“Teaching should be such that what is offered is perceived as a valuable gift and not as hard duty..”-ALBERT EINSTEIN

The Grammar Guardian: How Grammarly is Reshaping Our Writing Journey

An Honest Look at the AI Writing Companion We Can’t (and Don’t Want to) Live Without

Ever caught yourself staring at a blinking cursor, second-guessing whether your commas—or even your sentences—make sense? In an age where our keyboards double as our storytelling stages, having a second pair of digital eyes can be a game-changer. Enter Grammarly, the AI-powered writing sidekick that's quietly woven itself into millions of workflows. But beyond the green underline, how much does it really help—and where might it lead us astray?

Unpacking the Toolbox: What Grammarly Brings to the Table

Launched in 2009 by Alex Shevchenko and Max Lytvyn, Grammarly quickly outgrew its spellchecking roots to become a robust Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) platform (Faisal & Carabella, 2023). Instead of limiting itself to typos, it flags issues across six domains—spelling, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, style, and vocabulary enhancement—covering over 300 error types (O’Neill & Russell, 2019; Bailey & Lee, 2020). Whether you’re polishing a thesis or firing off a pitch deck, that multi-layered approach can feel like having an in-house editor on standby.

What the Research Really Says: Beyond the Hype

Professional Edge

Brumberg’s (2019) survey of 519 communications professionals found that Grammarly consistently spotted complex grammar errors more accurately than Microsoft Word Editor—a clear win for anyone who drafts high-stakes documents (Brumberg, 2019).


Helping Hand for EFL Learners

Ghufron and Rosyida (2018) reported significant drops in writing errors among English-as-a-Foreign-Language students using Grammarly; participants credited it with highlighting mistakes they often missed during peer review (Ghufron & Rosyida, 2018). Yet Daud, Park, and Khan (2021) caution that Word Editor sometimes caught tense-related errors more reliably, suggesting there’s no single “best” tool for every context.

Context Is King

In a study of Japanese ESL learners, Morimoto, Tanaka, and Fujita (2021) found Grammarly excelled at detailed grammar and punctuation feedback, while Word Editor offered stronger suggestions on overall style. The takeaway? Combine tools rather than choosing one over the other.

Real Talk: Benefits, Bumps, and Blind Spots

Lightning-Fast Feedback. “I paste my text and get suggestions in seconds,” one student told researchers—an immediacy traditional feedback loops can’t match (Ghufron & Rosyida, 2018).
Consistency You Can Trust. Algorithmic checks remove peer bias and deliver uniform guidance.

But it’s not all green ticks. Grammarly can miss bigger-picture issues like argument flow and structural coherence, and its suggestions sometimes clash with intended tone (Morimoto et al., 2021). Plus, unlocking premium insights comes at a price—something to weigh if you’re on a tight budget (Fitria, 2021).


Best Practices: Getting the Most from Grammarly

Don’t just accept or reject suggestions—dig into the explanations. Cavaleri and Dianati (2016) demonstrated that students who engaged with Grammarly’s feedback gained deeper grammatical understanding. And educators, pairing Grammarly’s instant checks with targeted lessons on organization and argumentation, reported the strongest student improvements (Wilson & Andrada, 2016).

For solo writers, try using Grammarly at two key moments: drafting (to catch errors as you go) and final polishing (to sharpen clarity)—but leave the creative brainstorming and outlining to your unfettered mind (Bailey & Lee, 2020).

The Takeaway: Grammarly as Part of Your Writing Ecosystem

Grammarly symbolizes the democratization of writing support—especially for non-native English users tackling invisible grammar rules. Yet automated tools should supplement, not supplant, our own critical thinking. Over-reliance can turn a learning opportunity into a crutch (Dupont, Martin, & Moreau, 2021).

In practice, the savviest writers use multiple tools—Grammarly and Word Editor included—each for its unique strengths. That sort of balanced approach, backed by human judgment, leads to richer learning and more authentic writing.


Final Thoughts

Grammarly isn’t a magic wand, but it can illuminate blind spots and boost confidence. Next time you wrestle with a pesky clause or waver over word choice, let Grammarly lend a hand—but remember, the best writing emerges when tech and human insight join forces.

References

  • Bailey, D., & Lee, A. R. (2020). An exploratory study of Grammarly in the language learning context: An analysis of test-based, textbook-based, and Facebook corpora. TESOL International Journal, 15(2), 4–17.
  • Brumberg, R. (2019). Grammarly vs. Microsoft Word Editor: A survey of professionals in communications and marketing. Journal of Business Communication, 7(2), 45–60.
  • Cavaleri, D., & Dianati, M. (2016). Student perceptions of Grammarly in terms of the Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of Educational Technology, 12(3), 225–240.
  • Daud, N. M., Park, S., & Khan, M. A. (2021). Exploring the accuracy of Grammarly and Microsoft Word Editor in detecting errors in English writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 10(1), 124–136.
  • Dupont, C., Martin, F., & Moreau, A. (2021). Grammarly and Microsoft Word Editor in French ESL students’ writing: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 25(1), 75–89.
  • 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), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v8i1.1006
  • Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as an AI-powered English writing assistant: Students’ alternative for writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65–78.
  • Ghufron, M. A., & Rosyida, F. (2018). The role of Grammarly in assessing English as a foreign language writing. Lingua Cultura, 12(4), 395–403.
  • Morimoto, Y., Tanaka, K., & Fujita, H. (2021). Grammarly and Microsoft Word Editor in Japanese ESL students’ writing: An exploratory study. ReCALL, 33(1), 54–70.
  • O’Neill, R., & Russell, A. M. T. (2019). Stop! Grammar time: University students’ perceptions of the automated feedback program Grammarly. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3795
  • Wilson, M., & Andrada, J. (2016). Grammarly’s impact on teacher workload and student writing development. Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 112–125.

Comments

Post a Comment