Frontiers in Educational Research, 2021, 4(11); doi: 10.25236/FER.2021.041117.
The University of New South Wales Randwick, New South Wales, Australia NSW2052
Exploring the effects of automated writing evaluation (AWE) is essential for maximizing the potential of using technology for language learning. Notwithstanding the large amount of research centered on AWE, the differential effects of automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) on writing accuracy across various proficiency levels remain to be empirically clarified. This current study fills the void in the existing literature by taking a quantitative approach in exploring the efficacy of Grammarly on L2 writing accuracy with various language proficiency.
Automated Writing Corrective Feedback, Grammarly, L2 writing
Wang Shiyao. Understanding the Effects of Automated Writing Corrective Feedback on L2 Writing Accuracy Across Proficiency Levels. Frontiers in Educational Research (2021) Vol. 4, Issue 11: 94-98. https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2021.041117.
 Bai, L., & Hu, G. (2017). In the face of fallible AWE feedback: How to students respond? Educational Psychology, 37(1), 67–81. doi:10.1080/01443410.2016.1223275
 Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31(2), 193–214. doi:10.1093/applin/amp016
 Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D.R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York, NY: Routledge.
 Chen, C.-F.E., & Cheng, W.-Y.E. (2008). Beyond the design of automated writing evaluation: Pedagogical practices and perceived learning effectiveness in EFL writing classes. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 94–112.
 Dikli, S., & Bleyle, S. (2014). Automated essay scoring feedback for second language writers:How does it compare to instructor feedback?Assessing Writing, 22, 1–17. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2014.03.006
 Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1–11.
 Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2012). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009
 Frear, D. (2012). The effect of written corrective feedback and revision on intermediate Chinese learners’ acquisition of English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Auckland.
 Grammarly. (2021). Grammarly: Free online writing assistant. Retrieved February 15, 2021, from https://www.grammarly.com/
 Goldstein, L. (2006). Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables. In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contextual and issues (pp. 185–205). Cambridge University Press.
 Guo, Q., Feng, R., & Hua, Y. (2021). How effectively can EFL students use automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) in research writing? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–20
 Hartshorn, K. J. (2010). Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy? TESOL Quarterly, 44, 84-109. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2010.213781
 Havranek, G., & Cesnik, H. (2001). Factors affecting the success of corrective feedback. EUROSLA Yearbook, 1, 99–122
 Kim, S. (2010). Revising the revision process with Google Docs. In S. Kasten (Ed.), TESOL classroom practice series (pp. 171–177). Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications.
 Lai, Y.H. (2010). Which do students prefer to evaluate their essays: Peers or computer program. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 432–454. doi:10.1111/j.1467-85352009.00959.x.
 Lavolette, E., Polio, C., & Kahng, J. (2015). The accuracy of computer-assisted feedback and students’ responses to it. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2), 50–68.
 Lee, J., & Hegelheimer, V. (2012). A hybrid use of Criterion® and teacher feedback in process writing. Paper presented at the EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden.
 Li, J., Link, S., & Hegelheimer,V. (2015). Rethinkingthe role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 1–18.
 Lin, S. M., & Griffith, P. (2014). Impacts of online technology use in second language writing: A review of the literature. Reading Improvement, 51(3), 303–312.
 Loewen, S. (2012). The role of feedback. In S. Gass, & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledgehandbook of second language acquisition (pp. 24–41). New York: Routledge.
 Ranalli, J. (2018). Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), 653–674. doi:10.1080/09588221.2018.1428994
 Shintani, N., Ellis, R., & Suzuki, W. (2014). Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures. Language Learning, 64(1), 103–131.
 Van Beuningen, C. G., De Jong, N., & Kuiken, F. (2012). Evidence on the effectiveness of comprehensive error correction in second language writing. Language Learning, 62(1), 1–41.
 Wang, Y. J., Shang, H. F., & Briody, P. (2013). Exploring the impact of using automated writing evaluation in EFL university students’ writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 234–257.
 Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 157–180. doi:10.1191/1362168806lr190oa
 Weigle, S.C., & Malone, E. (2016). Assessment of English for academic purposes. In K. Hyland & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 608– 620).New York, NY: Routledge.
 Yu, B. (2015). Incorporation of automated writing evaluation software in language education: A case of evening university students’ self-regulated learning in Taiwan. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(11), 808–813. doi:10.7763/IJIET.2015. V5.616