writing educational journals

Teaching/Writing: The Journal of Writing Teacher Education

• ScholarWorks

ScholarWorks > Arts & Sciences > English > Teaching/Writing

Co-Editor:	, University of Nevada, Reno
Co-Editor:	, University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh
, Western Michigan University and , Columbus State University

Current Issue: Volume 12, Issue 1 (2024) Summer 2024

“Without Boundaries, Something Great Might Just Be Created”: Examining Preservice Teachers’ Radical Imagination Through Becoming Writers and Teachers of Writing Erica Holyoke and Susan Tily

The Embedded Scaffolded Writing Mini-Course (TESWMC): An Approach to Improve Teacher Candidates’ Writing Skills and Attitudes Vicky Giouroukakis Ph.D. and Laurie Bocca

Five Secondary Teachers’ Developing Identities as Teachers of Digital Writing Brad Jacobson

Critical Media Literacy: Taking Steps to Understand and Implement (in First-Year Composition Courses) Kevin Shank and Lara Searcy

Writing as (Self) Service and Witness: Exploring the Experience of a Teacher Educator Writing Group Sarah Donovan, Amy Vetter, and Eileen Shanahan PhD

It Takes a Community: One NWP Site's Approach to Establishing and Sustaining a Writing Community H. Michelle Kreamer

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• Submit Article
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Research and teaching writing

• Published: 12 July 2021
• Volume 34 , pages 1613–1621, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Steve Graham 1 , 2 &
• Rui A. Alves 3  

13k Accesses

16 Citations

3 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Writing is an essential but complex skill that students must master if they are to take full advantage of educational, occupational, and civic responsibilities. Schools, and the teachers who work in them, are tasked with teaching students how to write. Knowledge about how to teach writing can be obtained from many different sources, including one’s experience teaching or being taught to write, observing others teach writing, and advise offered by writing experts. It is difficult to determine if much of the lore teachers acquire through these methods are effective, generalizable, or reliable unless they are scientifically tested. This special issue of Reading & Writing includes 11 writing intervention studies conducted primarily with students in the elementary grades. It provides important new information on evidence-based writing practices.

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

There are many different ways that teachers can learn about how to teach writing. One way of acquiring such knowledge is by teaching this skill to others. As teachers apply different instructional procedures, they form judgments about the value and efficacy of these practices. In essence, they learn by doing (Graham, 2018 ).

A second way teachers learn about how to teach writing is by observing others and learning from them (Graham, 2018 ). Teachers likely remember some of the instructional methods used by those who taught them to write (e.g., teachers, mentors, parents, guardians, and peers). They may in turn adopt some of these practices when they teach their own students. This may be particularly true for instructional practices they considered effective.

Teachers can gain additional insight into teaching writing by observing and absorbing insights offered by others who have taught writing or studied how to teach it. This includes knowledge acquired from instructors teaching literacy and writing courses as well as experts offering advice on writing instruction at conferences, through workshops, podcasts, or other forms of information sharing. Teachers may also learn about teaching writing by discussing this topic with their peers or observing them as they teach writing.

A third source of knowledge that teachers can access are published materials about how to teach writing. This includes textbooks and articles on the subject, curriculum guides, commercial materials, and position statements from professional organizations to provide just a few examples. These resources can further involve digital sources such as videos demonstrating how to apply specific writing procedures, experts promoting specific teaching techniques, or web sites devoted to writing instruction.

The concern

Given all of the possible knowledge sources teachers can access or experience, there is an abundance of information, recommendations, and teaching materials on how to teach writing that is available to teachers. This blessing experiences at least one serious limitation. Too often, there is limited, circumscribed, or no evidence that the proffered advice, know-how, or wisdom works. There are many claims about what is effective, but too little proof. Unfortunately, this observation applies to much of the lore that teachers acquire about writing instruction.

Teaching lore mainly involves writing practices teachers experienced when they learned to write, instructional practices teachers develop and apply with their students, writing practices they see other teachers apply, and teaching practices promoted by experts (Graham & Harris, 2014 ). While we have no doubt that teachers and experts possess considerable knowledge and insight about how to teach writing, basing the teaching of this complex skill on such lore alone is risky.

Why is this the case? One reason is that it is difficult to determine which aspects of teaching lore are valid. For example, there are many things a teacher does while teaching writing. When their students’ writing improves, they may attribute this change to specific procedures they applied. While this evaluation may be correct, it is also possible that this judgment is incorrect or only applies to some students or to a procedure in a given context.

Teachers are not the only ones who can succumb to such selective bias. Specific teaching lore promoted by writing experts are also susceptible to misinterpretation in terms of their effectiveness. To illustrate, writing experts can overestimate the impact of favored instructional methods, forming judgments consistent with their philosophical views on writing development or instruction. For instance, proponents of the whole language approach to learning to read and write believed that writing and reading develop naturally just like oral language (Goodman, 1992 ). Consistent with these beliefs, they championed an approach to literacy instruction based on the use of informal teaching methods (e.g., reading and writing for real purposes), while at the same time deemphasizing explicitly and systematically teaching students foundational writing and reading skills and strategies (Graham & Harris, 1997 ). Instead, these skills are only taught when the need arises, mostly through short mini-lessons. Advocates for whole language frequently promoted the effectiveness of this two-pronged approach (Begeron, 1990 ), without providing much in the way of empirical evidence that it was effective, or perhaps even more importantly, that it was as effective as other alternatives such as reading and writing programs that emphasized reading and writing for real purposes, coupled with systematic and explicit skills and strategy instruction (Graham & Harris, 1994 ). Even for fundamental writing skills such as spelling, there is considerable evidence that both informal teaching and explicit instruction are effective (Graham, 2000 ; Graham & Santangelo, 2014 ), while whole language approaches are fundamentally misguided about what is written language (Liberman, 1999 ).

Whole language is not the only approach to teaching writing that has suffered from questionable claims about its effectiveness. Even the venerable Donald Graves was guilty of this to some degree with the process approach to writing that he supported and advocated (see Smagorinski, 1987 ). The evidence he offered in support of his favored approach to teaching writing relied in large part on testimonials and exemplar writing of selected students, presenting a potentially overly optimistic assessment of this approach. This is not to say that the process approach is ineffective, as there is now considerable empirical evidence supporting the opposite conclusion (Sandmel & Graham, 2011 ). Instead, this example illustrates that adopting whole cloth even highly popular and widely used teaching lore without careful consideration of its effectiveness and the evidence available to support it can be risky. The lack of evidence or the type of evidence provided can make it extremely difficult for teachers or other interested parties to determine if the testimonials or evidence used to support specific teaching lore in writing are representative or atypical.

A third issue that makes some teaching lore risky is that it may be based on the experience of a single or a very small number of teachers. As an example, this can occur for knowledge a teacher acquires as a result of his or her experience teaching writing. The teaching practice(s) may in fact be effective for the students in this teacher’s classroom, but they may not be effective when applied by another teacher or with different students. Until this proposition is tested, there is no way to determine if this teaching lore will produce reliable results when applied more broadly.

As these concerns demonstrate, the validity, generalizability, and replicability of instructional practices based on teaching lore are uncertain. This is not to devalue what teachers or experts know, but to demonstrate the limits of this knowledge.

Evidence-based writing practices

The concerns about the value of teaching lore raised above raises the question: How should the structure and details of writing instruction be determined? The solution that we recommend is to take an evidence-based practice approach to both enhance teachers’ knowledge and develop writing instruction. Starting with medicine in the 1990s, and spreading quickly to psychology, informational science, business, education, and a host of other disciplines, this movement promoted the idea that practitioners in a field should apply the best scientific evidence available to make informed and judicious decisions for their clients (Sackett et al., 1996 ). The basic assumption underlying this approach is that the findings from research can positively impact practice. The evidence-based practice movement was a reaction to practitioners basing what they did almost strictly on tradition and lore, without scientific evidence to validate it.

One reason why this represents a positive step forward in education and the teaching of writing is that instructional practices based on high quality intervention research addresses the three issues of concern we raised about teaching lore. First, high quality intervention studies address the issue of validity. They are designed specifically to isolate the effects of a specific instructional practice or set of instructional practices. They provide systematically gathered evidence on whether the instructional practices tested produced the desired impact. They further apply methodological procedures to rule out alternative explanations for observed effects. Second, high quality intervention studies address issues of generalizability by describing the participants and the context in which the practice was applied, and by using statistical procedures to determine the confidence that can be placed in specific findings. Three, they address the issue of replicability, as the replication of effects across multiple situations is the hall mark of scientific testing (Graham & Harris, 2014 ).

Another reason why the evidence-based approach represents a positive step forward in terms of teaching writing is that the evidence gathered from high quality intervention studies can provide a general set of guidelines for designing an effective writing program. Graham et al. ( 2016 ) created such a roadmap by drawing on three sources of scientific evidence: true-and quasi- experimental writing intervention studies, single-case design studies, and qualitative studies of how exceptional literacy teachers taught writing (see also Graham & Harris, 2018 ). They indicated that the scientific evidence from these three sources supports the development of writing programs that include the following. Students write frequently. They are supported by teachers and peers as they write. Essential writing skills, strategies, and knowledge are taught. Students use word processors and other twenty-first century tools to write. Writing occurs in a positive and motivating environment. Writing is used to support learning. Based on several recent meta-analyses of high quality intervention studies (Graham, et al., 2018a , b ; Graham, et al., 2018a , b ), Graham now recommends that the evidence also supports connecting writing and reading instruction (Graham, 2019 , 2020 ).

A third reason why the evidence-based approach is a positive development is that it provides teachers with a variety of techniques for teaching writing that have been shown to be effective in other teachers’ classes and in multiple situations. While this does not guarantee that a specific evidence-based practices is effective in all situations, a highly unlikely proposition for any writing practice, it does provide teachers with instructional procedures with a proven track record. This includes, but is not limited to (Graham & Harris, 2018 ; Graham et al., 2016 ):

Setting goals for writing.

Teaching general as well as genre-specific strategies for planning, revising, editing, and regulating the writing process. Engaging students in prewriting practices for gathering, organizing, and evaluation possible writing contents and plans.

Teaching sentence construction skills with sentence-combining procedures.

Providing students with feedback about their writing and their progress learning new writing skills.

Teaching handwriting, spelling, and typing.

Increasing how much students write; analyzing and emulating model texts.

Teaching vocabulary for writing.

Creating routines for students to help each other as they write.

Putting into place procedures for enhancing motivation.

Teaching paragraph writing skills.

Employing technology such as word processing that makes it easier to write.

It is also important to realize that an evidence-based approach to writing does not mean that teachers should abandon the hard-earned knowledge they have acquired through their experiences as teachers or learners. The evidence-based movement emphasizes that teachers contextualize knowledge about teaching writing acquired through research with their own knowledge about their students, the context in which they work, and what they know about writing and teaching it (Graham et al., 2016 ). When applying instructional practices acquired through research as well as teaching lore, we recommend that teachers weigh the benefits, limitations, and possible harm that might ensue as a consequence of applying any teaching procedure. Once a decision is made to apply a specific practice, it is advisable to monitor its effectiveness and make adjustments as needed.

Finally, while the scientific testing of writing practices has provided considerable insight into how writing can be taught effectively, it is not broad, deep, or rich enough to tell us all we need to know about teaching writing. It is highly unlikely that this will ever be the case. We operate on the principle that there is no single best method for teaching writing to all students, nor is it likely that science will provide us with formulas to prescribe exactly how writing should be taught to each student individually. Writing, learning, children, and the contexts in which they operate are just too complex to make this a likely consequence of the evidence-based movement. As a result, we believe that the best writing instruction will be provided by teachers who apply evidence-based practices in conjunction with the best knowledge they have acquired as teachers and learners, using each of these forms of knowledge in an intelligent, judicious, and critical manner.

Over time, we anticipate that evidence-based practices will play an ever increasing role in the process described above. This is inevitable as our knowledge about evidence-based writing practices expands. This brings us to the purpose of this special issue of Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal . This special issue presents 11 writing intervention studies focusing almost exclusively with students in the elementary grades. These studies were conducted in Europe and the United States, and they replicate and extend prior research conducted with young developing writers.

The special issue

Perhaps the most tested writing instructional practice of all time, and the one yielding the largest effects sizes (Graham et al., 2013 ), is the Self-regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) model developed by Karen Harris (see Harris et al., 2008 for a description of this approach). Several studies in the current special issue tested specific iterations of the use of the SRSD model as a means for teaching writing to elementary grade students. Collins and her colleagues examined the effectiveness of teaching third grade students in the United States task specific strategies for planning and drafting expository essays using information from social studies text using this model. This instruction enhanced the quality of students’ texts and resulted in improvement on a norm-referenced measure of writing where students identified their favorite game and provided reasons why this was the case.

In a second SRSD study conducted with second and third grade children in Spain, Salas and her colleagues examined if teaching planning and drafting strategies for writing an opinion essay was equally effective with children from more and less disadvantaged backgrounds. SRSD was equally effective in improving the opinion writing of children from both backgrounds, but carryover effects to reading comprehension (a skill not taught in this study) only occurred for students from less disadvantaged backgrounds.

A third study by Rosario and his colleagues involved a secondary analysis of data from an investigation in Portugal where third grade students were taught to write narratives using SRSD procedures and a story writing tool they developed. Their reanalysis focused on students experiencing difficulties learning to write showing that they differed in their approach and perceptions of teacher feedback. The majority of these children were able to use the feedback provided by their teacher and viewed it as helpful.

A fourth investigation by Hebert and his colleagues taught fourth grade students in the United States to write informational text using five text structures (description, compare/contrast, sequence of events, problem–solution, and cause effect). While the authors did not indicate they used SRSD to teach these strategies, the teaching methods mirrored this approach. In any event, the instruction provided to these children enhanced how well they wrote all five of these different kinds of text. These effects, however, did not generalize to better reading performance.

Lopez and her colleagues in Spain examined three approaches to improving sixth grade students’ writing. Students in all three conditions were taught how to set communicative goals for their writing. Students in one treatment condition were taught a strategy for revising. Students in a second treatment condition observed a reader trying to comprehend a text and suggesting ways it might be improved. Control students continued with the goal setting procedures. Students in both treatment conditions improved their writing and revising skills more than control students, but there were no differences between these two treatments.

In another Spanish study conducted by Rodriguez-Malaga and colleagues, the impact of two different treatments on the writing of fourth grade students was examined. One treatment group learned how to set product goals for their writing, whereas the other writing treatment group learned how to set product goals and strategies for planning compare/contrast texts. Only the students in the product goal and planning strategy treatment evidenced improved writing when compared to control students.

Philippakos and Voggt examined the effectiveness of on-line practice-based professional development (PBPD) for teaching genre-based writing strategies. Eighty-four second grade teachers were randomly assigned to PBPD or a no-treatment control condition. Treatment teachers taught the genre-based writing strategies with high fidelity and rated PBPD positively. Even more importantly, their students writing evidenced greater improvement than the writing of students in control teachers’ classes.

Walter and her colleagues in England examined the effectiveness of two writing interventions, sentence combining and spelling instruction, with 7 to 10 year old children experiencing difficulties learning to write. As expected, sentence combining instruction improved sentence construction skills, but even more importantly, these researchers found that the degree of improvements in sentence writing was related to students’ initial sentence, spelling, and reading skills.

In another study focused on improving students’ sentence construction skills, Arfé and her colleagues in Italy examined the effectiveness of an oral language intervention to improve the sentence construction skills of fifth and tenth grade students. This oral treatment did enhance the sentence writing skills of the younger fifth grade students. This study provides needed evidence that interventions aimed at improving oral language skills transfer to writing.

Chung and his colleagues in the United States examined if sixth grade students’ writing can be improved through self-assessment, planning and goal setting, and self-reflection when they revised a timed, on-demand essay. These students as well as students in the control condition were also taught how to revise such an essay. Treatment students evidenced greater writing gains, and were more confident about their revising capabilities than control students.

Lastly, Graham and his colleagues in the United States examined if the revising behavior of fourth grade students experiencing difficulties with writing can be enhanced through the use of revising goals that focused attention on making substantive when revising stories (e.g., change the setting of the story). Applying such goals across four stories had a positive effect on the revising behavior of these students when these goals were not in effect, resulting in more text-level revisions, more revisions that changed the meaning of text, and more revisions rated as improving text.

The 11 intervention studies in this special issue of Reading & Writing are particularly noteworthy for several reasons. One, some of these studies ( n  = 4) concentrated on improving students’ skills in writing informational and expository text. This is an area that has not received enough attention in existing writing literature. Two, enhancing students’ revising was the goal of multiple studies ( n  = 4). Again, too little attention has been given to this topic with either younger or older students. Three, it was especially gratifying to see that a pair of studies examined how to enhance sentence writing skills. This has been a neglected area of writing research since the 1980s. Four, multiple studies focused on improving the writing of students who experienced difficulties learning to write ( n  = 3). This is an area where we need much more research if we are to maximize these students’ writing success. Finally, more than half of the studies in this special issue ( n  = 6) were conducted in Europe, with the other half conducted in the United States. It is important to examine if specific writing treatments are effective in different social, cultural, political, institutional, and historical context (Graham, 2018 ), as was done with the four studies that applied SRSD to teach students strategies for writing.

We hope you enjoy the studies presented here. We further hope they serve as a catalyst to improve your own research if you are a writing scholar or your teaching if you are a practitioner.

Begeron, B. (1990). What does the term whole language mean? constructing a definition from the literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22 , 301–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862969009547716

Article   Google Scholar  

Goodman, K. (1992). I didn’t found whole language. The Reading Teacher, 46 , 188–199.

Google Scholar  

Graham, S. (2000). Should the natural learning approach replace traditional spelling instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 , 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.2.235

Graham, S. (2018). The writer(s)-within-community model of writing. Educational Psychologist, 53 , 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406

Graham, S. (2019). Changing how writing is taught. Review of Research in Education, 43 , 277–303. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x18821125

Graham, S. (2020). The sciences of reading and writing must become more fully integrated. Reading Research Quarterly, 55 (S1), S35–S44.

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1997). It can be taught, but it does not develop naturally: myths and realities in writing instruction. School Psychology Review, 26 , 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1997.12085875

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2014). Conducting high quality writing intervention research: twelve recommendations. Journal of Writing Research, 6 (2), 89–123. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2014.06.02.1

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2018). Evidence-based writing practices: A meta-analysis of existing meta-analyses. In R. Fidalgo, K. R. Harris, & M. Braaksma (Eds.), Design Principles for teaching effective writing: Theoretical and empirical grounded principles (pp. 13–37). Brill Editions.

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Chambers, A. (2016). Evidence-based practice and writing instruction. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research (2: 211–226). NY; Guilford.

Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & McKeown, D. (2013). The writing of students with LD and a meta-analysis of SRSD writing intervention studies: Redux. In L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of Learning Disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 405–438). Guilford Press.

Graham, S., & Harris, . (1994). The effects of whole language on writing: a review of literature. Educational Psychologist, 29 , 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2904_2

Graham, S., Liu, K., Aitken, A., Ng, C., Bartlett, B., Harris, K. R., & Holzapel, J. (2018a). Effectiveness of literacy programs balancing reading and writing instruction: a meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 53 , 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.194

Graham, S., Liu, K., Bartlett, B., Ng, C., Harris, K. R., Aitken, A., Barkel, A., Kavanaugh, C., & Talukdar, J. (2018b). Reading for writing: a meta-analysis of the impact of reading and reading instruction on writing. Review of Educational Research, 88 , 243–284. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317746927

Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? a meta-analytic review. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27 , 1703–1743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9517-0

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L., & Friedlander, B. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Liberman, A. M. (1999). The reading researcher and the reading teacher need the right theory of speech. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3 (2), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0302_1

Sackett, D., Rosenberg, W., Gray, J., Haynes, R., & Richardson, W. (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312 , 71–72. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71

Sandmel, K., & Graham, S. (2011). The process writing approach: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 104 , 396–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2010.488703

Smagorinski, P. (1987). Graves revisited: a look at the methods and conclusions of the New Hampshire study. Written Communication, 4 , 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088387004004001

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA

Steve Graham

Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia

University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

Rui A. Alves

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui A. Alves .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Graham, S., Alves, R.A. Research and teaching writing. Read Writ 34 , 1613–1621 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10188-9

Download citation

Accepted : 29 June 2021

Published : 12 July 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10188-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Writing intervention
• Evidence-based
• Elementary grades
• Writing instruction
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

English and language arts education : Journals

• Children's Literature in Education "Children's Literature in Education has been a key source of articles on all aspects of children's literature for more than 40 years. It covers classic and contemporary material, the highbrow and the popular, and ranges across works for infants through to material for young adults. It features analysis of fiction, poetry, drama and non-fictional material (plus studies in other media: film, TV, computer games, online works); visual narratives from picture books and comics to graphic novels; interviews with writers and artists; textual analysis and interpretation from differing theoretical perspectives; historical approaches to the area; reader-response work with children; ideas for teaching children's literature; adaptation, translation and publishing."
• ELT journal "ELT Journal aims to provide a medium for informed discussion of the principles and practice which determine the ways in which English is taught and learnt around the world. It also provides a forum for the exchange of information and ideas among members of the profession worldwide."
• English education "English Education is the journal of English Language Arts Teacher Educators (ELATE), formerly the Conference on English Education (CEE), a constituent organization of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). The journal serves teachers engaged in the preparation, support, and continuing education of teachers of English language arts/literacy at all levels of instruction."
• English journal "English Journal is NCTE's award-winning journal of ideas for English language arts teachers in junior and senior high schools and middle schools. It presents information on the teaching of writing and reading, literature, and language, and includes information on how teachers are putting the latest technologies to work in their classrooms."
• Journal of adolescent & adult literacy : a journal from the International Reading Association "The Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy highlights innovative, peer-reviewed, research-based practices aimed at improving engagement and achievement among literacy learners ages 12 and older."
• Journal of literacy research : JLR "The Journal of Literacy Research (JLR) is a peer-reviewed journal that has contributed to the advancement literacy and literacy education research for over 50 years. JLR is a forum for sharing innovative research and pedagogy that considers a broad range of topics encompassing instruction and assessment, policy development, understandings of literacies, and relationships of ideology and knowledge."
• Language arts "Language Arts is a professional journal for elementary and middle school teachers and teacher educators. It provides a forum for discussions on all aspects of language arts learning and teaching, primarily as they relate to children in pre-kindergarten through the eighth grade."
• Reading & writing quarterly: overcoming learning disabilities "Interdisciplinary in scope, the journal addresses the causes, prevention, evaluation, and remediation of reading and writing difficulties in regular and special education settings."
• Reading improvement "Publishes reports of investigations and creative theoretical papers dealing with every aspect of reading improvement, and at all levels of instruction."
• Reading research quarterly "Reading Research Quarterly is the leading global journal offering multidisciplinary scholarship on literacy among learners of all ages, including the latest research studies (methods, results, effects, findings, and implications)."
• The Reading teacher "The Reading Teacher (RT) provides the latest peer-reviewed, research-based best practices to literacy educators working with children up to age 12. RT’s classroom-ready articles cover topics from curriculum, instruction, and assessment to strategies for teaching diverse populations of literacy learners."
• Research in the teaching of English "Research in the Teaching of English (RTE) is a multidisciplinary journal composed of original research and scholarly essays on the relationships between language teaching and learning at all levels, preschool through adult."
• TESOL quarterly TESOL Quarterly, a professional, refereed journal, was first published in 1967. The Quarterly encourages submission of previously unpublished articles on topics of significance to individuals concerned with English language teaching and learning and standard English as a second dialect.
• << Previous: Recent print books
• Next: Databases >>
• Background information
• Recent e-books
• Recent print books
• Connect to Stanford e-resources
• Related guides
• Last Updated: Aug 14, 2024 1:39 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.stanford.edu/english_and_language_arts

• NAEYC Login
• Member Profile
• Hello Community
• Accreditation Portal
• Online Learning
• Online Store

Popular Searches:   DAP ;  Coping with COVID-19 ;  E-books ;  Anti-Bias Education ;  Online Store

• Writing for Young Children

You are here

Types of articles.

• Young Children cluster topics

Formatting requirements

Photos and visuals, permissions, how to submit an article, review and editing process, writing for  young children.

Young Children   is a peer-reviewed journal from the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). Published four times a year, each issue offers practical, research-based articles on timely topics of interest. Our readers work with or on behalf of young children from birth through age 8. Readers include teachers, family child care providers, child development program administrators, resource and referral counselors, early intervention specialists, elementary school principals, teacher educators, students, researchers, policy makers, and others.

The editorial team and consulting editors use the following criteria when reviewing the content of articles submitted to  Young Children . We look for articles that

• reflect the  current knowledge base  in early childhood education
• describe real life examples of  developmentally appropriate practice
• provide  practical strategies  for practitioners
• cite  relevant research findings , when appropriate
• suggest ways to  involve families , when appropriate
• consider the roles of  culture, ethnicity, and home language  when relevant to the content
• support  inclusion  of children with a range of abilities
• show  respect  for gender, culture, and home language
• reflect NAEYC's recent initiatives on  developmentally appropriate practice and  advancing equity

Articles selected for publication in  Young Children  are considered a contribution to the profession; authors do not receive fees or royalties. Articles published in Young Children are  peer reviewed  and vetted by the  Young Children  editorial team.      

Young Children  articles vary in content, length, and writing style. The best way to determine what types of manuscripts we are seeking is to  read recently published articles . Many authors write about a particular classroom, school, or teacher they have observed. If your article describes another educator’s practice in detail, please acknowledge this contribution or consider including him or her as coauthor.

Young Children  does not publish term papers, literature reviews without clear connections to practitioners, content or promotional pieces that focus on and promote one organization's products or services as editorial content, or reports that emphasize research methodology or the findings of an individual study. The journal does not accept articles already published elsewhere in print or electronic format. We expect that articles have not been simultaneously submitted to other publications.

Young Children  articles are written in an informal, conversational style. They use active voice (e.g., “The teacher planned…” rather than “Plans were made by the teacher…”) and clear language. This makes the text easier and more enjoyable to read.

Cluster-topic articles

Each issue features a group of articles that address different aspects of a topic. Although cluster topics are decided on many months in advance (see below), in order to respond to topical issues and trends, the editors may change the publication date of a cluster from time to time.

General articles

These articles address important early childhood topics and have a variety of styles. General articles typically include

• innovative, research-based teaching strategies
• early childhood theories and research, along with recommended practices
• specific issues affecting young children
• professional stories and observations, often intended to enhance understanding of research-based practices

These are research-informed opinion pieces, similar to op-eds, that address specific questions, issues, or challenges of practices. A Viewpoint piece takes a particular stance or presents a specific perspective and offers supporting sources and examples. It should answer the question of why this viewpoint is important and impactful for early childhood teaching and learning as well as what it looks like in practice.

Young Children  cluster topics 

Young Children , NAEYC's award-winning, peer-reviewed journal, publishes four times a year, in Spring, Fall, Summer, and Winter.  

We are excited to announce the cluster topics and associated due dates, which you will find in the table below, and we look forward to continuing to support educational excellence and focus on meeting the needs of all children, birth through third grade, through high-quality content in Young Children .

The table below provides the cluster topics for upcoming issues of  Young Children , along with the due dates for submitting articles to be considered for each cluster. 

	(2024), this issue of will focus on how early childhood leaders and educators determine what, when, and how children learn in programs and schools. We are seeking specific examples and illustrations of high-quality curricula in action in preschool through grade 2. This could include program- or school-wide efforts, or it could include classroom-level efforts. A manuscript could delve into one aspect of a program/school curriculum, or it could explore how various elements are addressed in a comprehensive way.
	will focus on the following elements:
	focuses on clarifying how educators and programs can think about the impacts including:
	: Reflections on NAEYC’s 100th Anniversary , NAEYC’s flagship journal.   archive is vast with some ideas and practices still relevant today while many others have been challenged and changed over the years. The Spring 2026 issue will focus on revisiting the past, examining the present, and looking to the future—to remind and reflect as well as to stimulate and inspire readers and the field. We are seeking articles that   archive  article impacted one’s own practice or transformed others’ thinking and teaching. A submission could offer a profile of an early learning program or educator who exemplifies an idea from the archives. Or it could present a commentary that debunks a concept or practice presented in the archive. An article could offer an analysis of how an idea or practice has evolved over time in the pages of or how much a concept or issue has stayed the same For the issue, submission length can vary (from 2,000-3,000 words, not including references and graphic elements).   . (Select the link for the digital archive.) It is also available through other digital library databases, including EBSCO and ProQuest.
	, we are focusing on educator agency, exploring questions such as

Please note: We are no longer asking authors to submit proposals for cluster articles. Authors should submit complete articles (along with figures and  photos , if possible). 

When submitting an article to  Young Children , please adhere to the following formatting and submission guidelines.

• All manuscripts  must  meet page-length requirements.
• General, cluster, and viewpoint articles: 3,000 - 3,500 words (not including the reference list or graphics)

If manuscripts are not formatted correctly, they will be unsubmitted until the appropriate changes are made.

• All manuscripts are subject to blind review. Make sure the name(s) of author(s) as well as specific workplaces/schools/program names do not appear on any pages of the article. This includes the reference list.
• Use pseudonyms in place of children's real names.
• Use in-text citations as outlined in  The Chicago Manual of Style . Do not include footnotes.
• Include subheadings throughout the article.
• Use Times New Roman font, 12-point type, double space lines, and allow for at least 1-inch margins.
• Number the pages.

Cover letter

• Prepare the cover letter as a separate document.
• List the title of the article.
• Indicate the type of article (cluster topic, general, viewpoint).
• List the name, affiliation, title, and e-mail for each author.
• Designate one author as the primary contact.
• Provide a brief summary of how the submission offers useful and relevant information for teachers and other practitioners.
• Provide a brief abstract of 50 words or less.

Style guides

Authors should provide accurate and complete information for references and resources.  Young Children  expects authors to focus on references published within the last 10 years (unless they are seminal sources) in order to reflect the most recent research and data. Use primary references when available and avoid online resources such as Wikipedia. Authors should also use the number of resources appropriate for the length of their manuscript.

Young Children follows  Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary , 11th edition, for spelling and  The Chicago Manual of Style , 17th edition, for style and reference formatting.

We encourage authors to include informative, interesting visuals (e.g., high-resolution photographs, children's work samples, charts, and graphs) that enhance the content of the article and promote understanding. This is not a requirement.

The author must confirm completed model release forms for any recognizable person appearing in the author's photos (signed by any adult who appears in the photo and by the legal guardian of any child who appears in the photo). If the author did not take the photos but submits them with the article, the author must confirm that she or he has the right to publish the photos and that the photographer possesses the necessary model releases. The editorial team will reach out to the author upon acceptance to process the forms. NAEYC-approved model release forms are available from the editorial team if needed. Forms must be confirmed and provided to the editorial team before publication. Failure to do so will result in the visuals being excluded from publication.

The visuals themselves can be uploaded as separate files in Editorial Manager  as part of the manuscript submission. Do not include them in the body of the article.  Young Children  does not pay authors for their own photos when they are integral to the content of the article.

Authors are responsible for seeking and maintaining written permission from parents or legal guardians to include photos of children or children's work samples, and for seeking and maintaining written permission to include photos of adults. These permissions must be provided to NAEYC for review prior to publication.

For quoted material longer than 100 words, as well as figures and tables (or the content therein), authors must seek and submit to  Young Children  written permission from the copyright holder prior to publication.

Young Children  receives all submissions electronically through  Editorial Manager . After creating an account, authors will find instructions for manuscript submission. Be sure to submit the cover letter, article, and photographs as separate files. Authors can view tutorials on the Editorial Manager  website for assistance or e-mail the  Young Children  editorial staff at [email protected] .

With the exception of cluster-topic articles, submissions are generally published 16 to 24 months after acceptance. Authors may check the status of their submissions by logging into their Editorial Manager account.

Please note: Individuals may submit only one article within a six-month period.   Young Children 's preferred practice is to publish a particular author only once per 12-month period. On rare occasions we make exceptions to best meet the needs of our readers.

Authors may submit only one article at a time. This holds true whether they are the only author, or one of several. If authors have written several articles for submission, they must decide which one to submit first.

After the article has been reviewed, the authors will be notified of its status. After receipt of this notification, the author may submit another article.  Thus, only one article per author can be under initial consideration and review at a time.

The  Young Children  review process generally takes 6–8 months from receipt of manuscript. The process is compressed for cluster articles. The schedule may vary according to the schedule of our reviewers, many of whom are on the academic calendar.  

Steps in the Review and Editing Process

Given the volume of articles we receive, not all articles can be sent out for review, nor can we provide individual feedback on articles that are not reviewed. The editor in chief determines whether articles will go out for review. There are a number of reasons why articles are not sent out for review. Sometimes articles do not meet basic guidelines for content, writing style, length, or format. At times, the journal has a backlog of articles or has recently published an article on the same topic. In some cases, we receive a number of articles for a cluster that address the same topic and age group. The editor in chief might recommend revising an article before it is reviewed by consulting editors.	1  to 16 weeks after receipt
Articles that meet basic guidelines undergo peer review by NAEYC’s consulting editors. The reviewers provide comments and suggestions. NAEYC senior staff may also review articles.	16 to 26 weeks after receipt
Using all reviews as a guide, the editorial team determines one of the following as the next step. The editor in chief notifies the author of the decision via e-mail. When necessary, this correspondence includes the reviewers' feedback and suggestions for enhancing the manuscript.	26 to 32 weeks after receipt
When authors submit revised articles, they must include a summary of what the author did to address the reviewers’ feedback, through Editorial Manager.	Within 6 months of authors' receipt of decision e-mail

From acceptance to print

It is not possible to determine in advance the exact publication dates of accepted articles (unless for a particular cluster). When planning issues, the editorial team considers the content, style, intended audience, and length of articles, as well as articles’ submission dates.

Authors are notified when their articles are scheduled for publication. They are asked to make updates—sometimes significant—and to complete biography, copyright transfer, and photograph submission and credit forms.

Editing involves substantive editing and copyediting by members of the editorial team. The lead editor returns the edited article to the author via email for final approval before the manuscript enters production. On occasion, last-minute changes in an issue’s content may cause publication of an article to be postponed.

Authors receive a protected PDF copy of their article and have the option to receive two print copies of the issue in which their article appears. 

Contact information 

Annie Moses , PhD, Editor in Chief,  Young Children

Susan Donsky , Managing Editor,  Young Children

Email:   [email protected]

Interested in writing for other NAEYC publications?

Check out our author guidelines for

• Teaching Young Children
• Voices of Practitioners

Recommendations For Authors & Photographers Catalog Webinars NAEYC Books List  

Permissions Desk Copies FAQ

Books NAEYC Books List   Catalog Quantity & Special Pricing

For Authors and Photographers

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

In this EdWeek blog, an experiment in knowledge-gathering, Ferlazzo will address readers’ questions on classroom management, ELL instruction, lesson planning, and other issues facing teachers. Send your questions to [email protected]. Read more from this blog.

Four Strategies for Effective Writing Instruction

• Share article

(This is the first post in a two-part series.)

The new question-of-the-week is:

What is the single most effective instructional strategy you have used to teach writing?

Teaching and learning good writing can be a challenge to educators and students alike.

The topic is no stranger to this column—you can see many previous related posts at Writing Instruction .

But I don’t think any of us can get too much good instructional advice in this area.

Today, Jenny Vo, Michele Morgan, and Joy Hamm share wisdom gained from their teaching experience.

Before I turn over the column to them, though, I’d like to share my favorite tool(s).

Graphic organizers, including writing frames (which are basically more expansive sentence starters) and writing structures (which function more as guides and less as “fill-in-the-blanks”) are critical elements of my writing instruction.

You can see an example of how I incorporate them in my seven-week story-writing unit and in the adaptations I made in it for concurrent teaching.

You might also be interested in The Best Scaffolded Writing Frames For Students .

Now, to today’s guests:

‘Shared Writing’

Jenny Vo earned her B.A. in English from Rice University and her M.Ed. in educational leadership from Lamar University. She has worked with English-learners during all of her 24 years in education and is currently an ESL ISST in Katy ISD in Katy, Texas. Jenny is the president-elect of TexTESOL IV and works to advocate for all ELs:

The single most effective instructional strategy that I have used to teach writing is shared writing. Shared writing is when the teacher and students write collaboratively. In shared writing, the teacher is the primary holder of the pen, even though the process is a collaborative one. The teacher serves as the scribe, while also questioning and prompting the students.

The students engage in discussions with the teacher and their peers on what should be included in the text. Shared writing can be done with the whole class or as a small-group activity.

There are two reasons why I love using shared writing. One, it is a great opportunity for the teacher to model the structures and functions of different types of writing while also weaving in lessons on spelling, punctuation, and grammar.

It is a perfect activity to do at the beginning of the unit for a new genre. Use shared writing to introduce the students to the purpose of the genre. Model the writing process from beginning to end, taking the students from idea generation to planning to drafting to revising to publishing. As you are writing, make sure you refrain from making errors, as you want your finished product to serve as a high-quality model for the students to refer back to as they write independently.

Another reason why I love using shared writing is that it connects the writing process with oral language. As the students co-construct the writing piece with the teacher, they are orally expressing their ideas and listening to the ideas of their classmates. It gives them the opportunity to practice rehearsing what they are going to say before it is written down on paper. Shared writing gives the teacher many opportunities to encourage their quieter or more reluctant students to engage in the discussion with the types of questions the teacher asks.

Writing well is a skill that is developed over time with much practice. Shared writing allows students to engage in the writing process while observing the construction of a high-quality sample. It is a very effective instructional strategy used to teach writing.

‘Four Square’

Michele Morgan has been writing IEPs and behavior plans to help students be more successful for 17 years. She is a national-board-certified teacher, Utah Teacher Fellow with Hope Street Group, and a special education elementary new-teacher specialist with the Granite school district. Follow her @MicheleTMorgan1:

For many students, writing is the most dreaded part of the school day. Writing involves many complex processes that students have to engage in before they produce a product—they must determine what they will write about, they must organize their thoughts into a logical sequence, and they must do the actual writing, whether on a computer or by hand. Still they are not done—they must edit their writing and revise mistakes. With all of that, it’s no wonder that students struggle with writing assignments.

In my years working with elementary special education students, I have found that writing is the most difficult subject to teach. Not only do my students struggle with the writing process, but they often have the added difficulties of not knowing how to spell words and not understanding how to use punctuation correctly. That is why the single most effective strategy I use when teaching writing is the Four Square graphic organizer.

The Four Square instructional strategy was developed in 1999 by Judith S. Gould and Evan Jay Gould. When I first started teaching, a colleague allowed me to borrow the Goulds’ book about using the Four Square method, and I have used it ever since. The Four Square is a graphic organizer that students can make themselves when given a blank sheet of paper. They fold it into four squares and draw a box in the middle of the page. The genius of this instructional strategy is that it can be used by any student, in any grade level, for any writing assignment. These are some of the ways I have used this strategy successfully with my students:

* Writing sentences: Students can write the topic for the sentence in the middle box, and in each square, they can draw pictures of details they want to add to their writing.

* Writing paragraphs: Students write the topic sentence in the middle box. They write a sentence containing a supporting detail in three of the squares and they write a concluding sentence in the last square.

* Writing short essays: Students write what information goes in the topic paragraph in the middle box, then list details to include in supporting paragraphs in the squares.

When I gave students writing assignments, the first thing I had them do was create a Four Square. We did this so often that it became automatic. After filling in the Four Square, they wrote rough drafts by copying their work off of the graphic organizer and into the correct format, either on lined paper or in a Word document. This worked for all of my special education students!

I was able to modify tasks using the Four Square so that all of my students could participate, regardless of their disabilities. Even if they did not know what to write about, they knew how to start the assignment (which is often the hardest part of getting it done!) and they grew to be more confident in their writing abilities.

In addition, when it was time to take the high-stakes state writing tests at the end of the year, this was a strategy my students could use to help them do well on the tests. I was able to give them a sheet of blank paper, and they knew what to do with it. I have used many different curriculum materials and programs to teach writing in the last 16 years, but the Four Square is the one strategy that I have used with every writing assignment, no matter the grade level, because it is so effective.

‘Swift Structures’

Joy Hamm has taught 11 years in a variety of English-language settings, ranging from kindergarten to adult learners. The last few years working with middle and high school Newcomers and completing her M.Ed in TESOL have fostered stronger advocacy in her district and beyond:

A majority of secondary content assessments include open-ended essay questions. Many students falter (not just ELs) because they are unaware of how to quickly organize their thoughts into a cohesive argument. In fact, the WIDA CAN DO Descriptors list level 5 writing proficiency as “organizing details logically and cohesively.” Thus, the most effective cross-curricular secondary writing strategy I use with my intermediate LTELs (long-term English-learners) is what I call “Swift Structures.” This term simply means reading a prompt across any content area and quickly jotting down an outline to organize a strong response.

To implement Swift Structures, begin by displaying a prompt and modeling how to swiftly create a bubble map or outline beginning with a thesis/opinion, then connecting the three main topics, which are each supported by at least three details. Emphasize this is NOT the time for complete sentences, just bulleted words or phrases.

Once the outline is completed, show your ELs how easy it is to plug in transitions, expand the bullets into detailed sentences, and add a brief introduction and conclusion. After modeling and guided practice, set a 5-10 minute timer and have students practice independently. Swift Structures is one of my weekly bell ringers, so students build confidence and skill over time. It is best to start with easy prompts where students have preformed opinions and knowledge in order to focus their attention on the thesis-topics-supporting-details outline, not struggling with the rigor of a content prompt.

Here is one easy prompt example: “Should students be allowed to use their cellphones in class?”

Swift Structure outline:

Thesis - Students should be allowed to use cellphones because (1) higher engagement (2) learning tools/apps (3) gain 21st-century skills

Topic 1. Cellphones create higher engagement in students...

Details A. interactive (Flipgrid, Kahoot)

B. less tempted by distractions

C. teaches responsibility

Topic 2. Furthermore,...access to learning tools...

A. Google Translate description

B. language practice (Duolingo)

C. content tutorials (Kahn Academy)

Topic 3. In addition,...practice 21st-century skills…

Details A. prep for workforce

B. access to information

C. time-management support

This bare-bones outline is like the frame of a house. Get the structure right, and it’s easier to fill in the interior decorating (style, grammar), roof (introduction) and driveway (conclusion). Without the frame, the roof and walls will fall apart, and the reader is left confused by circuitous rubble.

Once LTELs have mastered creating simple Swift Structures in less than 10 minutes, it is time to introduce complex questions similar to prompts found on content assessments or essays. Students need to gain assurance that they can quickly and logically explain and justify their opinions on multiple content essays without freezing under pressure.

Thanks to Jenny, Michele, and Joy for their contributions!

Please feel free to leave a comment with your reactions to the topic or directly to anything that has been said in this post.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at [email protected] . When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

Education Week has published a collection of posts from this blog, along with new material, in an e-book form. It’s titled Classroom Management Q&As: Expert Strategies for Teaching .

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email (The RSS feed for this blog, and for all Ed Week articles, has been changed by the new redesign—new ones are not yet available). And if you missed any of the highlights from the first nine years of this blog, you can see a categorized list below.

• This Year’s Most Popular Q&A Posts
• Race & Racism in Schools
• School Closures & the Coronavirus Crisis
• Classroom-Management Advice
• Best Ways to Begin the School Year
• Best Ways to End the School Year
• Student Motivation & Social-Emotional Learning
• Implementing the Common Core
• Facing Gender Challenges in Education
• Teaching Social Studies
• Cooperative & Collaborative Learning
• Using Tech in the Classroom
• Student Voices
• Parent Engagement in Schools
• Teaching English-Language Learners
• Reading Instruction
• Writing Instruction
• Education Policy Issues
• Differentiating Instruction
• Math Instruction
• Science Instruction
• Advice for New Teachers
• Author Interviews
• Entering the Teaching Profession
• The Inclusive Classroom
• Learning & the Brain
• Administrator Leadership
• Teacher Leadership
• Relationships in Schools
• Professional Development
• Instructional Strategies
• Best of Classroom Q&A
• Professional Collaboration
• Classroom Organization
• Mistakes in Education
• Project-Based Learning

I am also creating a Twitter list including all contributors to this column .

The opinions expressed in Classroom Q&A With Larry Ferlazzo are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

• Park University
• Writing in Your Discipline

Writing for Education

Writing in Your Discipline: Writing for Education

• URL: https://library.park.edu/disciplinewriting
• Writing for Business
• Writing for Humanities
• Writing for Nursing
• Writing for Science
• Writing for Social Sciences
• Writing for Social Work
• Tools for Academic Writing This link opens in a new window
• Citing This link opens in a new window
• Individual Help This link opens in a new window

Writing Lesson Plans

If you plan to certify to teach, you will be asked to write lesson plans in many different classes. Lesson planning lies at the heart of good teaching, and written plans represent the most structured writing assignments you will do in education classes. A good lesson plan describes all the critical elements of your teaching plan, including what you intend for your students to learn, how the lesson will proceed, and how you will know that your lesson reached your goals. In good lesson plans these three elements (objectives, instructional activities, and assessments) are very clearly connected, and they inform each other.

Education is a field that bridges anthropology, sociology, psychology, science, and philosophy. When writing about education, you will utilize a myriad of writing styles and formats to address your essay topics. Your writing should always:

1) Be tailored for the audience of the educational community

2) Be tailored for the type or purpose of writing in education

3) Use formal, specific, and precise language

4) Be credibly sourced and free of plagiarism

5) Convey clear, complete, and organized communication

6) Use correct English language conventions

7) Be correctly formatted and styled

The types of writing in Education include: reflective writing, persuasive writing, analytic writing and procedural writing. 

Types of Papers

As an education student, you may be asked to write:

• journals/field-notes: think of field-notes as the clay for your future thoughts, observations, and ideas; these are informal
• literature reviews: categorize or conceptualize relevant pieces of literature
• analysis papers: analyze outside sources to promote your own interpretation of a particular theory or style
• evaluative essays: look at a particular approach to teaching or theory of learning and discuss strengths and weaknesses
• narratives present collected data through use of informal methods, imaginary letters to parents, recommendations for school, etc.
• case studies: present problem, discuss others' thoughts on the issue, describe and analyze data/evidence, and draw conclusions
• research and lab papers: identify research questions, contextualize the question in the research literature; identify hypotheses, methods of data collection and reduction and analysis; discuss findings.
• << Previous: Writing for Business
• Next: Writing for Humanities >>
• Last Updated: Aug 23, 2024 9:50 AM

8700 NW River Park Drive, Box 61 - Parkville, MO - 64152

Phone: (816) 584-6285 Toll-free: (800) 270-4347

• Our Mission

The Importance of Student Journals and How to Respond Efficiently

Burdened by expanding curriculum and multiplying high-stakes assessment requirements, some of my respected colleagues might be forgiven for not integrating student journals into their courses. The most common objection: "Who has time?"

"What instructor doesn't have time for student journaling?" is my typical reply, a non-answer that halts further conversation by employing a rhetorical cul-de-sac familiar to high-school debaters. To atone, I'll summarize research on journaling, identify my favorite reflective writing formats, and describe a labor-saving method of teacher response.

Classroom Journaling Is Essential

The benefits of students integrating journal writing across the curriculum are amply documented . From a teacher's perspective, there are few activities that can trump journal writing for understanding and supporting the development of student thinking. Journaling turbo-charges curiosity. The legendary Toby Fulwiler, author of The Journal Book , writes, "Without an understanding of who we are, we are not likely to understand fully why we study biology rather than forestry, literature rather than philosophy. In the end, all knowledge is related; the journal helps clarify the relationship."

Vary Student Journal Formats to Enhance Content-Specific Thinking

Annette Lamb and Larry Johnson's 42explore presents implementation advice and describes different journal formats. Introducing a range of reflective genres can encourage students to generalize about their content attitudes. Every subject area "pot" has its own reflective "lid," allowing teachers a peak into the metacognitive soup of students' misconceptions and insight. For example, here is a format that supports scientific reflection: "Today I observed... I predict that... I also measured... I concluded that..."

One of my favorites, the microtheme , supports comprehension, extends thinking, improves confidence, and bolsters writing across the content areas. I've run into different versions. In one, students write a summary to a reading, lecture, demonstration, or experiment on the back of an index card. Teachers collect the note cards and write responses to the students on the other side. Microthemes quickly activate thinking before whole-class discussions.

But, while essentially all reflective writing formats yield benefits, there is a problem...

Who Has Time to Grade Journals?

For years, I've taken home crates of journals on the weekend and responded with a Theseusian intensity that has crushed classroom preparation time and personal leisure, and has exasperated friends and family. To lessen the time costs, I tried skimming journals. My token analysis, however, signaled students to submit journals that were equivalently weak ("If he doesn't care, why should we?").

So, how do you implement journals, make them a priority, and reduce responding time?

An Efficient Journal Response Strategy

Premised on the notion that students should assess their own writing, Terri Van Sickle , a virtuoso instructor and writer for Crystal Coast Parent Magazine, teaches her classes to use a rich and organic process of open-ended reflection that works well as a culminating journal activity.

Whether your students write in daybooks , two entry notebooks , or academic journals , you can use the following instruction sheet to help students self-reflect.

Journal Coding

Assignment Introduction: The following questions will help you to deeply examine the thinking, interactions, exercises, and writing you have experienced over the course of the semester.

1. Reading and Marking: Read through your entire journal. Identify and star (*) 10 passages that seem most significant to you as a learner of the subject matter in this course. You might choose an entry that was written when you were thinking on all cylinders, discovering something revelatory, engaging in higher order thinking, struggling with an idea that was only partially formed, or experiencing confusion. Maybe you were able to transcend the classroom conversations and texts to come up with an original idea. These ten passages should be as varied as possible and make generalizations that provide a full portrait of you as a learner of this course's content. Next, double star (**) five of the passages most significant to you. Why did you choose these five sections? What generalizations can you make about you as a writer and learner?

2. Letter to Reader: Write a letter to your reader, describing the items you starred and explaining how and why you chose them. Also, reflect on the following:

• a. What was the most persuasive or convincing argument introduced in this class?
• b. What could you relate to the most in class or in the readings? Why?
• c. Was there an argument or position taken in class or in the readings with which you strongly disagreed? Explain your reaction.
• d. What do you think was the most important point or central concept communicated this semester?
• e. If you could do this semester over again more successfully, what would you do differently? Why?

3. Final Check: Is your name, class, and date written on the cover?   Make sure your journal has a complete table of contents, page numbers on every page, and that each entry is dated. If you were absent on a day when we used journals in class, enter "absent" next to the date. 

I allow a full class period or more for students to follow these instructions. Many adolescents wrestle with critical reflection and therefore may need more individual help or modeling.

By primarily focusing my commentary on students' starred passages and reflective letters, I acquire a snapshot of the students' understanding of course content and save 3-4 hours on every set of 30 semester-length journals. Even though I only collect journals one time per semester, I can meet students' eyes, knowing that I haven't neglected journal segments that they wanted me to read.

Coda: The three best albums to write reflections to:

1. "Kind of Blue" by Miles Davis 2. "The Last Temptation of Christ" (Soundtrack) by Peter Gabriel 3. "Unleft" by Helios

-- Todd Finley's Twitter address is @finleyt .

• All subject areas
• Agricultural and Biological Sciences
• Arts and Humanities
• Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
• Business, Management and Accounting
• Chemical Engineering
• Computer Science
• Decision Sciences
• Earth and Planetary Sciences
• Economics, Econometrics and Finance
• Engineering
• Environmental Science
• Health Professions
• Immunology and Microbiology
• Materials Science
• Mathematics
• Multidisciplinary
• Neuroscience
• Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
• Physics and Astronomy
• Social Sciences
• All subject categories
• Acoustics and Ultrasonics
• Advanced and Specialized Nursing
• Aerospace Engineering
• Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
• Agronomy and Crop Science
• Algebra and Number Theory
• Analytical Chemistry
• Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
• Animal Science and Zoology
• Anthropology
• Applied Mathematics
• Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
• Applied Psychology
• Aquatic Science
• Archeology (arts and humanities)
• Architecture
• Artificial Intelligence
• Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
• Assessment and Diagnosis
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atmospheric Science
• Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
• Automotive Engineering
• Behavioral Neuroscience
• Biochemistry
• Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (miscellaneous)
• Biochemistry (medical)
• Bioengineering
• Biological Psychiatry
• Biomaterials
• Biomedical Engineering
• Biotechnology
• Building and Construction
• Business and International Management
• Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
• Cancer Research
• Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
• Care Planning
• Cell Biology
• Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
• Ceramics and Composites
• Chemical Engineering (miscellaneous)
• Chemical Health and Safety
• Chemistry (miscellaneous)
• Chiropractics
• Civil and Structural Engineering
• Clinical Biochemistry
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Colloid and Surface Chemistry
• Communication
• Community and Home Care
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Complementary and Manual Therapy
• Computational Mathematics
• Computational Mechanics
• Computational Theory and Mathematics
• Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design
• Computer Networks and Communications
• Computer Science Applications
• Computer Science (miscellaneous)
• Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
• Computers in Earth Sciences
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Conservation
• Control and Optimization
• Control and Systems Engineering
• Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
• Critical Care Nursing
• Cultural Studies
• Decision Sciences (miscellaneous)
• Dental Assisting
• Dental Hygiene
• Dentistry (miscellaneous)
• Dermatology
• Development
• Developmental and Educational Psychology
• Developmental Biology
• Developmental Neuroscience
• Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics
• Drug Discovery
• Drug Guides
• Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
• Earth-Surface Processes
• Ecological Modeling
• Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
• Economic Geology
• Economics and Econometrics
• Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
• Electrical and Electronic Engineering
• Electrochemistry
• Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
• Emergency Medical Services
• Emergency Medicine
• Emergency Nursing
• Endocrine and Autonomic Systems
• Endocrinology
• Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
• Energy Engineering and Power Technology
• Energy (miscellaneous)
• Engineering (miscellaneous)
• Environmental Chemistry
• Environmental Engineering
• Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
• Epidemiology
• Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
• Family Practice
• Filtration and Separation
• Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes
• Food Animals
• Food Science
• Fuel Technology
• Fundamentals and Skills
• Gastroenterology
• Gender Studies
• Genetics (clinical)
• Geochemistry and Petrology
• Geography, Planning and Development
• Geometry and Topology
• Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology
• Geriatrics and Gerontology
• Gerontology
• Global and Planetary Change
• Hardware and Architecture
• Health Informatics
• Health Information Management
• Health Policy
• Health Professions (miscellaneous)
• Health (social science)
• Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis
• History and Philosophy of Science
• Horticulture
• Human Factors and Ergonomics
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Immunology and Allergy
• Immunology and Microbiology (miscellaneous)
• Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
• Industrial Relations
• Infectious Diseases
• Information Systems
• Information Systems and Management
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Insect Science
• Instrumentation
• Internal Medicine
• Issues, Ethics and Legal Aspects
• Leadership and Management
• Library and Information Sciences
• Life-span and Life-course Studies
• Linguistics and Language
• Literature and Literary Theory
• LPN and LVN
• Management Information Systems
• Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
• Management of Technology and Innovation
• Management Science and Operations Research
• Materials Chemistry
• Materials Science (miscellaneous)
• Maternity and Midwifery
• Mathematical Physics
• Mathematics (miscellaneous)
• Mechanical Engineering
• Mechanics of Materials
• Media Technology
• Medical and Surgical Nursing
• Medical Assisting and Transcription
• Medical Laboratory Technology
• Medical Terminology
• Medicine (miscellaneous)
• Metals and Alloys
• Microbiology
• Microbiology (medical)
• Modeling and Simulation
• Molecular Biology
• Molecular Medicine
• Nanoscience and Nanotechnology
• Nature and Landscape Conservation
• Neurology (clinical)
• Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
• Neuroscience (miscellaneous)
• Nuclear and High Energy Physics
• Nuclear Energy and Engineering
• Numerical Analysis
• Nurse Assisting
• Nursing (miscellaneous)
• Nutrition and Dietetics
• Obstetrics and Gynecology
• Occupational Therapy
• Ocean Engineering
• Oceanography
• Oncology (nursing)
• Ophthalmology
• Oral Surgery
• Organic Chemistry
• Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
• Orthodontics
• Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
• Otorhinolaryngology
• Paleontology
• Parasitology
• Pathology and Forensic Medicine
• Pathophysiology
• Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
• Periodontics
• Pharmaceutical Science
• Pharmacology
• Pharmacology (medical)
• Pharmacology (nursing)
• Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (miscellaneous)
• Physical and Theoretical Chemistry
• Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
• Physics and Astronomy (miscellaneous)
• Physiology (medical)
• Plant Science
• Political Science and International Relations
• Polymers and Plastics
• Process Chemistry and Technology
• Psychiatry and Mental Health
• Psychology (miscellaneous)
• Public Administration
• Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
• Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
• Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
• Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
• Rehabilitation
• Religious Studies
• Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
• Reproductive Medicine
• Research and Theory
• Respiratory Care
• Review and Exam Preparation
• Reviews and References (medical)
• Rheumatology
• Safety Research
• Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
• Sensory Systems
• Signal Processing
• Small Animals
• Social Psychology
• Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
• Social Work
• Sociology and Political Science
• Soil Science
• Space and Planetary Science
• Spectroscopy
• Speech and Hearing
• Sports Science
• Statistical and Nonlinear Physics
• Statistics and Probability
• Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
• Strategy and Management
• Stratigraphy
• Structural Biology
• Surfaces and Interfaces
• Surfaces, Coatings and Films
• Theoretical Computer Science
• Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management
• Transplantation
• Transportation
• Urban Studies
• Veterinary (miscellaneous)
• Visual Arts and Performing Arts
• Waste Management and Disposal
• Water Science and Technology
• All regions / countries
• Asiatic Region
• Eastern Europe
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Northern America
• Pacific Region
• Western Europe
• ARAB COUNTRIES
• IBEROAMERICA
• NORDIC COUNTRIES
• Afghanistan
• Bosnia and Herzegovina
• Brunei Darussalam
• Czech Republic
• Dominican Republic
• Netherlands
• New Caledonia
• New Zealand
• Papua New Guinea
• Philippines
• Puerto Rico
• Russian Federation
• Saudi Arabia
• South Africa
• South Korea
• Switzerland
• Syrian Arab Republic
• Trinidad and Tobago
• United Arab Emirates
• United Kingdom
• United States
• Vatican City State
• Book Series
• Conferences and Proceedings
• Trade Journals

• Citable Docs. (3years)
• Total Cites (3years)

-->

	Title	Type
1		journal	5.772 Q1	186	43	74	5366	1338	73	12.59	124.79	64.39
2		journal	4.321 Q1	142	118	208	11698	2845	197	12.23	99.14	53.76
3		journal	3.956 Q1	151	67	205	3036	2030	198	6.76	45.31	48.23
4		journal	3.914 Q1	73	58	116	4766	837	109	7.32	82.17	27.78
5		journal	3.874 Q1	100	48	130	5704	2101	129	12.20	118.83	57.87
6		journal	3.863 Q1	130	84	216	7477	2702	214	4.93	89.01	55.99
7		journal	3.651 Q1	232	163	597	13475	9892	596	12.14	82.67	47.96
8		journal	3.520 Q1	68	72	199	2880	2148	182	10.46	40.00	44.83
9		journal	3.313 Q1	11	14	46	400	635	40	18.34	28.57	62.96
10		journal	3.227 Q1	29	79	106	5426	2196	105	18.85	68.68	31.47
11		journal	2.966 Q1	185	62	269	5579	3184	253	6.30	89.98	54.17
12		journal	2.838 Q1	54	12	21	1493	236	21	8.20	124.42	61.90
13		journal	2.808 Q1	116	20	74	3639	621	74	7.31	181.95	63.08
14		journal	2.774 Q1	252	53	307	5250	2234	306	6.45	99.06	57.48
15		journal	2.761 Q1	118	51	104	5425	885	103	6.56	106.37	68.78
16		journal	2.738 Q1	106	130	273	5755	2125	272	6.97	44.27	55.08
17		journal	2.606 Q1	105	61	101	2688	644	81	5.00	44.07	52.53
18		journal	2.601 Q1	60	94	161	5032	1493	146	4.15	53.53	58.00
19		journal	2.578 Q1	61	62	183	3613	2510	178	11.28	58.27	52.17
20		journal	2.426 Q1	117	18	76	1500	827	75	9.75	83.33	52.38
21		journal	2.425 Q1	119	120	387	7794	3894	366	9.33	64.95	48.14
22		journal	2.357 Q1	144	80	243	4949	1824	236	6.12	61.86	47.45
23		journal	2.249 Q1	88	229	835	18525	11016	834	12.66	80.90	34.93
24		journal	2.232 Q1	144	35	142	2674	802	141	4.99	76.40	61.98
25		journal	2.198 Q1	107	42	190	3459	1159	174	4.85	82.36	68.75
26		journal	2.158 Q1	109	56	129	2747	762	115	5.14	49.05	63.64
27		journal	2.155 Q1	29	84	192	3501	1345	99	5.38	41.68	45.53
28		journal	2.124 Q1	115	82	166	5522	836	153	4.52	67.34	52.29
29		journal	2.105 Q1	111	23	71	1314	388	66	3.79	57.13	54.90
30		journal	2.082 Q1	289	172	621	11356	3257	614	4.57	66.02	61.38
31		journal	2.075 Q1	104	146	461	9456	3132	458	6.12	64.77	43.27
32		journal	2.065 Q1	127	256	396	15378	3075	392	7.11	60.07	52.47
33		journal	2.041 Q1	113	22	55	1730	276	53	4.17	78.64	50.00
34		journal	2.035 Q1	50	68	187	5429	1767	174	7.37	79.84	55.85
35		journal	2.007 Q1	95	38	106	3403	550	97	4.51	89.55	43.02
36		journal	1.987 Q1	74	0	43	0	328	40	3.11	0.00	0.00
37		journal	1.982 Q1	21	40	63	1645	288	56	4.46	41.13	68.25
38		journal	1.954 Q1	144	186	494	11252	2846	489	5.44	60.49	61.37
39		journal	1.937 Q1	120	899	1482	45502	12101	136	5.91	50.61	34.69
40		journal	1.933 Q1	95	16	58	1494	236	58	3.84	93.38	62.00
41		journal	1.908 Q1	132	96	127	4236	669	122	5.03	44.13	61.15
42		journal	1.906 Q1	157	99	181	9134	1171	168	5.19	92.26	59.22
43		journal	1.898 Q1	60	235	544	12273	3423	526	4.26	52.23	70.75
44		journal	1.888 Q1	122	112	178	5739	923	171	4.44	51.24	47.51
45		journal	1.866 Q1	112	71	150	3408	620	150	3.57	48.00	37.28
46		journal	1.866 Q1	75	98	124	6503	1063	121	8.11	66.36	51.61
47		journal	1.852 Q1	62	89	123	4840	1140	112	5.56	54.38	57.95
48		journal	1.842 Q1	62	76	99	5306	789	91	7.30	69.82	41.16
49		journal	1.842 Q1	114	179	313	12758	2443	312	7.41	71.27	46.41
50		journal	1.840 Q1	111	55	151	5498	837	149	4.29	99.96	65.33

Follow us on @ScimagoJR Scimago Lab , Copyright 2007-2024. Data Source: Scopus®

Cookie settings

Cookie Policy

Legal Notice

Privacy Policy

Sign Up For Paid Writing Opportunities

26 education & teaching magazines and websites that pay freelance writers.

Dear Writers,

Here’s a roundup of magazines and websites that publish writing about education.

All of these publishers pay freelance writers. We’ve noted payment information, when available. Also, keep in mind that payment rates are not set in stone.

Also, if you are a teacher, there are many opportunities out there to use your expertise to get paid as a freelance writer. This article gives helpful advice.

PTO Today is the magazine for leaders of parent-teacher organizations. They’re published 6 times a year. They publish articles about parental involvement, leadership, fundraising, working with school staff, etc. They pay $125 to $500 (down from $200 to $700!) for features. To learn more, read their submission guidelines.

The Change Agent publishes articles written by adult educators and students. Published biannually, the magazine’s pieces promote advocacy skills and and social action. They pay a $50 stipend for accepted articles. To learn more, read their submission guidelines.

TakeLessons is an educational site that connects teachers with students. They invite writers to join their team of teachers and submit articles to their blog. Teachers can choose from a list of topics and write a 500-800 word post for consideration. They pay $50 per post by a site-registered teacher; non-teachers do not receive payment. To learn more, read their submission guidelines.

American Educator is published quarterly by the American Federation of Teachers. It addresses the state of education across the country and covers new trends in education, politics, labor issues, and more. They pay at least $300 for articles, which typically run 1,000 to 5,000 words. To learn more, read their submission guidelines.

Learning for Justice (formerly Teaching Tolerance) publishes articles for a national audience of pre-K through 12 educators with a focus on diversity and social justice. They accept freelance submissions for articles, blog posts, and lessons that reflect their perspective. They pay up to $1 a word for features and their Story Corner section. To learn more, read their submission guidelines.

Education Forum is the official magazine of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation. They are “a progressive voice on public education and on all issues affecting those that work in public education. ” They reach 60,000 public education workers in Ontario. They pay $500 for features. To learn more, read their submission guidelines .

SchoolArts Magazine publishes information on teaching art in schools. They’re looking for conversational articles that share “successful lessons, areas of concern, and approaches to teaching art.” They pay up to $100 per article. To learn more, read theirsubmission guidelines.

The Old Schoolhouse Magazine is a magazine for Christian homeschoolers. Articles can be from parents of homeschooled children or those with an interest in the topic. They have set out themes and deadlines for 2018. Query first. Length: 800 words. Pay: $50. Details here .

Back to College publishes information for adult re-entry students who are pursuing an advanced degree. They accept unsolicited articles that discuss all aspects of the re-entry experience, from finding financial aid to mastering online education. They appear to only accept submissions via mail. They pay $65 and up for features. To learn more, read their submission guidelines.

Practical Homeschooling Magazine is a print and digital magazine that features the latest educational trends, useful how-tos and practical answers to the toughest homeschooling questions. They are looking for “practical articles (with resource lists and, ideally, photos) that explain how to meet some homeschool challenge or how to venture forth in to some new area.” They pay $50 per article. To learn more, read their writer’s guidelines .

WeAreTeachers is an online media brand for educators. They welcome submissions on a wide range of topics related to teacher life and education. Before submitting, they recommend reviewing their blog to understand their style, format, and tone. Most of their blog posts are 500 to 700 words long. If they publish the submission, they pay an honorarium of $100. To learn more, visit this page .

Texas Adult Education & Literacy Quarterly is a publication of the Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy & Learning (TCALL) at Texas A&M University. They address “topics of concern to adult education and literacy practitioners, policymakers, and scholars.” They are looking for articles that are no longer than 900 words. They pay a stipend of $50 to $250 per article. Further details can be found here .

Living Education is an online journal that celebrates and explores issues that are of relevance to homeschooling families. They are “especially interested in articles that highlight unique and innovative paths that the educational journey can take.” They want the articles to be up to about 1,000 words long. They pay $50 per piece. For details, visit this page .

Faramira publishes quizzes on English vocabulary, general knowledge, basic mathematics, and general science to help people prepare for aptitude tests. They are seeking articles (500 to 800 words) from experienced freelance writers. The articles can be on “fashion & beauty, health & fitness, family & wellbeing, education, finance, personal growth, leadership, productivity, food & recipes, technology, social media, and entertainment.” They pay $8 to $30 per article to their paid writers. Details here . But with such low rates, why bother?

The Hechinger Report is an independent, nonprofit news organization that focuses on inequality and innovation in education. They provide in-depth, fact-based, and unbiased reporting on education. Payment reports indicate that they pay up to $1.50 per word. To contact them, refer to this page .  

The URMIA Journal is an annual scholarly publication by the University Risk Management and Insurance Association (URMIA), an international non-profit educational association that serves colleges and universities. The journal features peer-reviewed articles that contain “in-depth analysis on a broad range of risk management topics of concern in higher education.” They offer an honorarium of $300 per article (2,500 to 7,500 words). Details here .

The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal is a “nonprofit institute dedicated to improving higher education in North Carolina and the nation.” They are accepting unsolicited article submissions on topics including “higher education administration, finances, governance, academic standards, efficiency, enrollment, employment, pedagogy, and the curriculum, as well as exposure of bias, politicization, corruption, and poor practices.” They pay an honorarium that begins at $200 and increases with the amount of web traffic. Details here .

The Advocate is a newspaper for the students, faculty, and staff of the Graduate Center (GC), City University of New York (CUNY). They accept articles, reviews, photos, and illustrations from the students, faculty, and staff of CUNY as well as those who are not affiliated with CUNY. They accept articles on a wide range of topics including GC/CUNY issues; teaching and graduate life; New York City’s politics, culture, and art; local, national, and international issues; science and technology; and book, theater, film, music, and art. They pay $100 to $150 per article (1,000 to 3,000 words). To contribute, refer to this page .

E-Book Web is a magazine about eBooks, reading, education, and more. They are looking for book reviews, tips for increasing reading productivity, interviews, and education related content. They pay $50 for an article of 600 to 1500 words, and $75 for an article of more than 1,500 words. They pay $100 for interviews of authors and other education professionals. Details here .

The Medic Blog is a self-study resource to prepare for UCAT, BMAT, and GAMSAT. They welcome submissions from candidates who have taken UCAT, BMAT, or GAMSAT. They pay up to £100 per article. To learn more, refer to this page .

Generation Mindful creates educational products that build emotional intelligence and help connect the generations. They are interested in articles on the following topics: “social emotional learning, positive discipline, supportive classrooms, the power of play, mindfulness, foster families, co-regulation, Calming Corners, home schooling, early childhood education, special education, ADHD, autism, and childhood trauma.” They previously indicated payment of $75 per published post, but now ask that you specify your rate with the submission. Details here .

College & University (C&U) is a quarterly journal by American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO). They pay an honorarium of $300 for a feature article (refereed article) and $150 for a forum article (commentary, analysis, book review, and international resource). To learn more, refer to this page .

STEMTaught is an organization that is dedicated to improving the accessibility of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) education to elementary school students. They are looking for article submissions. They pay $100 for the author’s efforts and creativity. To learn more, visit this page .

Teachers & Writers Magazine is “published by Teachers & Writers Collaborative to provide resources and inspiration in support of our stated mission: teaching creative writing and educating the imagination.” They are looking for the following type of articles: Favorite Classroom Writing Prompts ($75 for 500-750 words), Narrative Lesson Plans ($100 for 750-2,000 words), The Art of Teaching Writing ($150 for 1,000+ words), Interviews ($150-$350 for 1,000-2,500 words), Profiles ($150 for 1,000-2,500 words), Redefining the Canon ($150 for 1,000-2,500 words), and Essays and Editorial Responses ($150 for 1,000-2,000 words). For details, read their submission guidelines .

EdTech Magazine explores “technology and education issues that IT leaders and educators face when they’re evaluating and implementing a solution for K-12 and Higher Ed.” They are always seeking new writing talent. According to their associate editor , they pay $0.50 to $1.00 per word for articles of 800 to 1,200 words. To learn more, refer to this page .

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news organization that reports on education in poor communities across America. They elevate the “voices of educators, students, parents, advocates, and others on the front lines of trying to improve public education.” They are looking for personal essays (around 800 words) centered around a personal experience or observation. They publish these essays in a series called First Person. According to their story editor , they pay $100 per personal essay. If interested, send your pitches or drafts to [email protected] . For more information, read their first person guidelines .

We send you writing jobs.

Sign up and we'll send you 3 companies hiring writers now. Plus, we'll send more companies as we find and review them. All in our free email magazine.

We're the magazine for freelance writers.

We send you companies hiring writers., subscribe and we'll send you 3 companies hiring right now., we'll also send you a guide that gets you started., we're completely free., subscribe now. (it's free.).

We're dedicated to helping freelance writers succeed. We send you reviews of freelance writing companies, assignments, and articles to help build your writing career. You can view our privacy policy here, and our disclaimer. To get started, simply enter your email address in the form on this page.

Freedom With Writing | We Send You Paid Writing Opportunities | View Our Privacy Policy

Journal Article References

This page contains reference examples for journal articles, including the following:

• Journal article
• Journal article with an article number
• Journal article with missing information
• Retracted journal article
• Retraction notice for a journal article
• Abstract of a journal article from an abstract indexing database
• Monograph as part of a journal issue
• Online-only supplemental material to a journal article

1. Journal article

Grady, J. S., Her, M., Moreno, G., Perez, C., & Yelinek, J. (2019). Emotions in storybooks: A comparison of storybooks that represent ethnic and racial groups in the United States. Psychology of Popular Media Culture , 8 (3), 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000185

• Parenthetical citation : (Grady et al., 2019)
• Narrative citation : Grady et al. (2019)
• If a journal article has a DOI, include the DOI in the reference.
• Always include the issue number for a journal article.
• If the journal article does not have a DOI and is from an academic research database, end the reference after the page range (for an explanation of why, see the database information page ). The reference in this case is the same as for a print journal article.
• Do not include database information in the reference unless the journal article comes from a database that publishes works of limited circulation or original, proprietary content, such as UpToDate .
• If the journal article does not have a DOI but does have a URL that will resolve for readers (e.g., it is from an online journal that is not part of a database), include the URL of the article at the end of the reference.

2. Journal article with an article number

Jerrentrup, A., Mueller, T., Glowalla, U., Herder, M., Henrichs, N., Neubauer, A., & Schaefer, J. R. (2018). Teaching medicine with the help of “Dr. House.” PLoS ONE , 13 (3), Article e0193972. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193972

• Parenthetical citation : (Jerrentrup et al., 2018)
• Narrative citation : Jerrentrup et al. (2018)
• If the journal article has an article number instead of a page range, include the word “Article” and then the article number instead of the page range.

3. Journal article with missing information

Missing volume number.

Lipscomb, A. Y. (2021, Winter). Addressing trauma in the college essay writing process. The Journal of College Admission , (249), 30–33. https://www.catholiccollegesonline.org/pdf/national_ccaa_in_the_news_-_nacac_journal_of_college_admission_winter_2021.pdf

Missing issue number

Sanchiz, M., Chevalier, A., & Amadieu, F. (2017). How do older and young adults start searching for information? Impact of age, domain knowledge and problem complexity on the different steps of information searching. Computers in Human Behavior , 72 , 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.038

Missing page or article number

Butler, J. (2017). Where access meets multimodality: The case of ASL music videos. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy , 21 (1). http://technorhetoric.net/21.1/topoi/butler/index.html

• Parenthetical citations : (Butler, 2017; Lipscomb, 2021; Sanchiz et al., 2017)
• Narrative citations : Butler (2017), Lipscomb (2021), and Sanchiz et al. (2017)
• If the journal does not use volume, issue, and/or article or page numbers, omit the missing element(s) from the reference.
• If the journal is published quarterly and the month or season (Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer) is noted, include that with the date element; see the Lipscomb example.
• If the volume, issue, and/or article or page numbers have simply not yet been assigned, use the format for an advance online publication (see Example 7 in the Publication Manual ) or an in-press article (see Example 8 in the Publication Manual ).

4. Retracted journal article

Joly, J. F., Stapel, D. A., & Lindenberg, S. M. (2008). Silence and table manners: When environments activate norms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 34 (8), 1047–1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208318401 (Retraction published 2012, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38 [10], 1378)

• Parenthetical citation : (Joly et al., 2008)
• Narrative citation : Joly et al. (2008)
• Use this format to cite the retracted article itself, for example, to discuss the contents of the retracted article.
• First provide publication details of the original article. Then provide information about the retraction in parentheses, including its year, journal, volume, issue, and page number(s).

5. Retraction notice for a journal article

de la Fuente, R., Bernad, A., Garcia-Castro, J., Martin, M. C., & Cigudosa, J. C. (2010). Retraction: Spontaneous human adult stem cell transformation. Cancer Research , 70 (16), 6682. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-2451

The Editors of the Lancet. (2010). Retraction—Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet , 375 (9713), 445. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60175-4

• Parenthetical citations : (de la Fuente et al., 2010; The Editors of the Lancet, 2010)
• Narrative citations : de la Fuente et al. (2010) and The Editors of the Lancet (2010)
• Use this format to cite a retraction notice rather than a retracted article, for example, to provide information on why an article was retracted.
• The author of the retraction notice may be an editor, editorial board, or some or all authors of the article. Examine the retraction notice to determine who to credit as the author.
• Reproduce the title of the retraction notice as shown on the work. Note that the title may include the words “retraction,” “retraction notice,” or “retraction note” as well as the title of the original article.

6. Abstract of a journal article from an abstract indexing database

Hare, L. R., & O'Neill, K. (2000). Effectiveness and efficiency in small academic peer groups: A case study (Accession No. 200010185) [Abstract from Sociological Abstracts]. Small Group Research , 31 (1), 24–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100102

• Parenthetical citation : (Hare & O’Neill, 2000)
• Narrative citation : Hare and O’Neill (2000)
• Although it is preferable to cite the whole article, the abstract can be cited if that is your only available source.
• The foundation of the reference is the same as for a journal article.
• If the abstract has a database accession number, place it in parentheses after the title.
• Note that you retrieved only the abstract by putting the words “Abstract from” and then the name of the abstract indexing database in square brackets. Place this bracketed description after the title and any accession number.
• Accession numbers are sometimes referred to as unique identifiers or as publication numbers (e.g., as PubMed IDs); use the term provided by the database in your reference.

7. Monograph as part of a journal issue

Ganster, D. C., Schaubroeck, J., Sime, W. E., & Mayes, B. T. (1991). The nomological validity of the Type A personality among employed adults [Monograph]. Journal of Applied Psychology , 76 (1), 143–168. http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.1.143

• Parenthetical citation : (Ganster et al., 1991)
• Narrative citation : Ganster et al. (1991)
• For a monograph with an issue (or whole) number, include the issue number in parentheses followed by the serial number, for example, 58 (1, Serial No. 231).
• For a monograph bound separately as a supplement to a journal, give the issue number and supplement or part number in parentheses after the volume number, for example, 80 (3, Pt. 2).

8. Online-only supplemental material to a journal article

Freeberg, T. M. (2019). From simple rules of individual proximity, complex and coordinated collective movement [Supplemental material]. Journal of Comparative Psychology , 133 (2), 141–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000181

• Parenthetical citation : (Freeberg, 2019)
• Narrative citation : Freeberg (2019)
• Include the description “[Supplemental material]” in square brackets after the article title.
• If you cite both the main article and the supplemental material, provide only a reference for the article.

Journal article references are covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 10.1 and the Concise Guide Section 10.1

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 26 August 2024

L2 writer engagement with automated written corrective feedback provided by ChatGPT: A mixed-method multiple case study

• Da Yan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1265-9772 1 &
• Shuxian Zhang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  1086 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Language and linguistics

Automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) has been widely applied in second language (L2) writing classrooms in the past few decades. Recently, the introduction of tools based on generative artificial intelligence (GAI) such as ChatGPT heralds groundbreaking changes in the conceptualization and practice of AWCF in L2 pedagogy. However, students’ engagement in such an interactive and intelligent learning environment remains unstudied. The present study aims to investigate L2 writers’ behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement with ChatGPT as an AWCF provider for writing products. This mixed-method multiple case study explored four L2 writers’ behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement with AWCF provided by ChatGPT. Bearing the conversational and generative mechanisms of ChatGPT in mind, data on students’ engagement were collected from various sources: prompt writing techniques, revision operations, utilization of metacognitive and cognitive strategies, and attitudinal responses to the feedback. The results indicated that: 1) behavioral engagement was related to their individual differences in language proficiencies and technological competencies; 2) the participants have failed to metacognitively regulate the learning processes in an effective manner; and 3) ChatGPT ushered in an affectively engaging, albeit competence-demanding and time-consuming, learning environment for L2 writers. The study delivers conceptual and pedagogical implications for educators and researchers poised to incorporate GAI-based technologies in language education.

Similar content being viewed by others

Timed second language writing performance: effects of perceived teacher vs perceived automated feedback

ChatGPT and the digitisation of writing

A large-scale comparison of human-written versus chatgpt-generated essays, introduction.

“Engagement defines all learning” (Hiver et al. 2021 , 2).

In second language (L2) writing, feedback, especially written feedback, is one of the most widely applied and researched topics (Hyland and Hyland 2019 ). In the past decades, the focus of relevant research has shifted from the effects of feedback on writing quality (e.g., Nelson and Schunn 2009 ; Dizon and Gayed 2021 ) towards students’ involvement in processing and utilizing feedback (Zhang 2017 ; Ranalli 2021 ). However, due to the multifaceted and dynamic nature of student engagement with written feedback (Han and Gao 2021 ), the body of existing literature suffers from the lack of multidimensional insights into all the aspects of engagement with feedback (Shi 2021 ).

Meanwhile, with the advancement of technologies, automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) has been widely implemented in L2 classrooms as a pedagogical innovation. Researchers have made continuous contributions to expand our knowledge in 1) the effects of AWCF on the quality of writing products (Barrot 2021 ); 2) the interplay of AWCF and classroom instruction (Tan et al. 2022 ); and 3) learners’ perceptions of the utilization of AWCF providers in L2 classrooms (ONeill and Russell 2019 ). Reversely, thorough investigations of students’ engagement with AWCF have been scant (Koltovskaia 2020 ). Furthermore, compared to the bravery to incorporate state-of-the-art technologies in L2 classrooms, there remains a lacuna of research on the students’ engagement with cutting-edge AWCF providers. Since its advent in late 2022, ChatGPT, a conversational generative artificial intelligence (GAI) chatbot powered by large language models (LLM), has evoked heated hype about its impact on language education (e.g., Jiao et al. 2023 ; Mizumoto and Eguchi 2023 ). Specifically, a few pioneering studies have unveiled its strength to outperform its precedents in correcting grammatical errors (Fang et al. 2023 ; Wu et al. 2023 ). Nevertheless, we confronted a dearth of empirical evidence of students’ engagement with AWCF generated by ChatGPT in authentic L2 pedagogical settings.

Against the above backdrops, the study has explored L2 writers’ engagement with AWCF provided by ChatGPT. Theoretically, the research has drawn upon existing studies to reconceptualize student engagement with feedback provided by GAI-based systems. Methodologically, the study adopted a mixed-method multiple case study approach to collect and triangulate data. The paper is significant as it brings new insights into the changes in learning patterns that resulted from students’ exposure to GAI-based feedback providers and the extent to which learners engage with the new environment.

Literature review

Awcf and the potential of chatgpt.

In recent years, the impact of AWCF, the written corrective feedback (WCF) provided by computerized automated writing evaluation (AWE) tools, on L2 writing pedagogy has grown continuously (Zheng et al. 2021 ). Compared to the traditional teacher-fronted WCF, AWCF has been praised by researchers and educators for its: 1) power to alleviate teachers’ and peers’ burden in L2 classrooms (Ranalli 2018 ); 2) empowering effects in augmenting students’ involvement in revision and proofreading (Li et al. 2015 ); and 3) promptness in providing effective feedback (Barrot 2021 ). However, researchers have conflicting perspectives regarding the efficacy of AWCF compared to WCF. On the one hand, technology-enhanced feedback providers or interventions serve as a significant assistant in facilitating teachers or peers in making an accurate evaluative judgment on writing artifacts, particularly in overcoming evaluation biases or inaccuracies (Wood 2022 ; Gong and Yan 2023 ; Yan 2024a ), for example, the choice between lenient or severe judgment (e.g., Jansen et al. 2021 ) or the tendency to use simple heuristics while forming feedback (e.g., Fleckenstein et al. 2018 ). On the other hand, AWCF has constantly been criticized as inferior to human-generated feedback with the relatively restricted abilities of AWE systems to form accurate and comprehensive evaluations of writing artifacts, particularly the more traditional corpus-based systems such as Pigai.com (Fu et al. 2022 ). Hence, there has been a long-standing pursuit to improve AWE systems in providing individualized and effective AWCF for language learners (Fleckenstein et al. 2023 ).

Recently, with the emergence of AI-based technologies such as Grammarly and QuillBot, researchers’ interest shifted gradually. According to existing empirical studies, AI-based AWCF providers outperform the corpus-based systems by a substantial margin in both the feedback uptake and revision quality of L2 writers (c.f., the successful revision rate of merely 60% in Bai and Hu 2017 ; and approximately 70% in Koltovskaia 2020 ). Based on such improvement in performance, the technological advancement would further spur the research and implementation of AWCF providers in L2 writing classrooms.

Since the appearance of ChatGPT, researchers have attempted to adopt it as an AWCF provider for L2 writing with promising results. As evidenced by the comparison between ChatGPT and Grammarly by Wu et al. ( 2023 ), the former offers a further improvement over existing AI-based solutions for correcting grammatical errors. Accordingly, researchers have optimistically prophesied the potential of ChatGPT as a significant assistant for language learners in the future (Jiao et al. 2023 ; Mizumoto and Eguchi, 2023 ). The potential of ChatGPT as a potential AWCF provider is based on: 1) the outstanding performance in providing grammatical and syntactical corrections in an accurate and instant fashion (Steiss et al. 2024 ); 2) the tremendous amount of pre-trained language data that ensures its excellent performance compared to its precedents (Wu et al. 2023 ); 3) the ability to iteratively respond to users’ inquiries for feedback due to the interactional and conversational mechanism of the human-computer interface (White et al. 2023 ; Yan 2024b ); and 4) the verified enhancement from conversational AI-based chatbots as learning assistants in previous studies (Wu and Yu 2023 ).

However, we cannot neglect that ChatGPT has its disadvantages; for example, it could create hallucination , the randomly generated and unverified information (Tonmoy et al. 2024 ). Additionally, since ChatGPT is a conversational chatbot, the quality of ChatGPT-generated feedback is dynamic and subject to the extent to which the learners agentically seek and process the feedback (Yan 2024b ). Moreover, from a student perspective, the effective and ethical use of ChatGPT called for a higher level of AI literacy and corresponding support and scaffolding from teachers or peers, both of which were inadequately possessed or provided at the current stage (Yan 2023 ). Taken together, the effective utilization of ChatGPT in educational settings needs meaningful and successful fulfillment of its potential while controlling the threats and menaces it might bring.

In the pre-ChatGPT era, Ranalli ( 2018 ) has called for an accurate and robust AWCF provider that could interactively answer individual learners’ specific needs and demands. Given the history of the AWCF application and the strength of ChatGPT, the GAI-based system is in the spotlight as a potential problem solver and game changer for the field.

In an era of change, the effects of ChatGPT or similar GAI-based tools on L2 writing still need to be studied. Among all the overheating hype and unfounded fears about adopting ChatGPT in education since its debut, we expect more empirical studies investigating the actual effects of the tool on language learners. As Zhang ( 2017 ) has suggested, students’ engagement with feedback providers is an indispensable prerequisite to benefiting from technology-mediated language learning facilities. Consequently, a study focusing on learners’ involvement in processing and utilizing the corrective feedback provided by ChatGPT would enrich our limited knowledge of AI-mediated language learning (e.g., Tseng and Warschauer 2023 ).

Student engagement with AWCF and relevant empirical research

In L2 research, engagement has been understood as one of the defining features of students’ active involvement in learning (Mercer 2019 ). For L2 writing, engagement is commonly conceptualized as a tripartite meta-construct composing three key components: behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement (Ellis 2010 ; Zhang and Hyland 2018 ; Fan and Xu 2020 ). Specifically, behavioral engagement refers to the learning behaviors (Zheng and Yu 2018 ) and strategical choices in translating the received feedback into a revision (Han and Hyland 2015 ); affective engagement represents students’ emotional and attitudinal responses to the feedback (Ellis 2010 ); and cognitive engagement denotes the extent to which the student cognitively perceives the feedback and the subsequent cognitive and metacognitive operations to process and utilize the feedback (Han and Hyland 2015 ).

In recent years, many studies have investigated the three dimensions of student engagement in pedagogical settings of L2 writing equipped with automated feedback providers. On the one hand, researchers have attributed students’ engagement with AWCF to various factors. In a single case study to examine engagement with Pigai.com in an EFL context, Zhang ( 2017 ) discovers that more teacher scaffolding and pedagogical assistance are needed to facilitate the cognitive engagement of L2 writers learning with AWE systems. In a subsequent multiple case study on engagement with teacher-scaffolded feedback provided by Pigai.com, Zhang and Hyland ( 2018 ) attribute the diversity in learners’ engagement to students’ language proficiency, learning styles, and utilization of learning strategies. As the interest of researchers shifts from traditional AWE systems to AI-based AWCF providers, new perspectives on student engagement emerge. Ranalli ( 2021 ) concludes by observing six Mandarin L1 learners who trust in AWCF quality and credibility and decisively determine engagement. Furthermore, a recent eye-tracking study reveals that feedback explicitness determines student engagement with AWCF provided by Write & Improve (Liu and Yu 2022 ). On the other hand, contradictory voices are often heard from research on the students’ engagement with AWCF. For example, the study by Rad et al. ( 2023 ) betokens the promoting effects of Wordtune, an AI-based writing assistant, on L2 students’ overall engagement. On the contrary, Koltovskaia ( 2020 ) manifests that students’ cognitive engagement with the feedback provided by Grammarly is insufficient, although positive affective engagement was reported after using the tool to support writing.

Despite the prolific insights into students’ engagement with AWCF in L2 writing classrooms, scholars have criticized existing research for neglecting key elements, e.g., overlooking students’ involvement in the revision process (Stevenson and Phakiti 2019 ), and the predominance of an outcome-based approach to studying the quality of writing products (Liu and Yu 2022 ). The present study not only embarks on a comprehensive investigation into students’ engagement but also strives to seek a new conceptual departure in L2 pedagogy in the age of AI. Considering the characteristics of ChatGPT as a potential AWCF provider, there exists a lacuna in our understanding of how and to what extent students engage with the new GAI-based feedback provider.

Conceptualizing engagement with GAI-generated feedback

The rationale to revisit the conceptualization of student engagement with corrective feedback in the context of GAI is posited on the paradox between the alleged positive effects of AWCF providers on writing pedagogy (Fang et al. 2023 ; Wu and Yu 2023 ) and the reported challenges encountered by students to effectively tap the strength of AI in seeking feedback (Yan 2024b ). To frame the decisive factors affecting engagement, Ellis’s ( 2010 ) componential framework for investigating corrective feedback is referred to. According to the framework, student engagement with corrective feedback is influenced by individual differences and contextual factors. Previous studies have generally attributed the individual differences of learners to language proficiency (Zhang and Hyland 2018 ; Ranalli 2021 ). However, for ChatGPT as an AWCF provider, technological competence should be included as a major aspect of individual competence since the interaction with ChatGPT, via iteratively prompt writing and amendments, calls for a higher level of digital literacy (Lee 2023 ; Naamati-Schneider and Alt 2024 ).

The tripartite dimensions within the meta-construct of engagement are developed on top of the body of literature. First, the concept of behavioral engagement is expanded. In the study of Zhang and Hyland ( 2018 ), behavioral engagement is deemed to be students’ behaviors to process feedback, i.e., operation and strategies of revision. However, for the present study, an additional aspect of students’ behaviors is considered, i.e., the actions of writing prompts to seek feedback from ChatGPT. Unlike conventional AWE systems and AWCF providers such as Grammarly, the quality, content, and quantity of feedback provided by ChatGPT rely on the user’s interaction with the GAI-based system through iterative and incremental prompt writing (Yan 2023 ). Second, in line with the work by Koltovskaia ( 2020 ), the present study conceptualizes cognitive engagement as students’ utilization of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in processing AWCF; and affective engagement as students’ emotional and attitudinal responses to the AWCF. The conceptual model of student engagement with ChatGPT-generated feedback is graphically shown in Fig. 1 .

Conceptual model of student engagement with ChatGPT-generated AWCF.

The current study

The study explores L2 writer engagement with AWCF generated by ChatGPT. The following logic guides the research: (1) compared to more traditional approaches to corrective feedback, we are facing a paucity of comprehensive understanding of student engagement with AWCF; (2) compared to AWE systems such as Pigai.com, we have barely any knowledge about how ChatGPT’s unique features, such as its outstanding text generation abilities, interactive and conversational interfaces, iterative feedback generation capabilities, would impact on L2 writer engagement with AWCF; and (3) given that effective use of ChatGPT calls for a higher level of domain knowledge and AI competence, we need to examine how do these individual characteristics influence L2 writer engagement with ChatGPT-generated AWCF. Therefore, the following research question would be answered:

How do L2 writer with varied language proficiency and technological competence behaviorally, cognitively, and affectively engage with AWCF provided by ChatGPT?

Participants

The study’s research site was an undergraduate EFL program at a Chinese university. Students enrolled in this program had to take three writing courses in which formative assessment and technology-enhanced feedback were practiced. Therefore, the students were relatively experienced in learning-oriented assessment practices.

The participants were recruited from a pool of students previously involved in a pilot project investigating the impact of ChatGPT on L2 learners (Yan 2023 ). A purposeful sampling method was applied to select four participants with distinct characteristics in language proficiency and technological competence (Palinkas et al. 2015 ). The sampling criteria included: 1) average performance in four precedent L2 writing assessments, which were adopted from the official writing prompts of Test for English Major band 4, a national level and widely applied test of English proficiency for English majors in China (Jin and Fan 2011 ); 2) average performances in the assessments of two precedent digital humanities courses; 3) interest in the project and self-rated trust in AWCF; and 4) recommendations from co-researchers (from the teaching faculty of the program) based on classroom observation and the analysis of learning artifacts. Originally, a group of 14 students voluntarily participated in the project. However, only 4 students were regarded as qualified participants for the present study since the others failed to provide complete learning data. See Table 1 for the background information of the 4 participants. To maintain the ethicality of the study, written informed consents were obtained from all participants, who were aware of the purpose, design, procedures, and anonymity policies of the study, prior to the data collection procedures.

In second language acquisition (Duff 2010 ) and educational feedback (e.g., Zhang and Hyland 2023 ), case study has been widely applied as an established means to collect rich data on students’ actual learning experiences. Adopting a mixed-method multiple case study approach (Yin 2013 ), a case in the study was defined as the extent to which an individual learner was behaviorally, cognitively, and affectively engaged with ChatGPT-generated feedback. For each specific case, the study followed a convergent design in which the quantitative and qualitative data were triangulated to manifest students’ engagement with the AWCF (Creswell and Plano Clark 2018 ). Furthermore, the study was a collective multiple-case study, as the cross-case comparison of the individual cases allowed the researcher to generalize the findings for a broader context (Stake 1995 ). Although the limited number of participants would possibly hinder the study’s potential implications for a general and broader context, small sample size and/or high drop-out rate are frequent phenomena among case studies on learning behaviors, for example, in Koltovskaia and Mahapatra ( 2022 ), only 2 student participants’ data were selected from a pool of 17; in Yan ( 2024b ), only 3 students were finalized as participants in the inquiry into L2 writer’s feedback-seeking behaviors. As argued by Adams ( 2019 ), the limited number of research subjects in case studies had its merits in unfolding learner experiences in using feedback other than the feedback design.

During the five-week project, 68 students (inclusive of all the participants of the study) joined an L2 writing practicum focusing on exploring the affordance of ChatGPT as a feedback provider. Each week, two sessions of teacher-fronted instruction and live demonstration were prescribed, in addition to four sessions of self-directed learning and practicing. Students must complete draft writing, seek feedback from ChatGPT, execute the revision based on the feedback, and submit it to the instructor each week. To facilitate the data collection, different data collection strategies were employed, i.e., students’ weekly reflective learning journals (Bowen 2009 ), the observation of students’ behaviors in the classroom (Jamshed 2014 ), and the interviews (Braun and Clarke 2012 ). The practicum structure and data collection procedures of the study are shown in Fig. 2 .

Procedures of the study.

First, after each week, the participants were required to complete a reflective learning journal. Specifically, they are asked to provide their weekly reflection on the learning progressions, experiences using ChatGPT for feedback, the episodes of interaction with ChatGPT for eliciting and refining corrective feedback, and the acceptance and rejection of the feedback in preparing the revisions. Participants were encouraged to complete the journal multimodally with multiple types of files, e.g., screenshots, audio recordings, and video clips as supplementary files. See Supplementary Appendix A for the template for the reflective journal. Moreover, a task worksheet was provided to the learners to write down the draft writing, formative revisions, and the final writing products for each writing task. See Supplementary Appendix B for a sample task worksheet.

Second, during each instructional and practice session, the instructors were requested to record the students’ learning behaviors and processes. The students attended all the sessions in language laboratories equipped with keylogging and screen recording facilities to facilitate the recording. All the loggings and recordings were gathered, processed, and taken down in notes by two co-researchers recruited from the teaching faculty. Furthermore, the note-takers coded the notes against a coding scheme for metacognitive and cognitive learning strategies for the study. See Supplementary Appendix C for the coding scheme adopted from the work of Sonnenberg and Bannert ( 2015 ). Inter-coder disagreements were solved by reaching a consensus between the two coders and the researcher through recording playbacks and collective discussion. According to the measurement of Cohen’s Kappa (κ = 0.72, 95% CI [0.65, 0.84]), good inter-rater reliability was attained.

Finally, an immediate post-session interview was performed for each participant after the final session of the week. Participants were required to follow the instructions of the interviewer to answer the questions from the pre-determined interview protocol with questions like “When the project ends, are you willing to continue using ChatGPT for feedback in L2 writing?”. Each interview session lasted for about 10–15 min. The moderator was required to write down all the major viewpoints and interview details in an interview note. The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Throughout the data collection processes, the researchers have taken measures to ensure the trustworthiness, reliability, and validity of data. For example, the reliability and validity of the observational data were attained after reaching interobserver agreement during the initial two weeks (Watkins and Pacheco 2000 ); the trustworthiness of the qualitative data were checked with member checking with participants (Doyle 2007 ), and the investigator triangulation (Carter et al. 2014 ).

First, quantified document analysis was applied to analyze the learning journals and the worksheets. For each case, the individual learner’s learning details, i.e., time spent for feedback processing, number of written ChatGPT prompts, time spent for the interaction with ChatGPT, and retention of feedback in the revision, were quantified and analyzed through descriptive statistics. For the coding of prompt writing patterns, a coding scheme developed by the first author in a previous work was used (Yan 2024b ). The coding was performed by three coders recruited from the teaching faculty. According to the measurement of Fleiss’ Kappa (κ = 0.86, 95%CI [0.78, 0.91]), good inter-rater reliability was achieved.

Second, a lag sequential analysis (LSA) using GSEQ 5.1 software was performed to analyze students’ transition and interaction patterns using metacognitive and cognitive strategies extracted from the coded classroom observations. LSA is a statistical technique used to identify patterns and sequences of behaviors or events over time by examining the conditional probabilities of one event occurring after another within a specified time delay or lag period (Bakeman and Quera 2011 ). Correspondingly, GSEQ calculated adjusted residuals from a transitional probability matrix based on the coded behavior sequences (Pohl et al. 2016 ). The significance of behavioral transitions was determined by the Z-score of the adjusted residuals (significant if Z  > 1.96). Behavioral transitions were visualized to present the behavioral patterns in terms of metacognition and cognition within the feedback processing and revision processes.

Third, a thematic analysis following the six-step procedures recommended by Braun and Clarke ( 2012 ) was applied to the interview transcripts. Two additional co-researchers were recruited to assist the researchers in coding and theme extraction. Disagreements among the co-researchers were solved through an ad hoc discussion convened and joined by the researcher.

Finally, when the data analyses were finalized, all findings were converged and triangulated to answer the research questions.

Behavioral engagement

After the quantified document analysis, the data on the participants’ feedback-seeking and revision operations were presented. Specifically, the actions of feedback seeking and revision were respectively manifested as detailed patterns in composing ChatGPT prompts and processing ChatGPT-generated feedback categorized by error types.

First, the actions of feedback seeking by the four participants were shown in Figs. 3 – 6 , respectively. According to the bar charts, Emma and Sophia created more than 2000 ChatGPT prompts in 5 weeks, followed by Robert’s 1670 and Mia’s 1238. Pertinent to the weekly developmental trends in using specific prompt writing techniques, Emma and Sophia have displayed similarities, indicating that the patterns of Robert and Mia were on common ground. For example, in using the [+QUA] technique (providing the user’s quality evaluation of the feedback to re-elicit feedback from ChatGPT), Emma and Sophia have displayed a parabolic curve in the weekly frequencies. At the same time, Robert and Mia have kept a growing momentum to use such a technique throughout the project.

Based on Yan ( 2024 b).

BP: minimal prompt; [+BG]: providing background information; [+TSK]: providing task requirement; [+PER]: providing virtual persona; [+TON]: ask to feedback with ascertain style and tone; [+SPE]: with additional specific demands; [-NAR]: ask to narrow down feedback foci; [+CRE]: ask to check credibility; [+Aff]: provide affective evaluation to regenerate feedback; [+QUA]: provide quality evaluation to regenerate feedback; [!REG]: totally regenerate feedback.

Second, the operations of revision of the four participants were gathered, coded, and categorized by the error types (see Tables 2 – 5 respectively for each participant). The taxonomy of errors was based on the coding instruments developed and used in the work by Ferris ( 2006 ) and Han and Hyland ( 2015 ). According to the results, ChatGPT has provided an average of 11 pieces of corrective feedback for Emma per writing task. Emma performed outstandingly with 74.55% of correct revision and actively used substitutions to correct her errors (14.55%), leaving a relatively limited amount of incorrectly executed revision (1.82%) and a low rate of rejection for correction suggestions (3.64%). Sophia’s performance in revision execution was basically on par with Emma’s (received 12.4 pieces of corrective feedback per task), with a high correction rate (74.19%), a good percentage of substitution (19.35%), and a low rate of correction suggestion rejection (4.84%). Alternatively, Robert and Mia, who have received more than 22 pieces of corrective feedback per task, attained lower rates of correct revision (about 60%) and substitution (≤6.25%), higher rates of incorrect revision (16.5% and 12.5% respectively), correction suggestion rejection (≥6.9%), and deletion (>10%).

Cognitive engagement

The results of the LSA for the participants are displayed in Tables 6 – 9 respectively. In the tables, the leftmost column refers to the starting behavior, while the top row stands for the following behavior in the sequence. The behavior sequence is statistically significant when the corresponding Z value of the adjusted residual is greater than 1.96 ( p  < 0.05). For example, the behavior sequence from planning to feedback seeking is statistically significant for Emma as the adjusted residual is significant ( Z  = 7.483).

The above four tables were visualized diagrammatically (see Fig. 7 for the behavioral transition diagram). Each node in the diagram stands for a category of (meta)cognitive strategies, while a line linking two nodes indicates a significant behavioral transition of the sequence.

P: planning, referring to allocation of time, resources for the following-up feedback and writing processes; M: monitoring, referring to an on-going process in which the quality feedback is observed and compared; E: evaluation, referring to an appraisal of the value and cost for a potential revision or correction based on the feedback selected from the monitoring process; F: feedback elicitation, referring to using the interactive communication with ChatGPT to elicit AWCF; N: feedback refinement, referring to comparing and finalizing potential feedback and ask ChatGPT to regenerate for quality improvement if the quality is unsatisfactory; D: making decision, referring to a final appraisal of the feedback quality and translate the feedback to a potential revision; R: executing the revision, referring to applying the finalized revision to the writing products.

Emma has displayed a relatively higher level of metacognitive regulatory skills. The utilization of cognitive strategies to seek feedback, that is, feedback elicitation and feedback refinement, was integrated with the metacognitive regulations, i.e., monitoring and evaluation. Such integration was characterized by the bidirectional interaction between feedback seeking and metacognitive monitoring (Z F→M  = 16.527; Z M→F  = 12.137), and the similar bidirectional behavioral sequence between monitoring and feedback refinement (Z N→M  = 9.009; Z M→N  = 12.679).

Sophia has demonstrated a similar pattern of utilizing cognitive and metacognitive strategies but in a relatively weaker fashion. Sharing a similar diagrammatical structure, the role of metacognitive monitoring has been reduced, typically in the feedback refinement processes (as indicated by the unidirectional sequence of M → N, Z M→N  = 15.209). However, the role played by metacognitive monitoring during the feedback elicitation processes remained strong (as indicated by the bidirectional behavioral sequence of F ⇌ M, Z F→M  = 18.15; Z M→F  = 3.834).

Contrarily, the diagrams of Robert and Mia were simple and absent of the interweaving between cognitive and metacognitive strategies. In Robert’s case, metacognitive strategies, i.e., monitoring and evaluation, were involved in the learning processes. He was incapable of effectively and metacognitively regulating his learning behaviors, resulting in most of his feedback elicitation and refinement being one-off activities (as indicated by the unidirectional sequences of Z N→M  = 15.633; Z M→E  = 15.126; and Z E→D  = 12.911). Similarly, Mia has failed to integrate cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Compared to Robert, her case was even worse, as the metacognitive monitoring and evaluation were eventually severed from her feedback-seeking and revision behaviors (as indicated by Z N→M  = 8.698; Z N→D  = 9.755; Z M→E  = 10.419; and the disconnection between E and D).

Affective engagement

In the interview, all four participants were invited to express their affective engagement with AWCF provided by ChatGPT. We used four representative quotes to represent the four major themes that emerged from the qualitative data: (1) a beneficial journey; (2) challenges and mental stresses; (3) easier to deal with GAI-generated negative feedback; and (4) continuous usage in the future.

First, students described the overall journey of using ChatGPT for AWCF as a beneficial and interesting experience. Students showcased remarkable trust in the quality of ChatGPT-generated AWCF, especially when their skills at writing prompts increased. Emma described her experiences as a “fun journey.” She was rather satisfied with ChatGPT-generated feedback, as it was of “remarkable quality and great versatility.” Sophia, sharing relatively a large proportion of Emma’s viewpoints, summarized her experiences during the project as a “thrilling journey in a bizarre yet magnificent site.” She reported that the quality of ChatGPT-generated feedback was not always stable yet mostly trustworthy and clear to follow. Robert, seeing his experiences as a “ride on the highway,” was satisfied with ChatGPT as a feedback provider for its promptness and automated workflow. Mia concluded her journey with the project as a “shocking and slow-paced exploration.” She was satisfied with the tool and the learning environment, but not so much with her own progress.

Second, students identified the cognitive challenges they have faced and the resultant mental stresses. A consensus reached by the participants was the logistical issues, particularly the time spent seeking and refining ChatGPT’s responses while using ChatGPT for AWCF. For example, Emma reflected that the processes took her a relatively longer time and were a little bit mentally taxing, as she must “try very hard to seek better prompts that will bring feedback of higher quality and value.” Sophia expressed her desire for more training and scaffolding from teachers since one-on-one conversations with ChatGPT cannot be “sustained with fruitful outcomes.” The feedback-seeking and revision processes were “interesting, rewarding, but challenging” to her, and she was somewhat mentally stressed after using ChatGPT continuously for feedback. Mia explained that the feedback-seeking process was rewarding but hard and took her too much time since she regarded herself as a slow-paced learner. The only exception is Robert, who found that the feedback-seeking processes were “a little bit boring” but not mentally taxing at all since he was confident in his digital competence.

Third, students favored ChatGPT when the tones of AWCF were negative and harsh. Compared to the traditional scenarios, the students were relieved of the shame and “losing face” experience in front of teachers and peers. Emma asserted that it’s much easier for her to accept negative feedback from AI systems than teachers in the classroom. Mia shared a similar feeling that handling ChatGPT-generated negative feedback feels like those from an anonymous agent.

Finally, students expressed their interest in continuously using ChatGPT in the future. On a broader spectrum, the students acknowledge the value and applicability of ChatGPT as an AWCF provider. As Emma remarked, “using AI for corrective feedback will be normal in the future, and the tips and tricks we have explored will be of valuable significance”. Sophia was sure that she would continue to explore the more advanced features of ChatGPT in writing classrooms, but Mia was worried that she would be outperformed by her classmates as she was slow to pick up the more sophisticated tricks and usage. Robert claimed rather straightforwardly that he would be using ChatGPT after the project to “avoid face-to-face feedback from teachers”.

Discussions

The study explored the behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement of L2 writers with corrective feedback provided by ChatGPT in feedback-seeking and revision processes. The findings are categorically presented and discussed in the following sections against existing research and theoretical insights.

Proactive feedback seeking and revision behaviors

The four participants’ behavioral engagement revealed that students were actively involved in the feedback-seeking and revision execution processes. At first glance, all four participants have made progress in seeking feedback from ChatGPT throughout the weeks. Internally, high language-proficiency learners (represented by Emma and Sophia), showed a more sophisticated approach to refining ChatGPT prompts. Instead of repeatedly asking ChatGPT to regenerate feedback, the two learners focused on the quality and content richness of the prompts. The observed varieties could be explained by the process of inner feedback , a term advocated by Nicol ( 2021 ) to represent the natural processing and comparison after learners’ exposure to feedback. Based on the findings, we could infer that the ability to internally process the received feedback during the feedback seeking from ChatGPT depended on the students’ language proficiencies. From another perspective, students’ feedback-seeking behaviors revealed that students with a higher level of technological competence were likely to make more attempts in feedback elicitation and refinement. The specific result was in line with the widely accepted viewpoint that a higher level of ICT competence or digital literacy would lead to more advanced learning outcomes in a technology-enhanced learning environment (Park and Weng 2020 ; Yan and Wang 2022 ).

Similarly, participants with different language proficiencies manifested varied patterns in translating the received feedback to revision execution. Apart from the differences in total errors detected by the AI system per writing task, the most drastic discrepancies among the four participants in the revision operation were the rate of correct revision and adoption of revision strategies. On the one hand, the rate of correct revision was higher than that from precedent research with Grammarly as a feedback provider (i.e., Koltovskaia 2020 ). This could be explained by the alleged strength of ChatGPT in correcting grammatical errors (H. Wu et al. 2023 ). On the other hand, the observation that high-proficiency language learners would make significantly more substitutions than low-proficiency learners echoed the findings of Barkaoui ( 2016 ). However, in contrast with Barkaoui’s ( 2016 ) study, low-proficiency language learners made significantly more revision deletions than their peers. Comprehensively, the students, especially the low-proficiency ones, have ineffectively utilized the corrective feedback provided by ChatGPT. This phenomenon was in line with previous literature (Warschauer and Grimes 2008 ; Chapelle et al. 2015 ).

Diversified metacognitive regulatory skills

Cognitively, the extent to which the participants were engaged with the ChatGPT-generated corrective feedback diversified distinctly. Generally, the students performed unsatisfactorily to metacognitively regulate their learning, especially during the feedback-seeking processes. This phenomenon was in unison with Koltovskaia’s ( 2020 ) study, where the participants failed to process AWCF effectively. Furthermore, the relatively poor metacognitive strategy use also testified to the finding of Zhang and Zhang ( 2022 ) that the AWCF hindered students’ active utilization of monitoring and evaluation strategies. Specifically, higher proficiency learners (represented by Emma and Sophia) have effectively utilized metacognitive monitoring and evaluation of the quality of the received feedback to make full use of the strength of ChatGPT; conversely, the lower proficiency learners (i.e., Robert and Mia) could not effectively integrate the metacognitive strategies with the cognitive processes. The variations in the metacognitive regulatory skills among the participants could be attributed to the view of Zheng and Yu ( 2018 ) that insufficient language proficiency would hinder learners’ ability to process feedback and revision.

Unexpected findings emerged from the comparison of the LSA results between Robert and Mia. Based on the data and the visualization, we could posit that students possessing better technological competence could compensate for their limited abilities to monitor and evaluate the quality of received feedback with intensive communication with AI systems. Such inference underlined the revolutionary affordance of ChatGPT’s conversational AI system in providing a highly customizable and learner-aware environment that satisfies learners’ needs through repeated and creative prompt writing (Ranalli 2018 ; Oppenlaender et al. 2023 ; Rudolph et al. 2023 ). Additionally, the finding was in tandem with the meta-analysis results of Wu and Yu ( 2023 ) that AI chatbots were impactful on learning outcomes. The insights would create a new understanding of students’ feedback processing in a learning environment equipped with GAI-based or conversational tools.

An affectively engaging learning environment

The attitudinal and emotional responses towards ChatGPT-generated AWCF and the new GAI-powered learning environment were mostly positive. The overall satisfaction with and acceptance of ChatGPT as a corrective feedback provider was in line with relevant studies in the field of AWCF (Dikli and Bleyle 2014 ; Koltovskaia 2020 ). Furthermore, participants have agreed that the quality of ChatGPT-generated corrective feedback was reliable and accurate. Compared to previous research on the acceptance and evaluation of AWE systems and tools such as Grammarly, the performance of ChatGPT was convincing and well acclaimed by its users (Zhang 2017 ; Koltovskaia 2020 ; Ranalli 2021 ). This phenomenon could be attributed to the interplay of the computational might of the AI system (Fang et al. 2023 ; Wu et al. 2023 ) and its interactive human-machine interface (Oppenlaender et al. 2023 ).

However, participants stressed the mental effort expenditure that resulted from using ChatGPT in L2 writing classrooms. This was not unexpected, as AWCF providers or AWE systems have always been linked with cognitive overload in previous studies (Ranalli 2018 ; Barrot 2021 ). Nevertheless, the cognitive burden experienced by users of ChatGPT was the aggregate of mental effort expenditure for both feedback seeking and feedback processing. The finding ushered in new insights that would expand our understanding of students’ cognitive load in utilizing feedback for L2 writing. Moreover, the finding was in tandem with a recent research trend beyond the scope of AWCF studies to explore how to effectively compose high-quality ChatGPT prompts (Oppenlaender et al. 2023 ; White et al. 2023 ) and how to develop students’ abilities to communicate with GAI systems (Yan 2023 ; Yan 2024b ).

The multiple mixed-method case study, involving four students with different language proficiencies and technological competences from an EFL program, has explored L2 writers’ engagement with ChatGPT-provided corrective feedback from behavioral, cognitive, and affective perspectives. The findings revealed that: 1) students were behaviorally engaged with ChatGPT-generated feedback; however, their feedback-seeking behaviors and revision operations are highly related to language proficiencies and technological competences; 2) only high language proficiency learners could cognitively engage with ChatGPT-generated AWCF by effectively utilizing metacognitive regulatory strategies; and 3) ChatGPT was well-received by participants as a powerful and affectively engaging AWCF provider.

Adding to the body of literature on students’ engagement with AWCF, the study also focuses on the changes in learning brought about by the appearance of ChatGPT. Noticeably, the research underlines the importance of technological competence for L2 learners exposed to technology-enhanced learning environments. Furthermore, as an initial effort to investigate the patterns of learning behaviors and utilization of (meta)cognitive strategies of L2 writers in a GAI-powered environment, the study offers insights into how students are involved in seeking feedback instead of receiving feedback from AWCF providers and how the feedback processing and revision processes are regulated metacognitively.

The diversity of student engagement with ChatGPT-generated corrective feedback, as manifested by the study, has significant pedagogical implications. First, ChatGPT was not only a powerful rival to its precedents but also an affectively engaging solution with which a new learning environment could be constructed. As a result, the inclusion of GAI-based applications as learning assistants in L2 classrooms should be popularized. Second, teacher scaffolding or instruction on the utilization of ChatGPT for the purposes of L2 writing pedagogy or assessment should be developed and provided. As reflected in the study, learners’ individual ability to metacognitively regulate feedback seeking and revision execution is a far cry from perfection. Hence, support from instructors and peer learners is highly expected. Third, a more rational attitude towards the position of GAI-based products in education should be upheld. Instead of a “silver bullet” or a terminator of education, ChatGPT’s integration in classrooms needs the enhancement of students’ and instructors’ multicompetence and the corresponding restructuring of instructional patterns. Finally, from an L2 learner perspective, the relatively high drop-out rate during the participant recruitment showed that, at least at the current stage, students didn’t possess sufficient AI competence and domain knowledge to effectively utilize GAI for longer-time learning improvement. Thus, sustained efforts should be provided in training students of the contemporary era into better users of state-of-the-art technologies.

The study was not without limitations. First, the study adopted a multiple-case study approach methodologically. Hence, researchers should be cautious when translating or generalizing the findings of the present study to different research settings with larger populations. In follow-up research, alternative research methods could be considered to comprehensively investigate the impact of ChatGPT on a larger number of language learners. Second, the duration of the research is limited. In a five-week project, students have completed merely five writing tasks with limited exposure to ChatGPT. In subsequent studies, researchers could try to conduct longitudinal investigations through which the long-term effects of ChatGPT on the learning behaviors and outcomes of L2 learners could be uncovered. Third, the modes of sources of feedback are limited. The study partially adopted a self-regulated learning style for the participants. Hence, the role of peer learners and instructors in processing the feedback was not examined. In successive inquiries, researchers could introduce collaborative learning or peer scaffolding into the learning environment. Fourth, the impact of ChatGPT-generated feedback on writing of different genres was not studied. In future studies, researchers could delve into the effects of the AWCF provided by ChatGPT on multiple types and genres of writing. In general, with the exhibited potential of ChatGPT as a game changer for language education, the researcher hopes the study could kindle more in-depth insights into the pedagogical practice of utilizing GAI-based applications in L2 classrooms.

Data availability

The pseudonymized data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The raw data are not publicly available due to the concern that they might disclose the privacy of the participants.

Adams G (2019) A narrative study of the experience of feedback on a professional doctorate: ‘a kind of flowing conversation. Stud Contin Educ 41(2):191–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2018.1526782

Article   Google Scholar  

Bai L, Hu G (2017) In the face of fallible AWE feedback: how do students respond? Educ Psychol 37(1):67–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2016.1223275

Bakeman R, Quera V (2011) Sequential analysis and observational methods for the behavioral sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139017343

Barkaoui K (2016) What and when second-language learners revise when responding to timed writing tasks on the computer: the roles of task type, second language proficiency, and keyboarding skills. Mod Lang J 100(1):320–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12316

Barrot JS (2021) Using automated written corrective feedback in the writing classrooms: effects on L2 writing accuracy. Comput Assist Lang Learn. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1936071

Bowen GA (2009) Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qual Res J 9(2):27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Braun V, Clarke V (2012) Thematic analysis. In: APA handbook of research methods in psychology, vol 2: research designs: quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. APA handbooks in psychology®. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004

Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A et al. (2014) The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum 41(5):545–547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Chapelle CA, Cotos E, Lee J (2015) Validity arguments for diagnostic assessment using automated writing evaluation. Lang Test 32(3):385–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214565386

Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL (2018) Designing and conducting mixed methods research, 3rd edn. SAGE, LA

Dikli S, Bleyle S (2014) Automated essay scoring feedback for second language writers: How does it compare to instructor feedback? Assess Writ 22:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.03.006

Dizon G, Gayed J (2021) Examining the impact of Grammarly on the quality of mobile L2 writing. JALT CALL J 17(2):74–92. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v17n2.336

Doyle S (2007) Member checking with older women: a framework for negotiating meaning. Health Care Women Int 28(10):888–908. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399330701615325

Duff P (2010) Case study research in applied linguistics. Second language acqusition research. Routledge, New York

Google Scholar  

Ellis R (2010) A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Stud Second Lang Acq 32(2):335–349. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990544

Fan Y, Xu J (2020) Exploring student engagement with peer feedback on L2 writing. J Second Lang Writ 50:100775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100775

Fang T, Yang S, Lan K et al. (2023) Is ChatGPT a highly fluent grammatical error correction system? A comprehensive evaluation. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2304.01746

Ferris D (2006) Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. In: Hyland, F, Hyland, K (eds) Feedback in second language writing: contexts and issues. Cambridge applied linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 81–104. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007

Fleckenstein J, Leucht M, Köller O (2018) Teachers’ judgement accuracy concerning CEFR levels of prospective university students. Lang Assess Q 15(1):90–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421956

Fleckenstein J, Liebenow LW, Meyer J (2023) Automated feedback and writing: a multi-level meta-analysis of effects on students’ performance. Front Artif Intell. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1162454

Fu Q-K, Zou D, Xie H et al. (2022) A review of AWE feedback: types, learning outcomes, and implications. Comput Assist Lang Learn. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2033787

Gong H, Yan D (2023) The impact of danmaku-based and synchronous peer feedback on L2 oral performance: a mixed-method investigation. PLoS ONE 18(4):e0284843. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284843

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Han Y, Gao X (2021) Research on learner engagement with written (corrective) feedback: insights and issues. In: Mercer, S, Hiver, P, Al-Hoorie, AH (eds) Student engagement in the language classroom. Multilingual Matters, pp 56–74. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788923613-007

Han Y, Hyland F (2015) Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. J Second Lang Writ 30:31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002

Hiver P, Al-Hoorie AH, Vitta JP et al. (2021) Engagement in language learning: a systematic review of 20 years of research methods and definitions. Lang Teach Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211001289

Hyland K, Hyland F (2019) Contexts and issues in feedback on L2 writing. In: Hyland, F (ed) Feedback in second language writing: contexts and issues, 2nd edn. Cambridge applied linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547.003

Jamshed S (2014) Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. J Basic Clin Pharm 5(4):87–88. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-0105.141942

Jansen T, Vögelin C, Machts N et al. (2021) Judgment accuracy in experienced versus student teachers: assessing essays in English as a foreign language. Teach Teach Educ 97:103216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103216

Jiao W, Wang W, Huang J et al. (2023) Is ChatGPT a good translator? Yes with GPT-4 As the engine. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.08745

Jin Y, Fan J (2011) Test for English majors (TEM) in China. Lang Test 28(4):589–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211414852

Koltovskaia S (2020) Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: a multiple case study. Assess Writ 44:100450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450

Koltovskaia S, Mahapatra S (2022) Student engagement with computer-mediated teacher written corrective feedback: a case study. JALT CALL J 18(2):286–315. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v18n2.519

Lee H (2023) The rise of ChatGPT: exploring its potential in medical education. Anat Sci Educ. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.2270

Li J, Link S, Hegelheimer V (2015) Rethinking the role of automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback in ESL writing instruction. J Second Lang Writ 27:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.10.004

Liu S, Yu G (2022) L2 learners’ engagement with automated feedback: an eye-tracking study. Lang Learn Technol 26(2):78–105. 10125/73480

Mercer S (2019) Language learner engagement: setting the scene. In: Gao, X (ed) Second handbook of English language teaching. Springer international handbooks of education, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58542-0_40-1

Mizumoto A, Eguchi M (2023) Exploring the potential of using an AI language model for automated essay scoring. Res Methods Appl Linguist 2(2):100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100050

Naamati-Schneider L, Alt D (2024) Beyond digital literacy: the era of AI-powered assistants and evolving user skills. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12694-z

Nelson MM, Schunn CD (2009) The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instr Sci 37(4):375–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x

Nicol D (2021) The power of internal feedback: exploiting natural comparison processes. Assess Eval High Educ 46(5):756–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314

ONeill R, Russell A (2019) Stop! Grammar time: university students’ perceptions of the automated feedback program Grammarly. Australas J Educ Technol. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3795

Oppenlaender J, Linder R, Silvennoinen J (2023) Prompting AI art: an investigation into the creative skill of prompt engineering. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.13534

Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA et al. (2015) Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health 42(5):533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

Park S, Weng W (2020) The relationship between ICT-related factors and student academic achievement and the moderating effect of country economic index across 39 countries: using multilevel structural equation modelling. Educ Technol Soc 23(3):1–15

Pohl M, Wallner G, Kriglstein S (2016) Using lag-sequential analysis for understanding interaction sequences in visualizations. Int J Hum Comput Stud 96:54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.07.006

Rad HS, Alipour R, Jafarpour A (2023) Using artificial intelligence to foster students’ writing feedback literacy, engagement, and outcome: a case of Wordtune application. Interact Learn Environ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2208170

Ranalli J (2018) Automated written corrective feedback: how well can students make use of it? Comput Assist Lang Learn 31(7):653–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1428994

Ranalli J (2021) L2 student engagement with automated feedback on writing: potential for learning and issues of trust. J Second Lang Writ 52:100816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100816

Rudolph J, Tan S, Tan S (2023) ChatGPT: bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? J Appl Learn Teach 6(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9

Shi Y (2021) Exploring learner engagement with multiple sources of feedback on L2 writing across genres. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.758867

Sonnenberg C, Bannert M (2015) Discovering the effects of metacognitive prompts on the sequential structure of SRL-processes using process mining techniques. J Learn Anal 2(1):72–100. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2015.21.5

Stake RE (1995) The art of case study research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

Steiss J, Tate T, Graham S et al. (2024) Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing. Eur Res Int 91:101894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894

Stevenson M, Phakiti A (2019) Automated feedback and second language writing. In: Hyland, F, Hyland, K (eds) Feedback in second language writing: contexts and issues, 2nd edn. Cambridge applied linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547.009

Tan S, Cho YW, Xu W (2022) Exploring the effects of automated written corrective feedback, computer-mediated peer feedback and their combination mode on EFL learner’s writing performance. Interact Learn Environ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2066137

Tonmoy SMTI, Zaman SMM, Jain V et al. (2024) A comprehensive survey of hallucination mitigation techniques in large language models. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.01313

Tseng W, Warschauer M (2023) AI-writing tools in education: if you can’t beat them, join them. J China Comput Assist Lang Learn. https://doi.org/10.1515/jccall-2023-0008

Warschauer M, Grimes D (2008) Automated writing assessment in the classroom. Pedagogies 3(1):22–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800701771580

Watkins MW, Pacheco M (2000) Interobserver agreement in behavioral research: Importance and calculation. J Behav Educ 10(4):205–212. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012295615144

White J, Fu Q, Hays S et al. (2023) A prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with ChatGPT. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2302.11382

Wood J (2022) Supporting the uptake process with dialogic peer screencast feedback: a sociomaterial perspective. Teach Higher Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2022.2042243

Wu H, Wang W, Wan Y et al. (2023) ChatGPT or Grammarly? Evaluating ChatGPT on grammatical error correction benchmark. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2303.13648

Wu R, Yu Z (2023) Do AI chatbots improve students learning outcomes? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Brit J Educ Technol. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13334

Yan D (2023) Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: an exploratory investigation. Educ Inf Technol 28(11):13943–13967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4

Yan D (2024a) Rubric co-creation to promote quality, interactivity and uptake of peer feedback. Assess Eval Higher Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2333005

Yan D (2024b) Feedback seeking abilities of L2 writers using ChatGPT: a mixed method multiple case study. Kybernetes. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-09-2023-1933

Yan D, Wang J (2022) Teaching data science to undergraduate translation trainees: pilot evaluation of a task-based course. Front Psychol 13:939689. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.939689

Yin RK (2013) Case study research: design and methods. 5th edn. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles

Zhang J, Zhang LJ (2022) The effect of feedback on metacognitive strategy use in EFL writing. Comput Assist Lang Learn. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2069822

Zhang Z (2017) Student engagement with computer-generated feedback: a case study. ELT J 71(3):317–328. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw089

Zhang Z, Hyland K (2018) Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assess Writ 36:90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004

Zhang Z, Hyland K (2023) Student engagement with peer feedback in L2 writing: Insights from reflective journaling and revising practices. Assess Writ 58:100784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100784

Zheng L, Niu J, Zhong L et al. (2021) The effectiveness of artificial intelligence on learning achievement and learning perception: a meta-analysis. Interact Learn Environ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2015693

Zheng Y, Yu S (2018) Student engagement with teacher written corrective feedback in EFL writing: a case study of Chinese lower-proficiency students. Assess Writ 37:13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.001

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research project is supported by funding from the Young Researcher Program of Xinyang Agriculture and Forestry University [Grant QN2022049, QN2021033]. We would also like to thank all the anonymous reviewers for the constructive feedback.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Foreign Languages, Xinyang Agricultural and Forestry University, Xinyang, China

Da Yan & Shuxian Zhang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Da Yan: conceptualization, data curation, writing—original draft, formal analysis, project administration, writing—review, and editing. Shuxian Zhang: data curation, coding, and writing—review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuxian Zhang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

At the time of the study, Xinyang Agriculture and Forestry University had no policy for ethical clearance, nor did it have an ethical committee. Thus, ethical approval was obtained from the School of Foreign Languages, Xinyang Agriculture and Forestry University in December 2022. The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards, including existing laws and regulations on personal data, privacy, and research data management.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained via email from all participants before the study in December 2022.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplemental material, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Yan, D., Zhang, S. L2 writer engagement with automated written corrective feedback provided by ChatGPT: A mixed-method multiple case study. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1086 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03543-y

Download citation

Received : 27 February 2024

Accepted : 31 July 2024

Published : 26 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03543-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Advance Articles
• Specialty Certificate Examination Cases
• Cover Archive
• Virtual Issues
• Trending Articles
• Author Guidelines
• Reviewer Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• Reasons to Publish
• Self-Archiving Policy
• About Clinical and Experimental Dermatology
• About British Association of Dermatologists
• Editorial Board
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

• < Previous

Comment on ‘ChatGPT and medical writing in dermatology: why should we keep writing?’

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Eimear Duff, Jason Hynes, Kashif Ahmad, Comment on ‘ChatGPT and medical writing in dermatology: why should we keep writing?’, Clinical and Experimental Dermatology , Volume 49, Issue 9, September 2024, Pages 1082–1083, https://doi.org/10.1093/ced/llae130

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Dear Editor, Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies such as ChatGPT hold immense potential to generate efficiencies for medical researchers. In this context, we read with great interest the recent letter in Clinical and Experimental Dermatology by Potestio et al . 1 While we concur that AI can be a helpful collaborator in academic writing, the authors claim that this tool, trained on data from the internet written by humans, may ‘help to extract information from electronic medical records’. It should be noted that there are significant legal risks associated with privately-owned AIs accessing patient data, most notably issues of data governance 2 and patient confidentiality.

Furthermore, the authors highlight that AI may assist during the screening process for literature reviews. A caveat when using AI as a tool for paper retrieval is the possibility of generating nonexistent literature references when the inquired content surpasses its capacity. 3 Open AI ChatGPT GPT-3.5 was trained on a fixed knowledge base, with the latest training data being from January 2022. Therefore, dermatologists must remain up to date with advances in the literature, and beware of fabrications arising from a tool operating from a stagnant source of data, known in AI as the ‘hallucination’ phenomenon. 4 This is a continuously-changing landscape, and GPT-4 (https://openai.com/index/gpt-4/), which can browse real-time internet data or alternative AIs, may be more targeted towards scholarly research.

British Association of Dermatologists members

Personal account.

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Short-term Access

To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.

Don't already have a personal account? Register

Month:	Total Views:
April 2024	13
May 2024	1
June 2024	1
July 2024	1
August 2024	2

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to Your Librarian
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1365-2230
• Copyright © 2024 British Association of Dermatologists
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Open access
• Published: 23 August 2024

The role of emotions in academic performance of undergraduate medical students: a narrative review

• Nora Alshareef 1 , 2 ,
• Ian Fletcher 2 &
• Sabir Giga 2  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  907 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

108 Accesses

Metrics details

This paper is devoted to a narrative review of the literature on emotions and academic performance in medicine. The review aims to examine the role emotions play in the academic performance of undergraduate medical students.

Eight electronic databases were used to search the literature from 2013 to 2023, including Academic Search Ultimate, British Education Index, CINAHL, Education Abstract, ERIC, Medline, APA Psych Articles and APA Psych Info. Using specific keywords and terms in the databases, 3,285,208 articles were found. After applying the predefined exclusion and inclusion criteria to include only medical students and academic performance as an outcome, 45 articles remained, and two reviewers assessed the quality of the retrieved literature; 17 articles were selected for the narrative synthesis.

The findings indicate that depression and anxiety are the most frequently reported variables in the reviewed literature, and they have negative and positive impacts on the academic performance of medical students. The included literature also reported that a high number of medical students experienced test anxiety during their study, which affected their academic performance. Positive emotions lead to positive academic outcomes and vice versa. However, Feelings of shame did not have any effect on the academic performance of medical students.

The review suggests a significant relationship between emotions and academic performance among undergraduate medical students. While the evidence may not establish causation, it underscores the importance of considering emotional factors in understanding student performance. However, reliance on cross-sectional studies and self-reported data may introduce recall bias. Future research should concentrate on developing anxiety reduction strategies and enhancing mental well-being to improve academic performance.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Studying medicine is a multi-dimensional process involving acquiring medical knowledge, clinical skills, and professional attitudes. Previous research has found that emotions play a significant role in this process [ 1 , 2 ]. Different types of emotions are important in an academic context, influencing performance on assessments and evaluations, reception of feedback, exam scores, and overall satisfaction with the learning experience [ 3 ]. In particular, medical students experience a wide range of emotions due to many emotionally challenging situations, such as experiencing a heavy academic workload, being in the highly competitive field of medicine, retaining a large amount of information, keeping track of a busy schedule, taking difficult exams, and dealing with a fear of failure [ 4 , 5 , 6 ].Especially during their clinical years, medical students may experience anxiety when interacting with patients who are suffering, ill, or dying, and they must work with other healthcare professionals. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the impact of emotions on medical students to improve their academic outcomes [ 7 ].

To distinguish the emotions frequently experienced by medical students, it is essential to define them. Depression is defined by enduring emotions of sadness, despair, and a diminished capacity for enjoyment or engagement in almost all activities [ 4 ]. Negative emotions encompass unpleasant feelings such as anger, fear, sadness, and anxiety, and they frequently cause distress [ 8 ]. Anxiety is a general term that refers to a state of heightened nervousness or worry, which can be triggered by various factors. Test anxiety, on the other hand, is a specific type of anxiety that arises in the context of taking exams or assessments. Test anxiety is characterised by physiological arousal, negative self-perception, and a fear of failure, which can significantly impair a student’s ability to perform well academically [ 9 , 10 ]. Shame is a self-conscious emotion that arises from the perception of having failed to meet personal or societal standards. It can lead to feelings of worthlessness and inadequacy, severely impacting a student’s motivation and academic performance [ 11 , 12 ]. In contrast, positive emotions indicate a state of enjoyable involvement with the surroundings, encompassing feelings of happiness, appreciation, satisfaction, and love [ 8 ].

Academic performance generally refers to the outcomes of a student’s learning activities, often measured through grades, scores, and other formal assessments. Academic achievement encompasses a broader range of accomplishments, including mastery of skills, attainment of knowledge, and the application of learning in practical contexts. While academic performance is often quantifiable, academic achievement includes qualitative aspects of a student’s educational journey [ 13 ].

According to the literature, 11–40% of medical students suffer from stress, depression, and anxiety due to the intensity of medical school, and these negative emotions impact their academic achievement [ 14 , 15 ]. Severe anxiety may impair memory function, decrease concentration, lead to a state of hypervigilance, and interfere with judgment and cognitive function, further affecting academic performance [ 16 ]. However, some studies have suggested that experiencing some level of anxiety has a positive effect and serves as motivation that can improve academic performance [ 16 , 17 ].

Despite the importance of medical students’ emotions and their relation to academic performance, few studies have been conducted in this area. Most of these studies have focused on the prevalence of specific emotions without correlating with medical students’ academic performance. Few systematic reviews have addressed the emotional challenges medical students face. However, there is a lack of comprehensive reviews that discuss the role of emotions and academic outcomes. Therefore, this review aims to fill this gap by exploring the relationship between emotions and the academic performance of medical students.

Aim of the study

This review aims to examine the role emotions play in the academic performance of undergraduate medical students.

A systematic literature search examined the role of emotions in medical students’ academic performance. The search adhered to the concepts of a systematic review, following the criteria of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [ 18 ]. Then, narrative synthesise was done to analyse the retrieved literature and synthesise the results. A systematic literature search and narrative review provide complete coverage and flexibility to explore and understand findings. Systematic search assures rigour and reduces bias, while narrative synthesis allows for flexible integration and interpretation. This balance improves review quality and utility.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria.

The study’s scope was confined to January 2013 to December 2023, focusing exclusively on undergraduate medical students. The research encompassed articles originating within medical schools worldwide, accepting content from all countries. The criteria included only full-text articles in English published in peer-reviewed journals. Primary research was considered, embracing quantitative and mixed-method research. The selected studies had to explicitly reference academic performance, test results, or GPA as key outcomes to address the research question.

Exclusion criteria

The study excluded individuals beyond the undergraduate medical student demographic, such as students in other health fields and junior doctors. There was no imposed age limit for the student participants. The research specifically focused on articles within medical schools, excluding those from alternative settings. It solely considered full-text articles in English-language peer-reviewed journals. Letters or commentary articles were excluded, and the study did not limit itself to a particular type of research. Qualitative studies were excluded from the review because they did not have the quantitative measures required to answer the review’s aim. This review excluded articles on factors impacting academic performance, those analysing nursing students, and gender differences. The reasons and numbers for excluding articles are shown in Table  1 .

Information sources

Eight electronic databases were used to search the literature. These were the following: Academic Search Ultimate, British Education Index, CINAHL, Education Abstract, ERIC, Medline, APA Psych Articles and APA Psych Info. The databases were chosen from several fields based on relevant topics, including education, academic evaluation and assessment, medical education, psychology, mental health, and medical research. Initially, with the help of a subject librarian, the researcher used all the above databases; the databases were searched with specific keywords and terms, and the terms were divided into the following concepts emotions, academic performance and medical students. Google Scholar, EBSCOhost, and the reference list of the retrieved articles were also used to identify other relevant articles.

Search strategy

This review started with a search of the databases. Eight electronic databases were used to search the literature from 2013 to 2023. Specific keywords and terms were used to search the databases, resulting in 3,285,208 articles. After removing duplicates, letters and commentary, this number was reduced to 1,637 articles. Exclusion and inclusion criteria were then applied, resulting in 45 articles. After two assessors assessed the literature, 17 articles were selected for the review. The search terms are as follows:

Keywords: Emotion, anxiety, stress, empathy, test anxiety, exam anxiety, test stress, exam stress, depression, emotional regulation, test scores, academic performance, grades, GPA, academic achievement, academic success, test result, assessment, undergraduate medical students and undergraduate medical education.

Emotions: TI (Emotion* OR Anxiety OR Stress OR empathy) OR emotion* OR (test anxiety or exam anxiety or test stress or exam stress) OR (depression) OR AB ((Emotion* OR Anxiety OR Stress OR empathy) OR emotion* OR (test anxiety or exam anxiety or test stress or exam stress)) (MH “Emotions”) OR (MH “Emotional Regulation”) DE “EMOTIONS”.

Academic performance: TI (test scores or academic performance or grades or GPA) OR (academic achievement or academic performance or academic success) OR (test result* OR assessment*) OR AB (test scores or academic performance or grades or GPA) OR (academic achievement or academic performance or academic success) OR test result* OR assessment*.

Medical Students: TI (undergraduate medical students OR undergraduate medical education) OR AB (undergraduate medical students OR undergraduate medical education), TI “medical students” OR AB “medical students” DE “Medical Students”.

Selection process

This literature review attempts to gather only peer-reviewed journal articles published in English on undergraduate medical students’ negative and positive emotions and academic performance from January 2013 to December 2023. Their emotions, including depression, anxiety, physiological distress, shame, happiness, joy, and all emotions related to academic performance, were examined in quantitative research and mixed methods.

Moreover, to focus the search, the author specified and defined each keyword using advanced search tools, such as subject headings in the case of the Medline database. The author used ‘MeSH 2023’ as the subject heading, then entered the term ‘Emotion’ and chose all the relevant meanings. This method was applied to most of the keywords.

Studies were included based on predefined criteria related to study design, participants, exposure, outcomes, and study types. Two independent reviewers screened each record, and the report was retrieved. In the screening process, reviewers independently assessed each article against the inclusion criteria, and discrepancies were resolved through consensus during regular team meetings. In cases of persistent disagreement, a third reviewer was consulted. Endnote library program was used for the initial screening phase. This tool was used to identify duplicates, facilitated the independent screening of titles and abstracts and helped to retrieve the full-text articles. The reasons for excluding the articles are presented in Table  1 .

Data collection process

Two independent reviewers extracted data from the eligible studies, with any discrepancies resolved through discussion and consensus. If the two primary reviewers could not agree, a third reviewer served as an arbitrator. For each included study, the following information was extracted and recorded in a standardised database: first author name, publication year, study design, sample characteristics, details of the emotions exposed, outcome measures, and results.

Academic performance as an outcome for medical students was defined to include the following: Exam scores (e.g., midterm, final exams), Clinical assessments (e.g., practical exams, clinical rotations), Overall grade point average (GPA) or any other relevant indicators of academic achievement.

Data were sought for all outcomes, including all measures, time points, and analyses within each outcome domain. In cases where studies reported multiple measures or time points, all relevant data were extracted to provide a comprehensive overview of academic performance. If a study reported outcomes beyond the predefined domains, inclusion criteria were established to determine whether these additional outcomes would be included in the review. This involved assessing relevance to the primary research question and alignment with the predefined outcome domains.

Quality assessment

The quality and risk of bias in included studies were assessed using the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) critical appraisal tool. The tool evaluates studies based on the following domains: selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, attrition bias, reporting bias, and other biases. Two independent reviewers assessed the risk of bias in each included study. Reviewers worked collaboratively to reach a consensus on assessments. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion and consensus. In cases of persistent disagreement, a third reviewer was consulted.

To determine the validity of eligible articles, all the included articles were critically appraised, and all reviewers assessed bias. The validity and reliability of the results were assessed by using objective measurement. Each article was scored out of 14, with 14 indicating high-quality research and 1 indicating low-quality research. High-quality research, according to the NIH (2013), includes a clear and focused research question, defines the study population, features a high participation rate, mentions inclusion and exclusion criteria, uses clear and specific measurements, reports results in detail, lists the confounding factors and lists the implications for the local community. Therefore, an article was scored 14 if it met all criteria of the critical appraisal tool. Based on scoring, each study was classified into one of three quality categories: good, fair or poor. The poorly rated articles mean their findings were unreliable, and they will not be considered, including two articles [ 16 , 19 ]. Seventeen articles were chosen after critical appraisal using the NIH appraisal tool, as shown in Table  2 .

Effect measures

For each outcome examined in the included studies, various effect measures were utilised to quantify the relationship between emotions and academic performance among undergraduate medical students. The effect measures commonly reported across the studies included prevalence rat, correlation coefficients, and mean differences. The reviewer calculated the effect size for the studies that did not report the effect. The choice of effect measure depended on the nature of the outcome variable and the statistical analysis conducted in each study. These measures were used to assess the strength and direction of the association between emotional factors and academic performance.

The synthesis method

The findings of individual studies were summarised to highlight crucial characteristics. Due to the predicted heterogeneity, the synthesis involved pooling effect estimates and using a narrative method. A narrative synthesis approach was employed in the synthesis of this review to assess and interpret the findings from the included studies qualitatively. The narrative synthesis involved a qualitative examination of the content of each study, focusing on identifying common themes. This synthesis was employed to categorise and interpret data, allowing for a nuanced understanding of the synthesis. Themes related to emotions were identified and extracted for synthesis. Control-value theory [ 20 ] was used as an overarching theory, providing a qualitative synthesis of the evidence and contributing to a deeper understanding of the research question. If the retrieved articles include populations other than medical, such as dental students or non-medical students, the synthesis will distinguish between them and summarise the findings of the medical students only, highlighting any differences or similarities.

The Control-Value Theory, formulated by Pekrun (2006), is a conceptual framework that illustrates the relationship between emotions and academic achievement through two fundamental assessments: control and value. Control pertains to the perceived ability of a learner to exert influence over their learning activities and the results they achieve. Value relates to a student’s significance to these actions and results. The theory suggests that students are prone to experiencing good feelings, such as satisfaction and pride when they possess a strong sense of control and importance towards their academic assignments. On the other hand, individuals are prone to encountering adverse emotions (such as fear and embarrassment) when they perceive a lack of control or worth in these particular occupations. These emotions subsequently impact students’ motivation, learning strategies, and, eventually, their academic achievement. The relevance of control-value theory in reviewing medical student emotions and their influence on academic performance is evident for various reasons. This theory offers a complete framework that facilitates comprehending the intricate connection between emotions and academic achievement. It considers positive and negative emotions, providing a comprehensive viewpoint on how emotions might influence learning and performance. The relevance of control and value notions is particularly significant for medical students due to their frequent exposure to high-stakes tests and difficult courses. Gaining insight into the students’ perception of their power over academic assignments and the importance they attach to their medical education might aid in identifying emotional stimuli and devising remedies. Multiple research has confirmed the theory’s assertions, showing the critical influence of control and value evaluations on students’ emotional experiences and academic achievements [ 21 , 22 ].

Data extraction

For this step, a data extraction sheet was developed using the data extraction template provided by the Cochrane Handbook. To ensure the review is evidence-based and bias-free, the Cochrane Handbook strongly suggests that more than one reviewer review the data. Therefore, the main researcher extracted the data from the included studies, and another reviewer checked the included, excluded and extracted data. Any disagreements were resolved via discussion by a third reviewer. The data extraction Table  2 identified all study features, including the author’s name, the year of publication, the method used the aim of the study, the number and description of participants, data collection tools, and study findings.

Finalisation of references and study characteristics

Prisma sheet and the summary of final studies that have been used for the review.

When the keywords and search terms related to emotions, as mentioned above, in the eight databases listed, 3,285,208 articles were retrieved. After using advanced search and subject headings, the number of articles increased to 3,352,371. Similarly, searching for the second keyword, ‘academic performance,’ using all the advanced search tools yielded 8,119,908 articles. Searching for the third keyword, ‘medical students’, yielded 145,757 articles. All terms were searched in article titles and abstracts. After that, the author combined all search terms by using ‘AND’ and applied the time limit from 2013 to 2023; the search narrowed to 2,570 articles. After duplicates, letters and commentary were excluded, the number was reduced to 1,637 articles. After reading the title and abstract to determine relevance to the topic and applying the exclusion and inclusion criteria mentioned above, 45 articles remained; after the quality of the retrieved literature was assessed by two reviewers, 17 articles were selected for the review. The PRISMA flow diagram summarising the same is presented in Fig.  1 . Additionally, One article by Ansari et al. (2018) was selected for the review; it met most inclusion and exclusion criteria except that the outcome measure is cognitive function and not academic performance. Therefore, it was excluded from the review. Figure  1 shows the Prisma flow diagram (2020) of studies identified from the databases.

Prisma flow diagram (2020)

Study characteristics

Table  2 , summarising the characteristics of the included studies, is presented below.

Findings of the study

Country of the study.

Many of the studies were conducted in developing countries, with the majority being conducted in Europe ( n  = 4), followed by Pakistan ( n  = 2), then Saudi Arabia ( n  = 2), and the United States ( n  = 2). The rest of the studies were conducted in South America ( n  = 1), Morocco ( n  = 1), Brazil ( n  = 1), Australia ( n  = 1), Iran ( n  = 1), South Korea ( n  = 1) and Bosnia and Herzegovina ( n  = 1). No included studies were conducted in the United Kingdom.

Study design

Regarding study design, most of the included articles used a quantitative methodology, including 12 cross-sectional studies. There were two randomised controlled trials, one descriptive correlation study, one cohort study, and only one mixed-method study.

Population and study setting

Regarding population and setting, most of the studies focused on all medical students studying in a medical school setting, from first-year medical students to those in their final year. One study compared medical students with non-medical students; another combined medical students with dental students.

The study aims varied across the included studies. Seven studies examined the prevalence of depression and anxiety among medical students and their relation to academic performance. Four studies examined the relationship between test anxiety and academic performance in medical education. Four studies examined the relationship between medical students’ emotions and academic achievements. One study explored the influence of shame on medical students’ learning.

Study quality

The studies were assessed for quality using tools created by the NIH (2013) and then divided into good, fair, and poor based on these results. Nine studies had a high-quality methodology, seven achieved fair ratings, and only three achieved poor ratings. The studies that were assigned the poor rating were mainly cross-sectional studies, and the areas of weakness were due to the study design, low response rate, inadequate reporting of the methodology and statistics, invalid tools, and unclear research goals.

Outcome measures

Most of the outcome measures were heterogenous and self-administered questionnaires; one study used focus groups and observation ward assessment [ 23 ]. All the studies used the medical students’ academic grades.

Results of the study

The prevalence rate of psychological distress in the retrieved articles.

Depression and anxiety are the most common forms of psychological distress examined concerning academic outcomes among medical students. Studies consistently show concerningly high rates, with prevalence estimates ranging from 7.3 to 66.4% for anxiety and 3.7–69% for depression. These findings indicate psychological distress levels characterised as moderate to high based on common cut-off thresholds have a clear detrimental impact on academic achievement [ 16 , 24 , 25 , 26 ].

The studies collectively examine the impact of psychological factors on academic performance in medical education contexts, using a range of effect sizes to quantify their findings. Aboalshamat et al. (2015) identified a small effect size ( η 2 = 0.018) for depression’s impact on academic performance, suggesting a modest influence. Mihailescu (2016) found a significant negative correlation between levels of depression/anxiety (rho=-0.14, rho=-0.19), academic performance and GPA among medical students. Burr and Beck Dallaghan (2019) reported professional efficacy explaining 31.3% of the variance in academic performance, indicating a significant effect size. However, Del-Ben (2013) et al. did not provide the significant impact of affective changes on academic achievement, suggesting trivial effect sizes for these factors.

In conclusion, anxiety and depression, both indicators of psychological discomfort, are common among medical students. There is a link between distress and poor academic performance results, implying that this relationship merits consideration. Table  3 below shows the specific value of depression and anxiety in retrieved articles.

Test anxiety

In this review, four studies examined the relationship between test anxiety and academic performance in medical education [ 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. The studies found high rates of test anxiety among medical students, ranging from 52% [ 27 ] to as high as 81.1% [ 29 ]. Final-year students tend to experience the highest test anxiety [ 29 ].

Test anxiety has a significant negative correlation with academic performance measures and grade point average (GPA) [ 27 , 28 , 29 ]. Green et al. (2016) found that test anxiety was moderately negatively correlated with USMLE score ( r = − 0.24, p  = 0.00); high test anxiety was associated with low USMLE scores in the control group, further suggesting that anxiety can adversely affect performance. The findings that a test-taking strategy course reduced anxiety without improving test scores highlight the complex nature of anxiety’s impact on performance.

Nazir et al. (2021) found that excellent female medical students reported significantly lower test anxiety than those with low academic grades, with an odds ratio of 1.47, indicating that students with higher test anxiety are more likely to have lower academic grades. Kim’s (2016) research shows moderate correlations between test anxiety and negative achievement emotions such as anxiety and boredom, but interestingly, this anxiety does not significantly affect practical exam scores (OSCE) or GPAs. However, one study found that examination stress enhanced academic performance with a large effect size (W = 0.78), with stress levels at 47.4% among their sample, suggesting that a certain stress level before exams may be beneficial [ 30 ].

Three papers explored shame’s effect on medical students’ academic achievement [ 24 , 31 , 32 ]. Hayat et al. (2018) reported that academic feelings, like shame, significantly depend on the academic year. shame was found to have a slight negative and significant correlation with the academic achievement of learners ( r =-0.15). One study found that some medical students felt shame during simulations-based education examinations because they had made incorrect decisions, which decreased their self-esteem and motivation to learn. However, others who felt shame were motivated to study harder to avoid repeating the same mistakes [ 23 ].

Hautz (2017) study examined how shame affects medical students’ learning using a randomised controlled trial where researchers divided the students into two groups: one group performed a breast examination on mannequins and the other group on actual patients. The results showed that students who performed the clinical examination on actual patients experienced significantly higher levels of shame but performed better in examinations than in the mannequin group. In the final assessments on standardised patients, both groups performed equally well. Therefore, shame decreased with more clinical practice, but shame did not have significant statistics related to learning or performance. Similarly, Burr and Dallaghan (2019) reported that the shame level of medical students was (40%) but had no association with academic performance.

Academic performance, emotions and medical students

Three articles discussed medical students’ emotions and academic performance [ 23 , 24 , 32 ]. Burr and Dallaghan (2019) examine the relationship between academic success and emotions in medical students, such as pride, hope, worry, and shame. It emphasises the links between academic accomplishment and professional efficacy, as well as hope, pride, worry, and shame. Professional efficacy was the most significant factor linked to academic performance, explaining 31.3% of the variance. The importance of emotions on understanding, processing of data, recall of memories, and cognitive burden is emphasised throughout the research. To improve academic achievement, efforts should be made to increase student self-efficacy.

Hayat et al. (2018) found that positive emotions and intrinsic motivation are highly connected with academic achievement, although emotions fluctuate between educational levels but not between genders. The correlations between negative emotions and academic achievement, ranging from − 0.15 to -0.24 for different emotions, suggest small but statistically significant adverse effects.

Behren et al.‘s (2019) mixed-method study found that students felt various emotions during the simulation, focusing on positive emotions and moderate anxiety. However, no significant relationships were found between positive emotions and the student’s performance during the simulation [ 23 ].

This review aims to investigate the role of emotions in the academic performance of undergraduate medical students. Meta-analysis cannot be used because of the heterogeneity of the data collection tools and different research designs [ 33 ]. Therefore, narrative synthesis was adopted in this paper. The studies are grouped into four categories as follows: (1) The effect of depression and anxiety on academic performance, (2) Test anxiety and academic achievement, (3) Shame and academic performance, and (4) Academic performance, emotions and medical students. The control-value theory [ 20 ], will be used to interpret the findings.

The effect of depression and anxiety on academic performance

According to the retrieved research, depression and anxiety can have both a negative and a positive impact on the academic performance of medical students. Severe anxiety may impair memory function, decrease concentration, lead to a state of hypervigilance, interfere with judgment and cognitive function, and further affect academic performance [ 4 ]. Most of the good-quality retrieved articles found that anxiety and depression were associated with low academic performance [ 16 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Moreira (2018) and Mihailescu (2016) found that higher depression levels were associated with more failed courses and a lower GPA. However, they did not find any association between anxiety level and academic performance.

By contrast, some studies have suggested that experiencing some level of anxiety reinforces students’ motivation to improve their academic performance [ 16 , 34 ]. Zalihic et al. (2017) conducted a study to investigate anxiety sensitivity about academic success and noticed a positive relationship between anxiety level and high academic scores; they justified this because when medical students feel anxious, they tend to prepare and study more, and they desire to achieve better scores and fulfil social expectations. Similarly, another study found anxiety has a negative impact on academic performance when excessive and a positive effect when manageable, in which case it encourages medical students and motivates them to achieve higher scores [ 35 ].

In the broader literature, the impact of anxiety on academic performance has contradictory research findings. While some studies suggest that having some level of anxiety can boost students’ motivation to improve their academic performance, other research has shown that anxiety has a negative impact on their academic success [ 36 , 37 ]. In the cultural context, education and anxiety attitudes differ widely across cultures. High academic pressure and societal expectations might worsen anxiety in many East Asian societies. Education is highly valued in these societies, frequently leading to significant academic stress. This pressure encompasses attaining high academic marks and outperformance in competitive examinations. The academic demands exerted on students can result in heightened levels of anxiety. The apprehension of not meeting expectations can lead to considerable psychological distress and anxiety, which can appear in their physical and mental health and academic achievement [ 38 , 39 ].

Test anxiety and academic achievement

The majority of the studies reviewed confirm that test anxiety negatively affects academic performance [ 27 , 28 , 29 ]. Several studies have found a significant correlation between test anxiety and academic achievement, indicating that higher levels of test anxiety are associated with lower exam scores and lower academic performance [ 40 , 41 ]. For example, Green et al. (2016) RCT study found that test anxiety has a moderately significant negative correlation with the USMLE score. They found that medical students who took the test-taking strategy course had lower levels of test anxiety than the control group, and their test anxiety scores after the exam had improved from the baseline. Although their test anxiety improved after taking the course, there was no significant difference in the exam scores between students who had and had not taken the course. Therefore, the intervention they used was not effective. According to the control-value theory, this intervention can be improved if they design an emotionally effective learning environment, have a straightforward instructional design, foster self-regulation of negative emotions, and teach students emotion-oriented regulation [ 22 ].

Additionally, according to this theory, students who perceive exams as difficult are more likely to experience test anxiety because test anxiety results from a student’s negative appraisal of the task and outcome values, leading to a reduction in their performance. This aligns with Kim’s (2016) study, which found that students who believed that the OSCE was a problematic exam experienced test anxiety more than other students [ 9 , 22 , 42 ].

In the wider literature, a meta-analysis review by von der Embse (2018) found a medium significant negative correlation ( r =-0.24) between test anxiety and test performance in undergraduate educational settings [ 43 ] . Also, they found a small significant negative correlation ( r =-0.17) between test anxiety and GPA. This indicates that higher levels of test anxiety are associated with lower test performance. Moreover, Song et al. (2021) experimental study examined the effects of test anxiety on working memory capacity and found that test anxiety negatively correlated with academic performance [ 44 ]. Therefore, the evidence from Song’s study suggests a small but significant effect of anxiety on working memory capacity. However, another cross-sectional study revealed that test anxiety in medical students had no significant effect on exam performance [ 45 ]. The complexities of this relationship necessitate additional investigation. Since the retrieved articles are from different countries, it is critical to recognise the possible impact of cultural differences on the impact of test anxiety. Cultural factors such as different educational systems, assessment tools and societal expectations may lead to variances in test anxiety experience and expression across diverse communities [ 46 , 47 ]. Culture has a substantial impact on how test anxiety is expressed and evaluated. Research suggests that the degree and manifestations of test anxiety differ among different cultural settings, emphasising the importance of using culturally validated methods to evaluate test anxiety accurately. A study conducted by Lowe (2019) with Canadian and U.S. college students demonstrated cultural variations in the factors contributing to test anxiety. Canadian students exhibited elevated levels of physiological hyperarousal, but U.S. students had more pronounced cognitive interference. These variations indicate that the cultural environment has an influence on how students perceive and respond to test anxiety, resulting in differing effects on their academic performance in different cultures. Furthermore, scholars highlight the significance of carrying out meticulous instruments to assess test anxiety, which are comparable among diverse cultural cohorts. This technique guarantees that the explanations of test scores are reliable and can be compared across different populations. Hence, it is imperative to comprehend and tackle cultural disparities in order to create efficient interventions and assistance for students who encounter test anxiety in diverse cultural environments. Therefore, there is a need for further studies to examine the level of test anxiety and cultural context.

Shame and academic performance

The review examined three studies that discuss the impact of feelings of shame on academic performance [ 23 , 24 , 48 ]. Generally, shame is considered a negative emotion which involves self-reflection and self-evaluation, and it leads to rumination and self-condemnation [ 49 ]. Intimate examinations conducted by medical students can induce feelings of shame, affecting their ability to communicate with patients and their clinical decisions. Shame can increase the avoidance of intimate physical examinations and also encourage clinical practice [ 23 , 24 , 48 ].

One study found that some medical students felt shame during simulations-based education examinations because they had made incorrect decisions, which decreased their self-esteem and motivation to learn. However, others who felt shame were motivated to study harder to avoid repeating the same mistakes [ 23 ]. Shame decreased with more clinical practice, but shame did not affect their learning or performance [ 48 ]. The literature on how shame affects medical students’ learning is inconclusive [ 31 ].

In the broader literature, shame is considered maladaptive, leading to dysfunctional behaviour, encouraging withdrawal and avoidance of events and inhibiting social interaction. However, few studies have been conducted on shame in the medical field. Therefore, more research is needed to investigate the role of shame in medical students’ academic performance [ 49 ]. In the literature, there are several solutions that can be used to tackle the problem of shame in medical education; it is necessary to establish nurturing learning settings that encourage students to openly discuss their problems and mistakes without the worry of facing severe criticism. This can be accomplished by encouraging medical students to participate in reflective practice, facilitating the processing of their emotions, and enabling them to derive valuable insights from their experiences, all while avoiding excessive self-blame [ 50 ]. Offering robust mentorship and support mechanisms can assist students in effectively managing the difficulties associated with intimate examinations. Teaching staff have the ability to demonstrate proper behaviours and provide valuable feedback and effective mentoring [ 51 ]. Training and workshops that specifically target communication skills and the handling of sensitive situations can effectively equip students to handle intimate tests, hence decreasing the chances of them avoiding such examinations due to feelings of shame [ 52 ].

The literature review focused on three studies that examined the relationship between emotions and the academic achievements of medical students [ 23 , 24 , 32 ].

Behren et al. (2019) mixed-method study on the achievement emotions of medical students during simulations found that placing students in challenging clinical cases that they can handle raises positive emotions. Students perceived these challenges as a positive drive for learning and mild anxiety was considered beneficial. However, the study also found non-significant correlations between emotions and performance during the simulation, indicating a complex relationship between emotions and academic performance. The results revealed that feelings of frustration were perceived to reduce students’ interest and motivation for studying, hampered their decision-making process, and negatively affected their self-esteem, which is consistent with the academic achievement emotions literature where negative emotions are associated with poor intrinsic motivation and reduced the ability to learn [ 3 ].

The study also emphasises that mild anxiety can have positive effects, corroborated by Gregor (2005), which posits that moderate degrees of anxiety can improve performance. The author suggests that an ideal state of arousal (which may be experienced as anxiety) enhances performance. Mild anxiety is commonly seen as a type of psychological stimulation that readies the body for upcoming challenges, frequently referred to as a “fight or flight” response. Within the realm of academic performance, this state of heightened arousal can enhance concentration and optimise cognitive functions such as memory, problem-solving skills, and overall performance. However, once the ideal point is surpassed, any additional increase in arousal can result in a decline in performance [ 53 ]. This is additionally supported by Cassady and Johnson (2002), who discovered that a specific level of anxiety can motivate students to engage in more comprehensive preparation, hence enhancing their performance.

The reviewed research reveals a positive correlation between positive emotions and academic performance and a negative correlation between negative emotions and academic performance. These findings align with the control–value theory [ 8 , 22 ], which suggests that positive emotions facilitate learning through mediating factors, including cognitive learning strategies such as strategic thinking, critical thinking and problem-solving and metacognitive learning strategies such as monitoring, regulating, and planning students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Additionally, several studies found that extrinsic motivation from the educational environment and the application of cognitive and emotional strategies improve students’ ability to learn and, consequently, their academic performance [ 23 , 24 , 32 ]. By contrast, negative emotions negatively affect academic performance. This is because negative emotions reduce students’ motivation, concentration, and ability to process information [ 23 , 24 , 32 ].

Limitations of the study

This review aims to thoroughly investigate the relationship between emotions and academic performance in undergraduate medical students, but it has inherent limitations. Overall, the methodological quality of the retrieved studies is primarily good and fair. Poor-quality research was excluded from the synthesis. The good-quality papers demonstrated strengths in sampling techniques, data analysis, collection and reporting. However, most of the retrieved articles used cross-section studies, and the drawback of this is a need for a more causal relationship, which is a limitation in the design of cross-sectional studies. Furthermore, given the reliance on self-reported data, there were concerns about potential recall bias. These methodological difficulties were noted in most of the examined research. When contemplating the implications for practice and future study, the impact of these limitations on the validity of the data should be acknowledged.

The limitation of the review process and the inclusion criteria restricted the study to articles published from January 2013 to December 2023, potentially overlooking relevant research conducted beyond this timeframe. Additionally, the exclusive focus on undergraduate medical students may constrain the applicability of findings to other health fields or educational levels.

Moreover, excluding articles in non-English language and those not published in peer-reviewed journals introduces potential language and publication biases. Reliance on electronic databases and specific keywords may inadvertently omit studies using different terms or indexing. While the search strategy is meticulous, it might not cover every relevant study due to indexing and database coverage variations. However, the two assessors’ involvement in study screening, selection, data extraction, and quality assessment improved the robustness of the review and ensured that it included all the relevant research.

In conclusion, these limitations highlight the need for careful interpretation of the study’s findings and stress the importance of future research addressing these constraints to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the nuanced relationship between emotions and academic performance in undergraduate medical education.

Conclusion and future research

The review exposes the widespread prevalence of depression, anxiety and test anxiety within the medical student population. The impact on academic performance is intricate, showcasing evidence of adverse and favourable relationships. Addressing the mental health challenges of medical students necessitates tailored interventions for enhancing mental well-being in medical education. Furthermore, it is crucial to create practical strategies considering the complex elements of overcoming test anxiety. Future research should prioritise the advancement of anxiety reduction strategies to enhance academic performance, focusing on the control-value theory’s emphasis on creating an emotionally supportive learning environment. Additionally, Test anxiety is very common among medical students, but the literature has not conclusively determined its actual effect on academic performance. Therefore, there is a clear need for a study that examines the relationship between test anxiety and academic performance. Moreover, the retrieved literature did not provide effective solutions for managing test anxiety. This gap highlights the need for practical solutions informed by Pekrun’s Control-Value Theory. Ideally, a longitudinal study measuring test anxiety and exam scores over time would be the most appropriate approach. it is also necessary to explore cultural differences to develop more effective solutions and support systems tailored to specific cultural contexts.

The impact of shame on academic performance in medical students was inconclusive. Shame is a negative emotion that has an intricate influence on learning outcomes. The inadequacy of current literature emphasises the imperative for additional research to unravel the nuanced role of shame in the academic journeys of medical students.

Overall, emotions play a crucial role in shaping students’ academic performance, and research has attempted to find solutions to improve medical students’ learning experiences; thus, it is recommended that medical schools revise their curricula and consider using simulation-based learning in their instructional designs to enhance learning and improve students’ emotions. Also, studies have suggested using academic coaching to help students achieve their goals, change their learning styles, and apply self-testing and simple rehearsal of the material. Moreover, the study recommended to improve medical students’ critical thinking and autonomy and changing teaching styles to support students better.

Data availability

all included articles are mentioned in the manuscript, The quality assessment of included articles are located in the supplementary materials file no. 1.

Weurlander M, Lonn A, Seeberger A, Hult H, Thornberg R, Wernerson A. Emotional challenges of medical students generate feelings of uncertainty. Med Educ. 2019;53(10):1037–48.

Article   Google Scholar  

Boekaerts M, Pekrun R. Emotions and emotion regulation in academic settings. Handbook of educational psychology: Routledge; 2015. pp. 90–104.

Google Scholar  

Camacho-Morles J, Slemp GR, Pekrun R, Loderer K, Hou H, Oades LG. Activity achievement emotions and academic performance: a meta-analysis. Educational Psychol Rev. 2021;33(3):1051–95.

Aboalshamat K, Hou X-Y, Strodl E. Psychological well-being status among medical and dental students in Makkah, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study. Med Teach. 2015;37(Suppl 1):S75–81.

Mirghni HO, Ahmed Elnour MA. The perceived stress and approach to learning effects on academic performance among Sudanese medical students. Electron Physician. 2017;9(4):4072–6.

Baessler F, Zafar A, Schweizer S, Ciprianidis A, Sander A, Preussler S, et al. Are we preparing future doctors to deal with emotionally challenging situations? Analysis of a medical curriculum. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102(7):1304–12.

Rowe AD, Fitness J. Understanding the role of negative emotions in Adult Learning and Achievement: a Social Functional Perspective. Behav Sci (Basel). 2018;8(2).

Pekrun R, Frenzel AC, Goetz T, Perry RP. The control-value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. Emotion in education: Elsevier; 2007. pp. 13–36.

Zeidner M. Test anxiety: The state of the art. 1998.

Cassady JC, Johnson RE. Cognitive test anxiety and academic performance. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2002;27(2):270–95.

Tangney JP, Dearing RL. Shame and guilt: Guilford Press; 2003.

Fang J, Brown GT, Hamilton R. Changes in Chinese students’ academic emotions after examinations: pride in success, shame in failure, and self-loathing in comparison. Br J Educ Psychol. 2023;93(1):245–61.

York TT, Gibson C, Rankin S. Defining and measuring academic success. Practical Assess Res Evaluation. 2019;20(1):5.

Abdulghani HM, Irshad M, Al Zunitan MA, Al Sulihem AA, Al Dehaim MA, Al Esefir WA, et al. Prevalence of stress in junior doctors during their internship training: a cross-sectional study of three Saudi medical colleges’ hospitals. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2014;10:1879–86.

Moreira de Sousa J, Moreira CA, Telles-Correia D, Anxiety. Depression and academic performance: a Study Amongst Portuguese Medical Students Versus non-medical students. Acta Med Port. 2018;31(9):454–62.

Junaid MA, Auf AI, Shaikh K, Khan N, Abdelrahim SA. Correlation between academic performance and anxiety in Medical students of Majmaah University - KSA. JPMA J Pakistan Med Association. 2020;70(5):865–8.

MihĂIlescu AI, Diaconescu LV, Donisan T, Ciobanu AM, THE INFLUENCE OF EMOTIONAL, DISTRESS ON THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS. Romanian J Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2016;4(1/2):27–40.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372.

Hahn H, Kropp P, Kirschstein T, Rücker G, Müller-Hilke B. Test anxiety in medical school is unrelated to academic performance but correlates with an effort/reward imbalance. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(2):1–13.

Pekrun R. The control-value theory of achievement emotions: assumptions, corollaries, and Implications for Educational Research and Practice. Educational Psychol Rev. 2006;18(4):315–41.

Graesser AC. Emotions are the experiential glue of learning environments in the 21st century. Learn Instruction. 2019.

Pekrun R, Perry RP. Control-value theory of achievement emotions. International handbook of emotions in education: Routledge; 2014. pp. 120 – 41.

Behrens CC, Dolmans DH, Gormley GJ, Driessen EW. Exploring undergraduate students achievement emotions during ward round simulation: a mixed-method study. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):316.

Burr J, Beck-Dallaghan GL. The relationship of emotions and Burnout to Medical Students’ academic performance. Teach Learn Med. 2019;31(5):479–86.

Zalihić A, Mešukić S, Sušac B, Knezović K, Martinac M. Anxiety sensitivity as a predictor of academic success of medical students at the University of Mostar. Psychiatria Danubina. 2017;29(Suppl 4):851–4.

Del-Ben CM, Machado VF, Madisson MM, Resende TL, Valério FP, Troncon LEDA. Relationship between academic performance and affective changes during the first year at medical school. Med Teach. 2013;35(5):404–10.

Nazir MA, Izhar F, Talal A, Sohail ZB, Majeed A, Almas K. A quantitative study of test anxiety and its influencing factors among medical and dental students. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2021;16(2):253–9.

Green M, Angoff N, Encandela J. Test anxiety and United States Medical Licensing Examination scores. Clin Teacher. 2016;13(2):142–6.

Ben Loubir D, Serhier Z, Diouny S, Battas O, Agoub M, Bennani Othmani M. Prevalence of stress in Casablanca medical students: a cross-sectional study. Pan Afr Med J. 2014;19:149.

Kausar U, Haider SI, Mughal IA, Noor MSA, Stress levels; stress levels of final year mbbs students and its effect on their academic performance. Prof Med J. 2018;25(6):932–6.

Hautz WE, Schröder T, Dannenberg KA, März M, Hölzer H, Ahlers O, et al. Shame in Medical Education: a randomized study of the Acquisition of intimate Examination skills and its effect on subsequent performance. Teach Learn Med. 2017;29(2):196–206.

Hayat AA, Salehi A, Kojuri J. Medical student’s academic performance: the role of academic emotions and motivation. J Adv Med Educ Professionalism. 2018;6(4):168–75.

Deeks JJ, Riley RD, Higgins JP. Combining Results Using Meta-Analysis. Systematic Reviews in Health Research: Meta‐Analysis in Context. 2022:159 – 84.

Aboalshamat K, Hou X-Y, Strodl E. The impact of a self-development coaching programme on medical and dental students’ psychological health and academic performance: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:134.

Jamil H, Alakkari M, Al-Mahini MS, Alsayid M, Al Jandali O. The impact of anxiety and depression on academic performance: a cross-sectional study among medical students in Syria. Avicenna J Med. 2022;12(03):111–9.

Mirawdali S, Morrissey H, Ball P. Academic anxiety and its effects on academic performance. 2018.

Al-Qaisy LM. The relation of depression and anxiety in academic achievement among group of university students. Int J Psychol Couns. 2011;3(5):96–100.

Cheng DR, Poon F, Nguyen TT, Woodman RJ, Parker JD. Stigma and perception of psychological distress and depression in Australian-trained medical students: results from an inter-state medical school survey. Psychiatry Res. 2013;209(3):684–90.

Lee M, Larson R. The Korean ‘examination hell’: long hours of studying, distress, and depression. J Youth Adolesc. 2000;29(2):249–71.

Ali SK. 861 – Social phobia among medical students. Eur Psychiatry. 2013;28:1.

Bonna AS, Sarwar M, Md Nasrullah A, Bin Razzak S, Chowdhury KS, Rahman SR. Exam anxiety among medical students in Dhaka City and its Associated Factors-A cross-sectional study. Asian J Med Health. 2022;20(11):20–30.

Kim K-J. Factors associated with medical student test anxiety in objective structured clinical examinations: a preliminary study. Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:424–7.

Von der Embse N, Jester D, Roy D, Post J. Test anxiety effects, predictors, and correlates: a 30-year meta-analytic review. J Affect Disord. 2018;227:483–93.

Song J, Chang L, Zhou R. Test anxiety impairs filtering ability in visual working memory: evidence from event-related potentials. J Affect Disord. 2021;292:700–7.

Theobald M, Breitwieser J, Brod G. Test anxiety does not predict exam performance when knowledge is controlled for: strong evidence against the interference hypothesis of test anxiety. Psychol Sci. 2022;33(12):2073–83.

Lowe PA. Examination of test anxiety in samples of Australian and US Higher Education Students. High Educ Stud. 2019;9(4):33–43.

Kavanagh BE, Ziino SA, Mesagno C. A comparative investigation of test anxiety, coping strategies and perfectionism between Australian and United States students. North Am J Psychol. 2016;18(3).

Mihăilescu AI, Diaconescu LV, Ciobanu AM, Donisan T, Mihailescu C. The impact of anxiety and depression on academic performance in undergraduate medical students. Eur Psychiatry. 2016;33:S341–2.

Terrizzi JA Jr, Shook NJ. On the origin of shame: does shame emerge from an evolved disease-avoidance architecture? Front Behav Neurosci. 2020;14:19.

Epstein RM. Mindful practice. JAMA. 1999;282(9):833–9.

Hauer KE, Teherani A, Dechet A, Aagaard EM. Medical students’ perceptions of mentoring: a focus-group analysis. Med Teach. 2005;27(8):732–4.

Kalet A, Pugnaire MP, Cole-Kelly K, Janicik R, Ferrara E, Schwartz MD, et al. Teaching communication in clinical clerkships: models from the macy initiative in health communications. Acad Med. 2004;79(6):511–20.

Gregor A. Examination anxiety: live with it, control it or make it work for you? School Psychol Int. 2005;26(5):617–35.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Lancaster university library for helping me to search the literature and to find the appropriate databases and thanks to Lancaster university to prove access to several softwares.

No funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Nora Alshareef

Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

Nora Alshareef, Ian Fletcher & Sabir Giga

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

NA made substantial contributions throughout the systematic review process and was actively involved in writing and revising the manuscript. NA’s responsible for the design of the study, through the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data, to the drafting and substantive revision of the manuscript. NA has approved the submitted version and is personally accountable for her contributions, ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the work. IF was instrumental in screening the literature, extracting data, and conducting the quality assessment of the included studies. Additionally, IF played a crucial role in revising the results and discussion sections of the manuscript, ensuring that the interpretation of data was both accurate and insightful. IF has approved the submitted version and has agreed to be personally accountable for his contributions, particularly in terms of the accuracy and integrity of the parts of the work he was directly involved in. SG contributed significantly to the selection of papers and data extraction, demonstrating critical expertise in resolving disagreements among authors. SG’s involvement was crucial in revising the entire content of the manuscript, enhancing its coherence and alignment with the study’s objectives. SG has also approved the submitted version and is personally accountable for his contributions, committed to upholding the integrity of the entire work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nora Alshareef .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Consent of publication was obtained from the other authors.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Alshareef, N., Fletcher, I. & Giga, S. The role of emotions in academic performance of undergraduate medical students: a narrative review. BMC Med Educ 24 , 907 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05894-1

Download citation

Received : 08 March 2024

Accepted : 12 August 2024

Published : 23 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05894-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Medical students
• Academic performance

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Rewiring the classroom: How the COVID-19 pandemic transformed K-12 education

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, brian a. jacob and brian a. jacob walter h. annenberg professor of education policy; professor of economics, and professor of education - university of michigan, former brookings expert cristina stanojevich cs cristina stanojevich doctoral student - michigan state university.

August 26, 2024

• The pandemic changed K-12 classrooms through new technologies, instructional practices, and parent-teacher communications, along with an emphasis on social-emotional learning.
• Less tangibly, COVID-19 might have shifted perceptions of the value and purposes of K-12 schooling.
• The durability and effects of these changes remain unclear and will depend on how educational leaders and policymakers manage them.

In March 2020, virtually all public school districts in the U.S. shut their doors. For the next 18 months, schooling looked like it never had before. Homes became makeshift classrooms; parents became de facto teachers. But by fall 2022, many aspects of K-12 education had returned to “normal.” Schools resumed in-person classes, extracurricular activities flourished, and mask mandates faded.

But did schools really return to what they were before the COVID-19 pandemic? Our research suggests not. We interviewed teachers, school leaders, and district administrators across 12 districts in two states, and then we surveyed a nationally representative set of veteran educators in May 2023. We found that the COVID-19 pandemic transformed K-12 education in fundamental ways.

Below, we describe how the pandemic reshaped the educational landscape in these ways and we consider the opportunities and challenges these changes present for students, educators, and policymakers.

Accelerated adoption of technology

One of the most immediate and visible changes brought about by the pandemic was the rapid integration of technology into the classroom. Before COVID-19, many schools were easing into the digital age. The switch to remote learning in March 2020 forced schools to fully embrace Learning Management Systems (LMS), Zoom, and educational software almost overnight.

When students returned to in-person classrooms, the reliance on these digital tools persisted. Over 70% of teachers in our survey report that students are now assigned their own personal device (over 80% for secondary schools). LMS platforms like Google Classroom and Schoology remain essential in many schools. An assistant superintendent of a middle-income district remarked, “Google Classroom has become a mainstay for many teachers, especially middle school [and] high school.”

The platforms serve as hubs for posting assignments, accessing educational content, and enabling communication between teachers, students, and parents. They have become popular among parents as well. One teacher, who has school-age children herself, noted :

“Whereas pre-COVID…you’re hoping and praying your kids bring home information…[now] I can go on Google classroom and be like, ‘Oh, it says you worked on Mesopotamia today. What was that lesson about?’”

Transformed instructional practices

The pandemic’s impact on student learning was profound. Reading and math scores dropped precipitously, and the gap widened between more and less advantaged students. Many schools responded by adjusting their schedules or adopting new programs. Several mentioned adopting “What I need” (WIN) or “Power” blocks to accommodate diverse learning needs. During these blocks, teachers provide individualized support to students while others work on independent practice or extension activities.

Teachers report placing greater emphasis on small-group instruction and personalized learning. They spend less time on whole-class lecture and rely more on educational software (e.g., Lexia for reading and Zearn for math) to tailor instruction to individual student needs. A third-grade teacher in a low-income district explained:

“The kids are in so many different places, Lexia is very prescriptive and diagnostic, so it will give the kids specifically what level and what skills they need. [I] have a student who’s working on Greek and Latin roots, and then I have another kid who’s working on short vowel sounds. [It’s] much easier for them to get it through Lexia than me trying to get, you know, 18 different reading lessons.”

Teachers aren’t just using technology to personalize instruction. Having spent months gaining expertise with educational software, more teachers find it natural to integrate those programs into their classrooms today. Those teachers who used ed tech before report doing so even more now. They describe using software like Flowcabulary and Prodigy to make learning more engaging, and games such as Kahoot to give students practice with various skills. Products like Nearpod let them create presentations that integrate instruction with formative assessment. Other products, like Edpuzzle, help teachers monitor student progress.

Some teachers discovered how to use digital tools to save time and improve their communications to students. One elementary teacher, for example, explains even when her students complete an assignment by hand, she has them take a picture of it and upload it to her LMS:

“I can sort them, and I can comment on them really fast. So it’s made feedback better. [I have] essentially a portfolio of all their math, rather than like a hard copy that they could lose…We can give verbal feedback. I could just hit the mic and say, ‘Hey, double check number 6, your fraction is in fifths, it needs to be in tenths.’”

Increased emphasis on social-emotional learning

The pandemic also revealed and exacerbated the social-emotional challenges that students face. In our survey, nearly 40% of teachers report many more students struggling with depression and anxiety than before the COVID-19 pandemic; over 80% report having at least a few more students struggling.

These student challenges have changed teachers’ work. When comparing how they spend class time now versus before the pandemic, most teachers report spending more time on activities relating to students’ social-emotional well-being (73%), more time addressing behavioral issues (70%), and more time getting students caught up and reviewing routines and procedures (60%).

In response, schools have invested in social-emotional learning (SEL) programs and hired additional counselors and social workers. Some districts turned to online platforms such as Class Catalyst and CloseGap that allow students to anonymously report their emotional state on a daily basis, which helps school staff track students’ mental health.

Teachers also have been adapting their expectations of students. Many report assigning less homework and providing students more flexibility to turn in assignments late and retake exams.

Facilitated virtual communication between parents and teachers

The pandemic also radically reshaped parent-teacher communications. Mirroring trends across society, videoconferencing has become a go-to option. Schools use videoconferencing for regular parent-teacher conferences, along with meetings to discuss special education placements and disciplinary incidents. In our national survey, roughly one-half of teachers indicate that they conduct a substantial fraction of parent-teacher conferences online; nearly a quarter of teachers report that most of their interactions with parents are virtual.

In our interviews, teachers and parents gushed about the convenience afforded by videoconferencing, and some administrators believe it has increased overall parent participation. (One administrator observed, “Our attendance rates [at parent-teacher conferences] and interaction with parents went through the roof.”)

An administrator from a low-income district shared the benefits of virtual Individualized Education Plan (IEP) meetings:

“It’s rare that we have a face-to-face meeting…everything is Docusigned now. Parents love it because I can have a parent that’s working—a single mom that’s working full time—that can step out during her lunch break…[and] still interact with everybody.”

During the pandemic, many districts purchased a technology called Remind that allows teachers to use their personal smartphones to text with parents while blocking their actual phone number. We heard that teachers continue to text with parents, citing the benefits for quick check-ins or questions. Remind and many LMS also have translation capabilities that makes it easier for teachers and parents to overcome language barriers.

Moving forward

The changes described above have the potential to improve student learning and increase educational equity. They also carry risks. On the one hand, the growing use of digital tools to differentiate instruction may close achievement gaps, and the ubiquity of video conferencing could allow working parents to better engage with school staff. On the other hand, the overreliance on digital tools could harm students’ fine motor skills (one teacher remarked, “[T]heir handwriting sucks compared to how it used to be”) and undermine student engagement. Some new research suggests that relying on digital platforms might impede learning relative to the old-fashioned “paper and pencil” approach. And regarding virtual conferences, the superintendent of a small, rural district told us, “There’s a disconnect when we do that…No, I want the parents back in our buildings, I want people back. We’re [the school] a community center.”

Of course, some of the changes we observed may not persist. For example, fewer teachers may rely on digital tools to tailor instruction once the “COVID cohorts” have aged out of the system. As the emotional scars of the pandemic fade, schools may choose to devote fewer resources to SEL programming. It’s important to note, too, that many of the changes we found come from the adoption of new technology, and the technology available to educators will continue to evolve (e.g., with the integration of new AI technologies into personalized tutoring systems). That being said, now that educators have access to more instructional technology and—perhaps more importantly—greater familiarity with using such tools, they might continue to rely on them.

The changes brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic provide a unique opportunity to rethink and improve the structure of K-12 education. While the integration of technology and the focus on social-emotional learning offer promising avenues for enhancing student outcomes, they also require continuous evaluation. Indeed, these changes raise some questions beyond simple cost-benefit calculations. For example, the heightened role of ed tech raises questions about the proper role of the private sector in public education. As teachers increasingly “outsource” the job of instruction to software products, what might be lost?

Educational leaders and policymakers must ensure that these pandemic-inspired changes positively impact learning and address the evolving needs of students and teachers. As we navigate this new educational landscape, the lessons learned from this unprecedented time can serve as a guide for building a more resilient, equitable, and effective educational system for the future.

Beyond technological changes, COVID-19 shifted perspectives about K-12 schooling. A middle-school principal described a new mentality among teachers in her district, “I think we have all become more readily able to adapt…we’ve all learned to assess what we have in front of us and make the adjustments we need to ensure that students are successful.” And a district administrator emphasized how the pandemic highlighted the vital role played by schools:

“…we saw that when students were not in school. From a micro and macro level, the environment that a school creates to support you growing up…we realized how needed this network is…both academically and socially, in growing our citizens up to be productive in the world. And we are happy to have everyone back.”

At the end of the day, this realization may be one of the pandemic’s most enduring legacies.

Related Content

Monica Bhatt, Jonathan Guryan, Jens Ludwig

June 3, 2024

Douglas N. Harris

August 29, 2023

September 27, 2017

Education Access & Equity Education Policy Education Technology K-12 Education

Governance Studies

U.S. States and Territories

Brown Center on Education Policy

Spelman College, Atlanta Georgia

7:00 pm - 12:30 pm EDT

Nicol Turner Lee

August 8, 2024

Online Only

10:00 am - 12:30 pm EDT