Understanding the Effects of Automated Writing Corrective Feedback on L2 Writing Accuracy Across Proficiency Levels

doi:10.25236/fer.2021.041117

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 3 summarizes the key advantages and limitations of the reliability of AWE feedback discussed in the literature. AWE tools like Grammarly do not have the ability to detect and correct some logical or syntactic errors (Wang, 2021).…”

Section: Awe Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the study underscored the vital role of instructor strategies in implementing AWE and boosting student engagement and awareness of the system's accuracy and reliability. Wang (2021) examined the impact of AWE corrective feedback. Errors within a clause were counted as one, whereas repeated errors across clauses were seen as distinct.…”

Section: Awe Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Automated Writing Evaluation in EFL Contexts

Aldosemani,

Assalahi,

Lhothali

et al. 2023

International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the literature on AWE feedback, particularly its perceived impact on enhancing EFL student writing proficiency. Prior research highlighted the contribution of AWE in fostering learner autonomy and alleviating teacher workloads, with a substantial focus on student engagement with AWE feedback. This review strives to illuminate these facets and offer critical insights on AWE effectiveness, feedback quality, reliability, and usefulness. Guided by the research questions, 16 studies were selected, adopting specific inclusion criteria to assess the effectiveness of AWE in enhancing EFL learner writing performance. Recommendations and implications from the reviewed articles regarding AWE implementation were synthesized and discussed. The review concludes that AWE can improve EFL student writing skills, with varying effectiveness based on student proficiency levels. AWE provides quality feedback and can be a reliable and valuable tool. However, despite its effectiveness, human intervention is essential to maximize its outcomes and mitigate limitations.

show abstract

Section: Awe Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Awe Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Automated Writing Evaluation in EFL Contexts

Aldosemani,

Assalahi,

Lhothali

et al. 2023

International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, a study by Link, Mehrzad, and Rahimi (2020) examined the impact of automated writing evaluation on the teacher's feedback, as well as on the students' revision, and writing improvement. Similarly, Ranalli (2018) and Shiyao (2021) explored the effect of using automated written corrective feedback on students' writing. Other studies have compared between automated corrective feedback and feedback provided by either peers or teachers (Luo & Liu, 2017;Shang, 2019;Tursina, Susanty, and Efendi, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the Use of Automated Written Corrective Feedback to Improve Undergraduate Efl Students’ Writing Performance

Nugroho

Benecia

2022

kolita

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on automated written corrective feedback have shown how it can help improve students’ overall writing performance. Nonetheless, it has also been found that the improvement is not always significant, especially when compared to traditional feedback provided by the teachers. Considering that there have been contradicting results regarding the effectiveness of automated written corrective feedback in improving learners’ writing, this study is aimed at exploring how Grammarly affects undergraduate EFL students’ writing performance, more specifically their grammar, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and vocabulary. This research employs an experimental design as it seeks to examine the effectiveness of utilizing Grammarly in improving students’ writing. The respondents for the current study are second-semester students of the English Department at Bunda Mulia University. They have been selected for this research as they are all currently taking the Writing 1 subject and their overall English writing proficiency range from novice to intermediate, meaning that most of them still tend to make some grammatical, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and vocabulary errors in their writing. The students are divided into two groups, namely the control group, in which the students receive feedback from the lecturer, and the experimental group, in which Grammarly is employed. The paired samples T-test is used to analyze the result of the pretest and posttest from both groups and the data is calculated using the SPSS version 23 software. The result of both groups is compared to find out whether Grammarly is more effective in comparison to the traditional feedback given by the lecturer. In addition, the students are asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding their perception of the feedback from Grammarly and their lecturer. The result of the questionnaire for both types of feedback is also compared to see which of the two are considered more beneficial for them. The findings of the study reveal that between the feedback provided by the lecturer and the feedback from Grammarly, the latter is more effective in improving the students’ writing. In addition, the students from both groups generally have a positive view of the necessity of the feedback and feel that they are more or less able to improve their writing after receiving the feedback, either from the lecturer or from Grammarly.

show abstract