Application of Artificial Intelligence to the Small Open Online English Abstract Writing Course

  • Judy F. ChenEmail author
  • Clyde A. Warden
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11937)


This project explores the small open online course (SMOOC) and the artificial intelligence (AI) assisted writing, grading and feedback system Quick Research Papers (QRP) that overcomes the traditional teaching method’s problems and limitations of class size, space, time, and number of exercises, in order to enhance graduate students’ English abstract writing skill. We apply SMOOC and QRP to teach 79 graduate students for abstract writing and track their writing errors in order to pinpoint their writing weaknesses so as to provide better teaching consultation. The results show that only 68 students followed through the second stage of writing the assignment. Total of 12,916 words were written by these 68 students, resulting in total errors of 501; top ten errors are noun, spelling, subject-verb agreement, writing style, common style error, formal writing error, long sentence, incomplete sentence, punctuation, object of verb, respectively. These research findings provide a good clue on how to guide and coach students as a class to enhance their abstract writing skill. Through AI analytics, individual student’s weakness can also be identified, leading to more effective individual consultation.


Artificial intelligence Small massive open online course E-training English abstract writing English as a foreign language 



The authors are grateful to the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of China, Taiwan, for financially supporting this research under Contract No. MOST 107-2511-H-240-001.


  1. 1.
    Barber, M., Donnelly, K., Rizvi, S., Summers, L.: An avalanche is coming: higher education and the revolution ahead. The Institute of Public Policy Research (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buck, G.H., Hatter, K.: Strategies for developing scholarly competence in beginning graduate students. In: 28th Annual Teacher Education Division Conference and 1st Annual Technology and Media Division and Teacher Education Division Conference. Portland, Maine (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Granello, D.H.: Promoting cognitive complexity in graduate written work: using Bloom’s taxonomy as a pedagogical tool to improve literature reviews. Counselor Educ. Supervision 40(4), 292–307 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harris, M.J.: Three steps to teaching abstract and critique writing. Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ. 17(2), 136146 (2006)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaplan, A.M., Haenlein, M.: Higher education and the digital revolution: about MOOCs, SPOCs, social media, and the Cookie Monster. Bus. Horiz. 59(4), 441–450 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pappano, L.: The Year of the MOOC. The New York Times 2(12) (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parr, C.: Fund ‘pick-and-mix’ MOOC generation, ex-wonk advises. Times Higher Education London. Accessed 22 Mar 2019
  8. 8.
    Watters, A.: Unbundling and unmooring: technology and the Higher Ed Tsunami. Educause Rev. 47(4), 60–61 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, Y.H., Liao, H.C.: Using QEC cloud software to reflective writing on literature study to enhance students’ critical thinking and english language proficiencies. In: EdMedia+Innovate Learning, p. 691. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business Administration DepartmentOverseas Chinese UniversityTaichungTaiwan
  2. 2.Marketing DepartmentNational Chung Hsing UniversityTaichungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations