Investigating the Application of Automated Writing Evaluation to Chinese Undergraduate English Majors: A Case Study of WriteToLearn

Sha Liu, Antony Kunnan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

Abstract

This study investigated the application of WriteToLearn on Chinese undergraduate English majors’ essays in terms of its scoring ability and the accuracy of its error feedback. Participants were 163 second-year English majors from a university located in Sichuan province who wrote 326 essays from two writing prompts. Each paper was marked by four human raters as well as WriteToLearn. Many-facet Rasch measurement (MFRM) was conducted to calibrate WriteToLearn’s rating performance in scoring the whole set of essays against those of four trained human raters. The accuracy of WriteToLearn’s feedback on 60 randomly selected essays was compared with the feedback provided by human raters. The two main findings related to scoring were that WriteToLearn was more consistent but highly stringent relative to the four trained human raters in scoring essays and that it failed to score 7 essays. In terms of error feedback, WriteToLearn had an overall precision and recall of 49% and 18.7% respectively. These figures did not meet the minimum threshold of 90% precision for it to be a reliable error detecting tool set by Burstein, Chodorow, and Leacock (2003). Furthermore, it had difficulty in identifying the errors made by Chinese undergraduate English majors in the use of articles, prepositions, word choice and expression.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)71-91
Number of pages21
JournalCALICO
Volume33
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Keywords

  • Accuracy of error feedback
  • automated writing evaluation
  • Chinese undergraduate English majors
  • scoring ability
  • WriteToLearn

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Investigating the Application of Automated Writing Evaluation to Chinese Undergraduate English Majors: A Case Study of WriteToLearn'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this