Integrated Natural Language Processing Algorithms for Automatic Feedback in English Writing: Improving Student Learning Outcomes Through Technology
Main Article Content
Abstract
English writing is a core component of language learning and an important indicator of students’ comprehensive language application ability. Traditional writing instruction often faces heavy teacher correction workload, delayed feedback, inconsistent evaluation standards, and insufficient personalized guidance. This study integrates mainstream natural language processing algorithms, including text segmentation, part-of-speech tagging, grammatical error correction, semantic analysis, discourse-structure evaluation, and similarity-based scoring, to construct an automatic feedback model for English writing. A controlled experiment with non-English major college students is designed, with an experimental group using the automatic feedback system and a control group receiving traditional correction. Statistical analysis is conducted on grammar-error recognition, sentence optimization, discourse organization, lexical-collocation correction, writing-score changes, and learning autonomy. The results show that the integrated NLP feedback system can provide real-time and refined revision suggestions, shorten feedback cycles, standardize writing logic, and improve students’ writing proficiency and autonomous learning ability. In intelligent education environments, wireless learning terminals, cloudedge data transmission, and educational signal-processing infrastructure further support scalable deployment. The study provides a feasible path for technology-enhanced English writing instruction.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
References
L. Yang, L. J. Zhang, and H. R. Dixon, “Understanding the impact of teacher feedback on EFL students use of self-regulated writing strategies,” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 60, Art. no. 101015, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2023.101015.
H. Alisoy, “The Role of Teacher Feedback in Enhancing ESL Learners Writing Proficiency,” Global Spectrum of Research and Humanities, vol. 1, 2024, doi: 10.69760/1rmdzx45.
Y. Wang, et al., “Chinese EFL Teachers Writing Assessment Feedback Literacy: A Scale Development and Validation Study,” Assessing Writing, vol. 56, Art. no. 100726, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2023.100726.
A. Charalampous and D. Maria, “The Contribution of Teacher Feedback to the Revision of Students Work in Primary and Secondary Education: A Systematic Literature Review,” International Journal of Learning and Development, vol. 14, pp. 18, 2024, doi: 10.5296/ijld.v14i3.21991.
C. Omoeva, N. Menezes Cunha, and W. Moussa, “Measuring equity of education resource allocation: An output-based approach,” International Journal of Educational Development, vol. 87, Art. no. 102492, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102492.
L. Yang and S. Zhao, “ARGUS: A Neuro-Symbolic System Integrating GNNs and LLMs for Actionable Feedback on English Argumentative Writing,” Systems, vol. 13, no. 12, 2025, doi: 10.3390/systems13121079.
Supriyono et al., “Advancements in natural language processing: Implications, challenges, and future directions,” Telematics and Informatics Reports, vol. 16, Art. no. 100173, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.teler.2024.100173.
Y. Xu, J. Zhong, and Y. Han, “How teacher feedback literacy changed by using Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) feedback as exemplars: Case studies of English as a foreign language school teachers in China,” Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 176, Art. no. 105501, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2026.105501.
W. Wiboolyasarin, et al., “Synergizing collaborative writing and AI feedback: An investigation into enhancing L2 writing proficiency in wiki-based environments,” Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 6, Art. no. 100228, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100228.
C. Keh, “Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation,” English Language Teaching Journal, vol. 44, pp. 294-304, 1990, doi: 10.1093/elt/44.4.294.
J. Marie Lim and C. Go, “Integrating ChatGPT into Teacher Feedback: Practical Insights for L2 Writing Instruction,” TESL-EJ, vol. 29, no. 3, 2025, doi: 10.55593/ej.29115int.
Y. Mao, et al., “Incorporating emotion for response generation in multi-turn dialogues,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 7218-7229, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10489-021-02819-z.
I. Saputra, et al., “The Evolution of Educational Assessment: How Artificial Intelligence is Shaping the Trends and Future of Learning Evaluation,” The Indonesian Journal of Computer Science, vol. 13, 2024, doi: 10.33022/ijcs.v13i6.4465.
L. Tian and Y. Zhou, “Learner engagement with automated feedback, peer feedback and teacher feedback in an online EFL writing context,” System, vol. 91, Art. no. 102247, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.system.2020.102247.
C. Kepner Goring, “An Experiment in the Relationship of Types of Written Feedback to the Development of Second-Language Writing Skills,” The Modern Language Journal, vol. 75, no. 3, pp. 305-313, 2011, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05359.x.
K. L. Partridge, “A comparison of the effectiveness of peer vs. teacher evaluation for helping students of English as a second language to improve the quality of their written compositions,” 1981.
T. M. Paulus, “The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing,” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 265-289, 1999, doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80117-9.
U. Connor and K. Asenavage, “Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision?” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 257-276, 1994, doi: 10.1016/1060-3743(94)90019-1.
Y. Attali, “Exploring the Feedback and Revision Features of Criterion,” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 14, 2004.
L. Kohnke, B. L. Moorhouse, and D. Zou, “Exploring generative artificial intelligence preparedness among university language instructors: A case study,” Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 5, Art. no. 100156, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100156.
Y. Su, Y. Lin, and C. Lai, “Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms,” Assessing Writing, vol. 57, Art. no. 100752, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752.