Automated writing evaluation: defining the classroom research agenda

346 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The tool for the automatic analysis of text cohesion (TAACO): Automatic assessment of local, global, and text cohesion (2015, result): “Nevertheless, the variance explained by cohesion features alone in our model is on the low end of acceptability when compared with previous research on AES models (Attali & Burstein, 2006; McNamara et al., 2013; Warschauer & Ware, 2006).”
Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing (2018, background): “…of this research has focused on error correction and limited itself to particular modes of delivery, examining the effectiveness of teacher written feedback (Ferris, 1997), oral conferencing (Weissberg, 2006), peer feedback (Mendonca & Johnson, 1994) or machine marking (Warschauer & Ware, 2006).”
An Overview of Automated Scoring of Essays. (2006, background): “Automated essay scoring systems have been criticized for eliminating the human element in writing assessment ( Warschauer & Ware, 2006 ) and falling short of human interaction as well”