[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-156701-105":59,"doc-detail-156701-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","ai-writing-correction-tools-teachers-and-students-perception","AI Writing Correction Tools - Teachers and Students’ Perception","","This study investigates how teachers and graduate students perceive AI writing correction tools and analyzes differences in their attitudes toward use in language classrooms. It focuses on academic integrity concerns and evaluates whether AI writing tools can be incorporated into language teaching and learning practices. Data were collected via closed- and open-ended questionnaires from TESOL lecturers and graduate students at the University of St Andrews and analyzed with Qualtrix Likert patterns and thematic analysis.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/ai-writing-correction-tools-teachers-and-students-perception/156701/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/ai-writing-correction-tools-teachers-and-students-perception/156701.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"\tWilliam","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-08-29",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",16,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What is the main focus of the study on AI writing correction tools?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"The study compares teachers’ and students’ perceptions and examines how those perceptions relate to academic integrity and the integration of AI writing correction tools into language teaching and learning.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"How were participants and data collected for the research?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"Eighteen lecturers and thirty-nine graduate students responded to closed- and open-ended questionnaires. Responses were analyzed using Qualtrix for Likert-scale patterns and thematic analysis for open-ended answers.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"What did the study find regarding academic integrity concerns?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"Most teachers and students did not regard using AI writing correction tools as a violation of academic integrity, though there were mixed views in other aspects of integration.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},156701,1787965097,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":140,"language":141,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":142,"faqs":143,"seo_title":144,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":130,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},5909887254083,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","AI WRITING CORRECTION TOOLS: TEACHERS AND STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION  \nMulyono Putra  \nUniveristy of St Andrews, United Kingdom  \n[mulyonoputra955@gmail.com](mulyonoputra955@gmail.com)  \nAbstract  \nThis study investigates the similarities and differences of perceptions of teachers and students, examines the issue of academic integrity, and explores the potential for incorporating AI writing correction tools into language teaching and learning.  \nEighteen lecturers and thirty-nine graduate students were asked to respond to a closed- and open-ended questionnaire to answer the research questions. The sample was collected from the TESOL program at St. Andrews University's International Education Institute. The questionnaire was analysed using Qualtrix to see the patterns from the Likert scale, and thematic analysis was utilized to anticipate the identified themes from the open-ended questionnaire.  \nThe findings show that teachers and students have various opinions about using AI writing correction tools in a classroom setting, with some similarities and differences. Interestingly, the majority of teachers and students did not regard the use of AI writing correction tools as a violation of academic integrity. Furthermore, there was a conflicting view among teachers about integrating AI writing correction tools in the classroom. Meanwhile, most students agreed that AI writing could be integrated into teaching and learning.  \nKeywords: AI writing correction tools, academic integrity, teaching and learning  \nINTRODUCTION  \nAutomated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback, more commonly known as computer-generated feedback, has grabbed increasing attention in writing research in recent years with advances in sophisticated language processing technologies that have made holistic scores and corrective feedback instantly available (Zhang, 2020) . AWE is the combination of natural language processing (NLP) and rule-based engines that assist users in identifying problems in language (grammar and sentence structures) and mechanics (such as punctuation, capitalization, and abbreviations) (Adams & Chuah, 2023). One of the popular examples ofAWE is Grammarly. AWE can also take the form of an intelligent paraphrase tool like QuillBot (Adams & Chuah,  \n2023). Today many students use AI writing tools, particularly for the purpose of composing academic writing (Wang et al., 2013; Yoon & Hirvela, 2004; Huot, 1996; Tuzi, 2004; Warschauer & Ware, 2006) . Writing is perceived as challenging to master due to its arduous and complex process (Levy & Ransdell, 1995) . The academic writing procedures and skills are becoming particularly difficult for non-native English speakers and international students (Campbell, 2019) . Cohesive devices such as substitution, lexical cohesion, transition, and deixis are also considered the most difficult aspect of discourse in students' academic texts (Al-Haq & Ahmed, 1994) . The advent of AI writing tools offering human-like writing (Alharbi, 2023) is a promising solution to support students' academic writing.  \nDespite students' widespread use of these tools, there is still a dispute concerning AWE's effectiveness. AI writing tools such as Grammarly and QuillBot have shortcomings, often making educators doubt their effectiveness. Grammarly, for example, has problems with grammar accuracy and tone suggestions (Ambarwati, 2021) . Despite the shortcomings, Sahu et al. (2020) found that Grammarly is the best correction tool compared to the other similar AWE applications, with the highest accuracy achieving 99% . These contradictory findings have, until now, created doubt about the AIpowered writing tools' effectiveness. In addition to the issue of effectiveness, teachers raise concerns about academic integrity, particularly regarding plagiarism or cheating. AI-powered writing tools transcend beyond vocabulary and grammar to deliver 'human-like' assistance, which worries teachers about students' writing (Alharbi, 2023) . Students rare","cbCaicFZmoRO5bce","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicFZmoRO5bce","pdf",958202,32,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n## Automated writing evaluation and AI writing tools\n## Effectiveness and limitations of AWE\n## Academic integrity and plagiarism/cheating concerns\n## Research gap and study purpose","[{\"question\":\"What is the main focus of the study on AI writing correction tools?\",\"answer\":\"The study compares teachers’ and students’ perceptions and examines how those perceptions relate to academic integrity and the integration of AI writing correction tools into language teaching and learning.\"},{\"question\":\"How were participants and data collected for the research?\",\"answer\":\"Eighteen lecturers and thirty-nine graduate students responded to closed- and open-ended questionnaires. Responses were analyzed using Qualtrix for Likert-scale patterns and thematic analysis for open-ended answers.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the study find regarding academic integrity concerns?\",\"answer\":\"Most teachers and students did not regard using AI writing correction tools as a violation of academic integrity, though there were mixed views in other aspects of integration.\"}]","AI Writing Correction Tools - Teachers and Students’ Perception | PDF",81]