Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 1 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 4 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 4 |
Descriptor
| Feedback (Response) | 4 |
| Grade 5 | 4 |
| Grade 6 | 4 |
| Revision (Written Composition) | 4 |
| Elementary School Students | 3 |
| Writing Evaluation | 3 |
| Automation | 2 |
| Computer Software | 2 |
| Essays | 2 |
| Evidence | 2 |
| Formative Evaluation | 2 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Grantee Submission | 4 |
Author
| Correnti, Richard | 2 |
| Litman, Diane | 2 |
| Afrin, Tazin | 1 |
| Correnti, R. | 1 |
| Diane Litman | 1 |
| Elaine Lin Wang | 1 |
| Haoran Zhang | 1 |
| Howe, E. | 1 |
| Howe, Emily | 1 |
| Lindsay Clare Matsumura | 1 |
| Litman, D. | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Publication Type
| Reports - Research | 3 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 2 |
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Reports - Descriptive | 1 |
Education Level
| Elementary Education | 4 |
| Grade 5 | 4 |
| Grade 6 | 4 |
| Intermediate Grades | 4 |
| Middle Schools | 4 |
Audience
Location
| Louisiana | 3 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewed
Download full text
Direct linkRichard Correnti; Lindsay Clare Matsumura; Elaine Lin Wang; Diane Litman; Haoran Zhang – Grantee Submission, 2022
Recent reviews of automated writing evaluation systems indicate lack of uniformity in the purpose, design, and assessment of such systems. Our work lies at the nexus of critical themes arising from these reviews. We describe our work on eRevise, an automated writing evaluation system focused on elementary students' text-based evidence-use. eRevise…
Descriptors: Writing Evaluation, Feedback (Response), Automation, Elementary School Students
Afrin, Tazin; Wang, Elaine; Litman, Diane; Matsumura, Lindsay C.; Correnti, Richard – Grantee Submission, 2020
Automated writing evaluation systems can improve students' writing insofar as students attend to the feedback provided and revise their essay drafts in ways aligned with such feedback. Existing research on revision of argumentative writing in such systems, however, has focused on the types of revisions students make (e.g., surface vs. content)…
Descriptors: Writing (Composition), Persuasive Discourse, Revision (Written Composition), Documentation
Wang, Elaine Lin; Matsumura, Lindsay Clare; Correnti, Richard; Litman, Diane; Zhang, Haoran; Howe, Emily; Magooda, Ahmed; Quintana, Rafael – Grantee Submission, 2020
We investigate students' implementation of the feedback messages they received in an automated writing evaluation system ("eRevise") that aims to improve students' use of text evidence in their writing. Seven 5th and 6th-grade teachers implemented "eRevise" (n = 143 students). Qualitative analysis of students' essays across…
Descriptors: Feedback (Response), Writing Evaluation, Computer Software, Grade 5
Zhang, H.; Magooda, A.; Litman, D.; Correnti, R.; Wang, E.; Matsumura, L. C.; Howe, E.; Quintana, R. – Grantee Submission, 2019
Writing a good essay typically involves students revising an initial paper draft after receiving feedback. We present eRevise, a web-based writing and revising environment that uses natural language processing features generated for rubric-based essay scoring to trigger formative feedback messages regarding students' use of evidence in…
Descriptors: Formative Evaluation, Essays, Writing (Composition), Revision (Written Composition)
