Pub Date : 2025-05-28DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100952
Fengkai Liu , Xiaofei Lu , Tan Jin
Research has shown that continuation writing assessment tasks place considerable demands on tester-takers’ vocabulary, especially in constructing coherent story plots and employing vivid language. Traditionally, learners have limited access to model continuations, and teacher feedback on vocabulary usage often falls short of guiding learners in selecting and using diverse words appropriate for specific contexts. To address these challenges, this paper introduces a ChatGPT-assisted platform designed to facilitate the learning of the meanings, functions, and usage of frequent core words in continuation writing assessment tasks. We further explore the pedagogical possibilities of this platform and discuss its limitations and implications for future research.
{"title":"Using ChatGPT to facilitate vocabulary learning in continuation writing assessment tasks","authors":"Fengkai Liu , Xiaofei Lu , Tan Jin","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100952","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100952","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Research has shown that continuation writing assessment tasks place considerable demands on tester-takers’ vocabulary, especially in constructing coherent story plots and employing vivid language. Traditionally, learners have limited access to model continuations, and teacher feedback on vocabulary usage often falls short of guiding learners in selecting and using diverse words appropriate for specific contexts. To address these challenges, this paper introduces a ChatGPT-assisted platform designed to facilitate the learning of the meanings, functions, and usage of frequent core words in continuation writing assessment tasks. We further explore the pedagogical possibilities of this platform and discuss its limitations and implications for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100952"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144166229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-12DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100939
Nicholas Glasson, Andrew Kitney
The notion of grammatical metaphor (GM) (Halliday, 1985) is essentially where a writer can shift an action or quality into being a ‘thing’. As in most senses of metaphor, the goal is to “represent something as something else” (McGrath & Liardét, 2023, p.33).
This study investigated the use of grammatical metaphor (GM) in Linguaskill writing exam responses across CEFR proficiency levels (below-B1 to C1 or above). It analysed the presence of a pre-existing GM list (see McGrath & Liardét, 2023) to explore GM frequency in L2 responses, the correlative relationship with proficiency scores and qualitatively explored candidate responses in terms of how GMs were used. Results show a moderate positive correlation between proficiency and GM use, with a dominance of process-to-thing shifts (e.g., transform→transformation) and emergence of GM use from lower to higher proficiency levels. This underscores GM's significance in crafting academically valued meanings in L2 contexts, suggesting its potential for informing instructional and assessment practices.
{"title":"Making things happen: A study of grammatical metaphors in L2 writing scripts","authors":"Nicholas Glasson, Andrew Kitney","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100939","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100939","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The notion of grammatical metaphor (GM) (Halliday, 1985) is essentially where a writer can shift an action or quality into being a ‘thing’. As in most senses of metaphor, the goal is to “represent something as something else” (McGrath & Liardét, 2023, p.33).</div><div>This study investigated the use of grammatical metaphor (GM) in Linguaskill writing exam responses across CEFR proficiency levels (below-B1 to C1 or above). It analysed the presence of a pre-existing GM list (see McGrath & Liardét, 2023) to explore GM frequency in L2 responses, the correlative relationship with proficiency scores and qualitatively explored candidate responses in terms of how GMs were used. Results show a moderate positive correlation between proficiency and GM use, with a dominance of process-to-thing shifts (e.g., transform→transformation) and emergence of GM use from lower to higher proficiency levels. This underscores GM's significance in crafting academically valued meanings in L2 contexts, suggesting its potential for informing instructional and assessment practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100939"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143937159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-08DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100947
Jia He , Jun Xia , Chun-mei Zhang , Jian-nan Liu
Peer review training is reported as an important scaffolding for students’ peer review practices in second language (L2) writing research, yet its effect on L2 learners’ cognitive engagement with peer feedback requires further exploration. This study examined the impact of ongoing peer review training on 45 Chinese EFL undergraduates’ cognitive engagement in peer reviews at a 12-week English public speaking and writing course. Drawing on multiple data, including reflective journals, written peer feedback and semi-structured retrospective interviews, this mixed-methods study found that students developed an enhanced awareness of deeper-level, content-related writing problems and peer feedback after receiving peer review training. However, understanding peer feedback occurred later than noticing writing problems. The employment of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies varied throughout the training sessions, with initial emphasis on analyzing, evaluating, monitoring, and reflecting, and later collective incorporation of comparing and integrating. The quality of post-training written peer feedback also triangulated the enhancement of cognitive engagement. These findings extend previous research that students had deeper cognitive feedback engagement over time, by unveiling asynchronous awareness and evolving cognitive and meta-cognitive operations, and indicated the critical role of language teachers in promoting students’ cognitive engagement in peer reviews in the EFL context.
{"title":"Promoting cognitive engagement with peer feedback through peer review training: The case of Chinese tertiary-level EFL learners","authors":"Jia He , Jun Xia , Chun-mei Zhang , Jian-nan Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100947","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100947","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Peer review training is reported as an important scaffolding for students’ peer review practices in second language (L2) writing research, yet its effect on L2 learners’ cognitive engagement with peer feedback requires further exploration. This study examined the impact of ongoing peer review training on 45 Chinese EFL undergraduates’ cognitive engagement in peer reviews at a 12-week English public speaking and writing course. Drawing on multiple data, including reflective journals, written peer feedback and semi-structured retrospective interviews, this mixed-methods study found that students developed an enhanced awareness of deeper-level, content-related writing problems and peer feedback after receiving peer review training. However, understanding peer feedback occurred later than noticing writing problems. The employment of cognitive and meta-cognitive strategies varied throughout the training sessions, with initial emphasis on analyzing, evaluating, monitoring, and reflecting, and later collective incorporation of comparing and integrating. The quality of post-training written peer feedback also triangulated the enhancement of cognitive engagement. These findings extend previous research that students had deeper cognitive feedback engagement over time, by unveiling asynchronous awareness and evolving cognitive and meta-cognitive operations, and indicated the critical role of language teachers in promoting students’ cognitive engagement in peer reviews in the EFL context.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100947"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143918349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-06DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100948
Seohyeon Choi, Kristen L. McMaster, Nana Kim
Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a valuable method for assessing students with intensive learning needs, including writing. However, research on English writing CBMs has paid insufficient attention to linguistic diversity, especially among young or beginning writers, raising questions about the validity of CBMs in evaluating multilingual students’ early writing development in English. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the measurement invariance of Word Dictation, a CBM writing task measuring English transcription skills at the word level, across multilingual and English-monolingual students with intensive writing needs in the U.S. Using data from 349 students, primarily in Grades 1–3, we evaluated measurement invariance at both item and assessment levels. Using different scoring metrics and various analytical methods, results revealed a few items as potentially displaying differential item functioning. Results also showed that, at the assessment level, Word Dictation did not function differently across the two student groups. The findings provide important evidence supporting the measure’s validity, fairness, and its CBM Stage 1 technical adequacy. We discuss the limitations of the study, along with future research directions and implications for educators using Word Dictation to serve linguistically diverse students requiring intensive support in developing English writing skills.
{"title":"Toward the fair and valid use of curriculum-based measurement for students with intensive writing needs and linguistically diverse backgrounds","authors":"Seohyeon Choi, Kristen L. McMaster, Nana Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100948","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100948","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a valuable method for assessing students with intensive learning needs, including writing. However, research on English writing CBMs has paid insufficient attention to linguistic diversity, especially among young or beginning writers, raising questions about the validity of CBMs in evaluating multilingual students’ early writing development in English. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the measurement invariance of Word Dictation, a CBM writing task measuring English transcription skills at the word level, across multilingual and English-monolingual students with intensive writing needs in the U.S. Using data from 349 students, primarily in Grades 1–3, we evaluated measurement invariance at both item and assessment levels. Using different scoring metrics and various analytical methods, results revealed a few items as potentially displaying differential item functioning. Results also showed that, at the assessment level, Word Dictation did not function differently across the two student groups. The findings provide important evidence supporting the measure’s validity, fairness, and its CBM Stage 1 technical adequacy. We discuss the limitations of the study, along with future research directions and implications for educators using Word Dictation to serve linguistically diverse students requiring intensive support in developing English writing skills.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100948"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143912603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-05DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100949
Haijing Zhang , Fangwei Huang
With the emergence of the psychological focus on second language acquisition, research on second language (L2) writing has gradually transitioned to a comprehensive exploration of the writing process. However, few studies have explored the potential trigger mechanism of negative emotions in L2 writing, especially in learning Chinese as a second language (CSL). To fill this gap, the explanatory sequential design was employed to investigate the relationships among CSL learners’ writing self-efficacy, perceived writing task value, writing anger, and writing boredom based on the control-value theory. The quantitative results illustrate that 1) writing self-efficacy positively predicts perceived writing task value, writing anger, and writing boredom; 2) perceived writing task value negatively predicts writing anger and writing boredom; and 3) perceived writing task value mediates the relationship between writing self-efficacy and writing anger/boredom. The qualitative results add insight to the L2 writing process, revealing that 1) writing self-efficacy exhibited dialectical tension during the writing process; 2) perceived writing task value illustrated contextual immediacy in L2 writing; and 3) writing anger/boredom demonstrated dynamism throughout the procedure of completing the L2 writing task. These results extend the application scope and deepen the theoretical understanding of control-value theory, offering significant pedagogical implications for L2 education.
{"title":"Unveiling the precursors of negative emotions in second language writing through control-value theory: An explanatory sequential design approach","authors":"Haijing Zhang , Fangwei Huang","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100949","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100949","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>With the emergence of the psychological focus on second language acquisition, research on second language (L2) writing has gradually transitioned to a comprehensive exploration of the writing process. However, few studies have explored the potential trigger mechanism of negative emotions in L2 writing, especially in learning Chinese as a second language (CSL). To fill this gap, the explanatory sequential design was employed to investigate the relationships among CSL learners’ writing self-efficacy, perceived writing task value, writing anger, and writing boredom based on the control-value theory. The quantitative results illustrate that 1) writing self-efficacy positively predicts perceived writing task value, writing anger, and writing boredom; 2) perceived writing task value negatively predicts writing anger and writing boredom; and 3) perceived writing task value mediates the relationship between writing self-efficacy and writing anger/boredom. The qualitative results add insight to the L2 writing process, revealing that 1) writing self-efficacy exhibited dialectical tension during the writing process; 2) perceived writing task value illustrated contextual immediacy in L2 writing; and 3) writing anger/boredom demonstrated dynamism throughout the procedure of completing the L2 writing task. These results extend the application scope and deepen the theoretical understanding of control-value theory, offering significant pedagogical implications for L2 education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100949"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143906760","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-01DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100950
Minjoo Kim , Yuah V. Chon
This study explores how learners in a South Korean high school English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context can effectively use neural machine translation (MT) and ChatGPT to enhance their L2 writing. While recent AI tools offer significant potential for supporting human writing feedback, a comparative analysis of how these tools impact writing outcomes—compared to when L2 writers independently proofread and revise their writing—has not been fully examined. To address this gap, a controlled experiment was conducted using three distinct proofreading interventions—self-proofreading (SP), MT-assisted proofreading (MAP), and ChatGPT-assisted proofreading (CAP). Learners were encouraged to first compose their texts in their L2 and then use either MT through inverse translation or ChatGPT through a structured proofreading process. The findings revealed that learners using MAP and CAP demonstrated substantial improvements in overall writing quality compared to those relying solely on SP. CAP users, in particular, produced longer texts, exhibited greater lexical diversity, and constructed more complex sentences, although this was accompanied by reduced verb cohesion. Both MAP and CAP significantly reduced grammatical errors, but did not affect prepositional errors. These findings provide practical recommendations for integrating MT and ChatGPT into L2 writing pedagogy.
{"title":"The impact of self-revision, machine translation, and ChatGPT on L2 writing: Raters’ assessments, linguistic complexity, and error correction","authors":"Minjoo Kim , Yuah V. Chon","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100950","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100950","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study explores how learners in a South Korean high school English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context can effectively use neural machine translation (MT) and ChatGPT to enhance their L2 writing. While recent AI tools offer significant potential for supporting human writing feedback, a comparative analysis of how these tools impact writing outcomes—compared to when L2 writers independently proofread and revise their writing—has not been fully examined. To address this gap, a controlled experiment was conducted using three distinct proofreading interventions—self-proofreading (SP), MT-assisted proofreading (MAP), and ChatGPT-assisted proofreading (CAP). Learners were encouraged to first compose their texts in their L2 and then use either MT through inverse translation or ChatGPT through a structured proofreading process. The findings revealed that learners using MAP and CAP demonstrated substantial improvements in overall writing quality compared to those relying solely on SP. CAP users, in particular, produced longer texts, exhibited greater lexical diversity, and constructed more complex sentences, although this was accompanied by reduced verb cohesion. Both MAP and CAP significantly reduced grammatical errors, but did not affect prepositional errors. These findings provide practical recommendations for integrating MT and ChatGPT into L2 writing pedagogy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100950"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143892141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-04-04DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100937
Peter Thwaites , Pauline Jadoulle , Magali Paquot
Several recent studies have explored the use of comparative judgement for assessing second language writing. One of the claimed advantages of this method is that it generates valid assessments even when judgements are conducted by individuals outside of the traditional language assessment community. However, evidence in support of this claim largely focuses on concurrent validity – i.e. the extent to which CJ rating scales generated by various groups of judges correlate with rubric-based assessments. Little evidence exists of the construct validity of using CJ for L2 writing assessment. The present study seeks to address this by exploring what judges pay attention to while making comparative judgements. Three distinct groups of judges assessed the same set of 25 English L2 argumentative essays, leaving comments after each of their decisions. These comments were then analysed in order to explore the construct relevance and construct representativeness of each judge group’s rating scale. The results suggest that these scales differ in the extent to which they can be considered valid assessments of the target essays.
{"title":"Comparative judgment in L2 writing assessment: Reliability and validity across crowdsourced, community-driven, and trained rater groups of judges","authors":"Peter Thwaites , Pauline Jadoulle , Magali Paquot","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100937","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100937","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Several recent studies have explored the use of comparative judgement for assessing second language writing. One of the claimed advantages of this method is that it generates valid assessments even when judgements are conducted by individuals outside of the traditional language assessment community. However, evidence in support of this claim largely focuses on concurrent validity – i.e. the extent to which CJ rating scales generated by various groups of judges correlate with rubric-based assessments. Little evidence exists of the construct validity of using CJ for L2 writing assessment. The present study seeks to address this by exploring what judges pay attention to while making comparative judgements. Three distinct groups of judges assessed the same set of 25 English L2 argumentative essays, leaving comments after each of their decisions. These comments were then analysed in order to explore the construct relevance and construct representativeness of each judge group’s rating scale. The results suggest that these scales differ in the extent to which they can be considered valid assessments of the target essays.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100937"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143769269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-26DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100936
Xian Liao , Pengfei Zhao , Zicheng Li
An accurate assessment of writing relies on a thorough understanding of its underlying processes and related factors. While integrated writing (IW) is crucial for students’ academic success and future career development, the factors influencing performance in such complex tasks remain under scientific investigation. In particular, although the core role of source use in completing IW tasks is widely acknowledged, we still need to explore factors that could facilitate writers’ effective use of sources. While recent studies have highlighted the critical role of executive functions (EFs)—such as working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility—during writing activities, the exact influence of these foundational cognitive skills on source use and IW performance remains unclear. To this end, this study recruited 233 secondary students in Hong Kong to complete a set of standardized EF tasks and a Chinese reading-to-write IW task. The students’ written products were analyzed regarding the use of content ideas and linguistic transformation based on source materials. We found that visual-spatial working memory had a significant direct effect on IW performance. Two critical aspects of source use—ideas from sources and near copy—mediated the relationship between EF skills and IW performance. These findings contribute to our understanding of the role of EF skills in complex IW tasks. We highlight the implications of our results for the assessment, teaching, and learning of integrated writing.
{"title":"The relationship between executive functions, source use, and integrated writing performance","authors":"Xian Liao , Pengfei Zhao , Zicheng Li","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100936","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100936","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>An accurate assessment of writing relies on a thorough understanding of its underlying processes and related factors. While integrated writing (IW) is crucial for students’ academic success and future career development, the factors influencing performance in such complex tasks remain under scientific investigation. In particular, although the core role of source use in completing IW tasks is widely acknowledged, we still need to explore factors that could facilitate writers’ effective use of sources. While recent studies have highlighted the critical role of executive functions (EFs)—such as working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility—during writing activities, the exact influence of these foundational cognitive skills on source use and IW performance remains unclear. To this end, this study recruited 233 secondary students in Hong Kong to complete a set of standardized EF tasks and a Chinese reading-to-write IW task. The students’ written products were analyzed regarding the use of content ideas and linguistic transformation based on source materials. We found that visual-spatial working memory had a significant direct effect on IW performance. Two critical aspects of source use—ideas from sources and near copy—mediated the relationship between EF skills and IW performance. These findings contribute to our understanding of the role of EF skills in complex IW tasks. We highlight the implications of our results for the assessment, teaching, and learning of integrated writing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100936"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143705348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-22DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100935
Xiaolong Cheng , Jinfen Xu
While there are copious studies investigating teacher written feedback in L2 writing contexts, much remains to be discovered about how English-L1 teachers enact this practice in EFL classrooms. To fill this gap, employing a mixed-methods approach, this study collected data from multiple sources including questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, students’ writing samples, stimulated recalls, and documents to examine such teachers’ implementation of written feedback and influencing factors in Chinese tertiary EFL settings. The results of survey study were generally in line with those of in-depth study in terms of feedback scope, strategy, and focus, but differences emerged in feedback orientation. Furthermore, both the quantitative and qualitative results found that the teachers’ provision of written feedback was mediated by a synthesis of factors related to teachers, students, and contexts. Important pedagogical implications are also discussed.
{"title":"A mixed-methods approach to English-L1 teachers’ implementation of written feedback in EFL classrooms","authors":"Xiaolong Cheng , Jinfen Xu","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100935","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100935","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While there are copious studies investigating teacher written feedback in L2 writing contexts, much remains to be discovered about how English-L1 teachers enact this practice in EFL classrooms. To fill this gap, employing a mixed-methods approach, this study collected data from multiple sources including questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, students’ writing samples, stimulated recalls, and documents to examine such teachers’ implementation of written feedback and influencing factors in Chinese tertiary EFL settings. The results of survey study were generally in line with those of in-depth study in terms of feedback scope, strategy, and focus, but differences emerged in feedback orientation. Furthermore, both the quantitative and qualitative results found that the teachers’ provision of written feedback was mediated by a synthesis of factors related to teachers, students, and contexts. Important pedagogical implications are also discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 100935"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143679848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-28DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2025.100921
Andrew Potter , Mitchell Shortt , Maria Goldshtein , Rod D. Roscoe
Broadly defined, academic language (AL) is a set of lexical-grammatical norms and registers commonly used in educational and academic discourse. Mastery of academic language in writing is an important aspect of writing instruction and assessment. The purpose of this study was to use Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools to examine the extent to which features related to academic language explained variance in human-assigned scores of writing quality in a large corpus of source-based argumentative essays (n = 20,820) written by 10th grade students. Using NLP tools, we identified and then calculated linguistic features from essays related to the lexical, syntactic, cohesion, and rhetorical features of academic language. Consistent with prior research findings, results from a hierarchical linear regression revealed that AL features explained 8 % of variance in writing quality when controlling for essay length. The most important AL features included cohesion with the source text, academic wording, and global cohesion. Implications for integrating NLP-produced measures of AL in writing assessment and automated writing evaluation (AWE) systems are discussed.
{"title":"Assessing academic language in tenth grade essays using natural language processing","authors":"Andrew Potter , Mitchell Shortt , Maria Goldshtein , Rod D. Roscoe","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100921","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.asw.2025.100921","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Broadly defined, academic language (AL) is a set of lexical-grammatical norms and registers commonly used in educational and academic discourse. Mastery of academic language in writing is an important aspect of writing instruction and assessment. The purpose of this study was to use Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools to examine the extent to which features related to academic language explained variance in human-assigned scores of writing quality in a large corpus of source-based argumentative essays (n = 20,820) written by 10th grade students. Using NLP tools, we identified and then calculated linguistic features from essays related to the lexical, syntactic, cohesion, and rhetorical features of academic language. Consistent with prior research findings, results from a hierarchical linear regression revealed that AL features explained 8 % of variance in writing quality when controlling for essay length. The most important AL features included cohesion with the source text, academic wording, and global cohesion. Implications for integrating NLP-produced measures of AL in writing assessment and automated writing evaluation (AWE) systems are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 100921"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143519751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号