z. 2009. The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda, eds., Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self, 9-42. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. [https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.30945943.5]
  • Edmondson, A. C. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly 44(2), 350-383. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999]
  • Gardner, R. C. 1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
  • Huta, V. and R. M. Ryan. 2010. Pursuing pleasure or virtue: The differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. Journal of Happiness Studies 11(6), 735-762. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-009-9171-4]
  • Hwang, H., X. Chang and J. Sun. 2025. Generative AI is useful for second language writing, but when, why, and for how long do learners use it? Journal of Second Language Writing 69, Article 101230. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2025.101230]
  • Jung, H.-J. 2018. Exploring English learners’ intentions to switch to mobile assisted language learning (MALL): Push and pull framework. English21 31(4), 381-401. [https://doi.org/10.35771/engdoi.2018.31.4.016]
  • Kasneci, E., K. Sessler, S. Küchemann, M. Bannert, D. Dementieva, F. Fischer, U. Gasser, G. Groh, S. Günnemann, E. Hüllermeier, S. Krusche, G. Kutyniok, T. Michaeli, C. Nerdel, J. Pfeffer, O. Poquet, M. Sailer, A. Schmidt, T. Seidel, M. Stadler, J. Weller, J. Kuhn and G. Kasneci. 2023. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences 103, Article 102274. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274]
  • Kim, T.-Y. 2006. Interview method development for qualitative study of ESL motivation. Foreign Languages Education 13(2), 231-256.
  • Kim, T.-Y. 2021. Historical Development of English Learning Motivation Research: Cases of Korea and Its Neighboring Countries in East Asia. Singapore: Springer. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2514-5]
  • Kim, T.-Y. 2026. Historical Progression of English Education in Korea. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-10084-9]
  • Kim, T.-Y. and S. Hong. 2026. EFL teachers’ teaching motivation in generative AI-integrated classrooms: A qualitative study. English Language Teaching 38(2), 115-141.
  • Kohnke, L., B. L. Moorhouse and D. Zou. 2023. ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal 54(2), 537-550. [https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868]
  • Lee, S.-M. 2020. The impact of using machine translation on EFL students’ writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning 33(3), 157-175. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1553186]
  • Li, Z. and Y. Liu. 2023. Theorising language learning experience in LOTE motivation with PERMA: A positive psychology perspective. System 112, Article 102975. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102975]
  • Lincoln, Y. S. and E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8]
  • Mackey, A. and S. M. Gass. 2015. Second Language Research: Methodology and Design (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
  • Nowell, L. S., J. M. Norris, D. E. White and N. J. Moules. 2017. Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 16(1), 1-13. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847]
  • Overdijk, M. and W. van Diggelen. 2008. Appropriation of a shared workspace: Organizing principles and their application. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 3(2), 165-192. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-008-9038-4]
  • Pekrun, R. 2006. The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review 18(4), 315-341. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9]
  • Pierce, J. L., T. Kostova and K. T. Dirks. 2001. Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review 26(2), 298-310. [https://doi.org/10.2307/259124]
  • Ranalli, J. 2018. Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? Computer Assisted Language Learning 31(7), 653-674. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1428994]
  • Ryan, R. M. and E. L. Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55(1), 68-78. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68]
  • Ryan, R. M. and E. L. Deci. 2017. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. New York: Guilford Press. [https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806]
  • Song, C. and Y. Song. 2023. Enhancing academic writing skills and motivation: Assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted language learning for EFL students. Frontiers in Psychology 14, Article 1260843. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1260843]
  • Su, Y., Y. Lin and C. Lai. 2023. Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing 57, Article 100752. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752]
  • Talmy, S. 2010. Qualitative interviews in applied linguistics: From research instrument to social practice. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30, 128-148. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190510000085]
  • Wang, L. and L. Wang. 2025. Exploring enjoyment, motivation, self-efficacy, and engagement in AI-assisted English learning: A self-determination theory approach. Learning and Motivation 92, Article 102197. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2025.102197]
  • Weiner, B. 1985. An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review 92(4), 548-573. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548]
  • Wen, Y., C.-K. Looi and W. Chen. 2015. Appropriation of a representational tool in a second-language classroom. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 10(1), 77-108. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9208-0]
  • Wineburg, S. and S. McGrew. 2019. Lateral reading and the nature of expertise: Reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information. Teachers College Record 121(11), 1-40. [https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811912101102]
  • Yuan, Y., H. Li and A. Sawaengdist. 2024. The impact of ChatGPT on learners in English academic writing: Opportunities and challenges in education. Language Learning in Higher Education 14(1), 41-56. [https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2023-0006]
  • Zhang, Z. and K. Hyland. 2018. Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing 36, 90-102. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004]