However, this does not exclude the need for supporting spelling and grammar improvements alongside formative strategy feedback. Across a number of age groups, the most effective means of improving writing is through instruction on writing strategies for planning, drafting, and revising essays for content coupled with opportunities for writing practice with formative feedback (Gillespie and Graham, 2014, Graham and Perin, 2007, Graham, 2006, Graham et al., 2014, Graham et al., 2015, Graham et al., 2013, Kiuhara et al., 2009). 6 High-quality writing emerges not only from mastery of spelling and mechanics, but from a clear structure and coherence of the content (see Graham & Harris, 2016). However, despite the growing list of spelling and grammar checkers available in a variety of languages, as well as the assumption that spelling and grammar feedback is necessary for good writing, there is little empirical work that assesses whether these tools improve overall writing quality. Modern automated writing evaluation (AWE) systems are often expected to include spelling and grammar checking tools, and services such as Grammarly promise that the use of their checkers will make “everyone a great writer” (Grammarly, 2019). The widespread use of word processors has made instantaneous feedback on spelling and grammar a common part of the writing experience (e.g., Morphy & Graham, 2012). Findings from this study demonstrate that strategy feedback with an opportunity to revise contributed to improved essay quality, but that spelling and grammar feedback provided modest, complementary benefits. Qualitative exploration of exemplar students’ revision moves revealed how students incorporated both strategy and spelling and grammar feedback into their revisions. The addition of spelling and grammar feedback contributed small but significant gains after revision on five subscales (i.e., mechanics, word choice, voice, conclusion, and organization) but no other aspects of the students’ essays. Linear mixed effects models revealed improvements from initial draft to revision on most subscales. Spelling and grammar feedback on its own had no effect on the quality of students’ first draft. Half of the participants were also given access to spelling and grammar checkers while writing.

All participants received automated strategy feedback after writing the first draft of their essays. High school students ( n = 119) wrote and revised six persuasive essays in Writing Pal, an automated writing evaluation and tutoring system.

This study examined the extent to which adding spelling and grammar checkers support writing and revision in comparison to providing writing strategy feedback alone. The benefits of writing strategy feedback are well established.

Spell revisions