NAVIGATING THE POST-GEN AI ACADEMIC LANDSCAPE: EFL STUDENTS’ FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENTIATION AND CRITICAL ENGAGEMENT WITH NMT AND CHATGPT
pdf

Keywords

Machine Translation
Generative AI
Technology Acceptance Model
Cognitive Load Theory
EFL Pedagogy
Higher Education

How to Cite

Sulistyani, U. N. L., & Utami, A. . (2026). NAVIGATING THE POST-GEN AI ACADEMIC LANDSCAPE: EFL STUDENTS’ FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENTIATION AND CRITICAL ENGAGEMENT WITH NMT AND CHATGPT. Lire Journal (Journal of Linguistics and Literature), 10(2), 221-238. https://doi.org/10.33019/lire.v10i2.625
Views
  • Abstract 0
  • pdf 0
Statistics reflect real-time downloads and views.

Abstract

The rapid expansion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has normalized digital translation in higher education, yet its integration into English as a Foreign Language (EFL) pedagogy remains complicated by an institutional vacuum. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model and Cognitive Load Theory, this study examines university students’ multi-tool strategies and critical engagement with Neural Machine Translation (NMT) and Generative AI (GenAI) platforms. Employing a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, quantitative data were gathered from 165 EFL undergraduates (73.7% female, 72.2% sophomores, 61.1% daily active users) via questionnaires, alongside semi-structured interviews with a purposive sub-sample (n=10).The findings reveal an advanced ecosystem characterized by functional differentiation: students strategically leverage specialized NMT engines like DeepL (38.9%) for academic precision but pivot to GenAI tools like ChatGPT (38.9%) for iterative conversational support. While students report high perceived usefulness (98.8%) and ease of use (96.1%) to minimize extraneous cognitive load, they reject passive consumption. Instead, 94.8% actively engage in critical post-editing due to systemic accuracy limitations regarding cultural nuances. Ethically, although 94.7% view automated assistance as an acceptable cognitive scaffold, the absence of clear institutional rules fosters a transparency gap, causing disclosure anxiety. This study dismantles the traditional narrative of student passivity and argues that higher education must move away from obsolete restrictions toward a framework of guided integration and structured translation literacy.

pdf

References

A’yun, S. Q., Karim, S. A., Matas, G., Radjaban, R. ., & Winarna. (2025). The use of DeepL as a translation tool in English language learning: Insights from Indonesian EFL university students. Journal of English Teaching and Learning Issues, 8(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.21043/jetli.v8i2.33633

Abimbola, L. I. (2023). The Impact of Machine Translation on Vocabulary Acquisition and Reading Comprehension in ESL Learners. Pulchra Lingua: A Journal of Language Study, Literature & Linguistics, 2(2), 80–93. https://doi.org/10.58989/plj.v2i2.27

Abraheem, A. K. H. Q. M. (2025). The Role of Machine Translationin Language Learning and Teaching. International Journal of Linguistics Studies, 5(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijls.2025.5.3.1

Adair, A. (2023). Teaching and Learning with AI: How Artificial Intelligence is Transforming the Future of Education. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students, 29(3), 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3589252

Al-Adwan, A. S., Li, N., Al-Adwan, A., Abbasi, G. A., Albelbisi, N. A., & Habibi, A. (2023). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Predict University Students’ Intentions to Use Metaverse-Based Learning Platforms. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 15381–15413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11913-3

Alqohfa, K. A. S., & Sanad, S. N. T. (2025). Linguistic and Cultural Challenges in Translating Idioms with Artificial Intelligence. Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 4(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v4i1.116

Batubara, M. H., Sibarani, B., Murni, S. M., & Aisyah Ginting, S. (2025). A Systematic Literature Review on the Application of Artificial Intelligence in Translation: Challenges, Innovations, and Impact Across Diverse Fields. Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching (JLLLT), 5(1), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.37249/jlllt.v5i1.934

Baxter, K. A., Sachdeva, N., & Baker, S. (2025). The Application of Cognitive Load Theory to the Design of Health and Behavior Change Programs: Principles and Recommendations. Health Education and Behavior, 52(4), 469–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981251327185

Braha, M. (2026). Kosovan EFL students’ acceptance of AI tools for English language learning: practices, perceptions, challenges, and suggestions for improvement. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1229, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2026.2621266

Breskas, A., Hansen-Schirra, S., & Kapnas, D. (2025). AI and digital literacy in translation competence development. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 18(2), 117–148. https://doi.org/10.33542/jti2025-s-7

Cahyani, R. D., Syamdianita, S., Aridah, A., Iswari, W. P., & Ahada, I. (2025). EFL STUDENTS’ ACCEPTANCE OF DEEPL TRANSLATION: A TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL STUDY. Lire Journal (Journal of Linguistics and Literature), 9(3). https://doi.org/10.33019/ire.v9i3.535

Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Wüstenberg, T., Kizilcec, R. F., Fan, Y., Li, Y., Lu, B., Yuan, M., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Geldsetzer, P., Chen, S., & Bärnighausen, T. (2025). Effects of generative artificial intelligence on cognitive effort and task performance: study protocol for a randomized controlled experiment among college students. Trials, 26(244), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-025-08950-3

Comelles, E., & Laso, N. J. (2025). The impact of MT as a writing tool on EFL academic writing: A qualitative linguistic analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 69, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2025.101231

Darmono, Setiawan, R. J., & Ma’ruf, K. (2025). Determining Factors Influencing Indonesian Higher Education Students’ Intention to Adopt Artificial Intelligence Tools for Self-Directed Learning Management. European Journal of Educational Research, 14(3), 805–828. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.14.3.805

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Delyana, D., & Tedjasuksmana, H. (2023). The use of Google Translate on EFL students’ language use in Writing and Attitudes. Beyond Words, 11(2), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.33508/bw.v11i2.4855

Duong, H. T. Q., & Ngan, H. T. Q. (2025). Online Technology Tools: Use and Perception by Vietnamese Students in a Translation Class. CALL-EJ, 26(4), 258–282. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.54855/

Edumadze, J., Ditlhokwa, G., & Demuyakor, J. (2022). Students’ Acceptance and Perceptions of Perceived Usefulness of Mobile Learning Devices in Higher Educational Institutions. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 12(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/11539

Gruenhagen, J. H., Sinclair, P. M., Carroll, J. A., Baker, P. R. A., Wilson, A., & Demant, D. (2024). The rapid rise of generative AI and its implications for academic integrity: Students’ perceptions and use of chatbots for assistance with assessments. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100273

Herget, K. (2021). Post-editing Machine Translation in MateCat: A classroom experiment. International Conference on Higher Education Advances, 1003–1009. https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd21.2021.12789

Jiang, L., Wei, B., & Al-Shaibani, G. K. S. (2025). Effective Neural Machine Translation with Human Post-Editing of Chinese Intangible Cultural Heritage Corpus into English. Sage Open, 15(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251386954

Khoso, A. K., Honggang, W., & Darazi, M. A. (2025). Empowering creativity and engagement: The impact of generative artificial intelligence usage on Chines EFL students’ language learning experience. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 18, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100627

Klimova, B. (2025). Use of machine translation in foreign language education. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2025.2491183

Lamont, J., & Cirocki, A. (2025). Talking to algorithms, not students: Students’ and lecturers’ perceptions of machine translation in academic discussion. The JALT CALL Journal, 21(3), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v21n3.103256

Leva, B., Onič, T., Todorović, T., Urh, J., & Hazemali, D. (2025). Student Perceptions of Digital Tools in Language and Translation Programs: A Survey-Based Case Study at the University of Maribor, Slovenia. Education Sciences, 15(9), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091119

Lodge, J. M. (2024). The evolving risk to academic integrity posed by generative artificial intelligence: Options for immediate action. In Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency.

Metwally, A. A., Busabaa, N. A., & Mohammed, H. A. N. (2025). University Students’ Diverse Perspectives on Google Translate: Enhancing EFL Writing Skills or Hindering Progress? An-Najah University Journal for Research - B (Humanities), 39(10), 841–858. https://doi.org/10.35552/0247.39.10.2450

Moneus, A. M., & Sahari, Y. (2024). Artificial intelligence and human translation: A contrastive study based on legal texts. Heliyon, 10(6), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28106

Moqbel, D. M. (2025). Impact of AI-Based Personalized English Learning on Cognitive Offloading and Breadth of Formal Curriculum. Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 4(2), 50–64. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v4i2.127

Munawaroh, S. (2024). Exploring EFL Students’ Experiences In Using AI tools to support academic writing. Socius: Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial, 2(7), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17605850

Naveen, P., & Trojovský, P. (2024). Overview and challenges of machine translation for contextually appropriate translations. In iScience (Vol. 27, Issue 10, pp. 1–25). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.110878

Onnen, A. (2024). Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Future Skills-An Integrative Competency Model. International Journal of Swarm Intelligence and Evolusionary Computation, 13(5), 1–18.

Paterson, K. (2023). Machine translation in higher education: Perceptions, policy, and pedagogy. TESOL Journal, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.690

Plass, J. L., Moreno, R., & Brünken, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory. In R. B. R. Plass, Jan L. ; Moreno (Ed.), Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511844744

Puppart, B., & Aru, J. (2025). Short-term AI literacy intervention does not reduce over-reliance on incorrect ChatGPT recommendations. PREPRINT, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.10556

Pym, A., & Hu, K. (2024). Machine Translation. An Overview. In Reference Module in Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-95504-1.00014-4

Raharjo, R. S., & Rohmadi, S. H. (2025). Artificial Intelligence in Indonesian Education: A Critical Review of Ethical Considerations, Implementation Challenges, and Educational Management Perspectives. At-Tarbawi: Jurnal Kajian Kependidikan Islam, 10(1), 50–68.

Rahmawati, S., Baihaqi, A., & Imtihanudin, D. (2025). Students’ Perception of Using Machine Translation: A Survey of Indonesian EFL Undergraduate Students. Journal of English Language Teaching and Cultural Studies, 8(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.48181/jelts.v8i1.28792

Ramadhani, S. R., & Widiastuty, H. (2024). Understanding the Impact of Cognitive Load on Vocabulary Retention in Efl : a Theoretical Analysis. International Proceddings Universitas Tulungagung 2024, 651–664.

Sharma, S., Diwakar, M., Singh, P., Singh, V., Kadry, S., & Kim, J. (2023). Machine Translation Systems Based on Classical-Statistical-Deep-Learning Approaches. In Electronics (Switzerland) (Vol. 12, Issue 7, pp. 1–29). https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12071716

Tian, J., & Zhang, R. (2025). Learners’ AI dependence and critical thinking: The psychological mechanism of fatigue and the social buffering role of AI literacy. Acta Psychologica, 260, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105725

Tian, S., Jia, L., & Zhang, Z. (2023). Investigating students’ attitudes towards translation technology: The status quo and structural relations with translation mindsets and future work self. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1122612

Torres, P. J., & Kahveci, Y. E. (2025). Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in language teaching. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100522

Tran, H., Crosthwaite, P., & Pham, Q. H. P. (2025). Students’ self-determination in using machine translation and generative AI tools for English for academic purposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 78, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2025.101578

Ulysa Humayrah, Novita Ritonga, Afia Nur Meiza, & Yani Lubis. (2026). Sentence Processing Difficulties in Academic English: A Psycholinguistic Study of EFL Students. International Journal Multidisciplinary Science, 5(1), 28–33. https://doi.org/10.56127/ijml.v5i1.2502

Yudianto, H., Surtikanti, M., & Agung, A. (2025). Students’ Viewpoint of Automatic Translation Tools in EFL Classroom. Pedagogy : Journal of English Language Teaching, 13(1), 37–63. https://doi.org/10.32332/joelt.v13i1.10482

Zarifi, A., & Azizinezhad, Z. (2020). Vocabulary learning and retention: Cognitive load framework on trial. Porta Linguarum, 2020(33), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi33.26660

Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7

Zlotnikova, I., & Hlomani, H. (2025). GenAI in the Context of African Universities: A Crisis of Tertiary Education or Its New Dawn? Digital Government: Research and Practice, 6(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3689215

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2026 Ummi Nur Laila Sulistyani, Athifah Utami

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.