Assessing Writing最新文献

{"title":"The development of syntactic complexity in integrated writing: A focus on fine-grained measures","authors":"Seyyed Ehsan Golparvar ,&nbsp;J. Elliott Casal ,&nbsp;Hamideh Abolhasani","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100983","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100983","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Past studies on complexity development in L2 writing have largely examined syntactic complexity, measured by traditional length-based measures, in independent writing, rather than integrated writing. The present research adds to the literature by investigating the development of clausal and phrasal indices of syntactic complexity in two integrated writing tasks (graph writing and summary writing) via fine-grained measures. The participants wrote three graph-based essays in the first semester, and three summary writing essays in the second semester. The results of mixed-effects modeling demonstrated significant changes in both phrasal and clausal complexity and syntactic variety at the phrasal level, evidencing growth towards a more phrasal complex academic style. Task type also had a significant impact on these measures; higher values were generally found in summary writing responses. The results are discussed in light of previous literature as well as the characteristics of the source texts, and theoretical and methodological implications for writing complexity research are offered.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100983"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145218946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Linguistic predictors of L2 writing performance: Variations across genres","authors":"Weiwei Yang ,&nbsp;Sara T. Cushing ,&nbsp;Guoxing Yu","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100985","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100985","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigated how linguistic complexity (including lexical and syntactic complexity), accuracy, and fluency (CAF) predicted second language (L2) writing scores across four essay genres: narration, exposition, expo-argumentation and argumentation. Approximately 60 essays were collected on each of these genres on the same subject matter and were scored using a holistic rubric. Eight measures of complexity, accuracy and fluency were examined. Forward stepwise regression analysis based on Akaike Information Criterion Corrected (AICC) was conducted for each genre. The findings revealed a large amount of score variance explained by CAF: 61 % for the argumentative task and about 70 % for the other three tasks. Fluency was found to be a highly important score predictor for the narrative and expository tasks, while lexical sophistication was equally important or more important than fluency for the expo-argumentative and argumentative tasks. The regression model for the narrative task also differed from those for the expository, argumentative task types, regarding syntactic complexity predictors. Lexical diversity was generally less important in predicting scores than lexical sophistication. The implications of the findings for L2 writing scoring and automated essay scoring are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100985"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145219003","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Challenges and opportunities of automated essay scoring for low-proficient L2 English writers","authors":"Vanessa De Wilde ,&nbsp;Orphée De Clercq","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100982","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100982","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Assessing students’ writing can be a challenging activity. To make writing assessment more feasible, researchers have investigated the possibilities of automated essay scoring (AES). Most studies investigating AES have focused on L1 writing or intermediate to advanced L2 writing. In this study we explored the possibilities of using AES with low proficiency L2 English writers. We used a dataset which comprised writing samples from 3166 young L2 English learners who were at the very start of L2 English instruction. All tasks received a score assigned by humans.</div><div>For automated scoring we experimented with two machine learning methods. First, a feature-based approach for which the dataset was linguistically preprocessed using natural language processing tools. The second approach employed deep learning by fine-tuning various large language models. Because we were particularly interested in the influence of spelling errors, we also created a corrected, spell-checked version of our dataset.</div><div>Models trained on the uncorrected samples yield the best results. Especially the deep learning approach leads to a satisfying performance with a quadratic weighted kappa above .70. The model which was fine-tuned on an underlying Dutch large language model was superior, which might be linked to the low L2 English proficiency of the young L1 Dutch writers in our sample.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100982"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145105005","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Can generative AI figure out figurative language? The influence of idioms on essay scoring by ChatGPT, Gemini, and Deepseek","authors":"Enis Oğuz","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100981","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100981","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The developments in Generative AI technologies have paved the way for numerous innovations in different fields. Recently, Generative AI has been proposed as a competitor to AES systems in evaluating student essays. Considering the potential limitations of AI in processing idioms, this study assessed the scoring performances of Generative AI models for essays with and without idioms by incorporating insights from Corpus Linguistics and Computational Linguistics. Two equal essay lists were created from 348 student essays taken from a corpus: one with multiple idioms present in each essay and another with no idioms. Three Generative AI models (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Deepseek) were asked to score all essays in both lists three times, using the same rubric used by human raters. The results revealed excellent consistency for all models without any detectable bias for any demographic group, but Gemini outperformed its competitors in interrater reliability with human raters. For essays with idioms, Gemini followed the most similar pattern to human raters. While models in the study demonstrated capability for a hybrid approach in formative assessments, Gemini was the best candidate due to its ability to handle figurative language and its potential for handling essay-scoring tasks in high-stakes exams in the future.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100981"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145004300","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Growth mindset and writing engagement: The roles of motivation regulation and engagement with teacher’s written corrective feedback","authors":"Mahdieh Darvari ,&nbsp;S. Yahya Hejazi ,&nbsp;Majid Sadoughi","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100980","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100980","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Although engagement is widely recognized as a key and desirable outcome in Foreign/Second Language (L2) education and has garnered increasing research attention, its skill-specific manifestation, particularly in areas such as writing, remains underexplored. To address this gap, this study is among the first attempts to examine L2 writing engagement and its three potential predictors. To this end, motivated by Dweck’s (2017) mindsets theory and Lou and Noels’ (2019) language mindset meaning system, the present study investigated the link between growth L2 writing mindset, i.e., beliefs about improvability and changeability of L2 writing skills and abilities, and engagement by taking into account the parallel mediating roles of learners’ motivation regulation and engagement with teacher’s written corrective feedback (WCF). A total of 343 Iranian learners at intermediate proficiency level were selected through convenience sampling and responded to questionnaires. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) analyses indicated that growth writing mindset could positively predict engagement, and this link was mediated by learners’ motivation regulation and engagement with teacher’s WCF. Implications and suggestions for fostering growth mindset and promoting learners’ feedback engagement as well as motivation regulation are presented.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100980"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144867216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring the cross-lingual influence of linguistic complexity in second language writing assessment","authors":"Sara Geremia ,&nbsp;Thomas Gaillat ,&nbsp;Nicolas Ballier ,&nbsp;Andrew J. Simpkin","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100951","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100951","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper explores the influence of L1 on the linguistic complexity of English learners. It relies on features extracted from texts and modelled using a statistical learning framework. Linguistic complexity is assessed automatically in terms of proficiency levels across different L1. We investigate whether proficiency grading by humans matches clusters of learner writings based on the similarity of linguistic features. We then use complexity metrics to automatically assess proficiency levels in samples of writings of different L1s. We focus on variable importance to understand which features best discriminate between levels. Analytic clusters of linguistic complexity data do not map well to learning levels, which promises poorly for the relevance of using language complexity metrics for level prediction. However, assessing L1 influence on linguistic complexity through a multinomial logistic regression with elastic net regularisation shows significant results. The models predict the proficiency levels of students of different L1s.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100951"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144851982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Response time for English learners on large-scale writing assessments","authors":"Catherine Welch,&nbsp;Stephen Dunbar,&nbsp;Jeongmin Ji,&nbsp;Annette Vernon,&nbsp;Junhee Park","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100979","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100979","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The focus of this study is on the relationship between response time and performance for students completing an evidence-based writing assessment as part of a state’s accountability plan. Within an untimed testing administration, this study examined the difference in performance between English Learners and Non-English Learners across four different writing traits. The differences observed lead to recommendations for assessment administration and the appropriate allocation of testing time and teaching strategies for taking the assessment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100979"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144831002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Understanding the critical thinking experiences of L2 student writers engaged in linguistically supported peer feedback giving","authors":"Xiaodong Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100977","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100977","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Research has examined second-language (L2) student writers’ peer feedback giving (PFG) and the impact that PFG has on students’ critical thinking, namely their critical engagement with writing content. However, the use of PFG to support students’ critical thinking has often been limited by approaches that treat critical thinking as a purely cognitive process, making critical thinking inaccessible as a practice for students. To address this gap, this qualitative study, conducted in a writing course at a Chinese university, explores L2 student writers’ critical thinking processes during PFG, which was supported by systemic functional linguistics (SFL). The study aims to show whether and how SFL-supported PFG could provide a linguistically accessible gateway through which student writers can practice critical thinking in the context of L2 writing. This exploration is justified by existing research on the potential of PFG in supporting student writers’ critical thinking and research on SFL in transparently highlighting language resources (lexicon and grammar) in constructing and deconstructing the content of discourse. Data sources included interviews with students, a written record of the students’ PFG, and their written reflections on PFG. Qualitative analyses reveal that with the support of SFL knowledge, student evaluators gradually developed the ability to understand language resources as an accessible gateway to unpacking the meaning making of writing content. The knowledge enabled them to practice critical thinking by analyzing and evaluating the subtleties of meaning making in their peers’ writing during feedback sessions, and connecting gains from PFG to their own writing. However, it was noted that practicing critical thinking in this process was sensitive to student-internal and student-external factors in the process of PFG (e.g., insufficient knowledge of SFL, teacher support). This study concluded that overall, engaging in SFL supported by PFG provided student evaluators with an accessible channel for practicing and developing critical thinking in the context of L2 writing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100977"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144826361","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Lexical richness in young English learners’ writing: A focus on opinion and listen-write task types","authors":"Hakyung Sung ,&nbsp;Mikyung Kim Wolf ,&nbsp;Michael Suhan ,&nbsp;Kristopher Kyle","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100975","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100975","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Ample research has examined the linguistic characteristics of second language (L2) writing across proficiency scores, with a focus on lexical diversity, sophistication, and density as key dimensions of lexical richness. However, the applicability of these indices to young L2 learners’ writings, often characterized by limited vocabulary and constrained output in standardized writing tasks, remained underexplored. To address this gap, this study analyzed the lexical richness of young L2 learners’ written productions from two TOEFL Junior Writing tasks (Opinion and Listen-Write tasks), using 37 tailored indices of lexical diversity, sophistication, and density. The results indicated that the lexical characteristics of young L2 learners vary by task score and task type, particularly when assessed through indices such as lexical diversity (e.g., moving-average type-token ratio) and sophistication (e.g., n-gram strength of association). Nonetheless, incorporating additional measures, such as syntactic complexity or discourse features, may be essential for distinguishing young L2 learners at higher proficiency levels.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100975"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144781790","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of task repetition schedules and emotions on L2 writing performance profiles using latent transition analysis","authors":"Mahmoud Abdi Tabari ,&nbsp;Hansol Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100974","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100974","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study employed Latent Transition Analysis (LTA) to identify distinct L2 writing performance profiles based on CALF measures (Syntactic Complexity, Accuracy, Lexical Complexity, and Fluency) and to examine the influence of emotional states under varying task repetition schedules. Participants included 270 ESL undergraduates in a U.S. university writing course, and they were randomly assigned to long-spaced, short-spaced, or massed repetition schedules. Each completed a persuasive writing task, followed by a questionnaire measuring anxiety and enjoyment. Results indicated that learners initially displayed similar performance levels but ultimately formed two profiles: Lower Performance and Higher Performance. Those in the long-spaced group were more likely to belong to the Higher Performance Profile, characterized by higher CALF measures, particularly in syntactic complexity, accuracy, and lexical complexity. Among the predictors—three types of task repetition schedules (long-spaced, short-spaced, and massed repetitions) and two task-related emotions (enjoyment and anxiety)—perceived enjoyment emerged as the strongest predictor of being classified into the Higher Performance Profile. These findings emphasize the importance of utilizing a person-centered approach to explore individual differences in L2 writing trajectories and suggest that carefully designed task repetition schedules and attention to emotional states can enhance writing performance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"66 ","pages":"Article 100974"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144724442","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}