English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Form-focused automated Corrective Feedback (CF) is widely used in general-purpose and specialized writing software and research indicates a positive effect for automated CF on second language (L2) learning (AbuSeileek, 2013; AbuSeileek & Abualsha’r, 2014). As any educational practice, preferences and perceptions of learners are expected to influence how automated CF is used by L2 learners (Amrhein & Nassaji, 2010; Brown, 2009; Schulz, 2001). However, preferences and perceptions of automated CF are poorly understood due to paucity of relevant research. This study contributes to this line of investigation by exploring three pertinent topics. First, it explores L2 learners’ preferences and perceptions of automated CF and four different CF strategies: identification, direct correction, metalinguistic CF, and graduated CF. Second, it examines learners’ preferences between different CF timings and frequency choices. Third, it explores learners’ past experience with AWE tools and investigates if past Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) experience affects learners’ preferences and perceptions of automated CF. To accomplish these objectives, the present study surveyed and interviewed 30 learners at an intermediate to advanced English as Second Language (ESL) proficiency level. It calculated descriptive statistics of the surveys and employed exploratory factor analysis to identify the underlying relationships between different variables measured by the survey. For interview analysis, it employed a grounded theory approach to identify major concerns and perceptions of automated CF not accounted for in the survey. Results revealed a strong preference for direct correction followed by metalinguistic CF, identification, and graduated CF respectively. Factor analysis identified a close association between clarity and usefulness perceptions and preferences for CF strategies, between comprehensive CF and direct correction and between the frequency of

L2 Learners’ Perceptions and Preferences of Automated Corrective Feedback