Managing Student Engagement in AI-supported  English Learning: A CIPO Analysis at   a Vietnamese University

Do Thi Thu; Do Thi Thu Ha

Do Thi Thu	thudt@fe.edu.vn	FPT University, Hanoi (Vietnam)
Do Thi Thu Ha*	hadtt13@fe.edu.vn	FPT University, Hanoi (Vietnam)

Summary:

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education has created new opportunities for personalized learning, while also raising questions about how to effectively manage student engagement in AI-enabled environments. This study employs the Context-Input-Process-Output (CIPO) model to examine how organizational context, learner input, and instructional processes shape student engagement in an AI-integrated English course at a university in Vietnam. A mixed-methods design was used by combining survey data from 288 undergraduate students with semi-structured interviews with seven students. Quantitative results show that the model explains 78.2% of the variance in engagement, with Process factors, including instructor support and motivation to learn, being the strongest predictors, followed by contextual conditions such as policy clarity and digital infrastructure. Input factors, including attitudes towards AI and digital competence, are no longer statistically significant after controlling for the effects of context and teaching process. Qualitative results reinforce the above findings, suggesting that learning engagement depends less on students’ individual AI competences than on how instructors design AI-enabled tasks and the consistency of organizational regulations in guiding AI use. The study contributes to existing scholarship by showing that student engagement in AI-enabled English learning is a systemic outcome, determined primarily by pedagogical and contextual mechanisms. At the same time, the study proposes managerial recommendations to strengthen AI governance, enhance instructor capacity, and support learners in higher education in the Asia-Pacific region.

View file

Keywords:

Artificial intelligence in education

Student engagement

English language learning

educational management

CIPO framework

Refers:

[1] Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. (2023). Challenges, opportunities and trends of digitalization in education in the Asia-Pacific region. APEC Secretariat.

[2] Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Buntins, K., Kerres, M., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2020). Facilitating student engagement in higher education through educational technology: A narrative systematic review in the field of education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 20(2), 315–368.

[3] Bond, M., Khosravi, H., De Laat, M., Bergamin, P., Conijn, R., Kaasalainen, J., Missipuikun, P., & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2024). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education: A call for increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(4), Article 4.

[4] Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

[5] Bui, T. T., & Nguyen, M. T. (2024). The influence of artificial intelligence in education on the quality of higher education: A systematic review [Nghiên cứu ảnh hưởng của trí tuệ nhân tạo trong giáo dục tới chất lượng đào tạo đại học: Tổng quan hệ thống]. Journal of Education, 24(5), 1–10.

[6] Cung, L. T., Hoang, U. P. T., Dinh, A. N., & Bui, T. H. (2025). University students’ perceptions of AI application in writing skills in Vietnam: A systematic review. Vietnam Journal of Education, 9(2), 325–334.

[7] Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

[8] Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

[9] Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning EMEA.

[10] Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Centre for Curriculum Redesign.

[11] Huang, X., Wu, Y., & Dou, A. (2024). AI-enhanced task based language teaching: Fostering personalised college English learning. Frontiers in Educational Research, 7(10), 204–209.

[12] Nguyen, D. T. (2017). Quality system implementation procedures based on the CIPO approach in managing training equipment at technical universities in the military [Quy trình triển khai hệ thống chất lượng theo tiếp cận CIPO trong quản lý thiết bị đào tạo của các trường đại học kỹ thuật trong quân đội]. Vietnam Journal of Education, 419, 62–64.

[13] Nguyen, N. T. (2018). Applying the CIPO model to innovate school–enterprise cooperation management to meet labour market demands [Vận dụng mô hình CIPO để đổi mới trong quản lý hợp tác giữa nhà trường và doanh nghiệp nhằm đáp ứng yêu cầu thị trường lao động]. Vietnam Journal of Education, 429, 11–15.

[14] Nguyen, T. T. H. (2023). EFL teachers’ perspectives toward the use of ChatGPT in writing classes: A case study at Van Lang University. International Journal of Language Instruction, 2(3).

[15] Pham, T. T. H. (2024). Artificial intelligence and digital transformation in Vietnamese education [Trí tuệ nhân tạo và chuyển đổi số trong giáo dục Việt Nam]. Journal of Educational Equipment: Education Management, 312(1), 22–23.

[16] Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https:// doi.org/10.2760/159770

[17] Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225–236.

[18] Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

[19] Schaufeli, W. B., Martínez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464–481.

[20] Scheerens, J. (1990). School effectiveness and the development of process indicators of school functioning. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(1), 61–80.

[21] Scheerens, J. (2016). Educational effectiveness and ineffectiveness: A critical review of the knowledge base. Springer.

[22] Scheerens, J., & Glas, C. (2006). Educational evaluation, assessment, and monitoring: A systematic approach. Taylor & Francis.

[23] Tran, B. H. (2009). Educational quality management: A CIPO approach [Quản lý chất lượng giáo dục: Tiếp cận hệ thống CIPO]. Vietnam Education Publishing House.

[24] UNESCO. (2017). Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments. UNESCO Publishing.

[25] UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO Publishing.

[26] Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., Carretero, S., & Van den Brande, L. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens. Publications Office of the European Union.

[27] Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), Article 39.

Journal:

Volume. 22 - issue 2 / 2026

VIETNAM JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

Managing Student Engagement in AI-supported English Learning: A CIPO Analysis at a Vietnamese University