Technology in Evaluation of L2 Writing
Updated: Apr 21, 2021
<The images/ videos/ partial content are from the internet. These materials are for educational reference only. >
Teacher evaluation
automated writing evaluation
screencast feedback
1. Automated Writing Evaluation
Automated writing evaluation refers to the evaluation and scoring of writing via computer programs. It uses the machine to generate electronic feedback in the form of scores and/or comments on content, organization, and/or language use.
It can give fast, instantaneous, and individualized feedback, and particularly useful for providing corrective feedback.
It can improve student writing outcomes, for example, as manifested in reduced error rates.
It may not lead to improvement in students’ general writing development.
It may reduces writing to a technical and acultural act.
2. Screencast Feedback
Screencast feedback allows teachers to combine spoken comments (audio) and on-screen actions (video) in order to show students how they can revise and improve their writing.
Screencast feedback enables teachers to talk to students, and hence it is like a “halfway house” between giving students written feedback and conferencing with them face to face.
Screencast feedback enables teachers to gather relevant resources to provide students with additional support while commenting on their writing.
Students can view it as often as they like, pausing at any time as they see fit, and repeating parts that they are not clear about. Playing the video feedback with the teacher speaking to them and yet without the physical presence of the teacher can take away some of the pressure too.
Students enjoyed screencast feedback because it renders “the feedback more engaging, comprehensive, and effective and that hearing the instructor’s voice made the feedback feel more ‘personal’ and ‘real’.”
If the audio quality is undesirable – the screencast feedback will be rendered much less useful than it is originally intended.
Self- & Peer- Evaluation
Microsoft Word Tools for Spelling, Grammar, and Vocabulary
Concordancing
Other Online Tools for Self−/Peer Evaluation
1. Microsoft Word Tools for Spelling, Grammar, and Vocabulary
Equipped with spelling and grammar check functions and a thesaurus, Microsoft Word provides the most common technology-assisted tools instantly available to a wide audience and comes in handy for self−/peer evaluation.
Misspelled words and grammatical errors are flagged with a red and blue squiggly line, respectively, and students can fix their spelling and grammar errors by capitalizing on the suggestions provided by Word. To improve the variety of word choice, students can use the built-in thesaurus to look for synonyms (or antonyms).
Sometimes the grammar checker may fail to reflect the writer’s original intention, and as a result the correct version suggested may not be helpful or accurate.
The thesaurus, although it provides a list of synonyms (or antonyms) as possible alternatives, are not necessarily appropriate in the context intended by the student writers.
2. Concordancing
Concordancing gives students access to “databases of authentic language uses culled from multiple sources,” which are comprised of a large amount of authentic target language discourse (i.e., corpus/corpora) through which students can develop more nuanced understandings of usage or meaning in context.
Concordancing helps students find out what works or what does not work in their writing through thinking and reflection, and verify the problems they pose, get answers to their problems, or edit their writing.
It can be used in tandem with other complementary resources (e.g., dictionaries) to benefit student writing.
It develops students’ ability to take charge of their own learning.
It help reduce student written errors and solve language-related problems in writing, such as collocation and simple confirmation.
3. Other Online Tools for Self−/Peer Evaluation
Annotation tool: students can give peer comments on both global and local issues.
Comment tool: students can give feedback on different parts of the peer’s text, and such feedback can be emailed back to the author for review.
Track Changes tool: students can edit, add, and/or delete the peer’s text, while the author can keep track of the original version and decide whether to accept or reject the suggested changes.
Google Docs: it provides a web-based platform for students to edit google documents stored on the server online, during which peer feedback can be provided.
Online feedback tool: students use the online tools with confidence and competence, especially the low-achievers.
The Writing ePlatform
The Writing ePlatform, aiming to promote AfL/AaL among upper primary and lower secondary students, comprises a number of tools that promote a discovery approach to learning and encourages students to reflect, self-assess, and develop greater fluency, accuracy, and independence in writing. It is a technological tool that facilitates AfL/AaL in the writing classroom.
Comentários