Evolution and Use of Grammarly in English Language Teaching and Learning in The Classroom Context
Keywords:
Grammarly in English Language, Teaching and Learning, Classroom contextAbstract
This research paper explores the evolution and use of Grammarly as a digital tool in English language teaching and learning, particularly within the classroom context. As technology continues to reshape education, Grammarly has emerged as a popular platform for enhancing writing skills by providing real-time feedback on grammar, punctuation, style, and plagiarism. The study examines the historical development of Grammarly, its integration into the educational system, and its effectiveness in supporting students' language learning processes. Through qualitative analysis, the research highlights how Grammarly facilitates personalized learning, promotes independent writing improvement, and assists teachers in addressing common language challenges. The paper also evaluates potential limitations, such as over-reliance on automated feedback, and suggests ways to incorporate Grammarly more effectively in classroom settings to foster a balanced approach to language acquisition. The findings contribute to understanding how digital tools like Grammarly can complement traditional language instruction, offering insights for educators aiming to optimize their teaching strategies.
References
Burston, J. (2008). Review of BonPatron: An online spelling, grammar, and expression checker. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 337-347. doi:10.1558/cj.v25i2.337-347
Nadasdi, T., & Sinclair, S. (2007). Anything I can do, CPU can do better: A comparison of human and computer grammar correction for L2 writing using BonPatron.com. Retrieved from http://bonpa tron.com
Gauthier, M. (2013). Anglophone high school boys‟ engagement and achievement in editing their French writing using the Bon Patron Pro. Journal of Classroom Research in Literacy, 6, 24-35. Retrieved from https://jcrl.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/jcrl/article/view/16093
Potter, R., & Fuller, D. (2008). My new teaching partner? Using the grammar checker in writing instruction. English Journal, 98(1), 36-41.
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
Chung, G. K. W. K., & Baker, E. L. (2003). Issues in the reliability and validity of automated scoring of constructed responses. In M. D. Shermis & J. Burstein (Eds.), Automated essay scoring: A cross-disciplinary perspective (pp. 23-40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ericsson, P. F. (2006). The meaning of meaning: Is a paragraph more than an equation. In P. F. Ericsson & R. H. Haswell (Eds.), Machine scoring of student essays (pp. 28-37).
McGee, T. (2006). Taking a spin on the Intelligent Essay Assessor. In P. F. Ericsson & R. H. Haswell (Eds.), Machine scoring of student essays (pp. 79-92). Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Eds.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97114). London: Oxford University Press.
Cavaleri, M., & Dianati, S. (2016). You want me to check your grammar again? The usefulness of an online grammar checker as perceived by students. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 10(1), 223-236.
