Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:15:01.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Automated Feedback and Second Language Writing

from Section 2: - Shaping Feedback: Delivery and Focus Dimensions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2019

By
Marie Stevenson  and
Aek Phakiti
Edited by
Ken Hyland  and
Fiona Hyland
Ken Hyland
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Fiona Hyland
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Feedback in Second Language Writing
Contexts and Issues
 , pp. 125 - 142
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aluthman, E. (2016). The effects of using automated essay evaluation on ESL undergraduate students’ writing skills. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6(5), 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Attali, Y., Bridgeman, B., & Trapani, C. (2010). Performance of a generic approach in automated essay scoring. Journal of Technology, Learning & Assessment, 10. Available at: http://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/jtla/article/view/1603/1455.Google Scholar
Bai, L. & Hu, G. (2017). In the face of fallible feedback: How do students respond? Educational Psychology, 37(1), 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balfour, S. P. (2013). Assessing writing in MOOCS: Automated essay scoring and calibrated peer review, Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 40–8.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Nekrasova, T., & Horn, B. (2011). The effectiveness of feedback for L1-English and L2-writing development: A meta-analysis. (ETS Research Report RR-11–05). Princeton, NJ: ETS.Google Scholar
Bridgeman, B., Tripani, C., & Attali, Y. (2012). Comparison of human and machine scoring of essays: Differences by gender, ethnicity, and country. Applied Measurement in Education, 25, 27–40.Google Scholar
Burstein, J., Tetreault, J., Chodorow, M., Blanchard, D., & Andreyev, S. (2013). Automated evaluation of discourse coherence quality in essay writing. In Shermis, M., & Burstein, J. (Eds.), Handbook of Automated Essay Evaluation: Current Applications and New Directions (pp. 267–80). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chang, T. H., Lee, C. H., & Chang, Y. M. (2016). Enhancing automatic Chinese essay scoring system from figures-of-speech. Proceedings of the 20th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, 28–34, Wuhan, China.Google Scholar
Chen, C. E. & Cheng, W. (2008). Beyond the design of automated writing evaluation: Pedagogical practices and perceived learning effectiveness in EFL writing classes. Language Learning and Technology, 12(2), 94–112.Google Scholar
Chen, J. F. (1997). Computer generated error feedback and writing process: A link [Electronic Version]. TESL-EJ, 2. Available at: http://tesl-ej.org/ej07/a1.html.Google Scholar
Choi, J. (2010). The Impact of Automated Essay Scoring (AES) for Improving English Language Learners’ Essay Writing. Doctoral dissertation. University of Virginia, 2010.Google Scholar
Deane, P. (2013). On the relation between automated essay scoring and modern views of the writing construct. Assessing Writing, 18, 7–24.Google Scholar
Dikli, S. (2007). Automated Essay Scoring in an ESL Setting. Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 2007.Google Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El Ebyary, K. & Windeatt, S. (2010). The impact of computer-based feedback on students’ written work. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 121–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, P. F. & Haswell, R. (Eds.). (2006). Machine Scoring of Student Essays: Truth and Consequences. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.Google Scholar
Frost, K. L. (2008). The Effects of Automated Essay Scoring as a High School Classroom Intervention. PhD dissertation. Las Vegas: University of Nevada.Google Scholar
Grimes, D. & Warschauer, M. (2010). Utility in a fallible tool: A multi-site case study of automated writing evaluation. Journal of Technology, Language, and Assessment, 8(6), 1–43.Google Scholar
Hagerman, C. (2011). An evaluation of automated writing assessment, JALT Call Journal, 7(3), 271–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoang, G. T. L. & Kunnan, A. J. (2016). Automated essay evaluation for English language learners: A case study of MY Access. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(4), 359–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoon, T. B. (2006). Online automated essay assessment: Potentials for writing development. Available at: http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw06/papers/refereed/tan3/paper.html [Accessed August 9, 2006].Google Scholar
Hsieh, Y., Hiew, C. K., & Tay, Y. X. (2017). Computer-mediated corrective feedback in Chinese as a second language writing: Learners’ perspective. In Zhang, D. & Lin, C. -H. (Eds.), Chinese as a Second Language Assessment (pp. 225–48). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39, 83–101.Google Scholar
Kellogg, R., Whiteford, A., & Quinlan, T. (2010). Does automated feedback help students learn to write? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42, 173–96.Google Scholar
Lee, C., Wong, K. C. K., Cheung, W. K., & Lee, F. S. L. (2009). Web-based essay critiquing system and EFL students’ writing: A quantitative and qualitative investigation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J., Link, S., & Hegelheimer, V. (2015). Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 27, 1–18.Google Scholar
Liao, H.C. (2015). Using automated writing evaluation to reduce grammar errors in writing, ELT Journal, 70(3), 308–19.Google Scholar
Liu, S. & Kunnan, A. J. (2016). Investigating the application of automated writing evaluation to Chinese undergraduate English majors: A case study of WriteToLearn. CALICO Journal, 33(1), 71–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, A. & Li, Z. (2016). Exploring EFL learners’ lexical application in AWE-based writing. In Papadima-Sophocleous, S., Bradley, L., & Thouësny, S. (Eds.), CALL Communities and Culture – Short Papers from EUROCALL 2016 (pp. 295–301).Google Scholar
Luo, Y. & Liu, Y. (2017). Comparison between peer feedback and automated feedback in college English writing: A case study. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 7, 197–215Google Scholar
Matsumoto, K. & Akahori, K. (2008). Evaluation of the use of automated writing assessment software. In Bonk, C., et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2008 (pp. 1827–32). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
Roscoe, R. D., Brandon, R. D., Snow, D. L., & MacNamara, D. S. (2014). Game-based writing strategy practice with the Writing Pal. In Pytash, K. E. & Ferdig, R. E. (Eds.), Exploring Technology for Writing and Writing Instruction (pp. 1–20). Information Science Reference: USA.Google Scholar
Schramma, E. & Srinivasan, V. (2015–16). WritingAssistant comprehensive automated feedback, EnglishHelper, Inc.Google Scholar
Shermis, M. D. (2014). State-of-the-art automated essay scoring: Competition, results, and future directions from a United States demonstration. Assessing Writing, 20, 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, M. (2016). A critical interpretative synthesis: The integration of automated writing evaluation into classroom writing instruction. Computers and Composition, 42, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, M. & Phakiti, A. (2014). The effects of computer-generated feedback on the quality of writing. Assessing Writing, 19, 51–65.Google Scholar
Vojak, C., Kline, S., Cope, B., McCarthey, S., & Kalantzis, M. (2011). New spaces and old places: An analysis of writing assessment software. Computers and Composition, 28, 97–111.Google Scholar
Wang, F. & Wang, S. (2012). A comparative study on the influence of automated evaluation system and teacher grading on students’ English writing. Procedia Engineering, 29, 993–7.Google Scholar
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), 234–57.Google Scholar
Warden, C. A. (2000). EFL business writing behavior in differing feedback environments. Language Learning, 50(4), 573–616.Google Scholar
Warden, C. A. & Chen, J. F. (1995). Improving feedback while decreasing teacher burden in ROC ESL business English classes. In Porythiaux, P., Boswood, T., & Babcock, B. (Eds.), Explorations in English for Professional Communications (pp. 125–37). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Warschauer, M. & Grimes, D. (2008). Automated writing assessment in the classroom. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 3, 22–36.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality, Computers and Education, 100, 94–109.Google Scholar
Wilson, J., Olinghouse, N. G., & Andrada, G. N. (2014). Does automated feedback improve writing quality?, Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 21(1), 93–118.Google Scholar
Yao, Y. C. & Warden, C. A. (1996). Process writing and computer correction: Happy wedding or shotgun marriage? [Electronic Version]. CALL Electronic Journal from Available at http://www.lerc.ritsumei.ac.jp/callej/1-1/Warden1.html.Google Scholar
Yu, B. -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), 808–13.Google Scholar
Yubing, Q. (2016). Pigai smart essay scoring system and its implications for teaching English writing, Journal of Applied Science and Engineering Innovation, 3(6), 217–19.Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. V. & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×