ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
While being very important and useful, in certain English as a foreign language (EFL) setting the act of providing feedback on writing constructs considered to be time-consuming that can lack meaning and focus, especially if not done well. In this regard, the development and use of automated writing evaluation (AWE) software is anticipated to assist EFL learners to improve writing skills through feedback as well as helping teachers by saving time and effort and supporting their writing instruction. This paper examines the influence of automated feedback (through the use of Criterion) with the process approach on the improvement of EFL learners’ writing performance specifically in relation to content/idea development and organization. The study employed a quasi-experimental research design with pre- and post-tests as well as the intervention which is the exposure to and use of automated writing evaluation (AWE) software with the process approach. Twenty-six Iraqi third year undergraduate students from the College of Education for Women at Baghdad University were assigned to receive automated feedback on their essays from the Criterion online writing evaluation system. Another 26 undergraduate students were assigned as a control group that received feedback from their writing instructor on their essays regarding content/idea development traditionally. According to the findings of the study, the incorporation of AWE software with process approach has a significant impact on students’ academic writing in term of improve content/idea development and organization. The experimental group outperformed the control group in their post-test results. This suggests that incorporating of process approach with AWE software was valuable in improving writing skills in term of content and organization. Each step of cognitive writing processes had overcome the barriers experienced by Iraqi EFL learners. They (Iraqi EFL learners) benefitted from Criterion features of planning ideas to develop essay content and reorganize them effectively. This suggested that incorporating automated feedback with process approach have great benefit in fostering academic writing improvement. Some pedagogical implications were highlighted.
Aluthman, E. S. (2016). The effect of using automated essay evaluation on ESL undergraduate students’ writing skill. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6(5), 54–67.
Burstein, J., Chodorow, M., & Leacock, C. (2004). Automated essay evaluation: The Criterion online writing service. Ai Magazine, 25(3), 27–27.
Casal, J. E. (2016). Criterion online writing evaluation. Calico Journal, 33(1), 146–155.
Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37–55). Sage Publications, Inc.
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267–296.?
Chen, H. H. J., Chiu, S. T. L., & Liao, P. (2009). Analyzing the grammar feedback of two automated writing evaluation systems: My Access and Criterion. English Teaching & Learning, 33(2).
Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Scaffolding EFL students' writing through the writing process approach. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(13), 131–141.
Gabrielatos, C. (2002). EFL writing: Product and process.
Ghozali, I., & Fuad. (2005). Structural equation modeling. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Hair, J. F., Ortinau, D. J., & Harrison, D. E. (2010). Essentials of marketing research (Vol. 2). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Hasan, M. K., & Akhand, M. M. (2010). Approaches to writing in EFL/ESL context: Balancing product and process in writing class at tertiary level. Journal of NELTA, 15(1-2), 77–88.
Hsiao, T., & Oxford, R. (2002). Comparing theories of language learning strategies: A confirmatory factor analysis. Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 368–383.
Hussin, S. N. L., & Aziz, A. A. (2022). Rethinking the teaching approaches of ESL/EFL writing skills.
Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (Eds.). (2019). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge University Press.?
Liu, M., Li, Y., Xu, W., & Liu, L. (2016). Automated essay feedback generation and its impact on revision. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10(4), 502–513.
Ruegg, R., & Sugiyama, Y. (2013). Organization of ideas in writing: What are raters sensitive to? Language Testing in Asia, 3(1), 1–13.
Shermis, M. D., & Burstein, J. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of automated essay evaluation: Current applications and new directions. Routledge.?
Wang, Z., & Han, F. (2022). The Effects of Teacher Feedback and Automated Feedback on Cognitive and Psychological Aspects of Foreign Language Writing: A Mixed-Methods Research. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 909802.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.909802
Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English language arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality. Computers & Education, 100, 94–109.
Zakaria, A. A. O. (2016). Writing and organizational strategies in the L2 written discourse of Sudanese EFL learners. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 42(1-2).
(Algburi et al., 2024)
Algburi, E., Razali, A. B., Nimehchisalem, V., & Ismail, L. (2024). Combination of AWE (Criterion) Feedback with the Process Approach and Its Impact on EFL Writing Content/Idea Development and Organization. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(1), 793–803.
Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode