Pak Fay New Blog

Friday, October 2, 2026

EXAMPLE OF DISCUSSION GENRE TEXT: TWO-SIDED ESSAY

Should Students Use AI in English Writing?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools are becoming very popular in education today. Many students now use AI programs to assist them with their schoolwork, especially in language classes. However, teachers and researchers have different opinions about using these digital tools for writing tasks. This leads to an important question: should students use AI in English writing?

On the positive side, supporters argue that AI helps students generate new ideas during the writing process. When students feel stuck or face writer's block, AI tools can suggest outlines, topics, and creative angles to help them start writing. Generative AI acts like a digital brainstorm partner that guides learners through the initial planning stage of an essay (Li et al., 2024).

Additionally, AI tools help students improve their grammar and vocabulary in real time. These tools can quickly highlight spelling errors, fix incorrect sentence structures, and suggest better word choices as students’ type (Waziana et al., 2024). This instant feedback allows learners to notice their language mistakes immediately and make quick revisions to their work.

On the other hand, critics worry that relying too much on AI may reduce students' independent thinking skills. If students let computers organize their thoughts and write sentences for them, they may lose the ability to analyze information critically on their own (Liu, 2024). Over time, learners might become passive and struggle to produce original thoughts without digital help.

Furthermore, another major concern is that AI can encourage academic dishonesty and plagiarism. Some students might copy AI-generated essays directly and submit them as their own work instead of practicing their own writing (Shi & Aryadoust, 2024). Because AI can generate full paragraphs in seconds, it makes cheating easier if there are no clear rules in place.

In conclusion, AI in English writing brings both helpful benefits and serious risks. While it offers useful support for brainstorming and grammar, it can also harm independent thinking and lead to plagiarism if misused. Therefore, AI can be a useful learning tool only when students use it responsibly alongside clear guidance from their teachers (Fleckenstein et al., 2024).

References

Fleckenstein, J., Liebenow, L. W., & Meyer, J. (2024). Using LLMs to bring evidence-based feedback into the classroom: AI-generated feedback increases secondary students’ text revision, motivation, and positive emotions. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 100199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100199

Li, M., Han, J., & colleagues. (2024). Exploring ChatGPT-supported teacher feedback in the EFL context. System, 126, Article 103502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103502

Liu, W. (2024). A systematic review of automated writing evaluation feedback: Validity, effects and students’ engagement. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 45, 86–105. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.45.05

Shi, H., & Aryadoust, V. (2024). A systematic review of AI-based automated written feedback research. ReCALL, 36(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344023000265

Waziana, W., Andewi, W., Hastomo, T., & Hasbi, M. (2024). Students’ perceptions about the impact of AI chatbots on their vocabulary and grammar in EFL writing. Register Journal, 17(2), 352–382. https://doi.org/10.18326/register.v17i2.352-382

EXAMPLE OF EXPOSITION:ONE-SIDED OPINION

Students should use AI in English writing

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is changing how students learn to write. In traditional classes, students usually write an essay, hand it in, and wait for the teacher to grade it. Today, AI digital tools give students instant help as they write. Research shows that AI helps teachers by giving students extra, immediate feedback on their drafts (Guo & Wang, 2024; Shi & Aryadoust, 2024). Instead of replacing real teachers, AI works best as a helpful assistant while teachers guide the learning process (Li et al., 2024). Therefore, AI should be used in English writing classes as a powerful tool to help students become independent writers.

First, AI helps students get started and build basic language skills. Many new writers struggle with writer's block or finding the right words. AI tools can suggest topic ideas, outline essay structures, and offer new vocabulary. They also catch grammar mistakes as students’ type (Waziana et al., 2024). However, students must learn to check AI suggestions carefully because these tools can sometimes make mistakes or give confusing advice (Shi & Aryadoust, 2024).

Second, AI gives instant feedback so students can fix their mistakes right away. In large classrooms, teachers often need days or weeks to grade papers. By the time students get their papers back, they may have forgotten what they wrote. AI gives immediate notes on sentences, word choice, and organization (Li et al., 2024). This fast feedback keeps students motivated and makes revising fun and effective (Fleckenstein et al., 2024). Still, AI should support teacher grading, not replace it, because human feedback is often more accurate and meaningful (Steiss et al., 2024).

Third, using AI teaches students how to check and improve their own writing. Simply fixing errors because a computer told you to does not help you learn. To become better writers, students must figure out why a correction is needed. AI points out passive sentences, confusing ideas, or repeated words, acting like a mirror for student writing. Over time, this helps students build self-editing skills so they can fix their own mistakes independently.

In conclusion, AI is a valuable addition to modern English classes. It helps students brainstorm ideas, learn new words, fix grammar errors, and revise faster. When combined with a teacher's guidance, AI helps students think critically about their work and build strong, independent writing habits (Fleckenstein et al., 2024; Li et al., 2024). Ultimately, AI serves as a helpful companion to traditional writing instruction.

References

Guo, K., & Wang, D. (2024). To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29(7), 8435–8463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0

Li, M., Han, J., & colleagues. (2024). Exploring ChatGPT-supported teacher feedback in the EFL context. System, 126, Article 103502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103502

Shi, H., & Aryadoust, V. (2024). A systematic review of AI-based automated written feedback research. ReCALL, 36(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344023000265

Steiss, J., Tate, T., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., & Olson, C. B. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, Article 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894

Thursday, October 1, 2026

5 Wilayah Muslimin around the Globe yang terdampak Genosida, Konflik dan Kekerasan

Lima tragedi besar yang menimpa umat Islam saat ini adalah genosida dan persekusi di Palestina, Xinjiang (Uyghur), Myanmar (Rohingya), India, dan Sudan. Semua kasus ini telah didokumentasikan oleh PBB, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, dan lembaga internasional lain sebagai pelanggaran berat HAM, banyak di antaranya memenuhi kriteria genosida.

1. Palestina

Korban: Lebih dari 42.000 warga Palestina tewas sejak Oktober 2023, termasuk 13.300 anak-anak.
Metode: Serangan udara, penghancuran kota, blokade makanan dan obat, serta penahanan massal.
Status hukum: Amnesty International dan laporan PBB menyatakan tindakan Israel memenuhi unsur genosida menurut Konvensi Genosida 1948.

2. Uyghur di China

Korban: Lebih dari 1 juta Uyghur ditahan sejak 2017 di kamp “re-edukasi”.
Metode: Penahanan massal, kerja paksa, steriliasi paksa, pemisahan keluarga, penghapusan budaya dan agama.
Status hukum: AS dan beberapa negara menyebutnya genosida; laporan PBB menyatakan bisa dikategorikan sebagai kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan.

3. Rohingya di Myanmar

Korban: Sejak 2017, lebih dari 700.000 Rohingya melarikan diri ke Bangladesh; ribuan tewas akibat operasi militer.
Metode: Pembunuhan massal, pemerkosaan, pembakaran desa, pengusiran sistematis.
Status hukum: ICJ sedang mengadili Myanmar atas dugaan pelanggaran Konvensi Genosida; laporan PBB menyebut kejahatan ini sebagai “gravest crimes under international law.”

4. Persekusi Muslim di India

Korban: Puluhan Muslim tewas tiap tahun akibat lynching, serangan massa, dan kebijakan diskriminatif.
Metode: Kekerasan vigilante (cow vigilantes), pembakaran rumah, pembatasan hak pilih, pembongkaran masjid, ujaran kebencian.
Status hukum: USCIRF merekomendasikan India sebagai “Country of Particular Concern” sejak 2019; pola kekerasan disebut sebagai apartheid dan persiapan pembersihan etnis.

5. Sudan (Darfur)

Korban: Ribuan tewas dalam serangan RSF di El Fasher (Oktober 2025), termasuk lebih dari 6.000 orang dalam tiga hari.
Metode: Pembunuhan etnis, pemerkosaan massal, penyiksaan, pengepungan 18 bulan yang menyebabkan kelaparan.
Status hukum: PBB menyatakan tindakan RSF memiliki “hallmarks of genocide” terhadap komunitas Zaghawa dan Fur.

Save Uygur Muslim

SOURCE: (3) UYGUR GENOCIDE - Pencarian / X & (3) Uyghur women - Pencarian / X

Situasi umat Muslim Uyghur di Xinjiang, Tiongkok, telah menjadi perhatian internasional yang luas, khususnya sejak kampanye penahanan berskala besar yang semakin intensif sekitar tahun 2017. Laporan dari Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (PBB), Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, dan berbagai organisasi lainnya telah mendokumentasikan atau melaporkan dugaan penahanan sewenang-wenang, penyiksaan dan perlakuan buruk lainnya, kerja paksa, pengawasan massal, pembatasan praktik keagamaan dan budaya, pemisahan keluarga, serta pelanggaran hak-hak reproduksi. Amnesty International melaporkan bahwa mungkin satu juta orang atau lebih, yang sebagian besar berasal dari kelompok etnis minoritas Muslim, telah ditahan di Xinjiang sejak 2017. Kantor Komisaris Tinggi PBB untuk Hak Asasi Manusia (OHCHR), setelah memeriksa berbagai dokumen dan melakukan wawancara dengan orang-orang yang memiliki pengetahuan langsung mengenai situasi tersebut, menyimpulkan pada 2022 bahwa tingkat penahanan sewenang-wenang dan diskriminatif serta berbagai pelanggaran terkait lainnya dapat merupakan kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan. Namun, pemerintah Tiongkok menolak tuduhan tersebut dan menjelaskan bahwa kebijakan mereka di Xinjiang ditujukan untuk memerangi terorisme, ekstremisme, dan kemiskinan.

Laki-laki Uyghur dilaporkan menjadi salah satu kelompok yang sangat terdampak oleh penahanan sewenang-wenang, pemenjaraan, kerja paksa, dan pemisahan keluarga. Berbagai investigasi hak asasi manusia menggambarkan bahwa sejumlah besar laki-laki Uyghur dan laki-laki Muslim dari kelompok etnis Turkik lainnya dikirim ke fasilitas interniran, penjara, atau bentuk penahanan lainnya, terkadang tanpa proses peradilan yang adil. Para mantan tahanan menggambarkan adanya pendidikan ideologis, indoktrinasi politik, pembatasan praktik keagamaan, rutinitas kehidupan sehari-hari yang sangat dikontrol, serta perlakuan buruk secara fisik maupun psikologis. Sebagian tahanan dilaporkan kemudian dipindahkan ke pabrik atau pekerjaan pertanian setelah atau dalam kaitannya dengan penahanan mereka. Sementara itu, program pemindahan tenaga kerja juga dilaporkan memindahkan masyarakat Uyghur dari wilayah pedesaan ke pabrik-pabrik di berbagai wilayah Xinjiang dan Tiongkok. Human Rights Watch melaporkan bahwa berdasarkan angka resmi yang tersedia, ratusan ribu orang Uyghur dan Muslim Turkik lainnya masih berada dalam penjara, bahkan setelah sebagian kamp “pendidikan politik” yang sebelumnya beroperasi tampak ditutup. Penahanan terhadap sejumlah besar laki-laki juga membawa konsekuensi besar bagi keluarga karena para istri, anak-anak, dan kerabat lainnya terpisah dari suami, ayah, dan saudara laki-laki mereka.