文献导读 | 自动化写作评估对教师反馈、学生修改和写作改进的影响
提示：点击上方"英语写作教学与研究"免费关注哦
征稿：二语写作
本期导读：王奕凯老师
本期：
简介 Brief Introduction
这篇文章研究自动写作评估（AWE）对写作教学的影响。从人们对AWE作用的怀疑出发，区分较高水平（HL）写作技能与较低水平（LL）技能，自变量是定类变量feedback condition（两水平：AWE+teacher feedback; teacher-only-feedback）; 因变量：teacher feedback; student revision; writing improvement (accuracy/retention).
结果表明，1)AWE+teacher feedback不会对HL教师反馈的数量产生显着影响，但teacher-only-feedback比单独使用AWE更多的LL反馈。2) 与计算机的LL反馈相比，学生似乎更频繁地修改老师的LL反馈。3)长期使用AWE的学生保留了accuracy的提高，但是没有访问权的学生的retention似乎较低。
研究解释了与基于论证的验证框架相关的研究结果的相关性？？？
研究问题 Research Questions
1: Is there a difference in amount and level (higher- versus lower-level) of teacher feedback between the AWE and Teacher groups?
2: Are there differences in student revision practices between the two groups?
3: Are there differences in short- and long-term effect on the students’ writing improvement in terms of CAF (Complexity, Accuracy, Fluency) between the two groups?
研究方法 Research Methods
1) 28 undergraduate English majors; 2groups (AWE group; Teacher group);Pretest: QPT (两组无差异）; description of teachers; Description of AWE tool
2) Pre-, post- and delayed post-tests ( a 105-minute, argumentative writing task); Teacher training
3) Study procedures
4) Study measures and analysis
RQ1: teacher feedback (coding, counting; HL/LL)
RQ2: acts of revision and text modification (coding framework)
RQ3: short- and long-term impact on performance: CAF measures
5）Statistical analysis: Chi-square tests; the Friedman Test
读后感 Comment
可取之处：
1）教师反馈区分高水平技能与低水平技能；
2）学生修改的编码框架
3）写作水平改善的影响区分短期与长期
4）最后还有argument-based appraisal of AWE（基于论证的验证框架），好像最近不少论文这样写讨论。
• ❤️END❤️ •
原文下载、学术共读
回复关键词：原文
等你加入
精彩推文回顾