Which do students prefer to evaluate their essays: Peers or computer program

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate problems and potentials of new technologies in English writing education. The effectiveness of automated writing evaluation (AWE) (MY Access) and of peer evaluation (PE) was compared. Twenty-two English as a foreign language (EFL) learners in Taiwan participated in this study. They submitted their draft to MY Access, received feedback from this automated grading system and then made some revision. In addition to the AWE, they also had peer revision in writing class. Three issues, including how writers used the feedback from these two kinds of evaluation, what progress they made in writing and how they perceived these two kinds of evaluation, are discussed. Results showed that EFL learners in Taiwan generally opted for PE over AWE. These findings raise several relevant issues, including social learning, feedback strategies, computer anxiety and cultural impact.

The impact of computer-based feedback on students’ written work

“…However, the research into the use of AES/AWE applications paints a confusing picture, with some studies reporting favourable results (Coniam, 2009;Hutchison, 2007) while others report negative or mixed results (Lai 2010;Lee et al, 2009;Tuzi, 2004), with factors such as individual writing ability, the pedagogy adopted and the particular AES/AWE application influencing the results (Lee et al, 2009). For example, less trained writers faced difficulties in using revision tools (Kozna and Johnston, 1991); learners using My Access were dissatisfied with the grade the software awarded them, and with both the accuracy and clarity of feedback on content and the rhetorical aspects of their writing (Chen and Cheng, 2006).…”

“…Students rated the electronic feedback superior for "markscheme clarity, feedback legibility, information on deficient aspects, and identification of those parts of the work where the student did well", and the lecturers reported taking less time to mark when using the software. Lai (2010), however, investigated preferences among English as a foreign language (EFL) learners in Taiwan for computer-based using MY Access or peer feedback and found that although both forms were considered effective the learners tended to express a preference for peer feedback over computer feedback. Matsumara (2004) investigated the influence of computer-anxiety on the preferences of Japanese students for face-to-face teacher feedback, online teacher feedback, and peer feedback in EFL writing classes.…”

“…Research suggests that the extent to which student-writers believe that using AES enhances their writing skills is still unknown (Lai, 2010). Denton et al (2008) compared the reactions of students to handwritten and electronic feedback using Electronic Feedback software.…”

Comparison between Peer Feedback and Automated Feedback in College English Writing: A Case Study

“…Additionally, students can make progress in linguistic performance, writing competence and self-efficacy with the help of automated feedback (Yang, 2004;Zhou, 2013;Yang & Dai, 2015). Meanwhile researchers also discover weaknesses in automated feedback, for example, it may appear mechanical, inaccurate and repetitive, lessening students' active adoption (Lai, 2010;Wei, 2015;Morch et al, 2017). Although its efficacy needs more empirical studies, there is no denying that automated feedback has gaining momentum in L2 writing practice.…”

Ethical Implementation of an Automated Essay Scoring (AES) System: A Case Study of Student and Instructor Use, Satisfaction, and Perceptions of AES In a Business Law Course

“…Some students do not like the idea of a computer scoring their work. Lai (2010) found that students preferred their writing be evaluated by a peer rather than by an AES. Students often worry that an AES cannot understand novel ideas and concepts, or properly grade answers that were not part of its training (Landauer, Laham & Foltz, 2000).…”