Keywords
How to Cite
Abstract
Abstract: The increasing integration of artificial intelligence–driven writing tools into ESL instruction has intensified scholarly debate regarding the relative pedagogical value of automated versus human-mediated feedback. While automated writing evaluation systems offer immediacy, consistency, and scalability, concerns remain regarding their capacity to support deeper cognitive engagement and meaningful revision processes. This study investigates the comparative effects of automated feedback and human feedback (teacher and peer) on ESL learners’ writing accuracy and revision behavior in Uzbek secondary schools. Grounded in sociocultural theory and models of self-regulated learning, the study conceptualizes feedback as a mediational process shaping learners’ cognitive and metacognitive development. Employing a mixed-methods design, the research analyzes pre- and post-writing tasks, revision patterns, and learner perceptions. The findings reveal that while automated feedback significantly improves surface-level linguistic accuracy, human feedback—particularly when dialogically mediated—promotes more substantive revisions and higher-order engagement with writing. The study argues that the pedagogical effectiveness of feedback lies not in its technological form but in its capacity to facilitate reflective, agentive learning. Implications are drawn for the principled integration of automated and human feedback in digitally mediated ESL writing instruction.
References
1. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. – Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
2. Carless D., Boud D. The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback // Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. – 2018. – Vol. 43, No. 8. – P. 1315–1325.
3. Chapelle C. Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
4. Ellis R. The study of second language acquisition. – 2nd ed. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
5. Hyland K. Second language writing. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
6. Hyland K., Hyland F. Feedback on second language students’ writing // Language Teaching. – 2006. – Vol. 39, No. 2. – P. 83–101.
7. Li Z., Link S., Hegelheimer V. Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation in ESL writing instruction // Journal of Second Language Writing. – 2015. – Vol. 27. – P. 1–18.
8. Musoyeva A. B. The importance of competencies in improving the professional skills of future foreign language teachers // Asian Journal of Multidimensional Research. – 2021. – Vol. 10, No. 9. – P. 89–95.
9. Musoyeva A. B. Exploring the distinctive features of learning management systems in enhancing academic writing in higher education // Ustozlar uchun. – 2024. – Vol. 57, No. 4. – P. 546–549.
10. Musoyeva A. B. Improving the quality of research with the help of new educational platforms // Multidisciplinary Journal of Science and Technology. – 2024. – Vol. 4, No. 4. – P. 159–164.
11. Nicol D., Macfarlane-Dick D. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice // Studies in Higher Education. – 2006. – Vol. 31, No. 2. – P. 199–218.
12. Patchan M., Schunn C. Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts // Instructional Science. – 2015. – Vol. 43, No. 5. – P. 591–614.
13. Ranalli J. Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? // Computer Assisted Language Learning. – 2018. – Vol. 31, No. 7. – P. 653–674.
14. Stevenson M., Phakiti A. Automated feedback and second language writing development: A systematic review // Language Learning & Technology. – 2019. – Vol. 23, No. 1. – P. 1–24.
15. Vygotsky L. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. – Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.
16. Zhang Z., Hyland K. Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing // Assessing Writing. – 2022. – Vol. 51. – Article 100604.