TY - GEN
T1 - Automated writing instruction and feedback
T2 - 62nd Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, HFES 2018
AU - Roscoe, Rod D.
AU - Allen, Laura K.
AU - Johnson, Adam C.
AU - McNamara, Danielle S.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education, through Grant R305A120707. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IES.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 by Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES). All rights reserved.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - This study evaluates high school students' perceptions of automated writing feedback, and the influence of these perceptions on revising, as a function of varying modes of computer-based writing instruction. Findings indicate that students' perceptions of automated feedback accuracy, ease of use, relevance, and understandability were favorable. Immediate perceptions of feedback received on a selected essay were minimally related to how and whether students revised their essays. However, attitudes formed over multiple sessions were significantly related to revising. More importantly, the mode of instruction appeared to influence how feedback perceptions shaped revising behaviors. Students who engaged in traditional writingbased training and practice seemed to focus on their own perceived writing abilities when deciding how to revise. In contrast, students who also received strategy instruction and game-based practice attended more carefully to the perceived quality of the automated feedback.
AB - This study evaluates high school students' perceptions of automated writing feedback, and the influence of these perceptions on revising, as a function of varying modes of computer-based writing instruction. Findings indicate that students' perceptions of automated feedback accuracy, ease of use, relevance, and understandability were favorable. Immediate perceptions of feedback received on a selected essay were minimally related to how and whether students revised their essays. However, attitudes formed over multiple sessions were significantly related to revising. More importantly, the mode of instruction appeared to influence how feedback perceptions shaped revising behaviors. Students who engaged in traditional writingbased training and practice seemed to focus on their own perceived writing abilities when deciding how to revise. In contrast, students who also received strategy instruction and game-based practice attended more carefully to the perceived quality of the automated feedback.
KW - Automated writing evaluation
KW - User experience
KW - User perceptions
KW - Writing instruction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072748874&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072748874&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1541931218621471
DO - 10.1177/1541931218621471
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85072748874
T3 - Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
SP - 2089
EP - 2093
BT - 62nd Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, HFES 2018
PB - Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Inc.
Y2 - 1 October 2018 through 5 October 2018
ER -