Vietnam has a reputation for being a successful nation in preventing the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in 2020, with a lower number of illnesses than other ASEAN countries. However, to ensure that students are safe and informed about the coronavirus outbreak, Vietnamese higher education has developed online learning (OL). During the COVID-19 epidemic, this paper explores the relationship between elements such as learning readiness, learning strategies, and learning performance in the Vietnamese OL setting. Four hundred undergraduate students were randomly selected from Hong Duc universities, and Saigon University participated in this study in different zones. Analyzed data has applied structural equation modeling (SEM) using partial least squares (SmartPLS-SEM). The findings found that Vietnamese students were much more likely to believe in interaction in OL, to feel comfortable using a computer with their computer efficacy, and to have confidence in communicating in the digital environment, all of which were important variables in assuring the success of using OL. The factors of “motivation” and “test preparation” show a poor relationship with learning performance. Therefore, the OL process in Vietnamese, on the other hand, needs to be more inventive, with a greater focus on lecturers' awareness and practice of online teaching pedagogies such as motivation, techniques, and test arrangement. During OL, students' readiness in terms of learning control, self-directed learning, and engagement must be considered and supported.

This preliminary study examines how three generative AI tools, ChatGPT-4, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot, support B+ level English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in opinion essay writing. Conducted at a preparatory school in Türkiye, the study explored student use of the tools for brainstorming, outlining, and feedback across three essay tasks. A mixed methods design combined rubric-based evaluations, surveys, and reflections. Quantitative results showed no significant differences between tools for most criteria, indicating comparable performance in idea generation, essay structuring, and feedback. The only significant effect was in the feedback stage, where ChatGPT-4 scored higher than both Gemini and Copilot for actionability. In the brainstorming stage, a difference in argument relevance was observed across tools, but this was not statistically significant after post-hoc analysis. Qualitative findings revealed task-specific preferences: Gemini was favored for clarity and variety in brainstorming and outlining, ChatGPT-4 for detailed, clear, and actionable feedback, and Copilot for certain organizational strengths. While the tools performed similarly overall, perceptions varied by task and tool, highlighting the value of allowing flexible tool choice in EFL writing instruction.