HUE UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH

Graduation Thesis Proposal

EFL UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ REFLECTIONS ON THE USE

OF GRAMMARLY PREMIUM IN WRITING

Student’s Name: Phan Bao Anh

Student’s ID: 17F7011002
Class: Anh SPK14B
Contact: 0708096641
Proposed Supervisor: Dr Le Pham Hoai Huong

Hue, December 2020

I. INTRODUCTION.
1.1. Rationale.
As for English as Second Language (ESL) or English as Foreign Language
(EFL) learners, language learning demands them to have a good command of the
target language such as listening, speaking, reading and writing. In particular, writing
skill is considered as the most challenging but essential part of the process of second
language acquisition (Jack, C. & Willy, A. 2002). This skill needs the learners’ such
abilities to deal with content-based parts as idea organisation, logical thinking,
background knowledge and the likes, and the grammar-based parts such as grammar,
diction, punctuation, spelling and the likes. Despite being a native speaker, he or she
cannot write an excellent piece of writing (Kukurs, 2012). Consequently, ESL or
EFL learners are inevitable to be error-free in writing skill in the light of limited
knowledge of English grammar (Sermsook, K. et al. 2017) and influences of mother
tongue (Benson, 2002; Cedar, 2004). James (1998) proposed five categories of errors
which include grammatical errors (adjectives, adverbs, articles, nouns, possession,
pronouns, prepositions and verbs), substance errors (capitalisation, punctuation and
spelling), lexical errors (word formation and word selection), syntactic errors
(coordination/ subordination, sentence structure and ordering), and semantic errors
(ambiguous communication and miscommunication). Given the fact that the learners
aspire to ameliorate their writing ability; Grammarly, which is a web-based platform,
was published in 2009 in an attempt to reduce its users’ errors to the minimum.
Thanks for this application, a text which is exerted on will be perfectly mistake-free
ranging from grammar and writing style and diction to plagiarism. As an ESL
learner, Grammarly Premium will be the ideal writing tool to make the most of
learning (Qassemzadeh and Soleimani, 2016).
1.2. Aims of the study.
The research aims to investigate the ESL or EFL learners’ reflections on the
efficacy of the web-based platform Grammarly and the potential effects Grammarly
Premium can have on learners.
1.3. Research questions.
The study tackles the following research questions:
1. What are frequent types of errors the participants improve after receiving
feedback by Grammarly Premium?
2. What are the participants’ reflections on the use of Grammarly Premium on
self-improvement after receiving feedback by Grammarly Premium?
1.4. Scope of research.
The research will be conducted on the fourth-year English-majored students at
the College of Foreign Languages, Hue University.
1.5. Significance.
The study emphasises the influences Grammarly Premium upgrade have on
ESL learners’ writing improvement as well as exploits the learners’ thoughts and
experiences of self-improvement through technology. Moreover, Grammarly
Premium can be a universal application in teaching and learning writing in
university.
1.6. Limitations.
In the light of a limited number of participants and materials during a short
period of time, and the basis on the qualitative research method, the study outcomes
can be considered subjective, limitedly generalised

II. LITERATURE REVIEW.

In the modern era, English plays a vital role as a lingua franca in oral and
written communication. As mentioned above, how to write fluently and naturally is
an arduous cognitive activity which demands the learners to deal with various factors
(Nunan, 1989). Noirish (1993) claimed that, as English as Foreign Language (EFL)
or English as Second Language (ESL) learners, they are inclined to commit
systematic errors in writing. Alongside with the development of international
language learning, technological advancement is also applied into learning and
teaching to augment the learners’ full potentials (Khan, 1997; Relan & Gillami,
1997; Lin, 1997; McCarthy and Grabowski, 1999). Therefore, Grammarly can be a
beneficial application to serve as a learning and teaching tool. This AI-powered
writing enhancement can be taken advantage of in various purposes. While much
recent research has focused on the effectiveness of Grammarly of a large number of
participants (Karyuatry, L. et al. 2018; Ghufron, M. A.,2018; Fadhilah, U. et al.
2018), few researchers have taken the insight into the learners’ writing improvement
into account. However, the above research concluded that utilising Grammarly can
assist the learners in writing enhancement significantly.
Grammarly, as a computer-mediated feedback system, can be compared to the
teacher’s corrective feedback. In the area of learning and success, corrective
feedback is a regular activity, which is a process of a learner receiving formal or
informal feedback from an agent such as an instructor or peer on his or her
performances (Hattie, J.; Timperley, H. 2007). However, it is worth noting that
teacher corrective feedback can take days or even weeks to provide review despite its
efficacy. While teachers’ prejudices or bias towards any student can strongly impact
their results, a computer-mediated feedback system like Grammarly expresses a
sense of equality among the learners. However, it is a pity that Grammarly is an AI-
powered tool, which is unable to evaluate coherence, cohesion and content quality of
writing. There was a heated debate as to whether corrective feedback is helpful or
harmful to students. Truscott (1996) asserted that written corrective feedback did not
have any positive impacts on students’ writing improvement while Ferris (2004,
2006) and Bitchener (2005, 2008) proved that written corrective feedback is
appreciated. To explore new ideas and knowledge of the use of electronic feedback
on the learning process,
Web-based platforms like Grammarly also offer an independent learning
environment for ESL learners. To specify, indirect corrective feedback is given by
teachers through such indications as highlighting, underlining and coding (Bitchener,
Young, and Cameron, 2005). The recipients will reflect their errors and problems in
writing by self-correction and self-reformulation. Mainly, self-correction is the
learner’s ability to correct the errors by themselves (Firth, 1987). Similarly, Saadat
(2015) revealed that using electronic feedback like Grammarly software can
potentially create a less intimidating and self-assessing environment for students.
Furthermore, they argue that electronic feedback systems can foster a student-centred
environment where ESL or EFL students are responsible for their learning. Should
students be more aware of what reflection is and comprises, this practice will boost
the promotion of learning to the utmost extent (Boud et al. 1985). According to Boud
and his partners, there are three stages: preparation, engagement in the activity and
the processing of what has experienced (Boud et al.1985). As ESL learners follow
these stages, their overall abilities will be enhanced, writing skill included.
Nonetheless, as for some students who are unable to be self-taught, it casts a doubt
that they can misuse Grammarly as a grammar checker tool for the review stage
before submitting their assignments and the likes. This phenomenon is the reason
why the teachers also play a crucial role in supervising as well as assessing ESL
learners’ works. Also, there should be more robust research of the students’
awareness of reflection in learning English writing skill to promote and search for
appropriate learning methods for the learners.
The previous research on the efficacy of Grammarly application in students'
writing amelioration only concentrated on qualitative research. With a large number
of participants, the aforementioned research could not probe into students'
advancement by the time but statistics. In place of that method, this study will be
conducted to exploit more new psychological aspects in ESL learning by qualitative
research method.
III. METHODOLOGY.
3.1. Participants.
This study will be conducted with the participation of 3 fourth-year English-
majored students at the College of Foreign Languages, Hue University.
3.2. Instruments.
Expected to gain an insight into the ESL university students’ thoughts of the
effects of Grammarly and the effects Grammarly Premium has on them, a qualitative
research method will be conducted in the forms of case study and interviews. There
will be nine interviews with three students in 3 weeks.
3.3. Procedure.
3.3.1. Data collection.
3.3.1.1. Informing the subjects their common errors that are given feedback by
Grammarly.
Three days before writing 40-minute Task 2 in the IELTS writing test, the
participants will be required to submit three most recent writings. The researcher will
have the writings checked by Grammarly Premium and inform the subjects their
common errors, which will be expected to impact their consciousness and attitudes
towards the errors.
3.3.2.2. Writing Task 2 in the IELTS writing test in 40 minutes, giving feedback
by Grammarly Premium and interviewing.
The procedures of data collection will be conducted the same in 3 weeks:
Step 1. The participants will spend 40 minutes on Writing Task 2 in the IELTS test.
Step 2. The researcher will show the participants’ feedback by Grammarly Premium
and elicit the reactions and thoughts from the subjects on the errors.
Step 3. The researcher will interview the participants about the reflection of their
writing improvements by the aid of Grammarly Premium.
3.3.2. Data analysis.
The researcher will use qualitative research approaches to analyse the collected data.
IV. PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF THE GRADUATION THESIS.
The study is organised into five different chapters with specific contents as
followed:
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION.
This chapter presents the fundamental aspects of the study, including the
background of the study, research objectives and research questions. The chapter also
presents the significance of the study and the limitations to which the study results
could be generalised.
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW.
This chapter presents an overview of current knowledge theories related to the
study as well as identifies the gaps that were lacking in previous studies.
Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.
This chapter describes the methodology used in this study, consisting of
chosen participants, procedure, data collection method and data analysis method.

Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION.

This chapter presents the findings of the study and discussions.

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION.

The last chapter presents the project summary, implications or suggestions for
further studies.

TIMELINE

The first week of January, 2020 Finding participations

The second week of January, 2020 Raising the participants’ awareness of

errors in writing.
Conducting the first 40-minute Task 2 of
the IELTS test
Interviewing the participants
The third week of January, 2020 Conducting the second 40-minute Task 2
of the IELTS writing test
Interviewing the participants

The fourth week of January, 2020 Conducting the third 40-minute Task 2 of
the IELTS writing test
Interviewing the participants
End of April, 2020 Completing the whole Graduation thesis

REFERENCES
1. Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types
of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 14(3), 191–205.
2. Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102–118.
3. Shute, Valerie J. (2008). "Focus on Formative Feedback". Review of
Educational Research.
4. Hattie, John; Timperley, Helen (2007). "The Power of Feedback". Review of
Educational Research. American Educational Research Association (AERA).
5. Warschauer, M & Meskill, C. (2000) Technology and second language
learning. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
6. Ferris, R. D. (2005). Treatment of errors in second language student writing.
Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press
7. Hyland, K. (2003a). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
8. Chapelle, C. (2019). Technology-Mediated Language Learning. In J.
Schwieter & A. Benati (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Language
Learning (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics, pp. 575-596).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.