The Implementation of Digital Support for Punctuation in Academic Writing of EFL Students

Authors

  • Daviq Rizal Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2466-2968
  • Dwi Arni Siti Margiyanti Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia
  • Lauwwanaddahri Jaufanishshofa Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia
  • Nida Ayu Dewanti Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21580/vjv13i224039

Keywords:

EFL academic writing, punctuation, digital writing tools , automated written corrective feedback, Grammarly

Abstract

Punctuation contributes independently to the quality of academic writing. However, little is known about how EFL students manage it in an environment saturated with automated writing tools. This study identified the digital supports that EFL students use in relation to their punctuation knowledge and skills in academic writing. It determined the extent to which these supports are used and relied upon. A cross-sectional survey was administered via Google Forms to students at fifteen universities, yielding 145 responses, and semi-structured interviews were subsequently conducted with seven participants selected for their experience with digital writing support. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and interview data were analyzed thematically. Results indicate extensive but weakly informed reliance. Most participants wrote academically at least weekly yet placed themselves at intermediate or basic proficiency, and a slightly larger proportion used digital tools at least weekly than wrote at that frequency. Grammarly was named roughly twice as often as any other tool, alongside smaller checkers and the built-in functions of ordinary word processors; no tool named was designed specifically for punctuation. A notable contradiction emerged: nearly four in five participants used grammar-checking software expressly to correct punctuation, yet fewer than one in thirty identified punctuation checking as a valuable feature, suggesting that students absorb punctuation feedback into their conception of grammar. Only about half had received formal instruction in using these tools, and most rated their effectiveness as moderate. Institutions should therefore treat competence with automated feedback as a teachable skill and make punctuation explicitly visible in writing instruction.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Androutsopoulos, J. (2023). Punctuating the other: Graphic cues, voice, and positioning in digital discourse. Language & Communication, 88, 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2022.11.004

Androutsopoulos, J., & Busch, F. (2021). Digital punctuation as an interactional resource: The message-final period among German adolescents. Linguistics and Education, 62, 100871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2020.100871

Barrot, J. S. (2022). Integrating technology into ESL/EFL writing through Grammarly. RELC Journal, 53(3), 764–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220966632

Barrot, J. S. (2023a). Using automated written corrective feedback in the writing classrooms: Effects on L2 writing accuracy. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(4), 584–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1936071

Barrot, J. S. (2023b). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745

Batista, F., Caseiro, D., Mamede, N., & Trancoso, I. (2008). Recovering capitalization and punctuation marks for automatic speech recognition: Case study for Portuguese broadcast news. Speech Communication, 50(10), 847–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2008.05.008

Benzer, A. (2010). Prospective teachers' proficiency in punctuation rules and opinions related to punctuation problems. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1878–1883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.1002

Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203832400

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bui, H. P., Nguyen, L. T., & Nguyen, T. V. (2023). An investigation into EFL pre-service teachers' academic writing strategies. Heliyon, 9(3), e13743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13743

Busch, F. (2021). The interactional principle in digital punctuation. Discourse, Context & Media, 40, 100481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2021.100481

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Daffern, T., Mackenzie, N. M., & Hemmings, B. (2017). Predictors of writing success: How important are spelling, grammar and punctuation? Australian Journal of Education, 61(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116685319

Dahlström, H. (2019). Digital writing tools from the student perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1563–1581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9844-x

Dankoski, M. E., Palmer, M. M., Banks, J., Brutkiewicz, R. R., Walvoord, E., Hoffmann-Longtin, K., Bogdewic, S. P., & Gopen, G. D. (2012). Academic writing: Supporting faculty in a critical competency for success. Journal of Faculty Development, 26(2), 47–54.

Dizon, G., & Gayed, J. M. (2021). Examining the impact of Grammarly on the quality of mobile L2 writing. The JALT CALL Journal, 17(2), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v17n2.336

Ebadi, S., & Rahimi, M. (2019). Mediating EFL learners' academic writing skills in online dynamic assessment using Google Docs. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(5–6), 527–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1527362

Elton, L. (2010). Academic writing and tacit knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562511003619979

Escalante, J., Pack, A., & Barrett, A. (2023). AI-generated feedback on writing: Insights into efficacy and ENL student preference. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00425-2

Evtushenko, T. G., & Butuzova, T. V. (2014). Punctuation of cohesive devices: Theory and practice. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences, 154, 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.173

Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English writing assistant: Students' alternative for writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.31002/metathesis.v5i1.3519

Gayed, J. M., Carlon, M. K. J., Oriola, A. M., & Cross, J. S. (2022). Exploring an AI-based writing assistant's impact on English language learners. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100055

Godwin-Jones, R. (2022). Partnering with AI: Intelligent writing assistance and instructed language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 26(2), 5–24. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73474

Green, S. (2013). Novice ESL writers: A longitudinal case-study of the situated academic writing processes of three undergraduates in a TESOL context. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(3), 180–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.04.001

Guerreiro, N. M., Rei, R., & Batista, F. (2021). Towards better subtitles: A multilingual approach for punctuation restoration of speech transcripts. Expert Systems with Applications, 186, 115740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115740

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

Guo, Q., Feng, R., & Hua, Y. (2022). How effectively can EFL students use automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) in research writing? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(9), 2312–2331. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1879161

Harris, M. J. (2006). Three steps to teaching abstract and critique writing. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(2), 136–146.

Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: Where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902989227

Hirvela, A., Nussbaum, A., & Pierson, H. (2012). ESL students' attitudes toward punctuation. System, 40(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.01.006

Højbjerg, K., & Hindhede, A. L. (2023). Academic writing strategies among Danish students with a professional background. Education Inquiry. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2023.2223790

Houghton, K. J., Upadhyay, S. S. N., & Klin, C. M. (2018). Punctuation in text messages may convey abruptness. Period. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.044

Hyland, K. (2013). Writing in the university: Education, knowledge and reputation. Language Teaching, 46(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000036

Ivanova, M., Arupova, N., & Mekeko, N. (2022). Digital support for teaching punctuation in academic writing in English. Journal of Language and Education, 8(3), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.13608

Klimova, B. F. (2011). Making academic writing real with ICT. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 133–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2010.12.023

Koltovskaia, S. (2020). Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 44, 100450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450

Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444

Murray, R., & Thow, M. (2014). Peer-formativity: A framework for academic writing. Higher Education Research and Development, 33(6), 1166–1179. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.911252

Nazari, N., Shabbir, M. S., & Setiawan, R. (2021). Application of artificial intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: Randomized controlled trial. Heliyon, 7(5), e07014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014

Nobles, S., & Paganucci, L. (2015). Do digital writing tools deliver? Student perceptions of writing quality using digital tools and online writing environments. Computers and Composition, 38, 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2015.09.001

O'Neill, R., & Russell, A. (2019). Stop! Grammar time: University students' perceptions of the automated feedback program Grammarly. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3795

Ranalli, J. (2018). Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), 653–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1428994

Ranalli, J. (2021). L2 student engagement with automated feedback on writing: Potential for learning and issues of trust. Journal of Second Language Writing, 52, 100816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100816

Shahsavar, Z., & Asil, M. (2019). Diagnosing English learners' writing skills: A cognitive diagnostic modeling study. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1608007. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1608007

Stanisz, T., Drożdż, S., & Kwapień, J. (2023). Universal versus system-specific features of punctuation usage patterns in major Western languages. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 168, 113183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113183

Steiss, J., Tate, T., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., Warschauer, M., & Olson, C. B. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students' writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, 101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894

Sülükçü, Y., & Kırboğa, A. (2020). A study on the punctuation knowledge levels of freshmen students. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(2), 684–710. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.759273

Tambunan, A. R. S., Andayani, W., Sari, W. S., & Lubis, F. K. (2022). Investigating EFL students' linguistic problems using Grammarly as automated writing evaluation feedback. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46428

Vakili, S., Ebadi, S., & Popescu, M. (2019). Investigating contextual effects on Iranian EFL learners' mediation and reciprocity in academic writing. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1571289. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1571289

Wu, C., Zhang, Y. W., & Li, A. W. (2023). Peer feedback and Chinese medical students' English academic writing development: A longitudinal intervention study. BMC Medical Education, 23(1), 578. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04574-w

Zhang, F., Min, H. T., He, P., Chen, S., & Ren, S. (2023). Understanding EFL students' feedback literacy development in academic writing: A longitudinal case study. Assessing Writing, 58, 100770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100770

Downloads

Published

2024-12-05

Issue

Section

Articles

Similar Articles

<< < 2 3 4 5 6 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.