The impact of automated writing evaluation on English as a foreign language learners' writing self-efficacy, self-regulation, anxiety, and performance

IF 5.1 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Pub Date : 2024-05-19 DOI:10.1111/jcal.13004

Elif Sari, Turgay Han

{"title":"The impact of automated writing evaluation on English as a foreign language learners' writing self-efficacy, self-regulation, anxiety, and performance","authors":"Elif Sari, Turgay Han","doi":"10.1111/jcal.13004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>With the growing trend of integrating technology into teaching environments, using Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) in writing instruction has been extensively studied over the last two decades. The studies on AWE mostly investigated its impact on students' writing proficiencies and revealed conflicting results. However, very few studies have investigated how the use of AWE impacts learners' writing-specific psychological factors, such as self-efficacy, self-regulation, and anxiety, from an empirical perspective. Therefore, further experimental studies are needed in this regard.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed at examining how a combined automated-teacher feedback condition in which the students received automated feedback on their sentence-level errors alongside teacher feedback on content and organization impacted English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, anxiety, and writing performance, compared with a traditional teacher-only feedback condition.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The study utilized a quasi-experimental design in which two intact classes were randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups. During one semester (16 weeks), students in the experimental group received both automated and teacher feedback, referred to in this study as combined automated-teacher feedback. In contrast, students in the control group received only teacher feedback. Two scales, a questionnaire and a focus group interview, were used to obtain the data. The data were analysed using both quantitative and qualitative techniques.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results and Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The quantitative results demonstrated no statistically significant difference between the two types of feedback procedures in promoting the use of self-regulated writing strategies by the students. However, the use of combined automated-teacher feedback was found to be more effective than conventional teacher-only feedback in enhancing the students' writing self-efficacy and writing performance. The two different feedback processes were shown to be ineffective at helping the students' writing anxiety, however. The qualitative data also showed that students had favourable opinions of their experiences with receiving automated and teacher comments together.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Considering the findings of this study regarding the impact of combined automated-teacher feedback on students' writing self-efficacy and writing performance, as well as positive student perceptions, it is suggested that this feedback model is used as an alternative to teacher-only feedback in EFL writing instruction.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"40 5","pages":"2065-2080"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.13004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.13004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

With the growing trend of integrating technology into teaching environments, using Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) in writing instruction has been extensively studied over the last two decades. The studies on AWE mostly investigated its impact on students' writing proficiencies and revealed conflicting results. However, very few studies have investigated how the use of AWE impacts learners' writing-specific psychological factors, such as self-efficacy, self-regulation, and anxiety, from an empirical perspective. Therefore, further experimental studies are needed in this regard.

Objectives

This study aimed at examining how a combined automated-teacher feedback condition in which the students received automated feedback on their sentence-level errors alongside teacher feedback on content and organization impacted English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, anxiety, and writing performance, compared with a traditional teacher-only feedback condition.

Methods

The study utilized a quasi-experimental design in which two intact classes were randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups. During one semester (16 weeks), students in the experimental group received both automated and teacher feedback, referred to in this study as combined automated-teacher feedback. In contrast, students in the control group received only teacher feedback. Two scales, a questionnaire and a focus group interview, were used to obtain the data. The data were analysed using both quantitative and qualitative techniques.

Results and Conclusion

The quantitative results demonstrated no statistically significant difference between the two types of feedback procedures in promoting the use of self-regulated writing strategies by the students. However, the use of combined automated-teacher feedback was found to be more effective than conventional teacher-only feedback in enhancing the students' writing self-efficacy and writing performance. The two different feedback processes were shown to be ineffective at helping the students' writing anxiety, however. The qualitative data also showed that students had favourable opinions of their experiences with receiving automated and teacher comments together.

Implications

Considering the findings of this study regarding the impact of combined automated-teacher feedback on students' writing self-efficacy and writing performance, as well as positive student perceptions, it is suggested that this feedback model is used as an alternative to teacher-only feedback in EFL writing instruction.

查看原文本刊更多论文

自动写作评估对英语作为外语学习者写作自我效能感、自我调节、焦虑和成绩的影响

随着将技术融入教学环境的趋势日益明显，过去二十年来，人们对在写作教学中使用自动写作评价（AWE）进行了广泛的研究。关于 AWE 的研究大多是调查其对学生写作能力的影响，结果相互矛盾。然而，很少有研究从实证的角度调查了 AWE 的使用如何影响学习者的写作心理因素，如自我效能感、自我调节和焦虑等。本研究旨在考察自动反馈与教师反馈相结合的条件下，学生在获得句子层面错误的自动反馈的同时，教师在内容和组织方面的反馈与传统的纯教师反馈条件相比，如何影响英语作为外语（EFL）学生的自我效能感、自我调节、焦虑和写作成绩。本研究采用准实验设计，将两个完整的班级随机分配到实验组和对照组。在一个学期（16 周）的时间里，实验组的学生同时接受了自动反馈和教师反馈，本研究称之为自动反馈与教师反馈相结合。相比之下，对照组的学生只接受教师反馈。本研究采用问卷调查和焦点小组访谈两种方式获取数据。定量结果表明，在促进学生使用自我调节写作策略方面，两种反馈程序之间没有统计学意义上的显著差异。然而，在提高学生的写作自我效能感和写作成绩方面，自动反馈和教师反馈相结合的方法比传统的教师反馈更有效。然而，两种不同的反馈过程在帮助学生消除写作焦虑方面效果不佳。定性数据还显示，学生对同时接受自动反馈和教师评语的体验评价良好。考虑到本研究关于自动反馈与教师反馈相结合对学生写作自我效能感和写作成绩的影响，以及学生的积极看法，建议在 EFL 写作教学中使用这种反馈模式来替代单纯的教师反馈。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

9.70

自引率

6.00%

发文量

116

期刊介绍： The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope