Attention:The NSF Public Access Repository (PAR) system and access will be unavailable from 5:00 PM ET until 8:00 PM ET on Friday, September 11 due to maintenance. We apologize for the inconvenience.

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


Title: Factors influencing students' perceptions of automated feedback and their impact on revision.
Automated feedback can provide students with timely information about their writing, but students' willingness to engage meaningfully with the feedback to revise their writing may be influenced by their perceptions of its usefulness. We explored the factors that may have influenced 339, 8th-grade students’ perceptions of receiving automated feedback on their writing and whether their perceptions impacted their revisions and writing improvement. Using HLM and logistic regression analyses, we found that: 1) students with more positive perceptions of the automated feedback made revisions that resulted in significant improvements in their writing, and 2) students who received feedback indicating they included more important ideas in their essays had significantly higher perceptions of the usefulness of the feedback, but were significantly less likely to engage in substantive revisions. Implications and the importance of helping students evaluate and reflect on the feedback to make substantive revisions, no matter their initial feedback, are discussed  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2010483
PAR ID:
10613998
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Proceedings of the International Society of the Learning Sciences
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings
ISSN:
1814-9316
ISBN:
979-8-9906980-3-1
Format(s):
Medium: X
Location:
Helsinki, Finland
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; (, Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer-Supported Learning)
    Writing and revising scientific explanations helps students integrate disparate scientific ideas into a cohesive understanding of science. Natural language processing technologies can help assess students’ writing and give corresponding feedback, which supports their writing and revision of their scientific ideas. However, the feedback is not always helpful to students. Our study investigated 241 middle school students’ a) use of feedback, b) how it affected their revisions, and c) how these factors affected students’ writing improvement. We found that students made more content-related revisions when they used feedback. Making content-related revisions also assisted students in improving their writing. But students still found it difficult to make integrated revisions and did not use feedback often. Additional support to assist students to understand and use feedback, especially for students with limited science knowledge, is needed. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; (, The WAC Journal)
    Peer review and revision have the potential to support the use of writing pedagogies across disciplines. The MWrite Program supports faculty across disciplines incorporate writing-to-learn (WTL) assignments in their classrooms. The WTL assignments incorporate peer review and revision to engage students in a collaborative co-construction of knowledge while alleviating the need for instructor feedback. Our study builds upon prior literature by examining how students view peer review as influencing their revisions in a WTL context. We analyzed the revision reflections students wrote as part of a WTL assignment in an introductory statistics course, characterizing the revisions students described and the sources to which they attributed their revisions. Students primarily described revising their arguments or adding missing content. They predominantly attributed revisions to receiving feedback, but they also valued reading their peers’ drafts. This study adds to prior literature by demonstrating that students viewed peer review as a valuable and supportive exercise enabling them to make productive revisions. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; (, In the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education 2024 Proceedings)
    Automated methods are becoming increasingly used to support formative feedback on students’ science explanation writing. Most of this work addresses students’ responses to short answer questions. We investigate automated feedback on students’ science explanation essays, which discuss multiple ideas. Feedback is based on a rubric that identifies the main ideas students are prompted to include in explanatory essays about the physics of energy and mass. We have found that students revisions generally improve their essays. Here, we focus on two factors that affect the accuracy of the automated feedback. First, learned representations of the six main ideas in the rubric differ with respect to their distinctiveness from each other, and therefore the ability of automated methods to identify them in student essays. Second, sometimes a student’s statement lacks sufficient clarity for the automated tool to associate it more strongly with one of the main ideas above all others. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, 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
  5. ; ; (, Assessing Writing)
    East, Martin; Slomp, David (Ed.)
    Studies examining peer review demonstrate that students can learn from giving feedback to and receiving feedback from their peers, especially when they utilize information gained from the review process to revise. However, much of the research on peer review is situated within the literature regarding how students learn to write. With an increasing use of writing-to-learn in STEM classrooms, it is important to study how students engage in peer review for these types of writing assignments. This study sought to better understand how peer review and revision can support student learning for writing-to-learn specifically, using the lenses of cognitive perspectives of writing and engagement with written corrective feedback. Using a case study approach, we provide a detailed analysis of six students’ written artifacts in response to a writing-to-learn assignment that incorporated peer review and revision implemented in an organic chemistry course. Students demonstrated a range in the types of revisions they made and the extent to which the peer review process informed their revisions. Additionally, students exhibited surface, midlevel, and active engagement with the peer review and revision process. Considering the different engagement levels can inform how we frame peer review to students when using it as an instructional practice. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Text Encoded Conversion
  • XML
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email