中学后二语写作教师对Grammarly的使用和认知作为反馈的补充

IF 4.6 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Recall Pub Date : 2022-10-03 DOI:10.1017/S0958344022000179
Svetlana Koltovskaia
{"title":"中学后二语写作教师对Grammarly的使用和认知作为反馈的补充","authors":"Svetlana Koltovskaia","doi":"10.1017/S0958344022000179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although it has been suggested that automated writing evaluation (AWE) can liberate teachers’ time to focus more on higher-order concerns as it can take care of lower-order concerns, AWE’s impact on teachers’ feedback practice is underexplored. Additionally, scant literature exists on teachers’ perception of AWE when they use it to complement their feedback. This study explored how Grammarly shaped postsecondary L2 writing teachers’ feedback when it was used to complement teacher feedback as well as teachers’ perceptions of the tool. To understand Grammarly’s impact, teachers’ comments on 10 essays were analyzed. The teachers then had a semi-structured interview aimed at exploring their perceptions of Grammarly. The findings showed that teachers provided feedback both on global and local aspects of writing despite using Grammarly as a complement, and there was no division of labor such as that a teacher takes care of higher-order and Grammarly takes care of lower-order concerns. The findings also revealed factors that impacted teachers’ feedback, including teachers’ use of Grammarly reports, their attitudes toward automated feedback, as well as their beliefs about feedback and course objectives. Overall, of the six teachers, four were positive about Grammarly, while two were skeptical. The study provides implications on how to use Grammarly meaningfully as a complement to teacher feedback.","PeriodicalId":47046,"journal":{"name":"Recall","volume":"35 1","pages":"290 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Postsecondary L2 writing teachers’ use and perceptions of Grammarly as a complement to their feedback\",\"authors\":\"Svetlana Koltovskaia\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0958344022000179\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Although it has been suggested that automated writing evaluation (AWE) can liberate teachers’ time to focus more on higher-order concerns as it can take care of lower-order concerns, AWE’s impact on teachers’ feedback practice is underexplored. Additionally, scant literature exists on teachers’ perception of AWE when they use it to complement their feedback. This study explored how Grammarly shaped postsecondary L2 writing teachers’ feedback when it was used to complement teacher feedback as well as teachers’ perceptions of the tool. To understand Grammarly’s impact, teachers’ comments on 10 essays were analyzed. The teachers then had a semi-structured interview aimed at exploring their perceptions of Grammarly. The findings showed that teachers provided feedback both on global and local aspects of writing despite using Grammarly as a complement, and there was no division of labor such as that a teacher takes care of higher-order and Grammarly takes care of lower-order concerns. The findings also revealed factors that impacted teachers’ feedback, including teachers’ use of Grammarly reports, their attitudes toward automated feedback, as well as their beliefs about feedback and course objectives. Overall, of the six teachers, four were positive about Grammarly, while two were skeptical. The study provides implications on how to use Grammarly meaningfully as a complement to teacher feedback.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Recall\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"290 - 304\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Recall\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000179\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recall","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000179","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

虽然有人认为自动化写作评估(AWE)可以在照顾低阶问题的同时解放教师的时间,使其更多地关注高阶问题,但AWE对教师反馈实践的影响尚未得到充分探讨。此外,关于教师使用敬畏来补充反馈时对敬畏的看法的文献很少。本研究探讨了语法如何影响中学后二语写作教师的反馈,当它被用来补充教师反馈以及教师对该工具的看法时。为了了解Grammarly的影响,我们分析了教师对10篇文章的评论。然后,教师们进行了一次半结构化的访谈,目的是探索他们对语法的看法。研究结果表明,尽管使用Grammarly作为补充,但教师对写作的整体和局部方面都提供了反馈,并且没有教师负责高阶问题而Grammarly负责低阶问题的劳动分工。研究结果还揭示了影响教师反馈的因素,包括教师对Grammarly报告的使用,他们对自动反馈的态度,以及他们对反馈和课程目标的信念。总的来说,六位老师中,四位对语法持肯定态度,两位持怀疑态度。该研究为如何有效地使用语法作为对教师反馈的补充提供了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Postsecondary L2 writing teachers’ use and perceptions of Grammarly as a complement to their feedback
Abstract Although it has been suggested that automated writing evaluation (AWE) can liberate teachers’ time to focus more on higher-order concerns as it can take care of lower-order concerns, AWE’s impact on teachers’ feedback practice is underexplored. Additionally, scant literature exists on teachers’ perception of AWE when they use it to complement their feedback. This study explored how Grammarly shaped postsecondary L2 writing teachers’ feedback when it was used to complement teacher feedback as well as teachers’ perceptions of the tool. To understand Grammarly’s impact, teachers’ comments on 10 essays were analyzed. The teachers then had a semi-structured interview aimed at exploring their perceptions of Grammarly. The findings showed that teachers provided feedback both on global and local aspects of writing despite using Grammarly as a complement, and there was no division of labor such as that a teacher takes care of higher-order and Grammarly takes care of lower-order concerns. The findings also revealed factors that impacted teachers’ feedback, including teachers’ use of Grammarly reports, their attitudes toward automated feedback, as well as their beliefs about feedback and course objectives. Overall, of the six teachers, four were positive about Grammarly, while two were skeptical. The study provides implications on how to use Grammarly meaningfully as a complement to teacher feedback.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Recall
Recall Multiple-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.40%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信