大學(xué)生英語寫作在線自動評價的反饋研究——以句酷網(wǎng)為例.pdf

1、 I 分 類 號： 密 級： 無 學(xué)校代碼： 10414 學(xué) 號： 2012010227 碩士研究生學(xué)位論文 碩士研究生學(xué)位論文 A Study on Feedback in College English Writing Based on Automated Writing Evaluation System

2、 —— —— A Case Study of Juku 大學(xué)生英語寫作在線自動評價的反饋研究 大學(xué)生英語寫作在線自動評價的反饋研究 —— ——以句酷網(wǎng)為例 以句酷網(wǎng)為例 院 所：教育學(xué)院 導(dǎo)師姓名：劉春燕 學(xué)科專業(yè)： 課程與教學(xué)論 研究方向

3、：英語教育學(xué) 二○一五 年 六月 III Abstract Automated writing evaluation (AWE) program, based on educational technology, automatically provides assessment and feedback to students‘ compositions. Such way of assessing compos

4、itions or essays has become the direction and trend of future feedback research. Juku, as a tool to evaluation students‘ writing abilities in this study, is one of such systems. Previous studies on AWE has generally cent

5、ered on examining its reliability, validity, comparison with human raters, participants‘ feedback and so on. The purpose of this study is to takes Juku as an example to discuss the effects of automated essay feedback on

6、writing development of Chinese college EFL leaners. The subjects in this study were 160 EFL sophomores and 5 English writing teachers from a university in Jiangxi. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods wer

7、e used: a questionnaire, a semi- structured interview and students‘ writing samples analysis. The research questions are: (1) what is students‘ attitude towards the usage of AWE and Juku‘s feedback? (2) What is teachers

8、‘a(chǎn)ttitude towards the usage of the AWE? (3) What effects does Juku‘s feedback have on learners‘ revision of essays and on learners‘ writing accuracy development? The research results reveal that on the whole, students he

9、ld positive attitudes toward the integrated use of Juku. It is found that Juku‘s feedback is most helpful in checking grammar, providing suggestions for word usage and revising mechanics mistakes. However, the students d

10、o not recognize the helpfulness of automated feedback in content and organization. What‘s more, most of the students considered that grades given by the program can not reflect their actual English writing ability and th

11、e revision feedback given by Juku sometimes is wrong. Moreover, a majority of students in this study thought the automated feedback was not specific or informative enough to guide them how to revise their writings. The t

12、eachers‘ views on the potential of AWE corrective feedback in helping students with grammar and mechanics were largely positive although they were not completely satisfied with the quality of the feedback. Teachers‘ job

13、on the organization and content is simply irreplaceable. As for the writing accuracy, Juku can correct over half of students‘ errors (53.6%). Besides, we also found that approximately 11.5% of the Juku feedback was wrong