Cited by 52EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningStudent Assessment and FeedbackEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

The Nature of Automated Essay Scoring Feedback

Dikli, Semire·2011·CALICO Journal

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the nature of feedback that English as a Second Language (ESL) students received on their writings either from an automated essay scoring (AES) system or from the teacher. The participants were 12 adult ESL students who were attending an intensive English center at a university in Florida. The drafts of the students were analyzed in depth from a case-study perspective. While the document (essay) analysis was the main data collection method, observations and interviews provided crucial information regarding the context in which the students wrote and the nature of each type of feedback they received. The results revealed that the nature of the AES feedback and written teacher feedback (TF) feedback was different from each other. While the written TF was shorter and more focused, the AES feedback was quite long, generic, and redundant. The findings suggested that AES systems are not entirely ready to meet the needs of ESL or English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students. The developing companies need to improve the feedback capabilities of the program for nonnative English-speaking students, that is, less redundancy, shorter feedback, simpler language for feedback, and feedback for short/off topic/repetitious essays.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.11139/cj.28.1.99-134

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dikli, S.
Corresponding author
Dikli, Semire
Venue
CALICO Journal
Published
2011-01-01
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
99-134
ISSN
  • 0742-7778 (ISSN-L)
  • 2056-9017
OpenAlex
W1983566062
Cited by
52
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
CALICO Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
automated essay scoring, written corrective feedback, teacher feedback, ESL writing, English as a foreign language, computer-assisted language learning, feedback quality, non-native English speakers, intensive English programs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review