Scrutinizing the Impacts of Grammarly Application on Students’ Writing Performance and Perception
Abstract
This research explored the impact of the Grammarly application on students’ writing performance and perceptions, particularly during the thesis writing stage. Writing is a complex cognitive process requiring strategic planning, organization, grammar, and vocabulary skills. The study focused on students majoring in English Language Education at Ar-Raniry State Islamic University, specifically those in their ninth semester from the 2018 cohort. A purposive sample of 42 students, all at the thesis writing stage and users of Grammarly, was selected from a total of 127. Additionally, three lecturers, serving as thesis supervisors, were randomly selected for interviews from a pool of 20. The research employed both qualitative and quantitative methods, using survey questionnaires and interviews for data collection. Results indicated that Grammarly was a beneficial tool for students, significantly aiding in thesis writing and reducing the time spent on checking grammatical errors. The surveys revealed unanimous student agreement on Grammarly’s positive impact on their writing process. Interviews with lecturers supported this, noting an improvement in the quality of theses written by students who used Grammarly. This study underscored the effectiveness of Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tools like Grammarly in enhancing students’ writing skills and outcomes.
References
Ahmad, A., Mukhaiyar, & Atmazaki. (2022). Exploring Digital Tools for Teaching Essay Writing Course in Higher Education: Padlet, Kahoot, YouTube, Essaybot, Grammarly. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 16(13), 200–209. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i13.30599.
Akmal, S., Rasyid, M. N. A., Masna, Y., & Soraya, C. N. (2020). EFL Learners’ Difficulties in the Structure and Written Expression Section of TOEFL Test in an Indonesian University. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 7(2), 156–180. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v7i2.6472.
Allen, L.K., Crossley, S.A., Snow, E.L., & McNamara, D.S. (2014). L2 writing practice: Game enjoyment as a key to engagement. Language Learning and Technology, 18(2), 124–150. https://doi.org/10125/44373.
Ayu, D. P., & Nurweni, A. (2023). Grammatical Interference in Islamic School Students’ English Narrative Writings. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.18947.
Bassot, B. (2016). The Reflective Practice Cycle: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Critical Reflection. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315768298.
Burns, R., Gallant, K. A., Fenton, L., White, C., & Hamilton-Hinch, B. (2020). The go-along Interview: A Valuable Tool for Leisure Research. Leisure Sciences, 42(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2019.1578708.
Calma, A., Cotronei-Baird, V., & Chia, A. (2022). Grammarly: An Instructional Intervention for Writing Enhancement in Management Education. International Journal of Management Education, 20(3), 100704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100704.
Creswell, J. W. (2022). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research Second Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Cui, J., Zhang, Y., Wan, S., Chen, C., Zeng, J., & Zhou, X. (2019). Visual Form Perception is Fundamental for Both Reading Comprehension and Arithmetic Computation. Cognition, 189, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.03.014.
Daniel, C., Wentz, E., Hurtado, P., Yang, W., & Pettit, C. (2023). Digital Technology Use and Future Expectations: A Multinational Survey of Professional Planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2023.2253295.
Denham, S.L., & Winkler, I. (2020). Predictive Coding in Auditory Perception: Challenges and Unresolved Questions. European Journal of Neuroscience, 51(5), 1151–1160. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13802.
Dizon, G., & Gayed, J. M. (2021). Examining the Impact of Grammarly on the Quality of Mobile L2 Writing. JALT CALL Journal, 17(2), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.29140/JALTCALL.V17N2.336.
Dobrić, N., Sigott, G., Ilc, G., Lazović, V., Cesnik, H., & Stopar, A. (2021). Errors as Indicators of Writing Task Difficulty at the Slovene General Matura in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (United Kingdom), 31(3), 475–491. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12345.
Ellis, N.C. (2019). Essentials of a Theory of Language Cognition. Modern Language Journal, 103, 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12532.
Fitria, R.A., Sabarun, S., & Miftah, M.Z. (2022). Students’ Perception of the Use of Grammarly in Undergraduate Thesis Writing. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 5(2), 366–371. https://doi.org/10.22460/project.v5i2.p366-371.
Fitria, T. N. (2021). QuillBot as an Online Tool: Students’ Alternative in Paraphrasing and Rewriting of English Writing. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 9(1), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v9i1.10233.
Graham, S. (2022). A Walk Through the Landscape of Writing: Insights from a Program of Writing Research. Educational Psychologist, 57(2), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1951734.
Hicham, B., & Bachir, B. (2020). Using Writing Assistive Technology to Improve EFL University Students Performance. Quarterly of Iranian Distance Education Journal, 2(2), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.30473/IDEJ.2019.6869.
Jain, N. (2021). Survey Versus Interviews: Comparing Data Collection tools for Exploratory Research. Qualitative Report, 26(2), 541–554. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4492.
Kadam, D.M., & Pusawale, S.N. (2023). Task-Based Approach: An Approach to Develop Writing Skills in English of Engineering Students Leads to Effective Communication Skills. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 37(1), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2023/v37i1/23132.
Koltovskaia, S. (2023). Postsecondary L2 Writing Teachers’ use and Perceptions of Grammarly as a Complement to their Feedback. ReCALL, 35(3), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000179.
Law, S., & Baer, A. (2020). Using Technology and Structured Peer Reviews to Enhance students’ writing. Active Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417740994.
Lee, S., Kuo, L.J., Xu, Z., & Hu, X. (2022). The Effects of Technology-Integrated Classroom Instruction on K-12 English Language Learners’ Literacy Development: A Meta-Analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(5–6), 1106–1137. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1774612.
Lin, C.A., Lin, Y.L., & Tsai, P.S. (2020). Assessing Foreign Language Narrative Writing Through Automated Writing Evaluation: A Case for the Web-Based Pigai System. In ICT-Based Assessment, Methods, and Programs in Tertiary Education, (pp. 100-119). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3062-7.ch006.
Lupyan, G., Rahman, R.A., Boroditsky, L., & Clark, A. (2020). Effects of Language on Visual Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(11), 930–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.08.005.
Mat, A.C., Zulkornain, L.H., & Rahman, N.A.A. (2024). Automated Writing Evaluation: Users’ Perception and Expectations. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 14(2), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.2.2039.
Merta, L.W.S., Ratminingsih, N.M., & Budasi, I.G. (2023). The Integration of Technology in English Language Teaching to Stimulate Students’ Critical Thinking. Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, 17(2), 333–341. https://doi.org/10.15294/lc.v17i2.39097.
Miranty, D., Widiati, U., Cahyono, B.Y., & Sharif, T.I.S.T. (2023). Automated Writing Evaluation Tools for Indonesian Undergraduate English as a Foreign Language Students’ Writing. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 12(3), 1705–1715. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v12i3.24958.
Mudra, H. (2023). Responses and Preferences of Rural Islamic University EFL Learners for Written Corrective Feedback. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.17943.
Muluk, S., Habiburrahim, H., & Rechal, S. R. (2020). Students’ Awareness and Perception Towards Learning Styles. Jurnal Ilmiah Didaktika: Media Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pengajaran, 20(2), 143-164. https://doi.org/10.22373/jid.v20i2.5229.
Muluk, S., Zainuddin, Z., & Dahliana, S. (2022). Flipping an IELTS Writing Course: Investigating its Impacts on Students’ Performance and Attitudes. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 591–612. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i2.23314.
Muluk, S., Habiburrahim, H., Safrul, M. S., Hakim, L., & Amiruddin, A. (2023). Scrutinizing online instructional approach: What drives faculty to adopt synchronous virtual classroom. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 270–288. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.19656.
Naeem, M., Ozuem, W., Howell, K., & Ranfagni, S. (2023). A Step-by-Step Process of Thematic Analysis to Develop a Conceptual Model in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789.
Nova, M. (2018). Utilizing Grammarly in Evaluating Academic Writing: A Narrative Research on EFL Students’ Experience. Premise: Journal of English Education, 7(1), 80-96. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v7i1.1300.
Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Qualitative Interviews: A Methodological Discussion of the Interviewer and Respondent Contexts. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-17.2.2551.
O’Neill, R., & Russell, A.M.T. (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.
Ozdem-Yilmaz, Y., & Bilican, K. (2020). Discovery Learning—Jerome Bruner. In B. Akpan & T. J. Kennedy (Eds.), Science Education in Theory and Practice: An Introductory Guide to Learning Theory (pp. 177–190). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5748/9contecsi2012/rf-456.
Qassemzadeh, A., & Soleimani, H. (2016). The Impact of Feedback Provision by Grammarly Software and Teachers on Learning Passive Structures by Iranian EFL Learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(9), 1884–1894. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0609.23.
Schwebel, D.C. (2021). The Challenge of Advanced Scientific Writing: Mistakes and Solutions. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 14(3), 22-25 https://journals.psu.edu/td/article/view/1619.
Setyani, E.D., Bunau, E., & Rezeki, Y.S. (2023). The Influence of Grammarly towards Indonesian EFL Students’ First-Degree Thesis Writing Confidence. Elsya: Journal of English Language Studies, 5(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.31849/elsya.v5i1.6773.
Spence, C. (2022). The Tongue Map and the Spatial Modulation of Taste Perception. Current Research in Food Science, 5, 598–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2022.02.004.
Spivey, M.J. (2023). Cognitive Science Progresses Toward Interactive Frameworks. Topics in Cognitive Science, 15(2), 219–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12645.
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.
Thi, N.K., & Nikolov, M. (2022). How Teacher and Grammarly Feedback Complement One Another in Myanmar EFL Students’ Writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 767–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2.
Utami, I.G.A.L.P., & Mahardika, I.G.N.A.W. (2023). Grammarly and Grammatical Errors Reduction: A Case for Non-Native English Teachers’ Professional Learning. International Journal of Language Education, 7(2), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v7i2.46431.
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., & Sullivan, Y.W. (2016). Guidelines for Conducting Mixed-Methods Research: An Extension and Illustration. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(7), 435–495. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00433.
White, L. (2021). Grammatical Theory and Language Acquisition. In Grammatical Theory and Language Acquisition, 6. De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112419700.
Xu, F. (2019). Towards a Rational Constructivist Theory of Cognitive Development. Psychological Review, 126(6), 841–864. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000153.
Xu, T.S., Zhang, L.J., & Gaffney, J.S. (2022). Examining the Relative Effects of Task Complexity and Cognitive Demands on Students’ Writing in a Second Language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(2), 483–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000310.
Akmal, S., Rasyid, M. N. A., Masna, Y., & Soraya, C. N. (2020). EFL Learners’ Difficulties in the Structure and Written Expression Section of TOEFL Test in an Indonesian University. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 7(2), 156–180. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v7i2.6472.
Allen, L.K., Crossley, S.A., Snow, E.L., & McNamara, D.S. (2014). L2 writing practice: Game enjoyment as a key to engagement. Language Learning and Technology, 18(2), 124–150. https://doi.org/10125/44373.
Ayu, D. P., & Nurweni, A. (2023). Grammatical Interference in Islamic School Students’ English Narrative Writings. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.18947.
Bassot, B. (2016). The Reflective Practice Cycle: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Critical Reflection. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315768298.
Burns, R., Gallant, K. A., Fenton, L., White, C., & Hamilton-Hinch, B. (2020). The go-along Interview: A Valuable Tool for Leisure Research. Leisure Sciences, 42(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2019.1578708.
Calma, A., Cotronei-Baird, V., & Chia, A. (2022). Grammarly: An Instructional Intervention for Writing Enhancement in Management Education. International Journal of Management Education, 20(3), 100704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100704.
Creswell, J. W. (2022). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research Second Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Cui, J., Zhang, Y., Wan, S., Chen, C., Zeng, J., & Zhou, X. (2019). Visual Form Perception is Fundamental for Both Reading Comprehension and Arithmetic Computation. Cognition, 189, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.03.014.
Daniel, C., Wentz, E., Hurtado, P., Yang, W., & Pettit, C. (2023). Digital Technology Use and Future Expectations: A Multinational Survey of Professional Planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2023.2253295.
Denham, S.L., & Winkler, I. (2020). Predictive Coding in Auditory Perception: Challenges and Unresolved Questions. European Journal of Neuroscience, 51(5), 1151–1160. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13802.
Dizon, G., & Gayed, J. M. (2021). Examining the Impact of Grammarly on the Quality of Mobile L2 Writing. JALT CALL Journal, 17(2), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.29140/JALTCALL.V17N2.336.
Dobrić, N., Sigott, G., Ilc, G., Lazović, V., Cesnik, H., & Stopar, A. (2021). Errors as Indicators of Writing Task Difficulty at the Slovene General Matura in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (United Kingdom), 31(3), 475–491. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12345.
Ellis, N.C. (2019). Essentials of a Theory of Language Cognition. Modern Language Journal, 103, 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12532.
Fitria, R.A., Sabarun, S., & Miftah, M.Z. (2022). Students’ Perception of the Use of Grammarly in Undergraduate Thesis Writing. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 5(2), 366–371. https://doi.org/10.22460/project.v5i2.p366-371.
Fitria, T. N. (2021). QuillBot as an Online Tool: Students’ Alternative in Paraphrasing and Rewriting of English Writing. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 9(1), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v9i1.10233.
Graham, S. (2022). A Walk Through the Landscape of Writing: Insights from a Program of Writing Research. Educational Psychologist, 57(2), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1951734.
Hicham, B., & Bachir, B. (2020). Using Writing Assistive Technology to Improve EFL University Students Performance. Quarterly of Iranian Distance Education Journal, 2(2), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.30473/IDEJ.2019.6869.
Jain, N. (2021). Survey Versus Interviews: Comparing Data Collection tools for Exploratory Research. Qualitative Report, 26(2), 541–554. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4492.
Kadam, D.M., & Pusawale, S.N. (2023). Task-Based Approach: An Approach to Develop Writing Skills in English of Engineering Students Leads to Effective Communication Skills. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 37(1), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2023/v37i1/23132.
Koltovskaia, S. (2023). Postsecondary L2 Writing Teachers’ use and Perceptions of Grammarly as a Complement to their Feedback. ReCALL, 35(3), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000179.
Law, S., & Baer, A. (2020). Using Technology and Structured Peer Reviews to Enhance students’ writing. Active Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417740994.
Lee, S., Kuo, L.J., Xu, Z., & Hu, X. (2022). The Effects of Technology-Integrated Classroom Instruction on K-12 English Language Learners’ Literacy Development: A Meta-Analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(5–6), 1106–1137. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1774612.
Lin, C.A., Lin, Y.L., & Tsai, P.S. (2020). Assessing Foreign Language Narrative Writing Through Automated Writing Evaluation: A Case for the Web-Based Pigai System. In ICT-Based Assessment, Methods, and Programs in Tertiary Education, (pp. 100-119). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3062-7.ch006.
Lupyan, G., Rahman, R.A., Boroditsky, L., & Clark, A. (2020). Effects of Language on Visual Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(11), 930–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.08.005.
Mat, A.C., Zulkornain, L.H., & Rahman, N.A.A. (2024). Automated Writing Evaluation: Users’ Perception and Expectations. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 14(2), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.2.2039.
Merta, L.W.S., Ratminingsih, N.M., & Budasi, I.G. (2023). The Integration of Technology in English Language Teaching to Stimulate Students’ Critical Thinking. Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, 17(2), 333–341. https://doi.org/10.15294/lc.v17i2.39097.
Miranty, D., Widiati, U., Cahyono, B.Y., & Sharif, T.I.S.T. (2023). Automated Writing Evaluation Tools for Indonesian Undergraduate English as a Foreign Language Students’ Writing. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 12(3), 1705–1715. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v12i3.24958.
Mudra, H. (2023). Responses and Preferences of Rural Islamic University EFL Learners for Written Corrective Feedback. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.17943.
Muluk, S., Habiburrahim, H., & Rechal, S. R. (2020). Students’ Awareness and Perception Towards Learning Styles. Jurnal Ilmiah Didaktika: Media Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pengajaran, 20(2), 143-164. https://doi.org/10.22373/jid.v20i2.5229.
Muluk, S., Zainuddin, Z., & Dahliana, S. (2022). Flipping an IELTS Writing Course: Investigating its Impacts on Students’ Performance and Attitudes. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 591–612. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i2.23314.
Muluk, S., Habiburrahim, H., Safrul, M. S., Hakim, L., & Amiruddin, A. (2023). Scrutinizing online instructional approach: What drives faculty to adopt synchronous virtual classroom. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 11(1), 270–288. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v11i1.19656.
Naeem, M., Ozuem, W., Howell, K., & Ranfagni, S. (2023). A Step-by-Step Process of Thematic Analysis to Develop a Conceptual Model in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789.
Nova, M. (2018). Utilizing Grammarly in Evaluating Academic Writing: A Narrative Research on EFL Students’ Experience. Premise: Journal of English Education, 7(1), 80-96. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v7i1.1300.
Oltmann, S. M. (2016). Qualitative Interviews: A Methodological Discussion of the Interviewer and Respondent Contexts. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-17.2.2551.
O’Neill, R., & Russell, A.M.T. (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.
Ozdem-Yilmaz, Y., & Bilican, K. (2020). Discovery Learning—Jerome Bruner. In B. Akpan & T. J. Kennedy (Eds.), Science Education in Theory and Practice: An Introductory Guide to Learning Theory (pp. 177–190). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5748/9contecsi2012/rf-456.
Qassemzadeh, A., & Soleimani, H. (2016). The Impact of Feedback Provision by Grammarly Software and Teachers on Learning Passive Structures by Iranian EFL Learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(9), 1884–1894. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0609.23.
Schwebel, D.C. (2021). The Challenge of Advanced Scientific Writing: Mistakes and Solutions. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 14(3), 22-25 https://journals.psu.edu/td/article/view/1619.
Setyani, E.D., Bunau, E., & Rezeki, Y.S. (2023). The Influence of Grammarly towards Indonesian EFL Students’ First-Degree Thesis Writing Confidence. Elsya: Journal of English Language Studies, 5(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.31849/elsya.v5i1.6773.
Spence, C. (2022). The Tongue Map and the Spatial Modulation of Taste Perception. Current Research in Food Science, 5, 598–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2022.02.004.
Spivey, M.J. (2023). Cognitive Science Progresses Toward Interactive Frameworks. Topics in Cognitive Science, 15(2), 219–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12645.
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.
Thi, N.K., & Nikolov, M. (2022). How Teacher and Grammarly Feedback Complement One Another in Myanmar EFL Students’ Writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 767–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2.
Utami, I.G.A.L.P., & Mahardika, I.G.N.A.W. (2023). Grammarly and Grammatical Errors Reduction: A Case for Non-Native English Teachers’ Professional Learning. International Journal of Language Education, 7(2), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v7i2.46431.
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., & Sullivan, Y.W. (2016). Guidelines for Conducting Mixed-Methods Research: An Extension and Illustration. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(7), 435–495. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00433.
White, L. (2021). Grammatical Theory and Language Acquisition. In Grammatical Theory and Language Acquisition, 6. De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112419700.
Xu, F. (2019). Towards a Rational Constructivist Theory of Cognitive Development. Psychological Review, 126(6), 841–864. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000153.
Xu, T.S., Zhang, L.J., & Gaffney, J.S. (2022). Examining the Relative Effects of Task Complexity and Cognitive Demands on Students’ Writing in a Second Language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(2), 483–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000310.
Published
2024-05-30
How to Cite
SURYANTO, Suryanto et al.
Scrutinizing the Impacts of Grammarly Application on Students’ Writing Performance and Perception.
Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, [S.l.], v. 12, n. 2, p. 465-490, may 2024.
ISSN 2443-2067.
Available at: <https://journal.scadindependent.org/index.php/jipeuradeun/article/view/1235>. Date accessed: 15 mar. 2025.
doi: https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v12i2.1235.
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms: (1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC-BY-SA) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal; (2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal; (3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
