PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF GRAMMARLY AND QUILLBOT IN SUPPORTING ENGLISH WRITING SKILLS

  • Bahing English Education Study Program, University of Palangka Raya
  • Mayang Meilantina Socio-Economic Agricultural Study Program, University of Palangka Raya

Keywords

Students’ Perceptions, Grammarly, Quillbot, Writing, Grammar

Abstract

This study aims to analyze students’ perceptions of using Grammarly and QuillBot in writing at MA Annur Teluk Palinget. This research employed a mixed-methods approach with a convergent parallel design. The population consisted of 95 students, with 65 students selected as the sample and 9 students involved in interviews. Data were collected through questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings show that students have highly positive perceptions of both tools, with an identical mean score of 3.85 categorized as “very positive.” Accessibility received the highest agreement (97%), indicating that flexibility and ease of use strongly influence students’ engagement. Both tools were perceived as effective in providing feedback and improving grammar, particularly in sentence structure and subject-verb agreement, although difficulties in tense usage remain.  Grammarly is mainly used for grammar correction, while QuillBot supports paraphrasing and sentence variation. Overall, both tools complement each other in enhancing writing development in EFL contexts

References

[1] Ahmadi, M. R. (2018). The use of technology in English language learning.

[2] Alotaibi, A. H. (2023). The impact of Grammarly on grammar proficiency.

[3] Amanda, S., Lubis, N., & Dewi, U. (2023). QuillBot as an AI-powered writing assistant.

[4] Asmara, R. (2024). The effectiveness of QuillBot in academic writing.

[5] Bulqiyah, S., Mahbub, M., & Nugraheni, D. (2021). Investigating writing difficulties.

[6] Carvalho, J., Pereira, L., & Laranjeira, R. (2018). Writing a master’s dissertation – students’ perspectives.

[7] Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition.

[8] Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.

[9] Faadhilah, N., Susilawati, E., & Sumarni. (2024). AI writing tools and EFL essay performance.

[10] Ismailia, T., & Novawan, A. (2024). Enhancing EFL students’ writing using Grammarly and QuillBot.

[11] Latifah, S., Muth’im, A., & Nasrullah. (2023). The use of QuillBot in academic writing.

[12] Murtiningsih, et al. (2022). Grammarly in language learning.

[13] Opoku-Darko, M. (2023). Students’ perceptions in language learning.

[14] Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching.

[15] Riviyanti, & Pratolo, B. W. (2024). Investigating AI use in EFL academic writing.

[16] Safitri, B., Dewi, U., & Ramadhan, A. (2024). EFL students’ preferences of artificial intelligence for writing.

[17] Setiawan, F., & Alkhowarizmi, A. (2023). AI as automated feedback in EFL writing.

[18] Suryani, Y., Nirwanto, R., & Qamariah, Z. (2024). Students’ perceptions of AI writing tools.

[19] Umah, K., Nurdianingsih, F., & Rozak, R. (2024). Grammarly and QuillBot in academic writing.

[20] Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning.

[21] Xu, Z. (2025). AI usage patterns in academic writing.

2026-05-08