The Impact of ChatGPT as a Brainstorming Tool on Gifted Students' Persuasive Writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17239/Keywords:
artificial intelligence, brainstorming, ChatGPT, gifted students, persuasive writingAbstract
This study investigated the impact of using ChatGPT 3.5 as a prewriting brainstorming tool on the overall quality of persuasive writing among five gifted seniors majoring in Arabic at the College of Education, Kuwait University. Giftedness, in this study, was not defined by innate advantages such as intelligence quotient (IQ) but was instead viewed from a multidimensional perspective, focusing on academic performance, writing skills, and personal traits that reflect intellectual engagement. Four participants were typically developing gifted students, while one participant was twice exceptional, both gifted and autistic. An integrated single-subject design with multiple probes across multiple baselines was used, with each participant serving as their own control. Repeated measures were used throughout the baseline, intervention, and maintenance phases to monitor intraindividual variability and examine the effectiveness of the intervention. The results indicated a significant increase in mean scores for persuasive essays from baseline to intervention for all participants, with continued improvement during maintenance for all but the twice-exceptional student, whose mean maintenance score remained unchanged from the intervention. While promoting ChatGPT 3.5 as a valuable brainstorming tool for persuasive writing, this study emphasizes its complementary role and recommends that writers engage in brainstorming using multiple resources before writing.
References
References
Algaraady, J., & Mahyoob, M. (2023). ChatGPT’s capabilities in spotting and analyzing writing errors experienced by EFL learners. Arab World English Journal, 9, 2–17. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/call9.1
Amka, S., Mirnawati, P., Asri, L., & Siti, F. (2021). Identification and learning services of gifted students in inclusion schools. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 12(8), 4534–4543.
Barrot, J. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
Bryant, D., Bryant, B., & Smith, D. (2020). Teaching students with special needs in inclusive classrooms. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Bruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029692
Callahan, C., Moon, T., & Oh, S. (2017). Describing the status of programs for the gifted: A call for action. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(1), 20–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353216686215
Christ, T. (2007). Experimental control and threats to internal validity of concurrent and non-concurrent multiple baseline designs. Psychology in the Schools, 44(5), 451–459. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20237
Ciampa, K., Wolfe, Z., & Bronstein, B. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Transforming digital literacy practices. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 67, 186–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.1310
The Davidson Institute for Talent Development. (2023). Gifted traits and characteristics: Characteristics and traits of gifted children. Reno, NV: Davison Institute for Talent Development. https://www.davidsongifted.org/prospective-families/gifted-traits-and%20characteristics/#:~:text=Common%20Characteristics%20of%20Gifted%20Children%3A&text=Strong%20sense%20of%20curiosity,problem%20solving%20and%20imaginative%20expression
Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Saad, H. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: Examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sports, 40(2), 615–622. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623
Equity in Gifted Talented Education. (2023). Twice exceptional learners. Texas Education Agency.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007a). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007b). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescent middle and high school. Alliance for Excellence in Education.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2016). A path to better writing: Evidence‐based practices in the classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(4), 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1432
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Fishman, E., Houston, J., Wijekumar, K., Lei, P. W., & Ray, A. B. (2019). Writing skills, knowledge, motivation, and strategic behavior predict students’ persuasive writing performance in the context of robust writing instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 119(3), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1086/701720
Graham, S., Liu, X., Bartlett, B., Ng, C., Harris, K. R., Aitken, A., Barkel, A., Kavanaugh, C., & Talukdar, J. (2018). Reading for writing: A meta-analysis of the impact of reading interventions on writing. Review of Educational Research, 88(2), 243–284. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317746927
Guenole, F., & Baleyte, J. (2017). The paradox of gifted children. Revue De Neuropsychologie, 9(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1684/nrp.2017.0406
Horner, R., Carr, E., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203
Huck, S. (2012). Reading statistics and research. Pearson Education Inc.
Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023). Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13605
Innali, H. O., & Aydin, I. S. (2020). The investigation of metacognitive strategies used by gifted and talented students in writing process according to some variables. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(5), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2020.05.016
Jonsen, K., Fendt, J., & Point, S. (2018). Convincing qualitative research: What constitutes persuasive writing? Organizational Research Methods, 21(1), 30–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117706533
Jouhar, M. R., & Rupley, W. H. (2021). The reading–writing connection based on independent
reading and writing: A systematic review. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 37(2), 136–156.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2020.1740632
Kazdin, A. (2011). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. Oxford University Press.
Michel-Villarreal, R., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Salinas-Navarro, D., Thierry-Aguilera, R., & Gerardou, F. (2023). Challenges and opportunities of generative AI for higher education as explained by ChatGPT. Education Sciences, 13(856), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13090856
Naumova, E. N. (2023). A mistake-find exercise: A teacher’s tool to engage with information innovations, ChatGPT, and their analogs. Journal of Public Health Policy, 44(2), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-023-00400-1
Olinghouse, N. G., Graham, S., & Gillespie, A. (2015). The relationship of discourse and topic knowledge to fifth graders’ writing performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037549
Pierangelo, R., & Giuliani, G. (2012). Assessment in special education: A practical approach. Pearson Education Inc.
Ray, P. (2023). ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope. Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems 3, 121–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003
Rimm, S., Siegle, D., & Davis, G. (2018). Education of the gifted and talented. Pearson.
Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (1994). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. SAGE Publication, Inc.
Sallam, M. (2023). ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research and practice: Systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns. Healthcare, 11(6), 887. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11060887
Scruggs, T., Mastropieri, M., & Casto, G. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33.
https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258700800206
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1998). Summarizing single-subject research: Issues and
applications. Behavior Modification, 22(3), 221–242.
https://doi.org/10.1177/01454455980223001
Siegle, D. (2020). I have an idea I need to share: Using technology to enhance brainstorming. Gifted Child Today, 43(3), 205–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217520919967
Siegle, D. (2023). A role for ChatGPT and AI in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 46(3), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168443
Singh, M. (2023). Maintaining the integrity of the South African university: The impact of ChatGPT on plagiarism and scholarly writing. South African Journal of Higher Education, 37(5), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.20853/37-5-5941
Slater, W. H., & Groff, J. A. (2017). Tutoring in critical thinking: Using the stases to scaffold high school students’ reading and writing of persuasive text. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 33(4), 380–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2017.1294516
Thorp, H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science, 379(6630), 313–313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879
Trail, B. (2011). Twice exceptional gifted children. Prufrock Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1989). Thoughts and language. MIT Press.
Webb, J., Gore, J., Amend, E., & DeVries, A. (2007). A parent’s guide to gifted children. Great Potential Press.
Yuen, M., Chan, S., Chan, C., Fung, D., Cheung, W., Kwan, T., & Leung, F. (2018). Differentiation in key learning areas for gifted students in regular classes. Gifted Education International, 34(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429416649047
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Huda Almumen, Mohammed Jouhar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
