The effect of AWE tools on the grammatical accuracy of EFL university students' argumentative essays
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to investigate the effect of using Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tools in comparison with traditional teacher feedback on the grammatical accuracy of argumentative essays written by Vietnamese English as a Foreign Language (EFL) university students. Sixty intermediate-level EFL university students in Vietnam were randomly assigned to either the experimental or the control group and received feedback on their writing using Grammarly or traditional teacher feedback, respectively, over an eight-week period. Grammatical accuracy was used as the dependent variable and was collected using a pretest–posttest research design and error frequency ratio per 100 words. An analysis of covariance was used to analyse the data, and the results showed a highly significant main effect of the feedback intervention on grammatical accuracy, F(1, 57) = 8691.83, p < .001, with the model accounting for 99.3% of the variance in posttest error rates (adjusted R² = .993). The results showed that the students in the experimental group using AWE tools had made significantly greater gains in grammatical accuracy in their writing in comparison with the students in the control group using traditional teacher feedback. Overall, the results of this study showed the transformative potential of using AWE tools in EFL writing instruction and the benefits of a hybrid model of teaching and learning.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The Research Studies in English Teaching and Learning (RSELTL) Journal adopts the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows for the free distribution and modification of the work, provided that the original author and source are credited. The CC BY 4.0 license is designed to promote the dissemination of scholarly work while protecting the rights of authors.
Author Rights
Under the CC BY 4.0 license, authors retain extensive rights to their work, including but not limited to:
-
Ownership of Copyright: Authors maintain copyright ownership of their work, permitting them to deposit their work in institutional repositories, share their work as they deem appropriate, and publish their work elsewhere, provided that the original publication in RSELTL Journal is properly cited.
-
Use and Distribution: Authors are entitled to unlimited use and distribution of their own work for educational and scholarly purposes, as long as the original work is properly cited.
-
Adaptation and Derivatives: Authors have the right to adapt, modify, or create derivatives of their work, provided that the original work is properly cited, and the modifications do not misrepresent the original work.
User Rights
In accordance with the CC BY 4.0 license, users (readers, scholars, and researchers) are granted the following rights:
-
Access and Distribution: Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles published in RSELTL Journal without seeking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as the original work and authorship are properly cited.
-
Creation of Derivative Works: Users may adapt or create derivative works from the RSELTL Journal articles, provided that the original work is properly cited, and the derivative work is distributed under the same CC BY 4.0 license.
Responsibilities and Restrictions
-
Attribution: Proper attribution must be given to the original author(s) and the RSELTL Journal, including provision of a link to the original work and indication if any changes were made.
-
No Additional Restrictions: Users must not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
-
Commercial Use: The CC BY 4.0 license permits commercial use of the works, as long as the original work and authorship are properly cited.
