Automated Essay Scoring feedback for second language writers: How exactly does it compare to instructor feedback?



We compared Automated Essay Scoring and teacher feedback in an ESL classroom.

Feedback on grammar, usage, and mechanics ended up being analyzed and pupils had been surveyed.

Perceived quality of feedback had been additionally assessed by the extra ESL trainer.

Results revealed the instructor supplied more quality feedback compared to the AES system.

Many pupils trusted AES feedback, yet ranked teacher feedback much more valuable.


Composing can be a crucial part of pupils’ educational English development, yet it needs a lot of effort and time from the element of both pupils and instructors. In an attempt to reduce their workload, many trainers searching for in to the utilization of Automated Essay Scoring (AES) systems to fit more conventional means of providing feedback. This paper investigates making use of an AES system in a university ESL writing classroom. Participants included 14 higher level pupils from various linguistic backgrounds whom penned on three prompts and received feedback through the trainer while the AES system (Criterion). Teacher feedback in the drafts (letter = 37) had been when compared with AES feedback and analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively over the feedback kinds of sentence structure ( e.g., subject-verb contract, ill-formed verbs), use ( e.g., wrong articles, prepositions), mechanics ( ag e.g., spelling, capitalization), and observed quality by one more ESL teacher. Information were triangulated with viewpoint studies student that is regarding for the feedback received. The outcomes reveal big discrepancies between your two feedback types (the trainer supplied more and better quality feedback) and recommend crucial pedagogical implications by providing writing that is ESL with insights concerning the usage of AES systems inside their classrooms.

Previous article in issue Next article in problem


Semire Dikli received her Ph.D. in Multilingual-Multicultural Education at Florida State University. She’s got taught English for Academic needs (EAP) as well as other English being A second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) associated courses both in the U.S. plus in Turkey. Her research passions consist of composing assessment and technology.

Susan Bleyle is an assistant professor of English for Academic needs at Georgia Gwinnett university and a doctoral pupil in Language and Literacy Education in the University of Georgia. Her research passions consist of 3rd language acquisition, the training of developmental immigrant students, and language writing that is second.