Effects of Teacher vs. Grammarly Feedback on Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Skill
محورهای موضوعی : Research Paper
Hoda Sistani
1
(
English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
)
Omid Tabatabaei
2
(
English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
)
کلید واژه: second language writing, L2 learners, Automated writing feedback, Grammarly,
چکیده مقاله :
Among four language skills, the task of writing is one of the most complex and demanding cognitive processes. Also, feedback is necessary for teachers during their careers to improve their students ‘self-confidence. So, the present study aimed to explore the impact of feedback provided by Grammarly Software compared to teachers’ feedback on the writing ability of Iranian EFL learners. Through the nonrandom sampling method, 60 intermediate male and female EFL learners were selected, then they were randomly assigned to two main groups: the experimental and control group. In ten sessions, the participants were administered the Oxford Placement Test (OQPT), Pretest of Essay Writing, the Grammarly software program, a Posttest of Essay Writing, and an attitude questionnaire. The data gathered from the comparison of the pretest and posttest revealed that the experimental group members outperformed those in the control group, meaning that the Grammarly software program positively affected the EFL learners' writing ability. The results might have implications for language teachers, learners, and materials developers.
Benali, A. (2021). The Impact of Using Automated Writing Feedback in ESL/EFL Classroom Contexts. English Language Teaching, 14(12), 189-195.
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D.R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. New York, NY, Routledge.
Brown, H. D. (2002). Strategies for Success. A Practical Guide to Learning English.Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., a Pearson Education Company, Order Processing Center, PO box 11071, Des Moines, IA 50336.
Chang, T. S., Li, Y., Huang, H. W., & Whitfield, B. (2021, March). Exploring EFL Students' Writing Performance and Their Acceptance of AI-based Automated Writing Feedback. In 2021 2nd International Conference on Education Development and Studies (pp. 31-35).
Chang, T. S., Li, Y., Huang, H. W., & Whitfield, B. (2021, March). Exploring EFL Students' Writing Performance and Their Acceptance of AI-based Automated Writing Feedback. In 2021 2nd International Conference on Education Development and Studies (pp. 31-35).
Chen, C. F. E., & Cheng, W. Y. E. C. (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.
Daniels, P., & Leslie, D. (2013). Grammar software ready for EFL writers. OnCueJournal, 9(4), 391-401.
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.
Fahmi, M. A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18-25.
Fitria, T. N. (2021). QuillBot as an online tool. Students’ alternative in paraphrasing and rewriting of English writing. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 9(1), 183-196.
Ghufron, M. A., & Rosyida, F. (2018). The role of Grammarly in assessing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. Lingua Cultura, 12(4), 395-403. Grammarly. Retrieved November 21, 2021, from Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammarly
Goldstein, L. M. (2005). Teacher written commentary in second language writing classrooms. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press.
Hidayatun, M., Nurfaidah, S., Humaera, I., & Gazaly, M. (2021). Students’ Metalinguistic Awareness in L2 Writing. The Case of Grammarly-Mediated Feedback. Al-TA'DIB: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Kependidikan, 14(2), 128-137.
Hirvela, A. (2005). Computer-based reading and writing across the curriculum. Two case studies of L2 writers. Computers and Composition, 22, 337–356.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing.Feedback in second language writing. Contexts and issues,56(7), 1-19.
Lailika, H. I. (2019). Students' perceptions of the use of Grammarly as an online grammar checker in thesis writing. Surabaya, Digilib UIN Sunan Ampel.
Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
Perdana, I., Manullang, S. O., & Masri, F. A. Effectiveness of Online Grammarly Application in Improving Academic Writing. Review of Experts Experience.
Qassemzadeh, A., & Soleimani, H., (2016). The impact of feedback provision by Grammarly software and teachers on learning passive structures by Iranian EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(9), 1884-1894.
Ranalli, J. (2018). Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), 653-674.
Saddler, B., Moran, S., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2004). Preventing writing difficulties: The effects of planning strategy instruction on the writing performance of struggling writers. Exceptionality, 12(1), 3-17.
Sheen, Y. (2010a). The role of oral and written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly 41, 255-83
Stevenson, M., & Phakiti, A. (2014). The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing. Assessing Writing, 19(3), 51-65.
Stevenson, M., & Phakiti, A. (2019). Automated feedback and second language writing. In K. Hyland, & F. Hyland (Eds.). Feedback in second language writing. Contexts and issues (pp. 125-142). (2nd ed.). New York, NY, Cambridge University Press.
Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and composition, 21(2), 217-235.
Wang, Y. J., Shang, H. F., & Briody, P. (2013). Exploring the impact of using automated writing evaluation in English as a foreign language university students' writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 234-257.
Wang, S. & Li, R. (2020). An empirical study on the impact of an automated writing assessment on Chinese college students’ English writing proficiency. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 7(5), 218-229.
Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language teaching research, 10(2), 157-180.
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge University Press.
Woodworth, J., & Barkaoui, K. (2020). Perspectives on Using Automated Writing Evaluation Systems to Provide Written Corrective Feedback in the ESL Classroom. TESL Canada Journal, 37(2), 234-247.
