Publication Date
| In 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2024 | 0 |
| Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 1 |
| Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
| Automation | 1 |
| Classification | 1 |
| Documentation | 1 |
| Elementary School Students | 1 |
| Evidence | 1 |
| Feedback (Response) | 1 |
| Grade 5 | 1 |
| Grade 6 | 1 |
| Logical Thinking | 1 |
| Persuasive Discourse | 1 |
| Revision (Written Composition) | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Grantee Submission | 1 |
Publication Type
| Reports - Descriptive | 1 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
| Elementary Education | 1 |
| Grade 5 | 1 |
| Grade 6 | 1 |
| Intermediate Grades | 1 |
| Middle Schools | 1 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewed
Download full textAfrin, Tazin; Wang, Elaine; Litman, Diane; Matsumura, Lindsay C.; Correnti, Richard – Grantee Submission, 2020
Automated writing evaluation systems can improve students' writing insofar as students attend to the feedback provided and revise their essay drafts in ways aligned with such feedback. Existing research on revision of argumentative writing in such systems, however, has focused on the types of revisions students make (e.g., surface vs. content)…
Descriptors: Writing (Composition), Persuasive Discourse, Revision (Written Composition), Documentation
