A Study on Teacher Feedback and AES Feedback in Chinese College students’ English Writings

Tong Guo
{"title":"A Study on Teacher Feedback and AES Feedback in Chinese College students’ English Writings","authors":"Tong Guo","doi":"10.22158/eltls.v5n5p81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Feedback holds significant importance in second language writing instruction, as evidenced by numerous studies indicating its direct or indirect impact on the quality of learners’ written work. Despite this recognition, there has been a dearth of comprehensive research concerning the distinct influences of teacher feedback and Automated Essay Scoring (AES) feedback on the writing quality of learners. Addressing this gap, the present study employs a mixed-method approach, integrating both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. By meticulously examining AES feedback, teacher feedback, writing revision logs, and conducting interviews, this investigation identifies noteworthy differentials in the multidimensional aspects of writing quality attributed to these two distinct feedback modalities. Primarily, within the realm of syntactic complexity, lexical richness, fluency, and accuracy, the cohort exposed to teacher feedback demonstrated notably superior performance relative to their AES feedback counterparts. Secondarily, an assessment of revised text quality revealed compelling insights. The ultimate version of the text, stemming from the AES feedback group’s iterative revisions, exhibited marked enhancements in terms of accuracy, total word count, and average word length. In contrast, the initial and final drafts of the teacher feedback group unveiled discernible disparities in vocabulary intricacy, accuracy, total word count, and average word length. Evidently, while the ultimate version did not witness a significant surge in average word length or total word count, it showcased heightened vocabulary sophistication and enhanced accuracy in relation to the initial draft. This study underscores the value of judiciously deploying these two categories of feedback within the landscape of writing instruction. The nuanced benefits of each feedback type can be strategically harnessed to suit distinct writing contexts, thereby augmenting the caliber of learners’ written compositions.","PeriodicalId":129739,"journal":{"name":"English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies","volume":"122 41","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22158/eltls.v5n5p81","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Feedback holds significant importance in second language writing instruction, as evidenced by numerous studies indicating its direct or indirect impact on the quality of learners’ written work. Despite this recognition, there has been a dearth of comprehensive research concerning the distinct influences of teacher feedback and Automated Essay Scoring (AES) feedback on the writing quality of learners. Addressing this gap, the present study employs a mixed-method approach, integrating both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. By meticulously examining AES feedback, teacher feedback, writing revision logs, and conducting interviews, this investigation identifies noteworthy differentials in the multidimensional aspects of writing quality attributed to these two distinct feedback modalities. Primarily, within the realm of syntactic complexity, lexical richness, fluency, and accuracy, the cohort exposed to teacher feedback demonstrated notably superior performance relative to their AES feedback counterparts. Secondarily, an assessment of revised text quality revealed compelling insights. The ultimate version of the text, stemming from the AES feedback group’s iterative revisions, exhibited marked enhancements in terms of accuracy, total word count, and average word length. In contrast, the initial and final drafts of the teacher feedback group unveiled discernible disparities in vocabulary intricacy, accuracy, total word count, and average word length. Evidently, while the ultimate version did not witness a significant surge in average word length or total word count, it showcased heightened vocabulary sophistication and enhanced accuracy in relation to the initial draft. This study underscores the value of judiciously deploying these two categories of feedback within the landscape of writing instruction. The nuanced benefits of each feedback type can be strategically harnessed to suit distinct writing contexts, thereby augmenting the caliber of learners’ written compositions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国大学生英语写作中的教师反馈和 AES 反馈研究
反馈在第二语言写作教学中具有重要意义,大量研究表明,反馈直接或间接地影响着学习者的写作质量。尽管认识到这一点,但关于教师反馈和自动作文评分(AES)反馈对学习者写作质量的不同影响的全面研究仍然缺乏。为了解决这一差距,本研究采用了一种混合方法,整合了定性和定量方法。通过仔细检查AES反馈、教师反馈、编写复习日志和进行访谈,本调查确定了这两种不同反馈方式在写作质量的多维方面的显著差异。首先,在句法复杂性、词汇丰富性、流畅性和准确性方面,接受教师反馈的学生表现出明显优于接受AES反馈的学生。其次,对修订文本质量的评估揭示了令人信服的见解。文本的最终版本,源于AES反馈组的反复修订,在准确性、总字数和平均字长方面表现出明显的增强。相比之下,教师反馈小组的初稿和终稿揭示了词汇复杂性、准确性、总字数和平均单词长度方面明显的差异。显然,虽然最终版本的平均字数和总字数并没有显著增加,但与初稿相比,它展示了更高的词汇复杂度和更高的准确性。这项研究强调了在写作教学中明智地部署这两类反馈的价值。每种反馈类型的微妙好处都可以策略性地利用,以适应不同的写作环境,从而提高学习者的写作水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Semantic Features of Noun-verb Metaphorical Compound verbs in Mandarin Chinese Educational Applications of ChatGPT: Ethical Challenges and Countermeasures The Effect of the Double Reduction Policy on the English Performance of Junior Middle School Students in Zengcheng, Guangdong Comparative Analysis of Evidentiality in Spoken and Written Academic Discourse A Study of Literary Translation from the Perspective of Discourse Translation: Taking Transient Days as an Example
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1