This study employs a systematic review approach to review research on the application of Pigai in English writing instruction from 2020 to 2024, aiming to optimize the use of the Pigai system and deepen the integration of educational technology with language teaching. The review finds that existing studies mainly focus on technology validation and basic effectiveness evaluation, integration of feedback modes and innovation in instructional applications, and mechanisms of student differences and individualized effects. Significant differences in needs and evaluations are observed among learners with varying language proficiency, academic majors, and educational levels. Although various methods have been employed in existing studies, improvements are needed in sample representativeness, and research on long-term effects. Future research should focus on enhancing the comprehensibility of feedback, developing personalized feedback strategies, and addressing challenges related to educational equity.

Hongyan Huang, Puteri Zarina Megat Khalid. Automated Writing Evaluation in EFL Instruction: A Systematic Review of Pigai's Applications, Learner Heterogeneity, and Methodological Implications. International Journal of Educational Innovation and Science (2025), Vol. 6, Issue 1: 176-189. https://doi.org/10.38007/IJEIS.2025.060121.

[1] Linqian Ding, Di Zou. Automated Writing Evaluation Systems: A Systematic Review of Grammarly, Pigai, and Criterion with a Perspective on Future Directions in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Education and Information Technologies. (2024) 29:14151–14203.

[2] Jinfen Xu, Shanshan Zhang. Understanding AWE Feedback and English Writing of Learners with Different Proficiency Levels in an EFL Classroom: A Sociocultural Perspective. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. (2022) 31(4): 357-367.

[3] Na Zhai, Xiaomei Ma. Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) Feedback: a Systematic Investigation of College Students’ Acceptance. Computer Assisted Language Learning. (2022) 35(9):2817-2842.

[4] Jim, Ranalli. Automated Written Corrective Feedback: How Well Can Students Make Use of It?. Computer Assisted Language Learning. (2018) 31(7): 653-674.

[5] Mark Feng Teng, Ying Zhan. Assessing Self-regulated Writing Strategies, Self-efficacy, Task Complexity, and Performance in English Academic Writing. Assessing Writing. (2023) 57: 1007285.

[6] Bo Sun, Tingting Fan. The Effects of an AWE-aided Assessment Approach on Business English Writing Performance and Writing Anxiety: A Contextual Consideration. Studies in Educational Evaluation. (2022) 72:101123.

[7] Lei,Guo. A Study on the Application of Pigai. org Software in Teaching University-level English Writing-Taking a Freshman Class in Chongqing as an Example. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, (2020). 10(8):952-958.

[8] Lifang Bai, Guangwei Hu. In the Face of Fallible AWE Feedback: How Do Students Respond?. Educational Psychology. (2016) 37(1): 67-81.

[9] Yao, D. Automated Writing Evaluation for ESL Learners: A Case Study of Pigai System. The Journal of Asia TEFL. (2021) 18(3):949-958.

[10] Zhe (Victor) Zhang. Engaging with Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) Feedback on L2 Writing: Student Perceptions and Revisions. Assessing Writing, (2020)43:100439.

[11] Zhanxiang Zhao. Error Analysis and Implications of Chinese Students' English Writing Based on Computer Scoring System. Advances in Education, Humanities and Social Science Research, (2024) 11(1):58-64.

[12] Siwei Liu. Promoting Effects of Computer Scoring on English Learning of College Students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. (iJET), (2020)15(7): 98-109.

[13] Yi Xue. Towards Automated Writing Evaluation: A Comprehensive Review with Bibliometric, Scientometric, and Meta-analytic Approaches. Education and Information Technologies. (2024) 29(15): 19553-19594.

[14] Limei Zhang, Zheng Huang. Effect of an Automated Writing Evaluation System on Students’ EFL Writing Performance. International Conference on Computers in Education. 2020: 567-569.

[15] Wenjing Chen. The Construction of Formative Assessment Model for College English Writing in “Internet+”. In 2024 3rd International Conference on Humanities, Wisdom Education and Service Management. (2024):136-143.

[16] Xiaolong Cheng, Lawrence Jun Zhang. Examining Second Language (L2) Learners’ Engagement with AWE-Teacher Integrated Feedback in a Technology-Empowered Context. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, (2024) 33(4):1023-1035.

[17] Lianjiang Jiang, Shulin Yu, and Chuang Wang. Second Language Writing Instructors’ Feedback Practice in Response to Automated Writing Evaluation: A Sociocultural Perspective. System, (2020)93: 102302.

[18] Jingxin Geng, Abu Bakar Razali, Lilliati Ismail, Nooreen Noordin. Effectiveness of Automated Writing Evaluation Program to Enhance EFL Undergraduates’ Writing Performance in China. Asia Pacific Education Review (2024): 1-16.

[19] Chen Shen, Penghai Shi, Jirong Guo J, SuyunXu S, JiweiTian. From Process to Product: Writing Engagement  and Performance of EFL learners under Computer-generated Feedback Instruction. Front. Psychol. (2023) 14:1258286.

[20] Leyi Qian, Yong Yang,Yali Zhao. Syntactic Complexity Revisited: Sensitivity of China’s AES-generated Scores to Syntactic Measures, Effects of Discourse-mode and Topic. Reading and Writing. (2021) 34(3): 681-704.

[21] Zhe Zhang, Ling Xu, L. Student Engagement with Automated Feedback on Academic Writing: A Study on Uyghur Ethnic Minority Students in China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. (2024) 45(8): 3466-3479.

[22] Dianping Liu, Yang-Hee Kim. The Juku Online Writing System as an Interactive College English Writing Instructional Tool in China. Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media, (2021) 22(2): 58-72.

[23] Kim Jinhee, Seongryeong Yu, Rita Detrick, Na Li. Exploring Students’ Perspectives on Generative AI-assisted Academic Writing. Education and Information Technologies.（2025）30: 1265–1300.

[24] Dan Zhao. The Impact of AI-enhanced Natural Language Processing Tools on Writing Proficiency: an Analysis of Language Precision, Content Summarization, and Creative Writing Facilitation. Education and Information Technologies. (2025) 30:8055–8086.

[25] Lili Tian, Yu Zhou. Learner Engagement with Automated Feedback, Peer Feedback and Teacher Feedback in an Online EFL Writing Context. System. (2020) 91: 102247.

[26] Yiran Hou. Implications of AES System of Pigai for Self-regulated Learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. (2020) 10(3):261-268.

[27] Rui Li. Modeling the Continuance Intention to Use Automated Writing Evaluation among Chinese EFL Learners. Sage Open. (2021) 11(4): 21582440211060782.

[28] Lianjiang Jiang, Shulin Yu. Appropriating Automated Feedback in L2 Writing: Experiences of Chinese EFL Student Writers. Computer Assisted Language Learning. (2022) 35(7):1329-1353.

[29] Li Dong. Exploring the Interplay between Writing Feedback Perception and Lexical Complexity among Chinese University Students: a latent Profile Analysis and Retrodictive qualitative modeling study. Reading and Writing, (2024) 37(10): 2687-2706.

[30] Hui-Fang Shang.  Effectiveness of Automated Corrective Feedback on EFL learners’ Writing Proficiency and Perception. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. (2024):1-17.

[31] Jianhua Zhang, Lawrence Jun Zhang. The Effect of Feedback on Metacognitive Strategy Use in EFL Writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning. (2024) 37:5-6, 1198-1223.

[32] Yangxi Han, Shuo Zhao, Lee-Luan Ng. How Technology Tools Impact Writing Performance, Lexical Complexity, and Perceived Self-Regulated Learning Strategies in EFL Academic Writing: A Comparative Study. Front. Psychol. (2021) 12:752793.

[33] Wenjin Li, Zhihong Lu, Qianwen Liu. Syntactic Complexity Development in College Students’ Essay Writing Based on AWE. CALL for widening participation: Short papers from EUROCALL (2020): 190-194.

[34] Linlin Xu, Tiefu Zhang. Engaging With Multiple Sources of Feedback in Academic Writing: Postgraduate Students’ Perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. (2023) 48(7):995-1008.

[35] Chaoran Wang. Exploring Students’ Generative AI-assisted Writing Processes: Perceptions and Experiences from Native and Nonnative English Speakers.Technology, Knowledge and Learning (2024): 1-22.

[36] Ali Dalgıç, Emre Yaşar, Mahmut Demir. ChatGPT and Learning Outcomes in Tourism Education: The Role of Digital Literacy and Individualized Learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, (2024) 34(Suppl. C): 100481.

[37] Juan Qian, Zhihong Wang. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Online Automatic Scoring of English Writing in Juku Correction Network and Mosoteach APP Under Blended Teaching Mode. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, (2020) 1533(4):042082.

[38] Yu Shao. A Case Study of Chinese Secondary Students' Automated. In Proceedings of the 2024 3rd International Conference on Science Education and Art Appreciation (SEAA 2024) Springer Nature. (2024) 866: 28-39.

[39] Zhe Zhang, Ken Hyland. The Role of Digital Literacy in Student Engagement with Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) Feedback on Second Language Writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning (2023): 1-26.

[40] Zhang Li, Dou Yan. "Effect of Pigai. org on English Majors’ Writing Self-efficacy and Writing Performance." Journal of Physics: Conference Series. (2020) 1533(4): 042086.