Short communication on the missing dialogic aspect of an automated writing evaluation system in written feedback research

Research on the efficacy of automated feedback systems in English writing has been on the rise over the past two decades. However, reaching a unanimous conclusion on the effectiveness of the systems in improving students' writing ability has been challenging due to variations in research designs, methodological issues, and heterogeneous contexts and participants. Criterion is one of these well-known systems that has been widely used and researched in English writing classes. Although researchers have encouraged creative integration of the system in the writing classroom, its application as writing tools has slightly differed in the studies to date. Drawing on the most recent implications of research on effective written corrective feedback, this critical short communication aims to draw the researchers' attention to an important but ignored aspect of AWE written corrective feedback in the fields of second language writing and language development: the role of active collaboration and participation of students through dialogue in dealing with written feedback in a digitalized social space. The paper concludes with recommendations for teachers and researchers as to how to use Criterion to provide coherent and cohesive feedback when it is integrated into classrooms and how to address the gap in research.