NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Laws, Policies, & Programs
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Showing 1 to 15 of 158 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Jussi S. Jauhiainen; Agustin Bernardo Garagorry Guerra – Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 2025
Aim/Purpose: This article investigates the process of identifying and correcting hallucinations in ChatGPT-4's recall of student-written responses as well as its evaluation of these responses, and provision of feedback. Effective prompting is examined to enhance the pre-evaluation, evaluation, and post-evaluation stages. Background: Advanced Large…
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Student Evaluation, Writing Evaluation, Feedback (Response)
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Jens Roeser; Sven De Maeyer; Mariëlle Leijten; Luuk Van Waes – Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2024
To writing anything on a keyboard at all requires us to know first what to type, then to activate motor programmes for finger movements, and execute these. An interruption in the information flow at any of these stages leads to disfluencies. To capture this combination of fluent typing and typing hesitations, researchers calculate different…
Descriptors: Keyboarding (Data Entry), Bayesian Statistics, Writing (Composition), Writing Evaluation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
PDF on ERIC Download full text
Aranzazu Bea Reyes; Carmen Rodríguez-Gonzalo – Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 2025
The importance of revision has been recognised by numerous scholars of the teaching and learning of writing (Abad & Rodríguez-Gonzalo, 2023; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987; Camps, 2020; Horning & Becker, 2006), especially if it is understood as a recursive and transversal phase that affects all levels of language (Álvarez Angulo, 2011;…
Descriptors: College Students, Collaborative Writing, Revision (Written Composition), Error Correction
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Fiona Richards; Nigel Harwood – International Journal for Educational Integrity, 2024
This article presents a research-based stakeholder tool informed by a study of the various types of changes proofreaders may make when proofreading a student text. Whilst the tool can be used to advise higher education students, (non-)professional proofreaders/editors, English for Academic Purposes (EAP) lecturers, writing centre tutors, and…
Descriptors: Proofreading, Writing Evaluation, Revision (Written Composition), English for Academic Purposes
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Khaled ElEbyary; Ramy Shabara; Deena Boraie – Language Testing in Asia, 2024
Despite the plethora of studies on the role of noticing in second language learning, little is known about the role of AI-operated feedback in noticing errors and uptake "during" and "after" writing. To address this gap, this study primarily aimed to investigate the impact of feedback modes and timing on L2 students' noticing…
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Artificial Intelligence, Second Language Learning, English (Second Language)
Christopher Mah; Mei Tan; Lena Phalen; Alexa Sparks; Dorottya Demszky – Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University, 2025
Effective writing feedback is a powerful tool for enhancing student learning, encouraging revision, and increasing motivation and agency. Yet, teachers face many challenges that prevent them from consistently providing effective writing feedback. Recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (AI) have led educators and researchers to…
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Technology Uses in Education, Natural Language Processing, Writing Evaluation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
PDF on ERIC Download full text
Maria-Lourdes Lira-Gonzales; Hossein Nassaji; Kuok-Wa Chao Chao – Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 2025
An increasing number of studies have explored the effects of collaborative writing on written outcomes; however, few studies have examined the influence of collaborative processing of feedback. This study addresses this gap by focusing on learner engagement. While collaborative writing involves co-authoring a text, which requires negotiation and…
Descriptors: Written Language, Error Correction, Feedback (Response), Second Language Learning
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Hongzhi Yang; Chuan Gao; Hui-zhong Shen – Education and Information Technologies, 2024
Recently, artificial intelligence (AI)-programmed automated writing evaluation (AWE) has attracted increasing attention in language research. Using a small data set arising from an analysis of five Chinese university-level English as a foreign language (EFL) students' submissions, this paper examined in detail how EFL students interacted with the…
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Programming, Writing Evaluation, Computer Mediated Communication
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Bei Cai; Ziyu He; Hong Fu; Yang Zheng; Yanjie Song – IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2025
Much research has applied automated writing evaluation (AWE) systems to English writing instruction; however, understanding how students internalize and apply this feedback to reduce writing errors is difficult, largely due to the personal and private nature of this process. Therefore, this research utilized eye-tracking technology to explore the…
Descriptors: Undergraduate Students, Majors (Students), Writing (Composition), Writing Evaluation
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Karim Sadeghi; Maryam Esmaeeli – RELC Journal: A Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2024
Corrective feedback (CF) has long been a hot topic in language education circles and has received extensive research attention. However, there is still controversy over the effectiveness of CF use and error correction in language classes. To address this discrepancy, the current study probed the effectiveness of different CF types in improving…
Descriptors: Writing (Composition), Writing Evaluation, Feedback (Response), Accuracy
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Hailay Tesfay Gebremariam – SAGE Open, 2024
Although, written corrective feedback (hereafter referred to as CF) is applauded in many writing courses for fostering students' quality writing, its impact on grammatical accuracy in L2 students' writing remains a debated topic. Thus, this study looked into the effect of CF types on L2 students' grammatical accuracy in writing. To achieve this…
Descriptors: Outcomes of Education, Written Language, Feedback (Response), Error Correction
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
PDF on ERIC Download full text
Gabriel Michaud; Kim McDonough; Mariane Parent – Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 2025
This study examines the impact of written corrective feedback (WCF) timing on the collaborative writing process and writing accuracy development of adult learners of French as a second language. Forty-eight learners were divided into three groups to complete a collaborative writing task in pairs. The first group received immediate WCF via Google…
Descriptors: Time Factors (Learning), Written Language, Feedback (Response), Error Correction
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Mohammad Bagheri – Cogent Education, 2024
Task-based language teaching (TBLT) has occupied an important place in the field of language education; however, some of TBLT dimensions that pertain to the interaction between task design features, written corrective feedback (WCF), and learners' performance have not received adequate attention in past studies. To fill this gap, the current study…
Descriptors: Task Analysis, Second Language Instruction, English (Second Language), Error Correction
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
PDF on ERIC Download full text
Anne-Coleman Webre; Darrell Allen – TESOL in Context, 2025
Providing useful feedback on student writing is a challenging task, requiring an understanding of the specific language expectations in assignments teachers give students. Studies have shown that teachers are more likely to give corrective feedback on surface-level errors than attend to meaning-making linguistic resources. The question is how to…
Descriptors: Preservice Teachers, Preservice Teacher Education, Writing Evaluation, Feedback (Response)
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
PDF on ERIC Download full text
Falhasiri, Mohammad – Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 2021
An underexplored question, and one with potentially far-reaching implications for the practice of written corrective feedback (WCF), is whether to mark a wide range of errors (comprehensive feedback) or to focus on a few error types (focused feedback) in learners' L2 writing. Despite limited evidence, it is argued that comprehensive WCF is…
Descriptors: Writing Evaluation, Feedback (Response), Error Correction, Second Language Learning
Previous Page | Next Page »
Pages: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11