Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction

Journal of Second Language Writing

Volumn 27, Issue , 2015, Pages 1-18

  Li, Jinrong ^a   Link, Stephanie ^b   Hegelheimer, Volker ^b  

^a GEORGIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

AWE; Corrective feedback; ESL writing; Mixed methods research

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919614880     PISSN: 10603743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Agresti A., Finlay B. Statistical methods for the social sciences 2009, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 4th ed.
2. Attali Y. Exploring the feedback and revision features of Criterion. Journal of Second Language Writing 2004, 14:191-205.
3. Bardovi-Harlig K., Bofman T. Attainment of syntactic and morphological acccuracy by advanced language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1989, 11:17-34.
4. Bitchener J., Ferris D.R. Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing 2012, Routledge, New York.
5. CCCC. (2006). Writing assessment: A position statement. Retrieved from . http://www.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/writingassessment.
6. Chen C.-F.E., Cheng W.-Y.E. Beyond the design of automated writing evaluation: Pedagogical practices and perceived learning effectiveness in EFL writing classes. Language Learning & Technology 2008, 12(2):94-112.
7. Cheville J. Automated scoring technologies and the rising influence of error. The English Journal 2004, 93(4):47-52. 10.2307/4128980.
8. Chodorow M., Gamon M., Tetreault J. The utility of article and preposition error correction systems for English language learners: Feedback and assessment. Language Testing 2010, 27:419-436.
9. Chung G.K.W.K., Baker E.L. Issues in the reliability and validity of automated scoring of constructed responses. Automated essay scoring: A cross-disciplinary perspective 2003, 23-40. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. M.D. Shermis, J.C. Burstein (Eds.).
10. Creswell J.W., Plano Clark V.L. Designing and conducting mixed methods research 2007, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
11. The Sage handbook of qualitative research 1994, Sage Publishing Company, Thousand Oaks, CA. N.K. Denzin, Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.).
12. ® scoring. Language Testing 2010, 27:317-334.
13. Ericsson P.F. The meaning of meaning: Is a paragraph more than an equation?. Machine scoring of student essays: Truth and consequences 2006, 28-37. Utah State University Press, Logan. P.F. Ericsson, R.H. Haswell (Eds.).
14. ETS. (2011). About the e-rater® Scoring Engine. Retrieved from . http://www.ets.org/erater/about/.
15. Ferris D.R. Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2010, 32:181-201.
16. Ferris D.R., Brown J., Liu H.S., Stine M.E.A. Responding to L2 students in college writing classes: Teacher perspectives. TESOL Quarterly 2011, 45:207-234. 10.5054/tq.2011.247706.
17. Ferris D.R., Roberts B. Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?. Journal of Second Language Writing 2001, 10:161-184.
18. Gass S.M. Second language vocabulary acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 1988, 9:92-106.
19. Gass S.M. Second and foreign language learning: Same, different or none of the above?. Second language acquisition 1990, 34-44. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, UK. B. VanPatten, J. Lee (Eds.).
20. Gass S.M. Grammar instruction, selective attention and learning. Foreign/second language pedagogy research 1991, 134-141. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, UK. R. Phillipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith, M. Swain (Eds.).
21. Grimes D., Warschauer M. Utility in a fallible tool: A multi-site case study of automated writing evaluation. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment 2010, 8(6):4-44.
22. Hartshorn K.J., Evans N.W., Merrill P.F., Sudweeks R.R., Strong-Krause D., Anderson N.J. Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy. TESOL Quarterly 2010, 44:84-109. 10.5054/tq.2010.213781.
23. Keith T.Z. Validity of automated essay scoring systems. Automated essay scoring: A cross-disciplinary perspective 2003, 147-167. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. M.D. Shermis, J.C. Burstein (Eds.).
24. Lai Y.H. Which do students prefer to evaluate their essays: Peers or computer program?. British Journal of Educational Technology 2009, 41:432-454.
25. Lee L. Focus-on-form through collaborative scaffolding in expert-to-novice online interaction. Language Learning & Technology 2008, 12(3):53-72.
26. Li Z., Link S., Ma H., Yang H., Hegelheimer V. The role of automated writing evaluation holistic scores in the ESL classroom. System 2014, 44:66-78.
27. Link S., Dursun A., Karakaya K., Hegelheimer V. Towards best practices for implementing automated writing evaluation. CALICO Journal 2014, 31(3).
28. Long M.H. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. Handbook of second language acquisition 1996, 413-468. Academic Press, New York. W.C. Ritchie, B.K. Bahtia (Eds.).
29. Long M.H., Inagaki S., Ortega L. The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modern Language Journal 1998, 82:357-371.
30. Lyster R. Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning 2001, 51:265-301.
31. Page E.B. Project Essay Grade: PEG. Automated essay scoring: A cross-disciplinary perspective 2003, 43-54. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey. M.D. Shermis, J.C. Burstein (Eds.).
32. Schmidt R.W. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 1990, 11:129-158.
33. Schmidt R. Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars and SLA. Implicit and explicit learning of languages 1994, 165-210. Academic Press, London. N. Ellis (Ed.).
34. Skehan P. Modeling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics 2009, 30:510-532.
35. Truscott J. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 1996, 46:327-369.
36. Truscott J. Some thoughts on Anthony Bruton's critique of the correction debate. System 2010, 38:329-335.
37. Truscott J., Hsu A.Y.-P. Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing 2008, 17:292-305.
38. Vantage Learning. (2006). Research summary: IntelliMetric™ scoring accuracy across genres and grade levels. Retrieved from . http://www.vantagelearning.com/docs/intellimetric/IM_ReseachSummary_IntelliMetric_Accuracy_Across_Genre_and_Grade_Levels.pdf.
39. Vantage Learning. (2007). MY Access! Efficacy Report. Retrieved from . http://www.vantagelearning.com/learning-center/research/.
40. Wang Y.-J., Shang H.-F., Briody P. Exploring the impact of using automated writing evaluation in English as a foreign language university students' writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning 2012, 26:234-257.
41. Ware P. Computer-generated feedback on student writing. TESOL Quarterly 2011, 45:769-774.
42. Warschauer M., Grimes D. Automated writing assessment in the classroom. Pedagogies: An International Journal 2008, 3:22-36.
43. Weigle S.C. Validation of automated scores of TOEFL iBT tasks against non-test indicators of writing ability. Language Testing 2010, 27:335-353.
44. Weir C.J. Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach 2005, Palgrave MacMillan, New York.
45. Wolfe-Quintero K., Inagaki S., Kim H.Y. Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy & complexity 1998, University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI.
46. Yilmaz Y., Yuksel D. Effects of communication mode and salience on recasts: A first exposure study. Language Teaching Research 2011, 15:457-477.