Computer or human: a comparative study of automated evaluation scoring and instructors' feedback on Chinese college students' English writing

被引:10
作者
Chen, Huimei [1 ,2 ]
Pan, Jie [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] No Arizona Univ, Coll Educ, Flagstaff, AZ 86011 USA
[2] Shanghai Normal Univ Tianhua Coll, Shanghai, Peoples R China
关键词
EFL writing; AES system; Human rater; Higher education; WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK; REVISITING TEACHER FEEDBACK; FOREIGN-LANGUAGE; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1186/s40862-022-00171-4
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The role of internet technology in higher education and particularly in teaching English as a Foreign language is increasingly prominent because of the interest in the ways in which technology can be applied to support students. The automated evaluation scoring system is a typical demonstration of the application of network technology in the teaching of English writing. Many writing scoring platforms have been developed and used in China, which can provide online instant and corrective feedback on students' writing. However, the validity of Aim Writing, a product developed by Microsoft Research Asia, which claims to be the best tool to facilitate Chinese EFL learners, has not been tested in previous studies. In this mixed methods study, the feedback and effect of Aim Writing on college students' writing will be investigated and compared to the instructor's feedback. The results indicate that Aim Writing's performance is insufficient to support all students' needs for writing and that colleges should encourage a hybrid model that contains both AES and instructor's feedback in writing.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 77 条
[1]  
Agbayahoun J.P., 2016, Theory Practice in Language Studies, V6, DOI [10.17507/tpls.0610.01, DOI 10.17507/TPLS.0610.01]
[2]   Exploring the impact of teacher feedback modes and features on students' text revisions in writing [J].
Alharbi, Mohammed Abdullah .
ASSESSING WRITING, 2022, 52
[3]   Exploring the potential of Google Doc in facilitating innovative teaching and learning practices in an EFL writing course [J].
Alharbi, Mohammed Abdullah .
INNOVATION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING AND TEACHING, 2020, 14 (03) :227-242
[4]   An error-analysis study from an EFL writing context: Human and Automated Essay Scoring Approaches [J].
Almusharraf, Norah ;
Alotaibi, Hind .
TECHNOLOGY KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING, 2023, 28 (03) :1015-1031
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2016, English Language Teaching, DOI 10.5539/elt.v9n9p36
[6]  
Basey J.M., 2014, International Journal For The Scholarship Of Teaching Learning, V8, P1, DOI DOI 10.20429/IJSOTL.2014.080215
[7]  
Burstein J., 2006, J TECHNOLOGY LEARNIN, V4, P1, DOI 10.1002/j.2333-8504.2004.tb01972.x
[8]  
Chen Ai-Hua, 2022, English Language Teaching, V15, P29
[9]  
Chen CFE, 2008, LANG LEARN TECHNOL, V12, P94
[10]   Technology-supported peer feedback in ESL/EFL writing classes: a research synthesis [J].
Chen, Tsuiping .
COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING, 2016, 29 (02) :365-397