A review of Grammarly studies in the EFL context in Indonesia
Abstract
Grammarly has been a popular automated writing evaluation (AWE) tool incorporated in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing instruction. Grammarly studies have also proliferated. However, the trends of Grammarly studies in this context have not been captured sufficiently. To fill this gap, this study reviews the trends of Grammarly studies in Indonesia, classifying published studies from 2014 to 2024 (the search occurred in March 2024). To this end, Grammarly studies were retrieved from the Sinta database and Google Scholar via Publish or Perish 8. The inclusion criteria determined that 11 studies were to be included. Using content analysis, research types, topics, instruments, methods, and key findings are classified and reported. The analysis showed that qualitative research was the most widely used method, followed by quantitative research. Meanwhile, research and development (R&D) and classroom action research (CAR) are extremely scant. Additionally, most studies have focused more on students’ perception of Grammarly than its actual performance. These findings suggest that further CAR-based, experimental, and correlational studies on the use of Grammarly in Indonesia are needed to address the research gaps identified. The study provides useful insights that can serve as a basis for future research on the use of Grammarly in language teaching and applied linguistics, especially in Indonesia.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Armanda, M. L., Nugraheni, A. F., Wulansari, A., & Imron, A. (2022). “Grammarly” as English writing assistant from EFL students’ perspective. English Education: Journal of English Teaching and Research, 7(2), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.29407/jetar.v7i2.17988
Ashrafganjoe, M., Rezai, M. J., & Elhambakhsh, S. E. (2022). Providing computer-based feedback through Grammarly® in writing classes. Journal of Language and Translation, 12(2), 163–176.
Bailey, D., & Lee, A. R. (2020). An exploratory study of Grammarly in the language learning context: An analysis of test-based, textbook-based, and Facebook corpora. TESOL International Journal, 15(2).
Banister, C. (2023). Exploring peer feedback processes and peer feedback meta-dialogues with learners of academic and business English. Language Teaching Research, 27(3), 746–764. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820952222
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Dodigovic, M., & Tovmasyan, A. (2021). Automated writing evaluation: The accuracy of Grammarly’s feedback on form. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 3(2), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.46451/ijts.2021.06.06
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press.
Emilia, E., Habibi, N., & Bangga, L. A. (2018). An analysis of cohesion of exposition texts: An Indonesian context. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v7i3.9791
Faisal, F., & Carabella, P. A. (2023). Utilizing Grammarly in an academic writing process: Higher-education students’ perceived views. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 8(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v8i1.1006
Gao, J. (2021). Exploring the feedback quality of an automated writing evaluation system pigai. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(11), 322–330. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i11.19657
Ginting, R. S., & Fithriani, R. (2022). Peer and automated writing evaluation (AWE): Indonesian EFL college students’ preference for essay evaluation. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 25(2), 461–473. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v25i2.4879
Hadiat, A. W. F., Tarwana, W., & Irianti, L. (2022). The use of Grammarly to enhance students’ accuracy in writing descriptive text (a case study at eighth grade of a junior high school in Ciamis). Journal of English Education Program (JEEP), 9(2), 1–10. https://jurnal.unigal.ac.id/jeep/article/download/8552/5158
Hakiki, G. N. R. (2021). Perception of EFL students on the use Grammarly application in writing class. EDUVELOP: Journal of English Education and Development, 4(2), 99–106. https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v4i2.891
Ismawati, Akib, E., & Muhsin, M. A. (2021). How errors made in essay writing: An analysis using Grammarly software in EFL students. Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 9(1), 365–375.
John, P., & Woll, N. (2020). Using grammar checkers in an ESL context: An Investigation of automatic corrective feedback. CALICO Journal, 37(2), 193–196. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.36523
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
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Kuyyogsuy, S. (2019). Promoting peer feedback in developing students’ English writing ability in L2 writing class. International Education Studies, 12(9), 76. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n9p76
Li, W.-Y., Kau, K., & Shiung, Y.-J. (2023). Pedagogic exploration into adapting automated writing evaluation and peer review integrated feedback into large-sized university writing classes. SAGE Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231209087
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.
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.
O’Neill, R., & Russell, A. M. T. (2019). Grammarly: Help or hindrance? Academic learning advisors’ perceptions of an online grammar checker. Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 13(1), 88–107.
Oppenheim, A. N. (2005). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement (New ed., reprinted). Continuum.
Palermo, C., & Wilson, J. (2020). Implementing automated writing evaluation in different instructional contexts: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Writing Research, 12(1), 63–108. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2020.12.01.04
Puri, G., & Setiamunadi, A. A. (2023). The use of Grammarly by tertiary English language learners in their online writing classes. English Education:Journal of English Teaching and Research, 8(2), 163–179. https://doi.org/10.29407/jetar.v8i2.20981
Rao, M., Gain, A., & Bhat, S. (2019). Usage of Grammarly – online grammar and spelling checker tool at the health sciences library, Manipal academy of higher education, Manipal: A Study. Library Philosophy and Practice (Ejournal). https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2610
Samosir, S. A., & Daulay, S. H. (2023). EFL students’ perception of the use “Grammarly Application” as automated writing evaluation (AWE). CELTI: Conference on English Language Teaching, 3, 928–940. https://proceedings.uinsaizu.ac.id/index.php/celti/article/view/562
Susetyarini, E., & Fauzi, A. (2020). Trend of critical thinking skill researches in biology education journals across Indonesia: From research design to data analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 535–550. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13135a
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. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 767–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2
Tian, L., Liu, Q., & Zhang, X. (2022). Self-regulated writing strategy use when revising upon automated, peer, and teacher feedback in an online English as a foreign language writing course. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.873170
Tian, L., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context. System, 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102247
Tuckman, B. W., & Harper, B. E. (2012). Conducting educational research (6th ed). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Villar Faller, J. M. (2018). Grammarly investigation into EFL writing issues involving Omani learners. International Journal of Language & Linguistics, 5(3), 165–174. https://doi.org/10.30845/ijll.v5n3p16
Vo, N. H. K., & Nguyen, Q. T. (2021). Applying Grammarly as an online grammar checker tool to enhance writing skills for English-major students. The 9th OpenTESOL International Conference 2021.
Wibawa, H. T., & Nabhan, S. (2023). The use of “Grammarly” application as ai-powered writing assistant: University students’ perception. The 2nd International Conference on Language and Language Teaching (InCoLLT 2023), 132–143. https://incollt.unipasby.ac.id/proceedings/index.php/incollt/article/view/60
Wu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2021). The effects of providing and receiving peer feedback on writing performance and learning of secondary school students. American Educational Research Journal, 58(3), 492–526. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831220945266
Yousofi, R. (2022). Grammarly deployment (in)efficacy within EFL academic writing classrooms: An attitudinal report from Afghanistan. Cogent Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2142446
Zainurrahman, & Rodliyah, R. S. (2024). Examining Bing AI as a solution to EFL writing feedback challenges. Project: Professional Journal of English Education, 7(2), 459–468.
Zinkevich, N. A., & Ledeneva, T. V. (2021). Using Grammarly to enhance students’ academic writing skills. Professional Discourse & Communication, 3(4), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.24833/2687-0126-2021-3-4-51-63
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/e.11.1.86-106
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Zainurrahman Zainurrahman, Rojab Siti Rodliyah, Emi Emilia
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/