BANKING ACADEMY OF VIETNAM FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES ------ GRADUATION THESIS TOPIC: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ACCEPTANCE OF USING GRAMMARLY AS AN AUTOMATED WRITING EVALUATIO
INTRODUCTION
Background of the study
English is a crucial global language that bridges cultural and geographical divides, enabling effective communication among diverse individuals It is essential for economic exchanges and international trade, allowing people to engage in global markets Additionally, English provides access to a wealth of knowledge from various sources worldwide Therefore, acquiring English proficiency is vital for meeting the demands of modern life and work.
In Vietnam, English is now a mandatory subject in educational curricula, underscoring its crucial importance for individual qualifications The language encompasses four essential skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing, with writing often viewed as a particularly challenging skill for both teachers and students Effective feedback in writing instruction has been identified as a vital resource for improving writing skills, as it provides students with the knowledge, skills, and motivation needed to refine their writing abilities (Luft, 2014).
Integrating technology into the classroom has emerged as a key solution for delivering effective feedback to students, with automated writing evaluation (AWE) programs leading the way Among these tools, Grammarly stands out as a popular choice among English majors, helping them identify grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, punctuation issues, and word choice improvements, ultimately enhancing their writing process.
This study explores the acceptance of Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool among English-major students at the Banking Academy's Faculty of Foreign Languages The research aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of how students utilize Grammarly in their writing processes.
Objective of the thesis
This study evaluates the acceptance of Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) assistant among Banking Academy students, aiming to gather insights into their experiences with the tool By analyzing these experiences, the research seeks to improve the integration of AWE technology in writing instruction, ultimately enhancing students' writing skills.
Research question
This study aims to address the following questions:
1 What factors contribute to the acceptance of ATC students to use Grammarly as an AWE tool?
2 How do these factors determine the actual use of Grammarly among ATC students?
Significance of the study
This study explores the integration of technology in writing assessment, focusing on the use of Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool It identifies key factors influencing students' choices to use Grammarly and highlights their preferences, enabling teachers to customize writing evaluations that enhance student engagement and improve writing quality Furthermore, the study provides recommendations to help students overcome any challenges they may face while using Grammarly for their writing assessments.
Scope and limitation of the thesis
A survey was conducted among English-majored students at the Faculty of Foreign Languages at the Banking Academy to assess their views on Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool Data was gathered via an online questionnaire to gain insights into user perceptions.
This research article has several limitations, including a relatively small sample size of only 131 Banking Academy students, which may weaken the persuasiveness of the findings Furthermore, the short duration of the study, lasting just 2 months, restricts the ability to observe long-term effects Additionally, the reliance on online questionnaires for data collection may limit the depth and comprehensiveness of the research results.
Chapter summary
English proficiency is increasingly essential in today's world, prompting individuals to develop their language skills for personal and professional success This research paper investigates the acceptance of Grammarly as a writing aid among ATC students at the Banking Academy Despite some limitations, the study aims to offer valuable insights into the current usage of Grammarly, benefiting both educators and students while paving the way for future research on the integration of technology in teaching.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Writing
Writing is an essential skill that involves the exploration of ideas and the careful arrangement of words to create clear and coherent sentences and paragraphs As noted by Nunan (2003), it requires both searching for concepts and analyzing how to effectively express them Echoing this, Knoch and Storch (2016) emphasize that writing enables individuals to convey their thoughts and ideas through meaningful language, highlighting its role in mental communication Ultimately, writing serves as a powerful tool for individuals to articulate their ideas in written form.
Writing is an essential skill for EFL students, as highlighted by Toba, Noor, and Sanu (2019), who emphasize its importance for effective written communication and academic tasks like essays and letters Vietnamese EFL students, in particular, may struggle with certain writing skills; thus, it is crucial for them to practice and enhance their writing techniques to achieve proficiency.
Feedback in writing
Feedback is essential for student development, providing insights into their work to enhance skills After completing assignments, students receive constructive feedback that emphasizes their strengths and suggests areas for improvement As noted by Jug, Jiang, and Bean (2019), effective feedback is derived from direct observation and aims to empower students to achieve better outcomes Wiggins (2012) further defines feedback as crucial information that informs individuals about their progress towards achieving specific goals.
Feedback can be categorized into four main types: focused, unfocused, direct, and indirect, as identified in Sabarun's (2019) research Focused feedback targets specific errors or categories, allowing for intensive correction in those areas, while unfocused feedback addresses all linguistic errors without prioritizing Direct corrective feedback involves teachers directly identifying and correcting errors, which helps students quickly understand the correct forms Conversely, indirect corrective feedback signals the presence of errors without providing direct corrections, encouraging learners to self-correct.
In their 2006 study on feedback for second language students' writing, Hyland and Hyland identified three primary types of feedback: teacher-written and oral feedback, peer feedback, and computer-mediated feedback.
Teacher feedback plays a vital role in guiding students' writing progress by providing comments that clarify grading and encourage improvements While students generally respond positively to written feedback, its effectiveness in enhancing writing skills over time remains unclear On the other hand, peer feedback fosters collaboration among students, offering essential support during the writing process through interactional modifications and opportunities for practice and revision Additionally, computer-mediated feedback leverages technology to deliver immediate evaluations, addressing individual errors for ESL learners and providing comprehensive assessments of content, organization, and mechanics These technological tools can ease the challenges faced by teachers due to larger class sizes and the increasing demand for personalized assistance.
6 automated essay evaluation presents itself as a cost-effective method to either replace or augment direct human feedback, as suggested by the author.
2.2.3 The necessary to give feedback in writing instruction
To create high-quality written work, students must follow a structured writing process that goes beyond simply stringing words together This process includes five essential steps: prewriting, planning, drafting, pausing and reading, and revising and editing, as highlighted by Abas and Abd Aziz (2018) Importantly, feedback plays a crucial role in the post-writing phase, significantly contributing to the development of a polished final piece.
Research highlights the numerous benefits of feedback in educational settings Race (2001) emphasizes that feedback is vital for language acquisition, ensuring linguistic accuracy, and boosting student motivation Supporting this, Ellis (2009) notes that writing accuracy improves when feedback includes clear guidance on language, grammar, and mechanics Additionally, Hyland and Hyland (2019) found that feedback enhances cognitive skills by helping students understand their writing processes, identify strengths and weaknesses, and set goals for improvement.
By engaging in feedback-guided self-assessment and self-regulation exercises, learners can significantly improve their understanding of their learning processes This approach empowers them to effectively monitor and adjust their performance, leading to enhanced learning outcomes.
Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)
Research by Kellogg and Raulerson (2007) highlights that college students can improve their writing skills through active practice, which includes repeated writing exercises and constructive feedback They suggest that Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) software can alleviate the grading burden on teachers, thereby increasing students' writing practice Additionally, Graham and Perin (2007) support the idea that technology can enhance students' writing abilities by fostering greater interest, motivation, and enjoyment in the writing process.
In today's technology-driven world, students have access to numerous automated writing evaluation tools that enable them to quickly and thoroughly assess their writing, significantly improving their overall writing skills.
2.3.1 Definition of Automated Writing Evaluation
Since 1960, automated scoring applications have emerged to enhance the efficiency of grading written assignments and assist educators in providing feedback on student essays The integration of computer technology in education has paved the way for new trends in language instruction and assessment One significant advancement is the use of Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE), which effectively meets various needs, including the summative assessment of writing skills and the provision of diagnostic feedback.
Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) utilizes advanced algorithms to assess written texts, providing valuable feedback on their quality As noted by Shermis and Burstein (2003), AWE enables computer technology to evaluate and score written prose effectively This innovative tool not only scores the text but also analyzes its organization, delivering comprehensive qualitative and quantitative assessments, as highlighted by Khoii and Doroudian (2013).
2.3.2 Importance of Automated Writing Evaluation
The increasing prevalence of Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) software in writing instruction is driven by technological advancements and the rise of internet usage AWE systems aim to enhance writing skills by delivering immediate and personalized feedback to writers.
AWE programs offer word processing, internet access, and electronic portfolio features, and many educators assert that utilizing this artificial intelligence approach can greatly improve students' writing skills in targeted areas.
Utilizing Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tools significantly enhances students' writing accuracy and mechanics through objective and consistent performance assessments (Wang, Shang & Briody, 2013) Research by Lin and Huang (2010) supports the notion that AWE tools facilitate the editing and revising process, motivating students to actively improve their writing, especially in grammar and spelling The objectivity and consistency of these tools play a crucial role in fostering better writing skills among learners.
Further research demonstrates that students' motivation receives a boost through computer-assisted writing For instance, Grimes and Warschauer's investigation
A study conducted in 2006 found that U.S high school students showed increased motivation to practice writing when AWE (Automated Writing Evaluation) tools were incorporated into their classroom activities Additionally, both teachers and students recognize the benefits of AWE programs, particularly for their ability to provide immediate scoring and corrective feedback, as noted in Wang's research from 2015.
Grammarly
Grammarly is an essential proofreading tool that effectively identifies grammar mistakes and offers corrections for plagiarism, punctuation, vocabulary usage, and spelling As noted by Schraudner (2014), it also delivers style-specific editing tailored to various writing styles.
Grammarly is a leading AWE program recognized for evaluating EFL writing classes, offering an intuitive interface that identifies spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors It provides comprehensive feedback, including corrections and suggestions to enhance clarity, precision, effectiveness, and readability With a high accuracy rate and rapid evaluation speed, Grammarly effectively supports students and educators in improving their writing, as noted by Fahmi and Cahyono (2021).
Previous research about Grammarly and perceptions towards using Grammarly
Grammarly as an AWE tool
Numerous researchers worldwide have focused their efforts on exploring Grammarly, and this section highlights key insights and findings from recent significant studies to enhance understanding of the topic.
In a study by Nova (2018), the strengths and weaknesses of the Grammarly program as an AWE tool for academic writing were assessed through narrative inquiry involving three EFL Indonesian postgraduate students with different Grammarly usage durations The findings highlighted that Grammarly's free accessibility, quick evaluation speed, and effective feedback significantly enhance the proofreading process of academic texts, thereby reducing time and cost constraints The program's color-coded feedback, along with clear explanations and simple examples, helps users identify errors and improve their learning However, some limitations were noted, such as occasional misleading feedback, difficulties in recognizing variations in English, and issues with reference list errors.
Despite its drawbacks, leveraging Grammarly's strengths alongside students' existing knowledge can enhance writing quality Therefore, further research is recommended to examine the effectiveness of Grammarly's feedback in improving students' writing, providing deeper insights into the program's benefits and limitations.
A study by Ghufron and Rosyida (2018) investigated the effectiveness of the Grammarly application in reducing errors in EFL writing compared to traditional teacher feedback Using a quantitative approach with a nearly-experimental design, 40 Indonesian university students were divided into experimental and control groups, with the former using Grammarly and the latter receiving indirect corrective feedback from teachers The results indicated that Grammarly significantly improved diction, grammar, and mechanics, while teacher feedback was more effective in enhancing content and organization Additionally, Grammarly promoted student autonomy through independent essay evaluation, leading to notable writing improvements However, some students struggled with using the software and interpreting its feedback, which affected their self-correction abilities The study recommends Grammarly as an alternative evaluation tool for EFL/ESL teachers but emphasizes the need for students to be proficient in its use and to have sufficient linguistic knowledge before implementation Future research should expand the sample size and scope to validate these findings.
11 for additional research to explore other topics relevant to the acceptance of Grammarly among EFL/ESL students.
A study by Karyuatry (2018) titled "Grammarly as a Tool to Improve Students’ Writing Quality" investigates the effectiveness of Grammarly in enhancing students' descriptive writing The research involved collaboration with a lecturer to implement an Action Research approach, focusing on the tool's influence on writing quality.
A study involving 40 students explored practical classroom solutions through the insights of a reflective language lecturer, utilizing data from interviews, student essays, questionnaires, and observations The results indicated that students had positive attitudes towards using Grammarly, which the lecturer also found beneficial in reducing the correction workload and increasing student engagement Notably, 82% of students achieved passing grades when Grammarly was incorporated into descriptive teaching, leading to the conclusion that Grammarly serves as an effective tool for minimizing errors and improving the writing quality of learners.
Koltovskaia (2020) investigated student satisfaction with Grammarly compared to traditional feedback from CQUniversity's Academic Learning Center The study assessed Grammarly's suitability for diverse students based on factors like language proficiency and visa status, utilizing a mixed-method approach to gather data from February to July 2016 It involved 54 students who received Grammarly feedback and 42 who received conventional feedback Results indicated that students using Grammarly reported greater satisfaction and more positive responses in surveys than those who did not Consequently, academic learning advisers can leverage Grammarly to effectively assist both domestic and international students with their grammar needs, enhancing support in both online and offline settings.
The study identified 12 notable differences between cohorts and delivery modes, leading to the recommendation that Grammarly be integrated into the Academic Learning Center's resources, while emphasizing the importance of instructor involvement However, the author acknowledged weaknesses in the research, including a small sample size and unconsidered variables that may have influenced the results The reliance on self-reported test scores and college grades from students introduced subjectivity For future research on student perceptions of Grammarly, it is essential to utilize a larger sample size to enhance the reliability of findings Furthermore, evaluating the program's accuracy and its impact on improving students' grammar usage is advised.
Fitria's research (2021) provides a comprehensive overview of 'Grammarly,' an AI-powered English writing assistant designed for EFL students Utilizing descriptive qualitative research, the study collects data through document analysis of selected online texts related to "Simple Present Tense" and "Simple Past Tense." The analysis, conducted with Grammarly software, focuses on spelling, punctuation, and grammar, revealing significant performance improvements Notably, students' test scores increased from an initial 34 after using Grammarly.
After using Grammarly, a student's score improved to 77 out of 100, demonstrating its effectiveness in enhancing writing quality The software provides valuable suggestions by highlighting word correctness and explaining errors in word choices It is highly recommended for students, as it efficiently checks grammar, spelling, and sentence structure while adhering to common grammar rules Additionally, Grammarly offers free services for correcting grammatical and spelling errors, including punctuation and capitalization As a versatile tool, it is particularly beneficial for users looking to translate documents written in foreign languages.
Fitriana and Nurazni's study (2022) investigated the perspectives of English department students on the use of Grammarly software for grammar checking in their writing The research was conducted with 150 sixth-semester students at Tidar University during the 2020-2021 academic year, employing a descriptive qualitative method Data was collected through questionnaires to gather insights on students' experiences with Grammarly.
The study involved 13 interviews that provided an in-depth investigation into the use of Grammarly among students, revealing both benefits and drawbacks Some participants noted that Grammarly's corrections sometimes altered the meaning of their text, leading to uncertainty about its suggestions and necessitating careful review before making changes The free version of Grammarly limits access to advanced features, which may impact user experience Despite these challenges, participants acknowledged Grammarly's effectiveness in enhancing grammar skills, increasing engagement in grammar study, and helping identify errors such as misspellings and punctuation mistakes The software's comprehensive features and user-friendly design received positive feedback, suggesting it facilitates the learning process To improve future research, the authors recommend exploring this topic with a diverse range of respondents across different contexts to gain a broader understanding of students' experiences with Grammarly.
In conclusion, previous research highlights the growing interest in integrating technology into writing instruction, particularly through the use of Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool Scholars have examined its strengths, weaknesses, impacts, and user perspectives using various methodologies However, a specific model to assess the acceptance of Grammarly remains absent Additionally, there is limited research on the use of Grammarly in Vietnam, indicating a need for a targeted model to evaluate the applicability of findings, as suggested by Karyuatry (2018) and Koltovskaia.
This study builds on previous research by Fitriana and Nurazni (2020, 2022) to explore students' acceptance of Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool within the Vietnamese context, employing the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) developed by Davis in 1989 To enhance the reliability of its findings, the research aims to expand its survey sample to approximately 120 participants, thereby strengthening the validity of its conclusions The focus is specifically on the experiences of users utilizing the free version of Grammarly.
A study was conducted to evaluate the use of Grammarly among students in Vietnam, primarily focusing on those who utilize the free version of the tool The aim was to gain insights into the real-life writing challenges faced by these students and to explore the implications of Grammarly for enhancing writing instruction in the region.
Technology Acceptance Model
Figure 1: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) adopted from Davis (1989)
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), developed by Davis in 1989, provides a framework for understanding how individuals adopt new technologies Central to this model are two key factors: perceived usefulness, which reflects a user's belief in the technology's ability to enhance task efficiency, and perceived ease of use, which pertains to the simplicity or complexity of utilizing the technology These factors shape user attitudes, influencing their behavioral intentions toward adoption and ultimately leading to technology acceptance A user's attitude toward technology can significantly affect their decision to use it, while their behavioral intention indicates their willingness to engage with the technology Actual system use is determined by the user's perception of ease of use, which plays a crucial role in their overall satisfaction with the technology, as highlighted in Ramadhani's 2023 study.
2.6.2 Applications of the TAM model in previous research
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is extensively utilized to study user acceptance of technology, particularly in the context of new learning technology applications.
A study by Farahat (2012) applied the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to investigate the factors influencing students' acceptance of online learning Utilizing a conceptual framework, data was collected through a questionnaire administered to 153 undergraduate students engaged in online learning The results revealed that students' intentions to adopt online learning were significantly affected by their perceptions of convenience and usefulness, their attitudes towards the medium, and the social influence of peers Additionally, the study confirmed that students' behavioral intentions to utilize online learning could be predicted by their attitudes, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and the social impact of their reference groups.
Yilmaz, Maxutov, Baitekov, and Balta (2023) explored various factors influencing students' adoption of Chat GPT, such as perceived usefulness, ease of use, and attitudes toward its application The study found that participants generally viewed Chat GPT positively in educational contexts, recognizing its benefits Additionally, a significant number of respondents reported that they found Chat GPT user-friendly, supporting prior research on technology acceptance that highlights the critical role of perceived usefulness and ease of use in shaping user attitudes and intentions.
In a recent study by Ramadhani (2023), titled "Using the Technology Acceptance Model to Understand Students’ Preferences for ICT Tools in Academic English Writing," the research explores how the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) provides insights into students' preferences for Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools used in academic English writing The study utilized a combination of interviews and analysis to gather data on student experiences and preferences.
The study involved 8 interview participants and 50 surveyed individuals, utilizing 17 questionnaires to explore various applications for academic writing, including Grammarly, Google Translate, YouTube, Turnitin, U-Dictionary, ERIC, and Research Gate Results indicated that students' acceptance of these tools was influenced by ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude, behavioral intention, and actual system usage, aligning with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) proposed by Davis in 1989.
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is a well-established framework for understanding technology adoption, with perceived usefulness and ease of use being crucial factors in the acceptance of learning technologies To gain deeper insights into the acceptance of new technologies, particularly Grammarly for automatic writing evaluation, further exploration of extended models is necessary.
The figure 2 below shows a conceptual framework for the present study, as follows:
Figure 2: Conceptual framework adapted from Davis (1989)
This study uses the conceptual framework which adapted from the Technology Acceptance Model to address the following questions:
1 What factors contribute to the acceptance of ATC students to use Grammarly as an AWE tool?
2 How do these factors determine the actual use of Grammarly among ATC students?
Chapter summary
Previous research highlights Grammarly's effectiveness as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool for assessing writing skills Many authors have employed the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to analyze technology adoption levels among users, suggesting its application in future studies This research adapts the TAM framework to evaluate the acceptance of Grammarly, focusing on two key questions: what factors influence this acceptance and how do these factors affect Grammarly's usage among ATC students at the Banking Academy.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Rationale of methodology
This study utilized a quantitative research method, known for its flexibility and convenience, allowing researchers to efficiently gather data from a large sample through questionnaires The primary aim of this approach is to maintain objectivity while exploring the context and characteristics of participants Quantitative research explains phenomena by collecting and analyzing numerical data using mathematical methods, as noted by Aliaga and Gunderson (1999) Researchers in this field focus on describing current situations and identifying relationships between variables (Charles, 1998).
Research setting
In the second semester of the 2023-2024 academic year, a study was conducted at the Faculty of Foreign Languages at Banking Academy to explore the factors influencing English-majored students' use of Grammarly and their willingness to use it for writing evaluation The survey invited students from all university years to share their experiences and opinions on this tool.
Participants of the research
This study targets students utilizing Grammarly for writing assessment at the Faculty of Foreign Languages, Banking Academy, during the second semester of the 2023-2024 academic year.
Here are the details of the survey participants:
Academic year First-year Second-year Third-year Last-year Total
Table 1: Number of students in each academic year
A survey conducted among the Faculty of Foreign Languages included 131 students from various academic years, comprising 21 freshmen, 20 second-year students, 36 third-year students, and 54 seniors.
Research tools
This study employs a questionnaire that was based on a conceptual framework, which was adopted from the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by Davis
The questionnaire, developed in 1989, comprises two main sections The first section collects demographic information from participants, including age, gender, and their experiences with Grammarly The second section assesses students' perceptions of Grammarly's effectiveness through a series of questions rated on a 5-point satisfaction scale, ranging from "Strongly Disagree" to "Strongly Agree."
Procedures of data analysis
The study utilized a modified questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to fit the specific research context A pilot test was conducted with ten students and one lecturer to gather feedback, resulting in positive evaluations regarding the questionnaire's clarity and comprehensibility Based on this feedback, minor adjustments were made to enhance the questionnaire The finalized version was then distributed to students as an online survey via Google Forms.
21 days, 131 responses were collected However, 02 responses were excluded because
02 students did not use the Grammarly application There were 129 valid responses for further analysis
After collecting raw data, it was analyzed using SPSS version 20 to assess reliability and descriptive statistics Evaluating the reliability of the question items is crucial for ensuring the trustworthiness of the findings The Cronbach’s Alpha method was employed to measure this reliability, focusing on the consistency and relationships among individual items in the scale Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients range from 0 to 1, with an acceptable research instrument typically exceeding 0.6 Instruments with coefficients below 0.6 are considered unreliable, with lower values indicating diminished reliability.
Responses from all sections were analyzed to calculate the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) for each item, with mean scores categorized as follows: 1 – 1.80 indicates Strongly Disagree, 1.81 – 2.60 indicates Disagree, 2.61 – 3.40 indicates Neutral, 3.41 – 4.20 indicates Agree, and 4.21 – 5.00 indicates Strongly Agree This analysis aims to provide valuable insights into the factors participants deem as either unimportant or extremely important.
Chapter summary
This study utilizes a quantitative approach through an online questionnaire to gather insights on the experiences and perceptions of Grammarly among 131 ATC students during the second semester of the 2023-2024 academic year The collected data is analyzed using SPSS version 20, focusing on reliability and descriptive statistics for interpretation and discussion.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Demographic results
The study's participant demographic reveals a predominance of females, making up 73.3% of the total, while males and other genders represent approximately 25% Participants span various academic years, with first-year and second-year students each comprising about 15%, third-year students at 27.5%, and over 40% being fourth-year students.
The percentage of students who sometimes use Grammarly is highest and reaches 38.9%, followed by 32.9% of participants who use it usually 19 students,
23 equivalent to 14.5% of participants, reported that their use of Grammarly is
Approximately 12% of users seldom utilize Grammarly, while only 1.5% of users, equating to two individuals, never use the tool Generally, students majoring in English frequently rely on Grammarly for writing evaluation, with their usage primarily falling between "sometimes" and "always."
Results on the reliability of the scale
Perceived Ease of Use of Grammarly 0.800 8
Behavioral Intention to Use Grammarly 0.808 6
Table 3: Summary of the Reliability Score
The Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients for Easiness, Usefulness, Attitude, Behavioral Intention, and Actual Use of Grammarly are 0.80, 0.79, 0.83, 0.81, and 0.83, respectively Each of these values exceeds the accepted threshold of 0.6, and none of the question items show a correlation index below 0.3, demonstrating the reliable trustworthiness of the questionnaire utilized in this study.
Results on the factors that contribute to the acceptance of using Grammarly 24
4.3.1 Results on perceived ease of use of Grammarly
1 Grammarly makes it easy for me to submit writing
2 Grammarly makes it easy for me to recognize errors that I have not noticed before
3 In general, Grammarly is easy to use
4 Grammarly makes it easy for me to evaluate writing
5 I can easily interact with feedback from Grammarly
6 Grammarly makes it easy for me to create accounts
7 I can easily understand the feedback given by Grammarly
8 Grammarly makes it easy for me to save documents after revising
Table 4: Student’s perceived ease of use of Grammarly
Students from the Faculty of Foreign Languages generally find Grammarly easy to use, as indicated by an overall mean score of 4.02 Specifically, they appreciate the tool's capability to evaluate and recognize their writing submissions.
25 errors thanks to Grammarly received the highest rating among the factors, while the capacity to save documents after revising had the lowest mean score
Students generally find Grammarly easy to use, with a high mean score of 4.12 (SD = 0.696) Specifically, they agree that submitting writing for evaluation is straightforward (M = 4.14, SD = 0.726) and that the tool effectively identifies previously unnoticed errors (M = 4.14, SD = 0.704) The ease of assessing writing follows closely with a mean score of 4.10 (SD = 0.635) While interacting with feedback and understanding it are rated slightly lower (M = 4.06, SD = 0.768; M = 4.01, SD = 0.723), creating an account on Grammarly is also perceived as easy (M = 4.03, SD = 0.760) However, students find saving documents after evaluation less straightforward, scoring it at 3.59 (SD = 0.825).
4.3.2 Results on perceived usefulness of Grammarly
1 Grammarly is useful for correcting grammar errors
2 Grammarly is useful for correcting spelling errors and punctuation
3 Grammarly has a fast speed of evaluation
4 In general, Grammarly is useful to use
5 Grammarly is useful for correcting compound and complex sentences
6 Grammarly is useful for correcting word choice errors
7 Grammarly is useful for correcting idea development errors
Table 5: Student's perceived usefulness of Grammarly
Students find Grammarly to be a valuable tool for writing evaluation, reflected in an overall mean score of 3.85 This perception is reinforced by a higher mean score of 4.12, indicating general usefulness Notably, the feature for correcting grammar errors received the highest rating, with a mean score of 4.23, demonstrating its significant importance to students.
Features like spelling and punctuation correction, along with rapid feedback, are deemed highly useful, achieving mean scores of 4.15 (SD = 0.751) and 4.12 (SD = 0.820) respectively In contrast, the usefulness of correcting sentence structure and word choice errors is rated at a moderate level.
The survey revealed that participants rated the usefulness of Grammarly's idea development correction as neutral, with a mean score of 3.24 (SD = 0.942), which is notably lower than the scores for other features, 3.54 (SD = 0.968) and 3.53 (SD = 0.969) This indicates uncertainty among users regarding the effectiveness of Grammarly in enhancing idea development in their writing.
4.3.3 Results on attitudes toward using Grammarly
1 I find Grammarly useful to use 4.14 0.634 Agree
2 Overall, I have a positive attitude toward using
3 I find Grammarly easy to use 4.10 0.694 Agree
4 I think using Grammarly is suitable for my writing objectives and goals
5 I think it is necessary to use
Grammarly to check my writing
Table 6: Student’s attitudes toward using Grammarly
The overall mean score for student attitudes toward using Grammarly is 4.02, reflecting a generally positive perception Students rated their attitude towards Grammarly at 4.13, with a standard deviation of 0.689, highlighting its perceived usefulness, which received the highest score of 4.14 (SD = 0.634) Ease of use also contributes to its appeal, with a mean score of 4.10 (SD = 0.694) Additionally, students believe that Grammarly supports their writing objectives (M = 3.91, SD = 0.734) and view it as essential for checking their writing (M = 3.84, SD = 0.843).
4.3.4 Results on behavioral intention to use Grammarly
1 I will continue using Grammarly in the future
2 I will recommend Grammarly for others to use
4 I feel confident about my writing after using Grammarly
Grammarly regularly to check my writing
6 After using Grammarly, I can examine my writing’s weaknesses and strengths myself
Table 7: Student’s behavioral intention to use Grammarly
The overall mean score of 3.89 reflects a strong behavioral intention among respondents to utilize Grammarly Notably, the intention to continue using Grammarly in the future achieved the highest mean score of 4.12 (SD = 0.714), closely followed by the willingness to recommend the application to others.
Users report high satisfaction with Grammarly, feeling more confident in their writing after using the application to evaluate their papers, with average satisfaction scores of 3.96 and 3.88 As a result, they intend to utilize Grammarly consistently for writing checks, reflected in an average intention score of 3.79.
In addition, students agreed that using Grammarly improved their ability to evaluate writing after using Grammarly (M = 3.60, SD = 0.814) This suggests that while
Grammarly is an effective tool for automatically evaluating writing, it may not necessarily enhance overall writing ability among students.
Results on actual use of Grammarly
1 I often use Grammarly to check grammar
2 I often use Grammarly to check spelling and punctuation
3 I primarily use Grammarly during the editing and revising stages, not throughout the writing process
4 I have been using Grammarly for a long time
5 I often use Grammarly to check vocabulary
6 I often use Grammarly to check sentences
8 I often use Grammarly to check idea development
Table 8: Student’s actual use of Grammarly
Students generally have a positive perception of Grammarly for evaluating their writing, with an average acceptance score of M= 3.63 While they report using Grammarly over an extended period (M= 3.74, SD= 0.972), its frequency of use is not very high, averaging M= 3.29 (SD= 1.003) for multiple times a week As shown in Table 8, Grammarly is predominantly utilized during the editing and revising phases of the writing process, with an average score of M= 3.85 (SD= 0.867), rather than throughout the entire composition process.
The acceptance level for using Grammarly to check grammar is notably high, with a mean score of 4.15 and a standard deviation of 0.919 This is closely followed by its effectiveness in checking spelling and punctuation, which received a mean score of 4.02 and a standard deviation of 0.879 However, the acceptance levels for Grammarly's capabilities in checking vocabulary, sentence structure, and idea development are comparatively lower, with mean scores of 3.53, 3.50, and an unspecified score for idea development, indicating a need for improvement in these areas.
4.4.1 Results on acceptance level of students using Grammarly
1 Perceived ease of use of Grammarly 4.02 Agree
2 Attitudes toward using Grammarly 4.02 Agree
3 Behavioral intention to use Grammarly 3.89 Agree
4 Perceived usefulness of Grammarly 3.85 Agree
5 Actual use of Grammarly 3.63 Agree
Table 9: Acceptance level of students using Grammarly
Using the conceptual framework shown in figure 2, the statistical results are understood as follows:
Students rate Grammarly as a user-friendly AWE tool for writing evaluation, reflected in an overall mean score of 4.02, highlighting its ease of use, error detection, and work assessment With an average score of 3.85, users find it particularly effective for assessing articles, excelling in identifying grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors while providing quick feedback However, its effectiveness in addressing word choice and idea development received a slightly lower rating Overall, the positive perception of Grammarly's simplicity and utility fosters a favorable attitude towards its use, leading to a behavioral intention to utilize it for article assessment, which scored an average of 3.89, ultimately contributing to its acceptance among students.
A study evaluating the use of Grammarly as an Assessment for Writing Excellence (AWE) tool revealed an overall mean score of 3.63 Notably, over 86% of survey participants indicated that they used Grammarly either sometimes or always, highlighting its significant role in enhancing writing quality.
Discussions
Analysis of survey data reveals that key factors influencing ATC students' acceptance of Grammarly as an automated writing evaluation tool include perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude towards using, and behavioral intention to use These findings support the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which examines user acceptance of technologies Specifically, ease of use and usefulness significantly shape attitudes towards Grammarly, ultimately influencing the intention to use it and contributing to its overall acceptance among ATC students.
Grammarly's ease of use significantly contributes to its popularity among students, as highlighted in a recent survey Participants noted its user-friendly interface, which simplifies the submission of work for review, helps identify overlooked mistakes, and facilitates the assessment of writing Users appreciate the clarity of Grammarly's suggestions and report no issues when creating accounts or utilizing the platform for automatic article evaluation This aligns with Nova's findings on user satisfaction.
In 2018, it was concluded that Grammarly's free accessibility, quick evaluation, and feedback mechanisms significantly aid EFL students in the writing-checking process, reducing both time and financial costs However, it is surprising that students are less inclined to save their writing after using Grammarly for revisions, despite the platform offering a dedicated category for automatic storage of student papers This may be attributed to the fact that most students utilize Grammarly primarily for immediate writing checks rather than for the purpose of storing their work for later review.
Students widely recognize Grammarly as a valuable tool for evaluating writing, particularly for its ability to quickly identify and correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors The platform's rapid feedback is appreciated, although its effectiveness in addressing sentence structure, word choice, and idea development is viewed as less satisfactory This aligns with Nova's (2018) findings, which highlight Grammarly's limitations in contextual and content evaluation As noted by Fitria (2021), Grammarly is particularly effective for checking grammar, spelling, and sentence structure, while Ghufron and Rosyida (2018) emphasize its significant impact on diction, language use, and mechanics, but less so on content and organization.
Students generally have a positive attitude towards using Grammarly for automatic writing evaluation, viewing it as both easy and useful, as indicated by a high mean score This highlights the importance of selecting user-friendly writing assessment tools that enhance students' writing experiences Similar to previous research by Karyuatry (2018) and Koltovskaia (2020), which found high satisfaction levels with Grammarly, students in these studies reported positive feedback on its implementation and appreciated the grammar advice it offers Furthermore, students believe that Grammarly effectively supports their writing goals and view it as essential for checking their work.
A key factor influencing the use of Grammarly is the user's positive attitude, which shapes their behavioral intention to continue utilizing the tool This intention reflects an individual's willingness to adopt the technology in the future, as evidenced by participants expressing their commitment to using Grammarly and recommending it to others Users report higher satisfaction and increased confidence in their writing after utilizing Grammarly, aligning with the findings of Fitriana and Nurazni.
Grammarly has proven effective in improving students' grammar and writing quality, as highlighted by research from 2022 and Karyuatry (2018) While students express a willingness to use Grammarly for future writing assessments, their intention to use it regularly remains low, suggesting they prefer to utilize it when it aligns with their specific writing goals Furthermore, students feel they can self-assess their writing after using Grammarly, though their confidence in this ability is not very high This aligns with findings from Ghufron and Rosyida (2018), which show that Grammarly fosters student autonomy by enabling independent essay evaluation, leading to significant improvements in writing skills.
(2022) also claim that Grammarly assists students in identifying errors like misspellings, incorrect structures, and punctuation errors, thereby facilitating the learning process and fostering positive student improvement
The factors discussed significantly influence the acceptance of Grammarly, supporting the initial hypothesis that the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) can effectively identify elements affecting the adoption of learning technologies like Grammarly, as evidenced by Ramadhani's prior research.
In 2023, factors such as ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude, behavioral intention, and actual system use significantly influenced students' acceptance of technology Research by Yilmaz et al highlights the critical roles of perceived usefulness and ease of use in shaping users' attitudes and intentions Furthermore, Farahat's study from 2012 emphasizes the importance of students' perceptions in this context.
The intention of students to engage in online learning practices is significantly influenced by their attitudes toward ease of use, usefulness, and social factors from their reference groups Although students are familiar with Grammarly for writing checks, its usage frequency is low, indicating it does not fully meet the writing correction needs of English majors Grammarly is primarily used during the editing and revising stages rather than throughout the entire writing process While it effectively checks grammar, spelling, and punctuation, its acceptance diminishes when it comes to identifying sentence structure, word usage, and idea development errors Consequently, Grammarly falls short in helping students evaluate the organization and development of their ideas, aligning with findings that highlight its limited impact on writing content and structure.
Chapter summary
The adoption of Grammarly among ATC students is influenced by several factors, with perceived ease of use being the most significant, followed by perceived usefulness Students who recognize the benefits of Grammarly tend to develop a positive attitude and intention to use the tool While Grammarly is primarily utilized for checking grammar, spelling, and punctuation, its effectiveness in evaluating organization and idea development is perceived as less valuable Most students engage with Grammarly during the editing and revising stages rather than throughout the entire writing process Despite its long-term availability, the frequency of use remains relatively low, suggesting that limitations in providing feedback on organization and ideas may impact its adoption among ATC students at Banking Academy.
SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS, IMPLICATIONS AND
Summary of the results
ATC students recognize four key factors influencing their acceptance of Grammarly: ease of use, usefulness, attitude towards use, and behavioral intention to use, aligning with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by Davis (1989) Perceived ease of use stands out as the most significant factor, particularly in its ability to quickly and efficiently detect writing errors While Grammarly is valued for its grammar, spelling, and punctuation corrections, its effectiveness in addressing sentence structure, word choice, and idea development is less appreciated Overall, the interplay of ease of use and usefulness fosters a positive attitude towards Grammarly, ultimately enhancing the students' intention to use the tool for automatic essay assessment.
A recent study indicates a high level of acceptance of Grammarly among ATC students, with many using the application primarily for post-writing evaluations rather than during the writing process While its usage may not be frequent, Grammarly remains a significant automatic writing assessment tool Students typically rely on it to identify grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors, although its effectiveness in detecting issues related to sentence structure, vocabulary, and idea organization is rated lower This suggests that Grammarly excels in grammar detection but is less effective for content-related errors These findings are consistent with previous research by Ghufron and Rosyida (2018), which highlighted Grammarly's strengths in improving diction, grammar, and mechanics while having a limited impact on content organization.
Implications
This study demonstrates the effectiveness of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in evaluating new technologies, particularly in understanding user acceptance The model provides a multi-dimensional perspective on educational technology assessment, complementing traditional methods like experimentation By identifying the strengths and weaknesses of technologies, such as Grammarly as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool, this approach allows for tailored recommendations to enhance user experience and optimize writing feedback effectiveness.
Lecturers should evaluate students' writing using specific criteria, including grammar, spelling, punctuation, word usage, sentence structure, and idea development Providing clear and concise feedback is essential for helping students understand and learn from their mistakes Timely feedback delivery significantly enhances its effectiveness in supporting student learning Instructors are encouraged to promote the use of Grammarly and other Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tools to save time and improve writing performance However, teachers must recognize the strengths and weaknesses of these tools, as they may lack the ability to assess context and content, which is crucial for comprehensive self-feedback.
Students should save their writing after using Grammarly for future review, ensuring they consciously utilize its features to enhance their writing By leveraging Grammarly's strengths in identifying grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors, students can improve their work significantly Additionally, seeking feedback from teachers on word usage, sentence structure, and idea development provides a comprehensive assessment of their writing skills This approach helps students minimize mistakes and avoid repeating errors in their future writing endeavors.
37 future writing, consequently, contributing to the improvement in overall writing ability
The conjunction of traditional feedback with feedback from online tools, then, assists students in detecting mistakes and eventually improves the quality of writing and writing skills comprehensively.
Suggestions for further studies
This article acknowledges several limitations that should be addressed in future research Firstly, it suggests the inclusion of qualitative methods, such as in-depth interviews, and experimental approaches, like small-scale tests, to gain deeper insights into students' experiences with Grammarly as a writing assessment tool Additionally, the study's focus on ATC students at the Banking Academy of Vietnam may limit the applicability of its findings to other student populations; thus, expanding the sample size in future studies could enhance generalizability Furthermore, the relatively short duration of the research, lasting only about two months, may have hindered the observation of other effects It is recommended that future research extend the study period to explore the topic more comprehensively, ultimately contributing to a better understanding of Grammarly's acceptance as an Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tool for English learners.
Chapter summary
Research findings suggest strategies to improve technology integration in writing instruction for lecturers and students, maximizing the benefits of Grammarly while addressing its limitations in context and content corrections Combining traditional feedback methods with online tools can enhance the overall writing experience.
Feedback plays a crucial role in helping students identify mistakes and enhance their writing skills Furthermore, recommendations for future research include refining the research methodology, expanding the scale, and extending the duration of studies to improve the applicability of findings Future investigations should ideally utilize the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to assess the acceptance levels of specific technologies among English learners.
Abas, I H., & Abd Aziz, N H (2018) Model of the Writing Process and Strategies of EFL Proficient Student Writers: A Case Study of Indonesian Learners Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 26(3)
Aliaga, M., & Gunderson, B (1999) Interactive statistics (No Title)
Creswell, J W (2021) A concise introduction to mixed methods research SAGE publications
Davis, F D (1989) Technology acceptance model: TAM Al-Suqri, MN, Al-Aufi,
AS: Information Seeking Behavior and Technology Adoption, 205, 219
Ellis, R (2009) Corrective feedback and teacher development L2 Journal: An electronic refereed journal for foreign and second language educators, 1(1)
Fahmi, M A., & Cahyono, B Y (2021) EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback JEES (Journal of English Educators
Farahat, T (2012) Applying the technology acceptance model to online learning in the Egyptian universities Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 64, 95-
Fitria, R A., Sabarun, S., & Miftah, M Z (2022) Students’ perception of the use of grammarly in undergraduate thesis writing PROJECT (Professional
Fitria, T N (2021) Grammarly as AI-powered English writing assistant: Students’ alternative for writing English Metathesis: Journal of English
Fitriana, K., & Nurazni, L (2022) Exploring English Department Students' Perceptions on Using Grammarly to Check the Grammar in Their Writing Journal of English Teaching, 8(1), 15-25
Ghufron, M A., & Rosyida, F (2018) The role of Grammarly in assessing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing Lingua Cultura, 12(4), 395-
Graham, S., & Perin, D (2007) Writing next-effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools
Grimes, D., & Warschauer, M (2006, April) Automated essay scoring in the classroom In Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F (2006) Feedback on second language students' writing Language teaching, 39(2), 83-101
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F (Eds.) (2019) Feedback in second language writing:
Contexts and issues Cambridge university press
Jug, R., Jiang, X S., & Bean, S M (2019) Giving and receiving effective feedback: A review article and how-to guide Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 143(2), 244-250
Karyuatry, L (2018) Grammarly as a tool to improve students’ writing quality: Free online-proofreader across the boundaries JSSH (Jurnal Sains Sosial dan
Kellogg, R T., & Raulerson, B A (2007) Improving the writing skills of college students Psychonomic bulletin & review, 14, 237-242
Khoii, R., & Doroudian, A (2013) Automated scoring of EFL learners’ written performance: a torture or a blessing In Conference proceedings ICT for language learning (p 367) libreriauniversitaria it Edizioni
Knoch, U., May, L., Macqueen, S., Pill, J., & Storch, N (2016) Transitioning from university to the workplace: Stakeholder perceptions of academic and professional writing demands [IELTS Research Reports Online Series, Reference: 2016/1]
Koltovskaia, S (2020) Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study Assessing
Luft, C D B (2014) Learning from feedback: The neural mechanisms of feedback processing facilitating better performance Behavioral brain research, 261, 356-368
Charles, C M (1998) Introduction to educational research Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., 1 Jacob Way, Reading, MA 01867; Web site: http://longman awl com
Nova, M (2018) Utilizing Grammarly in evaluating academic writing: A narrative research on EFL students’ experience Premise: Journal of English
Nunan, D (2003) Practical english language teaching
Race, P (2001) Using feedback to help students to learn The Higher Education
Ramadhani, R (2023) The Use Technology Acceptance Model to Understand
Students’ Preference Using of ICT Tools in English Academic Writing (Doctoral dissertation, UIN Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh)
Sabarun, S (2019) The influence of different types of feedbacks on learners’ writing performance at higher education
Schraudner, M (2014) The online teacher’s assistant: Using automated correction programs to supplement learning and lesson planning CELE Journal, 22(1), 128-140
Shermis, M D., & Burstein, J C (2003) Automated essay scoring: A cross- disciplinary perspective Routledge
Toba, R., Noor, W N., & Sanu, L O (2019) The Current Issues of Indonesian EFL Students' Writing Skills: Ability, Problem, and Reason in Writing Comparison and Contrast Essay Dinamika Ilmu, 19(1), 57-73
Tuzi, F (2004) The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course Computers and composition, 21(2), 217-235
Wang, P L (2015) Effects of an Automated Writing Evaluation Program: Student Experiences and Perceptions Electronic Journal of Foreign Language
Wang, Y J., Shang, H F., & Briody, P (2013) Exploring the impact of using automated writing evaluation in English as a foreign language university students' writing Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 234-257
Warschauer, M., & Grimes, D (2008) Automated writing assessment in the classroom Pedagogies: An International Journal, 3(1), 22-36
Wiggins, G (2012) Seven keys to effective feedback Feedback, 70(1), 10-16
Wilson, J., & Czik, A (2016) Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality Computers & Education, 100, 94-109
Yilmaz, H., Maxutov, S., Baitekov, A., & Balta, N (2023) Student attitudes towards chat GPT: A technology acceptance Model survey International
Questionnaire about the experiences of using Grammarly among ATC students
1 What is your gender? a) Male b) Female c) Others
2 Which university year are you in? a) First-year b) Second-year c) Third-year d) Last-year
3 Have you ever used Grammarly to check your writing? a) Never b) Seldom c) Sometimes d) Usually e) Always
Section 2: Student’s perception about using Grammarly
From a scale from 1- Strongly Disagree to 5- Strongly Agree, please indicate your level of agreement for the following statements
1.1 Grammarly makes it easy for me to create accounts
1.2 Grammarly makes it easy for me to submit writing
1.3 Grammarly makes it easy for me to evaluate writing
1.4 Grammarly makes it easy for me to recognize errors that I have not noticed before
1.5 Grammarly makes it easy for me to save documents after revising
1.6 I can easily understand the feedback given by Grammarly
1.7 I can easily interact with feedback from Grammarly (accept/ dismiss/ flag suggestions)
1.8 In general, Grammarly is easy to use
2 Perceived 2.1 Grammarly is useful for correcting idea
2.2 Grammarly is useful for correcting compound and complex sentences
2.3 Grammarly is useful for correcting word choice errors
2.4 Grammarly is useful for correcting grammar errors
2.5 Grammarly is useful for correcting spelling errors and punctuation
2.6 Grammarly has a fast speed of evaluation
2.7 In general, Grammarly is useful to use
3.1 I find Grammarly easy to use
3.2 I find Grammarly useful to use
3.3 I think it is necessary to use Grammarly to check my writing
3.4 I think using Grammarly is suitable for my writing objectives and goals
3.5 Overall, I have a positive attitude toward using Grammarly
4.1 I am satisfied with using Grammarly
4.2 I feel confident about my writing after using Grammarly
4.3 After using Grammarly, I can examine my writing’s weaknesses and strengths myself
4.4 I presently intend to use Grammarly regularly to check my writing
4.5 I will continue using Grammarly in the future
4.6 I will recommend Grammarly for others to use
5.1 I have been using Grammarly for a long time
5.2 I use Grammarly very frequently (many times per week)
5.3 I primarily use Grammarly during the editing and revising stages, not throughout the writing process
5.4 I often use Grammarly to check idea development
5.5 I often use Grammarly to check sentences
5.6 I often use Grammarly to check vocabulary
5.7 I often use Grammarly to check grammar
5.8 I often use Grammarly to check spelling and punctuation