skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Strategy Uptake in Writing Pal: Adaptive Feedback and Instruction
The present study examined the extent to which adaptive feedback and just-in-time writing strategy instruction improved the quality of high school students’ persuasive essays in the context of the Writing Pal (W-Pal). W-Pal is a technology-based writing tool that integrates automated writing evaluation into an intelligent tutoring system. Students wrote a pretest essay, engaged with W-Pal’s adaptive instruction over the course of four training sessions, and then completed a posttest essay. For each training session, W-Pal differentiated strategy instruction for each student based on specific weaknesses in the initial training essays prior to providing the opportunity to revise. The results indicated that essay quality improved overall from pretest to posttest with respect to holistic quality, as well as several specific dimensions of essay quality, particularly for students with lower literacy skills. Moreover, students’ scores on some of the training essays improved from the initial to revised version on the dimensions of essay quality that were targeted by instruction, whereas scores did not improve on the dimensions that were not targeted by instruction. Overall, the results suggest that W-Pal’s adaptive strategy instruction can improve the quality of students’ essays overall, as well as more specific dimensions of essay quality.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1828010
PAR ID:
10344106
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Journal of Educational Computing Research
Volume:
60
Issue:
3
ISSN:
0735-6331
Page Range / eLocation ID:
696 to 721
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; (, American Educational Research Association (AERA))
    This quasi-experimental investigation considers the influence of an instructor-led discussion of structural knowledge on the conceptual structure of summary essays from lesson to posttest. Undergraduate architectural engineering students, after completing the lecture portions on the topic Sustainability and Green Design, during lab time composed a 300-word summary essay using the online tool Graphical Interface of Knowledge Structure (GIKS, Authors, 2024, see Figure 1), then immediately one lab section participated in an instructor-led discussion of their group-average essay structure to note correct conceptions as well as common misconceptions, while the other two sections also wrote but did not have this discussion. Posttest essays were collected the following week. The instructor-led discussion of the networks relative to no discussion did improve posttest essay writing quality (human rater) but NOT content quality. The data indicates that the discussion altered students’ conceptual structures of the central terms in the expert network, but at the expense of peripheral, unmentioned terms. Therefore instructor-led discussion of content conceptual structure likely does influence students’ conceptual knowledge structures, and teachers and instructors must be vigilant in preparing and presenting such a discussion to make sure they appropriately and adequately cover the content. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; (, British Journal of Educational Technology)
    Abstract As use of artificial intelligence (AI) has increased, concerns about AI bias and discrimination have been growing. This paper discusses an application called PyrEval in which natural language processing (NLP) was used to automate assessment and provide feedback on middle school science writing without linguistic discrimination. Linguistic discrimination in this study was operationalized as unfair assessment of scientific essays based on writing features that are not considered normative such as subject‐verb disagreement. Such unfair assessment is especially problematic when the purpose of assessment is not assessing English writing but rather assessing the content of scientific explanations. PyrEval was implemented in middle school science classrooms. Students explained their roller coaster design by stating relationships among such science concepts as potential energy, kinetic energy and law of conservation of energy. Initial and revised versions of scientific essays written by 307 eighth‐grade students were analyzed. Our manual and NLP assessment comparison analysis showed that PyrEval did not penalize student essays that contained non‐normative writing features. Repeated measures ANOVAs and GLMM analysis results revealed that essay quality significantly improved from initial to revised essays after receiving the NLP feedback, regardless of non‐normative writing features. Findings and implications are discussed. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topicAdvancement in AI has created a variety of opportunities in education, including automated assessment, but AI is not bias‐free.Automated writing assessment designed to improve students' scientific explanations has been studied.While limited, some studies reported biased performance of automated writing assessment tools, but without looking into actual linguistic features about which the tools may have discriminated.What this paper addsThis study conducted an actual examination of non‐normative linguistic features in essays written by middle school students to uncover how our NLP tool called PyrEval worked to assess them.PyrEval did not penalize essays containing non‐normative linguistic features.Regardless of non‐normative linguistic features, students' essay quality scores significantly improved from initial to revised essays after receiving feedback from PyrEval. Essay quality improvement was observed regardless of students' prior knowledge, school district and teacher variables.Implications for practice and/or policyThis paper inspires practitioners to attend to linguistic discrimination (re)produced by AI.This paper offers possibilities of using PyrEval as a reflection tool, to which human assessors compare their assessment and discover implicit bias against non‐normative linguistic features.PyrEval is available for use ongithub.com/psunlpgroup/PyrEvalv2. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Association for Computational Linguistics)
    Dziri, Nouha; Ren, Sean; Diao, Shizhe (Ed.)
    The ability to revise essays in response to feedback is important for students’ writing success. An automated writing evaluation (AWE) system that supports students in revising their essays is thus essential. We present eRevise+RF, an enhanced AWE system for assessing student essay revisions (e.g., changes made to an essay to improve its quality in response to essay feedback) and providing revision feedback. We deployed the system with 6 teachers and 406 students across 3 schools in Pennsylvania and Louisiana. The results confirmed its effectiveness in (1) assessing student essays in terms of evidence usage, (2) extracting evidence and reasoning revisions across essays, and (3) determining revision success in responding to feedback. The evaluation also suggested eRevise+RF is a helpful system for young students to improve their argumentative writing skills through revision and formative feedback. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; (, British journal of educational technology)
    As use of artificial intelligence (AI) has increased, concerns about AI bias and discrimination have been growing. This paper discusses an application called PyrEval in which natural language processing (NLP) was used to automate assessment and pro- vide feedback on middle school science writing with- out linguistic discrimination. Linguistic discrimination in this study was operationalized as unfair assess- ment of scientific essays based on writing features that are not considered normative such as subject- verb disagreement. Such unfair assessment is espe- cially problematic when the purpose of assessment is not assessing English writing but rather assessing the content of scientific explanations. PyrEval was implemented in middle school science classrooms. Students explained their roller coaster design by stat- ing relationships among such science concepts as potential energy, kinetic energy and law of conser- vation of energy. Initial and revised versions of sci- entific essays written by 307 eighth- grade students were analyzed. Our manual and NLP assessment comparison analysis showed that PyrEval did not pe- nalize student essays that contained non-normative writing features. Repeated measures ANOVAs and GLMM analysis results revealed that essay quality significantly improved from initial to revised essays after receiving the NLP feedback, regardless of non- normative writing features. Findings and implications are discussed. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; (, British journal of educational technology)
    As use of artificial intelligence (AI) has increased, concerns about AI bias and discrimination have been growing. This paper discusses an application called PyrEval in which natural language processing (NLP) was used to automate assessment and pro- vide feedback on middle school science writing with- out linguistic discrimination. Linguistic discrimination in this study was operationalized as unfair assess- ment of scientific essays based on writing features that are not considered normative such as subject- verb disagreement. Such unfair assessment is espe- cially problematic when the purpose of assessment is not assessing English writing but rather assessing the content of scientific explanations. PyrEval was implemented in middle school science classrooms. Students explained their roller coaster design by stat- ing relationships among such science concepts as potential energy, kinetic energy and law of conser- vation of energy. Initial and revised versions of sci- entific essays written by 307 eighth- grade students were analyzed. Our manual and NLP assessment comparison analysis showed that PyrEval did not pe- nalize student essays that contained non-normative writing features. Repeated measures ANOVAs and GLMM analysis results revealed that essay quality significantly improved from initial to revised essays after receiving the NLP feedback, regardless of non- normative writing features. Findings and implications are discussed. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email