• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.7 no.5
• /
• pp.36-46
• /
• 2007

This paper presents an automated English scoring system designed to help non-native speakers of English, Korean-speaking learners in particular. The system is developed to help the 3rd grade students in junior high school improve their English grammar skills. Without human's efforts, the system identifies grammar errors in English sentences, provides feedback on the detected errors, and scores the sentences. Detecting grammar errors in the system requires implementing a special type of rules in addition to the rules to parse grammatical sentences. Error production rules are implemented to analyze ungrammatical sentences and recognize syntactic errors. The rules are collected from the junior high school textbooks and real student test data. By firing those rules, the errors are detected followed by setting corresponding error flags, and the system continues the parsing process without a failure. As the final step of the process, the system scores the student sentences based on the errors detected. The system is evaluated with real English test data produced by the students and the answers provided by human teachers.

• International Journal of Internet, Broadcasting and Communication
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.22-29
• /
• 2021

This study evaluates the accuracy of corrective feedback from Grammarly, an online grammar checker, on essays written by cyber university learners in terms of detected errors, suggested replacement forms, and false alarms.The results indicate that Grammarly has a high overall error detection rate of over 65%, being particularly strong at catching errors related to articles and prepositions. In addition, on the detected errors, Grammarly mostly provide accurate replacement forms and very rarely make false alarms. These findings suggest that Grammarly has high potential as a useful educational tool to complement the drawbacks of teacher feedback and to help learnersimprove grammatical accuracy in their written work. However, it is still premature to conclude that Grammarly can completely replace teacher feedback because it has the possibility (approximately 35%) of failing to detect errors and the limitationsin detecting errors in certain categories. Since the feedback from Grammarly is not entirely reliable, caution should be taken for successful integration of Grammarly in English writing classes. Teachers should make judicious decisions on when and how to use Grammarly, based on a keen awareness of Grammarly's strengths and limitations.