Rhian Webb<\/strong> Ferah \u015eenayd\u0131n<\/strong> Due to the rapid emergence and use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) by English as a foreign language (EFL) students in higher education (HE), further research is required to understand English language teaching (ELT) teachers\u2019 training needs to effectively manage digitally enhanced teaching and learning. This study identifies teachers\u2019 needs by investigating Turkish ELT teachers\u2019 reactions to their students\u2019 self-reported GenAI usage. Our transcendental phenomenological research design ensured minimal author bias from the thematically analysed, qualitative, interview data from 21 Turkish undergraduate EFL students (B1-C1 level) and six Turkish ELT teachers. Analysis has revealed that students used ChatGPT (version 3.5) as a human collaborator to build content, clarify tasks, be a critical friend, organise ideas, enhance language, and obtain feedback, which they found motivating. However, teachers\u2019 reactions to their students\u2019 usage were inconsistent and exposed a need for unified teacher identity development that is shaped by GenAI literacy training and supported by institutional policies that address GenAI integration into curriculum design and assessment practices.<\/p>\n Keywords<\/em><\/strong>: ChatGPT, English Language Teaching (ELT), Generative Artificial intelligence (GenAI), GenAI literacy, Higher Education (HE)<\/p>\n Teachers need to adapt to the rapidly unfolding artificial intelligence revolution (Baydemir, 2025). The launch of Generative AI (GenAI), ChatGPT in 2022 gained global interest for its capacity to perform tasks traditionally requiring human intelligence, which uses large language models (LLMs) to generate text, images, and music from prompts (Kanbach et al., 2024). Prominent GenAI tools include ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, and the emerging Chinese competitor DeepSeek-V2. This study focuses on EFL students\u2019 use of ChatGPT for their studies because it was the GenAI tool used by the Turkish participants.<\/p>\n Within EFL, researchers have examined the opportunities and challenges of GenAI tools for teaching and learning. This paper contributes to that discourse by offering an emic perspective grounded in live data from students and teachers. The ethical and effective use of GenAI by EFL students in HE and how educators accommodate this technology in pedagogy and assessment needs further exploration. While GenAI integration has been linked to improved skills acquisition and increased student engagement (Yuan & Liu, 2025), successful implementation depends on educators\u2019 understanding, preparedness, and attitudes to use it because GenAI is now considered essential to shape future educational practices (Almanea, 2024).<\/p>\n This research has used an authentic two-stage design. Student interviews, which explored why and how students used GenAI for their English learning, were thematically analysed and presented as prompts to teachers to elicit authentic spoken responses. The reactions were thematically analysed to identify what teachers need to guide students in ethical and effective GenAI practices.<\/p>\n Research has demonstrated that digital competence, which is the ability to use technology in context (Rizza, 2014) is now fundamental for EFL teachers. Specifically, AI literacy (Long & Magerko, 2020), which enables teachers to critically evaluate, communicate and collaborate with AI and demonstrate ethical awareness (Ng et al., 2021).\u00a0 In addition, critical GenAI literacy, which is defined as an \u2018active awareness of affordances and limitations of AI\u2019 (Mills et al., 2022). The study highlights students’ GenAI practices, teachers’ perceptions, and educators\u2019 digital literacy levels to inform strategies for GenAI accommodation in EFL pedagogy.<\/p>\n Research has indicated that EFL students hold positive attitudes toward GenAI tools such as ChatGPT for several reasons. Firstly, it enables students from different backgrounds and levels of English proficiency to access and use high-quality language (Yuliani et al., 2024). Secondly, it can accommodate students\u2019 diverse needs by personalizing responses from prompts (Nishant et al., 2020). Finally, it can create an ideal learning environment where students feel satisfied and listened to, which leads to them being extrinsically motivated to get results and intrinsically motivated by the joy of learning (Yuliani et al., 2024). Relatedly, Yin et al. (2024) explored GenAI\u2019s impact on students\u2019 attention and motivation. They identified improvements when teachers used GenAI interactive platforms to create participatory lessons, which included opinion polls and surveys, because the students could freely engage in discussions, ask questions, and state opinions. Wei (2023) stated that GenAI\u2019s positive impact on motivation would change students\u2019 study patterns and academic achievements, which is supported by Yamaoka (2024), who mentioned GenAI\u2019s contribution towards the decrease in students\u2019 study anxieties.<\/p>\n Empirical studies have found that GenAI improves EFL students\u2019 key language skills (Kushmar et al., 2022). Fathi et al. (2024) observed that interactive speaking activities enhanced students\u2019 willingness to communicate because they gained confidence and enjoyed risk-free chatbot interactions. Listening skill development depends on focused attention, and accurate interpretation to process information from spoken language (Newton & Nation, 2020), which is difficult for students to access in non-native English-speaking countries. However, Cheng et al. (2020) have found that GenAI\u2019s Google Assistant promoted enjoyment for listening because it provided authentic, flexible, edutainment, game-based learning that encouraged peer collaboration.\u00a0 Improvements have been identified in self-reading development, when students received personal and detailed performance feedback from a chatbot because they could track their own performance (Jose & Jayaron Jose, 2024; Pan et al., 2024; Selwyn, 2024). The GenAI Wordtune writing application improved students\u2019 writing at both lexical and syntactic levels (Al Mahmud, 2023). Whereas Huang and Teng\u2019s (2025) research found that ChatGPT feedback improved students\u2019 self-efficacy, motivation and engagement to write because they learned to notice and rectify their grammar errors and incorporate ChatGPT\u2019s constructive feedback.\u00a0 In addition, Huang and Teng (2025) discovered that ChatGPT feedback\u00a0 impacted students’ affective and behavioural engagement when compared to peer feedback, which was probably due to the immediacy of response. However, further research by Huang and Teng (2025) has indicated that students required metacognitive skills, critical thinking skills and cognitive effort to influence the effective use of ChatGPT for writing assistance. Relatedly, Cong-Lem et al., (2025) have found that Vietnamese EFL students\u2019 critical thinking skills became enhanced following short workshops that included multiple scaffolded activities.<\/p>\n While the findings demonstrate GenAI\u2019s advantages for student development, the next section examines teachers\u2019 perceptions of students\u2019 usage, which need consideration when integrating GenAI into EFL study.<\/p>\n Despite GenAI\u2019s demonstrated benefits to students learning, teachers\u2019 views on student use remain varied and contradictory, which is impacted by the lack of institutional policies and guidance. For example, McGrath et al.\u2019s (2024) online survey found that teachers advocated their universities to provide students with GenAI resources whilst they remained undecided about its role in assessed work. Relatedly, Delello et al. (2023) found that American students valued GenAI learning but believed a lack of university policy prevented their teachers from embracing their usage. Whilst, Almanea (2024) has indicated that a lack of guidance about appropriate GenAI use can generate vague areas, where students may engage in unethical GenAI use despite displaying ethical awareness. The position is exemplified in the following studies.<\/p>\n In America, Jowarder\u2019s (2023) students appreciated GenAI\u2019s perceived usefulness to better understand difficult subjects, to find study resources and its ease of use but lacked awareness about academic dishonesty, plagiarism, and data privacy. \u010cr\u010dek and Patekar\u2019s (2023) survey with 201 Croatian students reported that ChatGPT was used for several writing processes, which included idea generation, paraphrasing, summarizing, proofreading, and drafting written assignments. However, around 50% of the students were later involved in academic misconduct cases because of their GenAI use, despite being aware of their establishments\u2019 ethical violation policies. Additional studies have reported students\u2019 limited understanding of GenAI\u2019s limitations and bias, which contribute to problems with ethics (Hockly, 2023),<\/p>\n Cheng et al. (2020) have reported that some educators believe that GenAI simplifies processes too much and can lead to students underestimating academic tasks, which leaves them unable to discuss or present what they have produced. Ngo\u2019s (2023) research in Vietnam highlighted that students considered ChatGPT beneficial because it offered ideas, personal tutoring, and feedback for writing. However, GenAI\u2019s inability to assess the quality and reliability of sources, cite sources and replace words accurately were recognised as areas where teacher intervention was required. Almanea (2024) has found that despite students\u2019 positive attitudes towards GenAI use, their actual use is shaped by their teachers\u2019 expectations and guidance about acceptable and nonacceptable use. \u010cr\u010dek and Patekar\u2019s (2023) study in Vietnam found that students felt uncertain about their teachers\u2019 ChatGPT use expectations because some forbid it and others discouraged it, which may be due to a lack of GenAI technological knowledge (Luckin et al., 2022; McGrath et al., 2024).<\/p>\n The findings have demonstrated that teachers are uncertain how to guide students who are eager to engage with GenAI. The next section examines teachers\u2019 GenAI knowledge, which offers insights into why their views are contradictory and how enhanced digital literacy might reconcile divergent attitudes toward students\u2019 GenAI use.<\/p>\n The rapid emergence of GenAI has left many teachers feeling insecure about their digital abilities to integrate it into their teaching and to guide students\u2019 usage (Kohnke et al., 2024; Nyaaba, 2024; Prather et al., 2024). Teachers\u2019 AI-technological pedagogical content knowledge (AI-TPACK) is a significant predictor of this variation (Yue et al., 2024) because studies have demonstrated that in general, university teachers have limited GenAI technological knowledge (Luckin et al., 2022; McGrath et al., 2024).<\/p>\n Edmett et al.\u2019s (2023), global study with 1348 teachers has revealed that EFL teachers have received an inadequate amount of GenAI training to integrate into teaching. An et al.\u2019s (2023) study with 470 EFL teachers, has suggested that teacher AI-TPACK levels can predict teachers\u2019 perceptions and behavioural intentions towards GenAI use in teaching. Yue et al. (2024) have argued that low GenAI literacy levels lead to avoidance, whereas higher proficiency levels engender positive attitudes toward its pedagogical value.<\/p>\n Teachers have called for training and institutional support to understand, accommodate, manage, teach, and assess their students\u2019 GenAI usage (Choi et al., 2023). Early advocates urged a shift from traditional content delivery to facilitating critical thinking through digital literacy (Dillenbourg, 2016; Luckin, 2018). More recently, Toncelli and Kostka (2024) have documented teachers\u2019 excitement, optimism, and curiosity about GenAI alongside a sense of loss for established practices. They stated that as a critical first step, teachers needed support to incorporate GenAI into teaching, which would build communities of supportive teachers to teach in unknown territory. Similarly, Nazim and Alzubi (2025) have identified that constraints in technological competence and GenAI literacy encroached on professional autonomy. Conversely, Wu and Miller\u2019s (2025) research in China with one technically initiative-taking teacher and the other technically reluctant teacher has highlighted the impact institutional guidance, peer collaboration and individual beliefs can have on enabling successful GenAI integration into teaching practices.<\/p>\n ELT literature has presented research about students\u2019 GenAI usage, which is positive in relation to learning development, and teachers\u2019 perceptions, which are varied and contradictory and due to lack of GenAI literacy knowledge. However, there is a limited understanding about how teachers react to their students\u2019 self-reported GenAI usage for English language learning to enable teachers to understand what knowledge they need to guide and help students. This study addresses the gap in literature through two research questions (RQ), which are:<\/p>\n RQ1: How do students use GenAI, and teachers react to their students\u2019 GenAI usage for English language learning?<\/p>\n RQ2: What do teachers need to accommodate students\u2019 GenAI usage in English language learning?<\/p>\n We used Moustakas\u2019 (1994) transcendental phenomenological design, which encourages researchers to eliminate preconceived ideas about the phenomena and examine data with a fresh perspective. We relied on the teacher participants to provide the complexity of the phenomena, which was to identify teachers\u2019 needs to accommodate students\u2019 GenAI usage in ELT. The phenomena needed self-reported data from students about their GenAI usage. Therefore, a two-tier interview process was undertaken which firstly collected data from students for use in the second interview with the teachers. The double\u2010tier approach eliminated researcher bias and enabled teacher insights to be grounded in authentic student data.<\/p>\n Two participant cohorts contributed from a Turkish university. Group 1 consisted of 21 EFL students where, eight were B1\u2010level foundation students, and 13 were B2\u2013C1 first-year English Language and Literature undergraduate students. To create the sample, we emailed 50 eligible students\u2019 details about the study\u2019s aims, procedures, and ethics and 21 students volunteered to participate. Group 2 included six ELT and English Language and Literature teachers from the same university. All teachers were proficient L2 English speakers with over ten years of teaching experience. They agreed to undertake face-to-face interviews during their regular meetings on students\u2019 GenAI use.<\/p>\n Table 1. Profile of participating teachers <\/strong><\/p>\n
\nUniversity of South Wales, UK
\n<rhian.webb![\"atmark\"](\"http:\/\/www.tesl-ej.org\/atmark.png\")
southwales.ac.uk><\/p>\n
\nEge University, Turkey
\n<ferah.senaydinege.edu.tr><\/p>\nAbstract<\/h3>\n
Literature Review<\/h3>\n
Students\u2019 GenAI usage<\/h4>\n
Teachers\u2019 perceptions of students\u2019 GenAI usage<\/h4>\n
Teachers\u2019 GenAI knowledge<\/h4>\n
Methodology<\/h3>\n
Research Design<\/h4>\n
\u00a0Participants<\/h4>\n