Pangasinan State University, Open University Systems
Pangasinan State University, Lingayen Campus
One of the criteria for excellent work is a perfect grammar in English, which is the global lingua franca. The Pangasinan State University subscribed to Grammarly® software which considered as one of the leading grammar checker and plagiarism tester software available. The objective of the paper is to evaluate the software based on the perception of the graduate students from the Graduate Students of PSU Open University Systems. The selection of participants is purposive where 20% of the total graduate students of the Batch 2018 who completed there thesis writing before graduation was selected as the respondents. A SUS questionnaire and follow up the interview as part of the triangulation method was used in order to determine the usability of the software, its strengths, and weakness. This study also focuses on the impact of the application for Non-English majors. Based on the result of the study, the majority of the respondents agree that the utilized software is usable. The users identified the strength of the software that helps the user improve writing such as automatic detection of mistakes in Conceptual Writing, Grammar, Punctuation, Sentence Structure, Style and Vocabulary Enhancement. While other users also identified some weakness for possible future improvement of the software, the overall result shows that there is a significant improvement in writing for English and non-English majors. Students who are not English majors showed that there is a significant change of confidence level in writing. It recommends that the software is continuously utilized. It is also recommended that the software should improve its detection to avoid misleading feedback for users.
The researchers would like to thank the Center for the English Language, the Open University Systems and the Senior High School Department under the College of Teacher Education of the Pangasinan State University for supporting us in doing this research. Specifically to the following: Dr. Valentin B Calpo and Dr. Philip G. Queroda of the Open University Systems; Dr. Renato E Salcedo and Dr. Rosario DL Valencerina of the College of Teacher Education, and Dr. Luzviminda Q. Ramos of CEL for the entrusting the technical support task of the
Grammarly® Utilization. Laslty, to Mr. Michael Mager of Grammarly® for answering the researcher’s inquiry in the conducting of the research.
English is known as the global lingua franca, where it is used in writing and speaking. In every aspect of education around the world, the quality on the use of the English language is essential. In the article, Global Business Speaks English by Harvard Business Review (2012), the English language is the global language of business because more multinational companies are mandating the language as the typical corporate language. Most of the research papers around the globe are written in English, and with the ongoing development of technology, Grammar checker and plagiarism software are indispensable tools in aiding researchers to identify and correct their mistakes (Japos, 2013). Acceptance in Journal publication and even in paper presentation needs a corrected grammar in order to avoid embarrassment and to provide the right detail of the research.
In the Philippines alone, education from the primary level introduce the subject English, this is in order or the elementary student to master the language. The importance of the language in the Philippines is visible, such as the Philippine constitution, laws and court decisions are written in English. It is also used in higher education such as the programs in computing, business, and education. It is also preferred by authors writing textbooks in schools. Because of this adaptation in the language, Filipinos were able to speak and write fluent English, although there is the difference between the diction and pronunciation.
The English language in Philippine setting traditionally followed American English spelling and grammar (Gonzales, 2009). This advantage may have a contribution that Filipinos may be able to use Grammar Checker Software without any possible adjustment. Microsoft Office application such as Word has a built-in grammar checker and spell check, but this primary tool misses several critical grammatical issues. A number of applications came to the market in order to address this needs such as Grammarly®, Reverso, Ginger Software, WhiteSmoke, and LanguageTool. This Grammar checkers provides real-time correction of in-depth problems in writing.
The Pangasinan State University, Center for English languages initiate the subscription of a Grammar Checker software which is the Grammarly®. In the study of Daniels and Leslie (2016), Grammarly® application outperforms several competitors which offer the same service, that is why, Pangasinan State University chooses this application to uplift the quality of written outputs, such as researchers and communication. As part of the program, the center is also set to conduct series of training with its partner organization, American TESOL Institute Philippines Inc. which aims to educate, certify and produce world-class English educators by providing programs at par with international standards. (Pangasinan State University, 2018)
Because of this subscription, the institution needs to assess the use of the software by measuring its usability based on the perception of the users itself. There are 500 accounts available for Pangasinan State University. The division of accounts includes the graduate students from the School of Advanced Studies and the Open University Systems where there are 100 graduate students for SAS and 75 graduate students in OUS. All the 175 graduate students are in writing their thesis for a masters degree and dissertations for the doctoral degree. In order to achieve the high standard in language and plagiarism test, students are required to run their manuscript in Grammarly® and secure a clearance from the accredited tester in the Unit before bookbinding the final copies of the paper. A detailed report was needed in order or the Critic Reader to see if the corrections are integrated into the manuscript of the graduate student.
History of Grammar Checker
Grammar Checking is still in the field of Natural Language Processing in Computing under Artificial Intelligence. The history of a grammar checker is way back 1970. The first system was Writer's Workbench, and it was a set of writing tools included with Unix systems in the early 70s (Silverman, n.d.). Another breakthrough in the history of grammar checking is the program called Grammatik; it was the first grammar checking program developed for computers. Aspen Software of Albuquerque released the earliest version in 1981. In 1985 Reference Software of San Francisco, California, acquired Grammatik. Lastly, Grammatik was ultimately acquired by WordPerfect Corporation and is integrated into the WordPerfect, word processor. (Vernon, 2000)
As of these days, there are tens of available grammar checker software which is available for purchase or integrated into the software as plugins such as Reverso, Ginger Software, WhiteSmoke, and LanguageTool. With the list of software, Grammarly® was chosen as perceived by the institution as the leading grammar checker application. It was commercially available since 2009; it is an app that was developed by Alex Shevchenko and Max Lytvyn, in Kyiv. The application is owned under the company Grammarly® Inc. The application automatically recognized potential grammar, spelling, punctuation, word choice and wrong styles n writing. It is a web application where a user can upload a document or encode that automatically detects issues in the text and suggest possible corrections for errors. It also has a plagiarism checker for premium accounts. Grammarly® was patented last 2015 (Hoover, Lytvyn, & Shevchenko, 2015) Today, the Pangasinan State University is utilizing the software application Grammarly® to improve the writing skills of its selected faculty and student.
Statement of the Problem
This study aims to answer the following question
What is the Profile of the Graduate Students as a grammar checker application users?
What is the Usability Evaluation of the Grammarly® Application?
What is the status in the use of the Grammar Checker application and the impact?
What is the strength and weakness of the grammar Checker Application as perceived by the users?
What is the sentiment of the Non-English majors in the use of the grammar checker
What are the proposed actions for Pangasinan State University and other institution in the use of the grammar checker application?
Significance of the Study
The Pangasinan State University currently subscribes to the Premium Accounts of Grammarly®; this study will be a basis for the continuity of the accounts. This result also serves as a basis for validation of the previous study related to the usefulness of the application.
Grammar checkers and artificial intelligence history is around since the 80s, but this software is considered a novelty and inaccurate (Pogue, 1993; Major, 1994). In recent times as the value of technology increases, they are regarded as a helpful aid rather than a burden (Qassemzadeh & Soleimni, 2016). Based on the result of the study conducted by the Grammarly® itself, the majority of the users report significant benefits from using the application. based on the result, those who use Grammarly® more often tend to fee more confident in their writing, save time on writing, and get better grades in general. Lastly, the majority of the survey respondents are likely to recommend Grammarly® to others. (Grammarly®, 2018). It is seen in several studies that grammar checker obtain positive feedback from users because of the development of technology. But based on the previous studies, graduate students and faculty are not part of the respondents.
As the field of artificial intelligence and technological researches increases in the field of natural language processing, several applications, not only Grammarly® software provide this solution to the growing needs of the community. Another Research conducted by Cavaleri and Dianati (2016), states that the Student evaluations of Grammarly® were generally in agreement that it is useful and easy to use, and the application also helps the students increased their confidence in writing. While these studies provides an output, a good number of sampling of respondents was not attained, where the study was tiny scale with only 18 student participants. The correlation was not done as it needs a larger sample.
In the recent studies, the researcher found out that there is a need to conduct this study where faculty and graduate students who are currently employed are needed to ask about their perspective in the utilization of the Grammarly® software.
In order to conduct this study, the Pangasinan State University should be subscribed to the premium account of the service. A total of accounts 500 was allotted to the institution. Under the leadership of the Center of the English Language Director, the subscription was pursued in February 2018. With the help of the MIS Unit of the University, the web administration team assisted the faculty and staff for creation of the university email address under the domain of
psu.edu.ph. Initially, 44 accounts were created for the faculty and staff, as time goes by, more accounts were given to other faculty members. Students who are taking thesis writing in the Open University Systems and School of Advanced Studies are also given accounts with a total of 175 accounts for the graduate students. The remaining accounts were continuously given to the other qualified faculty members and staff of the institution. This study initially covers the 20 percent of the graduate students from the Open University Systems.
The research design of this study is descriptive. It gathers information based on survey and interview. The graduate students enrolled in the Open University Systems of the Pangasinan State University are the primary respondents of this study.
3.1. Sources of Data
The primary sources of the data are the graduate students enrolled in Doctoral and Mastera degree of the Open University Systems and School of Advanced Studie, where there are 75 students who are undergoing thesis writing and 20 percent was targeted as the respondents. Each of the students was created a psu.edu.ph domain email address; every user received an invitation to activate Grammarly®. There are 24 respondents who answered the online survey thru Google forms, and there are 15 students who were non-English majors sent the reports from the Grammarly® application to the researchers and was interviewed later.
3.2 Data Processing
After activation of the Grammarly® account for each student, they are given time to use the application. Grammarly® apps include the online editor, plugins for Microsoft Office, a plugin for Google Chrome, for windows and mobile keyboard. An orientation was conducted in order for them to be familiarized with the use of the application.
A survey questionnaire was created in order to know the usability of the application; this includes the profile of the respondents, the usability, usage and satisfaction and statement of strength and weakness. A follow-up interview was also conducted in order to validate the result and helps the researcher gather first information from the users. Google form was utilized in order to float a questionnaire.
System Usability Scale (SUS) was used in order to measure the usability of the application. The researcher uses this tool because it only consists of 10 item questionnaire with five response options for respondents that frank and easy to validate. After gathering all the data, the result was saved in CSV format for analysis. The proponent uses Spreadsheet which is Microsoft Excel in order to tabulate and analyze the data. (Affairs, 2018)
Non-English majors are also selected to run the thesis in their Grammarly® account with supervision; the supervision is just for the purpose of the reliability of the result. In order for a reliable result of the study, the student didn’t initially run the manuscript in Grammarly® or another plagiarism tester available.
3.3 Treatment of Data
Several statistical treatments were used, such as the frequency for the profile and frequency percentage on some part of the SUS survey. For the SUS questionnaire, the participant’s scores for each question are converted to a new number, which is added together and then multiplied by
2.5 to convert the original scores of 0-40 to 0-100. The average mean was also computed in several problems, and a compiled narrative explanation for the strength and weakness of the application was explained.
This part of the study discusses the result of the study. This will answers the Profile of the Graduate Students as a grammar checker application users, the Usability Evaluation Score of the Grammarly® Application, the status in the use of the Grammar Checker application and the impact, the strength and weakness of the grammar Checker Application as perceived by the users in narrative approach, and lastly, the proposed intervention for Pangasinan State University in the use of the grammar checker application.
Profile of the Respondents
Most of the Masters and Doctorate graduate students age are ranging 31 to 40 years of Age, followed by 21 to 30 years of Age. This shows that most of the students are millennials, where they are technology users.
Age
F
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
50 above 41 - 50 31 - 40 21 - 30 Less than 21
The Age of the Respondents
In the study of Deal, Altman, and Rogelberg (2010) that agrees with other studies, millennials differ in work attitudes specifically in the use of technology (Gibson & Sodeman, 2014). In this study shows that most of the students taking up Graduate Studies belong to a younger age.
Total
Female Male
Sex of the Graduate Students
Regarding sex, the majority of the respondents are Female. In the PSU Open University Systems, the majority of the students are female as shown in the enrollment data of the unit. In the article by Schow (2016), it emphasized that in the 7th year in a row in the year 2015, women are earning more doctoral and master's degrees than men.
Count of Educational Attainment
Masters Degree
Masters (with Units or Academic Requirements)
5
5
Doctoral Degree 4
Doctoral (with Units or Academic
Requirements) 10
Bachelor Degree 0
0
2
4
6
8
10 12
Educational Attainment
Most of the respondents are holding Doctoral units. They are a fresh graduate from Masters degree and continue directly to the Doctoral degree.
Major
English Major
Non-English Major
Majors
There is the majority of the Non-English major student. The PSU Open University Systems offers major in Educational Management and Instructional Leadership, it is expected that majority will be Non-English majors. In this study, there is a focus for non-English major to determine if there is a significant effect of the software in writing English.
Programs
Master of Arts in Education
10
Master in Development Management
3
Doctor of Education
11
0
2
4
6
8 10 12
Student Programs
Most of the respondents are taking up Doctor of Education and Master of Arts in Education since it is the primary offered programs of the Open University Systems. There is only one major for Doctor of Education which is Educational management, where there is a mixture of English and non-English major students.
4.2. Usability Score of Grammarly®
In this result of the study, a usability score measured, and a scale used in order to understand the usability evaluation of the application.
SUS Scores
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
-
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Grammarly® obtained an overall average of SUS score of 86.04 which is convertible to an A+ grade; this means that Grammarly® evaluation is excellent as perceived by the users.
SUS Scale Summary
Statement 1 % 2 % 3 % 4 % 5 %
I think that I would like to use this system frequently I found the system unnecessarily complex I thought the system was easy to use I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this system I found the various functions in this system were well integrated I thought there was too much inconsistency in this system I would imagine that most people would learn to use this system very quickly I found the system very cumbersome to use I felt very confident using the system I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this system | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 3 | 12.5% | 7 | 29.2% | 14 | 58.3% |
13 | 54.2% | 8 | 33.3% | 2 | 8.3% | 1 | 4.2% | 0 | 0.0% | |
0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 3 | 12.5% | 7 | 29.2% | 14 | 58.3% | |
12 | 50.0% | 8 | 33.3% | 4 | 16.7% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | |
0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 9 | 37.5% | 15 | 62.5% | |
13 | 54.2% | 7 | 29.2% | 4 | 16.7% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | |
0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 9 | 37.5% | 15 | 62.5% | |
10 | 41.7% | 13 | 54.2% | 1 | 4.2% | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | |
0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 3 | 12.5% | 7 | 29.2% | 14 | 58.3% | |
11 | 45.8% | 11 | 45.8% | 1 | 4.2% | 1 | 4.2% | 0 | 0.0% |
SUS is a validated questionnaire. The blue shaded part of the table is a positive statement, while the other even number is a negative statement. Based on the result, the majority of the respondents has a positive outlook on the utilization of the application.
It can be seen that the application has a positive impact on the graduating students’ perspective. As these graduate students utilized the software which they can learn from their grammatical mistakes and use of this program that could raise their awareness on their errors which provide them better feedback in revising their error. The result of the study agreed with the study of Cavaleri and Dianati (2016), where the results reveal that students perceive Grammarly® as useful and easy to use.
4.3 Usage and Student Scores
The graduate students embraced technology and appreciate the grammar checker which based on the result of the study. Similar to this, Grammarly® since Grammarly® provide several platform and plugins
Platform Used
Most of the Respondents or 91.7% prefer to use Grammarly® as Microsoft Office Add-on, where it automatically corrects mistakes as user type in a word processor. There are also 62.5% of the respondents use Grammarly® in the website itself where respondents generate a report for filing purposes.
Grammarly® Usage
Once or Twice a month
Every other week
Once or Twice a week
Almost Daily
Once a day or more Often
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Usage of the Application
Most of the respondents are using Grammarly® more often. It shows that most of them use the software once or twice a week, but there are many respondents use it daily if we combined the respondents from using “almost daily” and “once a day or more often.”
Confidence Level
14
12
12
10 9
8 8
8
6
4 3 3
2 2
2 1
0 0 0
0
Not Confident Not Very
At All Confident
Somewhat Confident Very Completely
Confident Confident Confident
Before After
Confidence Level
There is an apparent change in the confidence level of the respondents where most of them are not very confident before using Grammarly®. After using the application, the majority of the respondents was utterly confident. The result of the study agreed with the study of Cavaleri and Dianati (2016), where students reported that Grammarly® improved their writing and understanding of grammar rules. The results of the 100% increase in the level of confidence also superseded the result conducted by Grammarly® (2018) where 70% reported an increased level of writing confidence.
Impact on Time
Most of the respondents save time significantly with a total percentage of 37.5% followed by notably which is 29.2%. It shows that the software contributed to productivity and time management. 16 respondents agreed that Grammarly® helped them to save time significantly and notably, where the distribution is 15 non-English majors and only 1 English major. The result shows that there is a significant effect of the grammar checker application to the non-English major in terms of time management.
Overall satisfaction
Majority of the respondents or 58.3% are very much likely to recommend the Grammarly® software. There is no negative response from the respondents regarding the recommendation.
Student Scores of Non-English major students generated by Grammarly®
Issues Found in Text | |||||||||
Respondents | Plagiarism | Contextual Spelling | Grammar | Punctuation | Sentence Structure | Style | Vocabulary Enhancement | Score | No of Words |
1 | 5 | 61 | 156 | 59 | 37 | 234 | 154 | 69 | 17824 |
2 | 0 | 47 | 147 | 54 | 36 | 209 | 146 | 72 | 15235 |
3 | 37 | 17 | 48 | 27 | 7 | 99 | 75 | 78 | 17434 |
4 | 3 | 17 | 84 | 15 | 2 | 124 | 35 | 75 | 19434 |
5 | 11 | 9 | 39 | 12 | 3 | 93 | 37 | 77 | 18923 |
6 | 2 | 18 | 126 | 20 | 2 | 213 | 113 | 76 | 20162 |
7 | 35 | 29 | 73 | 28 | 4 | 126 | 81 | 80 | 21743 |
8 | 7 | 52 | 176 | 59 | 29 | 255 | 165 | 73 | 17342 |
9 | 1 | 48 | 166 | 62 | 38 | 198 | 143 | 71 | 13452 |
10 | 9 | 27 | 101 | 50 | 10 | 125 | 71 | 69 | 19093 |
11 | 12 | 31 | 86 | 33 | 12 | 126 | 78 | 70 | 20832 |
12 | 2 | 12 | 50 | 19 | 6 | 41 | 23 | 76 | 22783 |
13 | 63 | 50 | 92 | 76 | 9 | 219 | 130 | 79 | 20432 |
14 | 3 | 63 | 128 | 65 | 10 | 368 | 103 | 63 | 18663 |
15 | 23 | 63 | 63 | 59 | 20 | 209 | 167 | 75 | 16723 |
Scores of the graduate students show that students have low grammar skills without the grammar checking software. Scores of a graduate student are ranging from 69 to 80 out of 100. A thesis in Pangasinan State University averagely consists of a hundred page with around 15,000 to 20,000 words. As we can see in the result of the test, the majority of the non-English majors received a number of feedback from Contextual Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, Sentence Structure, Style, and Vocabulary Enhancement. Based on the given feedback, the students were asked to decide on the suggestion of the Grammarly® application and correct necessary mistakes. The software significantly improves the writing skills of the students based on their own perspective and thankful to the utilization of the software.
Plagiarism and Score
90
78
77
80
79
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
75
76
69
72
73
76
71
75
69 70
63 63
37
35
23
11
5
9
12
0
3
7
2
1
2
3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Plagiarism
Score
Plagiarism and Score Result
Based on the result of the Plagiarism versus the result, it is visible that graduate student with a high percentage of plagiarism result obtains a higher score based on the report generated by the Grammarly®. This implies that there is lesser grammatical error for plagiarized material. Majority of the plagiarized content is in the Review of related literature and introductory part of the thesis.
The students we’re carefully asked about the reason of the plagiarism, where most of them are not aware that there is a software or program that could detect. Students also agreed that several factors were identified influencing students to commit plagiarism such as lack of knowledge in technology, academic culture. The result of the study agrees with Roman (2018), where academic culture is one reason where students commit plagiarism.
The Strength and Weakness
In order to validate the response of the respondents, 15 of the respondents personally interviewed about the strength and weakness of the software.
Most of the respondents were amazed by the use of the software.
Strength of the Grammar Checker
Finally, graduate was asked for further comments about Grammarly® in their own words.
Most of the comments described Grammarly® as useful, helpful and easy to use: “useful assistance in grammar”, “It corrects most common mistakes in English”, “It provides great suggestions”, “though there is some suggestion that may not be correct for me, the best thing is it corrects grammar that I overlooked during proofreading”, “it saved a lot of my time checking my students' research papers”, “It has helped me correct subject-verb agreement issues”.
This result validates the overall satisfaction of the users in the utilization of the grammar checker software Grammarly®. Some of the Non-English major commented that the application is “useful” and provide them “greater confidence” in writing.
Weakness of the Grammar Checker
However, some students identified weakness such as: “it is only used when one has an internet connection. I wish it could be used offline”, “Well, even it is a promising tool, it has still some limitations”, “I can't undo some mistakes”, “there should be excluded from checking biography and references”, “When I use the mobile keyboard, it slows my mobile phone”.
Despite the given weakness of the application, it shows that there is no direct comment regarding grammatically result except for the statement “…it has still some limitations,” where the user did not specify if the limitation is internal or external. As commented by Nova and Lukmana (2018,
July), “the use of automated writing evaluation program in detecting error seems giving some benefits for the user. However, the application of this program still needs the teacher and lecturer’s supervision to reduce the weaknesses of the program in detecting the errors”. Thus, grammar checker is a useful tool that improves students writing quality (Darayani, Karyuatry, & Rizqan, 2018), but it cannot replace human as the best checker because the computer cannot think for us.
4.5 Focusing on Non-English majors
Since one of the objectives of this study is to determine the use of the Grammarly® application to non-English majors. The result of the study shows there is a positive reaction to the application from the non-englih majors.
Non-English Major
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
8
Not Confident Not Very
At All Confident
Somewhat Confident Very Confident Completely
Confident Confident
Before After
Confidence Level of Non-English Majors
7 | ||||||||||||||
5 | ||||||||||||||
3 3 | ||||||||||||||
2 | ||||||||||||||
1 | 1 | |||||||||||||
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||
The figure shows that 100% of the non-English majors have significant improvement in the confidence level of writing. The researchers received feedbacks from the non-English major that
they have confidence in writing in the presence and “without the tool, I cannot write it” as mention by one writer. Most of them appreciated the software as “it saves a lot of money and time”, since lesser help from the experts is needed. Majority of the respondents agrees that it improved their writing skills.
This result agrees with the study conducted by Karyuatry (2018) and other authors Darayani, Karyuatry & Rizqan, 2018) that Grammarly® can be used as an appropriate tool to minimize errors and improve students’ writing quality. For non-English majors, Grammarly® is a useful writing tool that provides instant feedback as you type. It has excellent online grammar knowledgebase and useful for non-native English speakers and new writers. Graduate students aim to write quality researches with excellent grammar because of errors in writing impact perceptions of both writing quality and characteristics of the author. The researchers agreed that texts that exhibit poor spelling and grammar are perceived as lower quality (Johnson, Wilson & Roscoe, 2017).
Proposed Action
The Pangasinan State University started its subscription to the Premium Accounts of Grammarly® this year. This study provides information to the institution on its usability based on the feedback of its users. The researcher suggested that the accounts should renew because it is usable. It also suggests that the MIS department should work closely in assisting the Grammarians to fully utilized the accounts.
This result also serves as a basis for validation of the previous study related to the usefulness of the application. The result shows that based on the findings, Grammarly® is useful as perceived by the users itself despite its limitations.
Based on the result of the study, the majority of the respondents agree that the utilized software is usable. The users identified the strength of the software that helps the user improve writing such as automatic detection of mistakes in Conceptual Writing, Grammar, Punctuation, Sentence Structure, Style and Vocabulary Enhancement. While other users, specifically the English major graduate students, who identified some weakness for possible future improvement of the software such as the misleading feedback from the software, the non-English majors provide feedback that the software is very much useful to them. Overall, the software found it to be usable despite minor flaws in the correction. It recommended that the software is continuously utilized. It is also recommended that the software should improve its detection to avoid misleading feedback for users. Grammarly® is a powerful tool for writing English, but a human cannot be replaced by computers. Since Grammarly® is automated, it does have limitations. A grammar checker is recommended to use as a supplement rather than a substitute for proofreading your article. For the future studies, the researchers suggest to validate the result in succeeding years in the Pangasinan State University; it is also suggested that future studies should include the undergraduate students and faculty staff.
Affairs, A. (2018). System Usability Scale (SUS) | Usability.gov. Usability.gov. Retrieved 9 August 2018, from https://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/system- usability-scale.html
Cavaleri, M. R., & Dianati, S. (2016). You want me to check your grammar again? The usefulness of an online grammar checker as perceived by students. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 10(1), A223-A236.
Cavaleri, M. R., & Dianati, S. (2016). You want me to check your grammar again? The usefulness of an online grammar checker as perceived by students. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 10(1), A223-A236.
Daniels, P., & Leslie, D. (2016) Grammar Software Ready for EFL Writers? OnCUE Journal, 9(4), 391-401
Darayani, N. A., Karyuatry, L. L., & Rizqan, M. D. A. (2018). GRAMMARLY® AS A TOOL TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’WRITING QUALITY. Edulitics (Education, Literature, and Linguistics) Journal, 3(1), 36-42.
Deal, J. J., Altman, D. G., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2010). Millennials at work: What we know and what we need to do (if anything). Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 191-199.
Gibson, L. A., & Sodeman, W. A. (2014). Millennials and technology: Addressing the communication gap in education and practice. Organization Development Journal, 32(4), 63-75.
Gonzalez, A. (2009). The Transplantation of American English in Philippine Soil. A Companion To The History Of The English Language, 313-322. doi:10.1002/9781444302851.ch31
Grammarly® (2018). Grammarly®@EDU Grammarly®.com Retrieved 8 August 2018, from https://www.Grammarly®.com/edu
Harvard Business Review. (2012). Global Business Speaks English. Retrieved 6 August 2018 from https://hbr.org/2012/05/global-business-speaks-english
Hoover, B., Lytvyn, M., & Shevchenko, O. (2015). U.S. Patent No. 9,002,700. Washington, DC:
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Japos, G. V. (2013). Effectiveness of coaching interventions using Grammarly® software and plagiarism detection software in reducing grammatical errors and plagiarism of undergraduate researches. JPAIR Institutional Research, 1(1), 97-109.
Johnson, A. C., Wilson, J., & Roscoe, R. D. (2017). College student perceptions of writing errors, text quality, and author characteristics. Assessing Writing, 34, 72-87.
Karyuatry, L. (2018). Grammarly® as a Tool to Improve Students’ Writing Quality: Free Online- Proofreader across the Boundaries. JSSH (Jurnal Sains Sosial dan Humaniora), 2(1), 83- 89.
Major, M. J. (1994). Spelling, grammar, & style go electronic. Managing Office Technology, 39(4), 18-20.
Nova, M., & Lukmana, I. (2018, July). The Detected and Undetected Errors in Automated Writing Evaluation Program’s Result. In English Language and Literature International Conference (ELLiC) Proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 120-126).
Pangasinan State University. (2018). CEL debuts Grammarly® utilization in PSU Psu.edu.ph. Retrieved 6 August 2018, from http://psu.edu.ph/cel-debuts-Grammarly®-utilization-in- psu/
Pogue, D. (1993). Grammar crackers. Macworld, 10(11), 183-186.
Qassemzadeh, A., & Soleimani, H. (2016). The impact of feedback provision by Grammarly® software and teachers on learning passive structures by Iranian EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(9), 1884-1894.
Roman, A. G. (2018). Minimizing Plagiarism Incidence in Research Writing in One State University in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 1(1).
Schow, A. (2016). Women earning more doctoral and master's degrees than men. Washington Examiner. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/women-earning-more- doctoral-and-masters-degrees-than-men
Silverman, D. (n.d.) Text Processing and the Writer's Workbench. Princeton.edu. Retrieved 6 August 2018, from https://www.princeton.edu/~hos/frs122/unixhist/text.htm
Vernon, A. (2000). Computerized grammar checkers 2000: capabilities, limitations, and pedagogical possibilities. Computers And Composition, 17(3), 329-349. doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(00)00038-4