Students’ Perception towards the Use of Grammarly for Academic Writin: A Systematic Literature Review

Melda Melda, Urai Salam, Surmiyati Surmiyati

Abstract


Dependency on AI tools in academic has increases, Grammarly become one of the most frequent application to support students' writing processes. Most previous literature reviews have emphasized Grammarly's technical benefits in improving grammar and writing skills, along with pros and cons, while giving limited attention to students’ experiences and attitudes. This study addresses that deficiency by focus on analyzing students’ perceptions of Grammarly, both positive and negative. A systematic literature review collected relevant studies, and thematic analysis identified common themes. The results indicate that students generally view Grammarly positively due to its accessibility and usefulness in improving writing quality and skills. However, limitations such as the need for a stable internet connection, restricted features, and high subscription fees reduce its acceptance. This study offers valuable insights for educators and developers to enhance the educational relevance and effectiveness of AI writing tools.


Keywords


Grammarly; students’ perceptions; academic writing; systematic literature review

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alotaibi, M. S. (2023). “It Makes Me Aware”: Undergraduates’ Perceptions toward Using Automated Corrective Feedback Program (Grammarly) to Improve Their Writing Skills. In Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research (Vol. 10, Issue 3).

Astuti, D., Darmahusni, Sumarni, S., & Suseno, M. (2023). The Use of Grammarly in the Academic Writing of Undergraduate Students : Advantages, Weaknesses, and Challenges (Systematic Review). English Language and Literature International Conference (ELLiC) Proceedings, 6, 593–607.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Bulatović, V., Mirović, I., & Kaurin, T. (2024). Analyzing grammarly software for corrective feedback: Teacher’s perspective on affordances, limitations and implementation. Focus on ELT Journal, 6(1).

Burkhard, M. (2022). Student Perceptions of Ai-Powered Writing Tools: Towards Individualized Teaching Strategies. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age, CELDA 2022, 73–81. https://doi.org/10.33965/celda2022_202207l010

Chang, T. S., Li, Y., Huang, H. W., & Whitfield, B. (2021). Exploring EFL Students’ Writing Performance and Their Acceptance of AI-based Automated Writing Feedback. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459043.3459065

Fahmi, M. A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849

Faisal, F., & Carabella, P. A. (2023). Utilizing Grammarly in an Academic Writing Process: Higher-Education Students’ Perceived Views. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 8(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v8i1.1006

Fernando, E. K., & Suryaman, M. (2022). Appropriating Grammar as a Tool in Writing Activities: Student’s Perception. Journal of English Language and Education, 7(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.31004/jele.v7i2.232

Fitria, R. A., Sabarun, S., & Miftah, M. Z. (2022). Students’ Perception of the Use of Grammarly in Undergraduate Thesis Writing. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 5(2), 366. https://doi.org/10.22460/project.v5i2.p366-371

Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English Writing Assistant: Students’ Alternative for Writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.31002/metathesis.v5i1.3519

Kurniati, E. Y., & Fithriani, R. (2022). Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions of Quillbot Utilization in English Academic Writing Class. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 7(3), 437. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v7i3.852

Liu, Y., Mittal, A., Yang, D., & Bruckman, A. (2022). Will AI Console Me when I Lose my Pet? Understanding Perceptions of AI-Mediated Email Writing. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517731

Llausas, S. M., Ruiz, E., Ayucan, S. M., & Jr, O. J. E. (2024). A Systematic Literature Review on the Use of Grammarly in Improving the Writing Skills of ESL / EFL Students. International Journal Of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business And Education Research, 5(9), 3507–3516. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.09.10

Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: how may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries? Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 26–29. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2023-0009

Maypida, A., & Damanik, E. S. D. (2024). Exploring Grammarly’s Effectiveness in EFL Writing through a Student Perception Study. The Journal of Educational Development, 12(2), 98–107.

Nour, M., Guba, A., Id, O., Awad, A., Id, O., & Qub, A. A. (2024). Grammarly in teaching writing to EFL learners at low levels: How useful is it? World Journal of English Language, 14(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v14n3p1

Nurhayati, D. A. W. (2022). The Relevance of Adopting Proofreading Tools to Maintain Academic Writing Integrity and Coherence Text. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 7(2), 373. https://doi.org/10.21462/ijefl.v7i2.547

Nurhidayah, A., & Irawati, T. (2024). Grammarly Through the Lens of Student Perception. Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Studi Amerika, 30(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.20961/jbssa.v30i1.87858

Palermo, & Wilson. (2020). Using automated feedback to improve writing quality: Opportunities and challenges.

Park, J. (2019). An AI-based English Grammar Checker vs. Human Raters in Evaluating EFL Learners’ Writing. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 112–131.

Qadir, J. (2023). Engineering Education in the Era of ChatGPT: Promise and Pitfalls of Generative AI for Education. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON54358.2023.10125121

Rejeki, S. (2023). Students’ perceived knowledge of using Grammarly application in academic writing. Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.

Rudnicka, K. (2023). Can Grammarly and ChatGPT accelerate language change ? AI- powered technologies and their impact on the English language : wordiness vs . conciseness. 205–214.

Safitri, M., & Fithriani, R. (2024). Exploring Higher Education EFL Students ’ Perception of AI Writing Tools in the 5 . 0 Era. 7, 267–276.

Setyani, E. D., Bunau, E., & Rezeki, Y. S. (2023). The Influence of Grammarly towards Indonesian EFL Students’ First-Degree Thesis Writing Confidence. Elsya : Journal of English Language Studies, 5(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.31849/elsya.v5i1.6773

Setyowati. (2024). No Title.

Susiana, E., & Yolanda, A. (2024). Students ’ Perception On The Use Of “ Grammarly ” In Thesis Writing At Nahdlatul Ulama University. Jurnal Sains Student Research, 2(3), 71–79.

Syahnaz, M., & Fithriani, R. (2023). Utilizing Artificial Intelligence-based Paraphrasing Tool in EFL Writing Class: A Focus on Indonesian University Students’ Perceptions. Scope : Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(2), 210. https://doi.org/10.30998/scope.v7i2.14882

UNESCO. (2017). Fostering a Culture of Reading and Writing. Unesco.

Wang, Z. (2022). Computer-assisted EFL writing and evaluations based on artificial intelligence: a case from a college reading and writing course. Library Hi Tech, 40(1), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-05-2020-0113

Wilson, J., & Andrada, G. N. (2016). Using automated feedback to improve writing quality: Opportunities and challenges. Handbook of Research on Technology Tools for Real-World Skill Development, 678–703. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-9441-5.ch026

Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality. Computers & Education, 100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.004




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31004/jele.v11i2.2120

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Melda Melda, Urai Salam, Surmiyati Surmiyati

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.