1. Introduction

This chapter introduces the iterative continuation task (ICT) as an innovative method in second language (L2) learning, where learners progressively write continuations of segmented reading materials to internalize grammar. ICT fosters both implicit and explicit grammar knowledge by encouraging recognition and use of grammatical structures across iterations, potentially enhancing automaticity and fluency. The development of grammar learning strategies (GLS) involves mastering explicit and highly automatized grammar knowledge. Given the demanding nature of ICT, the concept of grammar grit (GG), reflecting persistence and passion in grammar acquisition, is emphasized as a critical area for research. However, ICT's limited immediate feedback may impede learners' ability to self-correct, restricting growth in GLS, GG, and grammar competence (GC). Grammarly is presented as an automated corrective feedback tool that offers explicit grammar explanations, supporting the transition from explicit to implicit grammar knowledge and aiding the development of effective GLS. By reducing cognitive load, Grammarly may bolster learners’ grit during the challenging ICT process. Prior studies highlight Grammarly’s positive impact on GC, which motivates this study’s mixed-methods approach to examine Grammarly’s influence on GLS, GG, and GC among Chinese EFL learners using ICT. This pioneering research aims to shed light on combining automated feedback with ICT, offering new directions for L2 grammar instruction.

2. Literature Review

This chapter described iterative continuation tasks (ICT) as a multifaceted reading–writing integrated task requiring learners to read incomplete L2 texts and continue them through multiple iterative cycles. ICT necessitates continual interaction with source texts, encouraging syntactic alignment by adapting written production to embedded grammatical structures. Learners compare their continuations with original texts, fostering self-correction and grammar internalization that modifies their interlanguage grammar. ICT potentially promotes grammar learning strategies (GLS) across metacognitive, cognitive, affective, and social dimensions by encouraging planning, monitoring, self-reflection, motivation, and peer interaction. Despite these theoretical benefits, empirical evidence on ICT’s impact on GLS remains limited. The task also may enhance grit in grammar learning (GG), defined as sustained passion and perseverance in mastering grammar complexities, by fostering consistent effort and prolonged interest through iterative engagement with authentic texts. Research on GG’s relationship with ICT is still sparse. ICT has been shown to improve grammar competence (GC), as seen in studies highlighting improved syntactic alignment, grammatical accuracy, and reduced tense errors in multi-turn continuation writing compared to single-turn tasks. However, grammar competence in broad L2 writing contexts and across grammar structures requires further exploration. ICT’s reliance on learner self-correction and content coherence prioritization leads to limited and delayed grammar feedback, creating challenges such as high cognitive load and insufficient support, particularly for learners with weaker grammar skills or less-developed self-regulation strategies. Incorporating automated feedback tools like Grammarly could potentially mitigate these deficiencies by offering consistent, immediate, and personalized grammar feedback, complementing the iterative and self-directed nature of ICT.

Grammarly is introduced as an AI-powered writing assistant widely adopted to provide automated grammar and style feedback for L2 writing. It offers two main feedback types: overall writing scores and detailed error identification, with indirect metalinguistic support available through underlined suggestions and direct corrections accompanied by grammar rule explanations. Empirical findings highlight Grammarly’s effectiveness in reducing grammar errors and aiding learners in addressing flagged issues, such as the learning of passive structures. However, some studies report challenges like overcorrection, cognitive overload, and inadequate metalinguistic explanation, indicating the need for more nuanced research on Grammarly’s role across diverse contexts and long-term use. The potential integration of Grammarly with ICT is proposed to enhance L2 learners’ GLS, GG, and GC by facilitating metacognitive grammar strategies through real-time, personalized feedback. This integration may also support explicit and implicit grammar knowledge acquisition by providing iterative, contextualized grammar exercises, thereby amplifying grammar production and comprehension strategies within source-based writing tasks.

3. Method

This chapter describes the methodology used to investigate the impact of Grammarly on developing L2 grammar learning strategies, grit, and competence among EFL university students. Participants consisted of 56 first-year College English students from a university in southeastern China, randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Data collection combined quantitative measures, including pre- and post-tests on grammar learning strategies (GLS), grammar grit (GG), and grammatical competence (GC), with qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted after the intervention. The experimental group completed iterative continuation tasks (ICTs) involving reading and continuing narrative episodes, supplemented by Grammarly feedback to guide revisions, while the control group performed similar tasks without Grammarly, relying on self-assessment only.

A mixed-methods research design integrated surveys, grammar tests, and interviews to address the study's research questions. The instructional intervention spanned 10 weeks, featuring three cycles of reading, writing, and feedback for the experimental group. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with selected participants from each group to explore their experiences and perceptions regarding the tasks and feedback.

The research instruments included established scales and standardized tests. The Grammar Learning Strategy Inventory (GLSI) assessed multiple dimensions of grammar learning strategies, such as metacognitive, cognitive (for production, comprehension, explicit and implicit knowledge, corrective feedback), affective, and social strategies, utilizing a Likert scale with high internal consistency reliability. The Domain-Specific Grammar Grit Questionnaire (DSGGQ) measured the perseverance and consistency aspects of grammar grit. Grammatical competence was evaluated through sections of the Test for English Majors Grade Four (TEM-4), specifically the Language Usage and Cloze sections, to objectively gauge grammar and comprehension skills.

The iterative continuation tasks were based on excerpts from Watson’s psychological thriller novel "Before I Go to Sleep," chosen to suit student interests and proficiency levels. Tasks required students to write continuations of at least 250 words after reading approximately 2,000-word segments. Chinese translations and prompts supported comprehension and encouraged extended responses.

Grammarly’s free version was applied as an automated feedback tool, providing instant corrections and suggestions categorized into correctness, clarity, engagement, and delivery dimensions. The teacher uploaded students’ continuations to obtain detailed reports, which aided learners in identifying and addressing writing issues, particularly in grammar. This feedback system formed a core component of the experimental group's intervention, enabling iterative improvement throughout the study.

4. Data Analysis

This chapter described the use of descriptive and inferential statistics to analyze pre- and post-test data, employing SPSS 26.0. Non-normal data distributions led to the application of nonparametric tests, including the Mann‒Whitney U test for between-group comparisons and the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test for within-group changes. Qualitative data from audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed thematically following Braun and Clarke’s approach. Initial coding was done by the first author, reviewed independently by the second author, and finalized collaboratively through discussion to establish the key codes and themes.

5. Results

This chapter presented descriptive statistics comparing pre- and post-test scores for both experimental (Grammarly-assisted iterative continuation tasks, ICT) and control (ICT-only) groups. The experimental group showed substantial improvements in various grammar learning strategies (GLS), especially metacognitive GLS (MGLS), with an increase of +0.46, while affective GLS (AGLS) showed the smallest gain (+0.31). The control group demonstrated more modest improvements, with AGLS increasing by +0.30 and explicit grammar knowledge (GLSEK) the least by +0.13. Grammar grit measures also improved more in the experimental group, particularly in Consistency of Interest (COI) (+0.48), compared to smaller gains in the control group (+0.35). In terms of grammar competence (GC), the control group exhibited a larger gain (+3.47) than the experimental group (+2.77), indicating differing patterns of progress between groups.

Non-parametric two-related-samples tests revealed significant improvements in the experimental group's MGLS, GLSEK, and implicit knowledge GLS (GLSIK) with strong significance (p ≤ 0.01). The control group showed significant gains in AGLS, COI, and GC, but fewer improvements overall in GLS and grammar grit (GG). These results suggest that the experimental group progressed more in GLS and GG, while the control group advanced more in grammar competence.

Comparisons between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test found no significant differences in GLS types or grammar grit variables between the experimental and control groups. However, significant differences emerged in grammar competence, with the control group outperforming the experimental group at both pre- and post-test stages, highlighting a consistently higher ability in this domain.

Semi-structured interviews analyzed through thematic analysis identified four key themes reflecting students’ perceptions of Grammarly-assisted ICT versus ICT-only. Regarding the teaching environment, Grammarly was appreciated for supplementing limited teacher feedback in large classes by offering immediate corrections, which was important in the test-driven EFL context. Control group students, however, felt grammar focus sometimes overshadowed content, influenced by exam-oriented learning priorities. Personal traits influenced Grammarly’s effectiveness; more proficient learners used feedback confidently, whereas less proficient students struggled, and some found the tool’s complexity overwhelming, indicating uneven benefits of technological support.

Task characteristics revealed that Grammarly’s iterative feedback encouraged continuous improvement and reduced cognitive load by simultaneously addressing grammar and content. Nevertheless, task repetition sometimes caused disengagement, and emotionally unfamiliar topics posed challenges for all students. Feedback feature analysis showed high value placed on Grammarly’s immediate corrections, but concerns about over-reliance were voiced, with fears of reduced self-correction skills. ICT-only students lacked timely feedback, which hindered their grammar self-regulation. Overall, learners recognized Grammarly’s complex role in ICT, suggesting that combining individualized, context-sensitive feedback with technological tools is crucial to address diverse learner needs in L2 grammar development.

6. Discussion

This chapter discussed the impact of Grammarly-assisted iterative continuation tasks (ICT) on L2 grammar learning strategies (GLS), grit, and competence. It revealed that the Grammarly-assisted ICT group showed significant improvements in various GLS dimensions, particularly in implicit grammar knowledge acquisition (GLSIK), followed by metacognitive strategies (MGLS), and explicit knowledge development (GLSEK). This outcome contrasts with prior studies emphasizing corrective feedback and comprehension/production strategies, possibly due to Grammarly’s unique demand for learners to actively decide on accepting corrections, thus fostering both explicit and implicit grammar knowledge through real-time interaction and iterative practice. Grammarly’s feedback encouraged metacognitive processes such as self-monitoring, revision, and strategic writing decisions, enhancing learners’ cognitive and metacognitive engagement, which aligns with Koltovskaia’s (2020) findings regarding effective grammar strategy development.

Conversely, the ICT-only group improved mainly in affective grammar learning strategies (AGLS), likely due to emotionally engaging suspenseful narratives that reduce anxiety and maintain motivation by immersing learners in meaningful linguistic interactions. However, the absence of explicit corrective feedback in this group limited gains in other GLS dimensions, demonstrating that while ICT supports emotional regulation and motivation in grammar learning, feedback mechanisms are essential for broader strategy development.

The lack of significant GLS differences between the Grammarly-assisted and ICT-only groups may be due to several factors. The study did not control for overall L2 proficiency, a variable known to influence the effectiveness of automated feedback, as previous research has yielded mixed results regarding its suitability across proficiency levels. Additionally, ICT’s design inherently promotes self-directed grammar learning involving comprehension, deduction, induction, and automatization processes that support grammar production and comprehension (GLSPC). Grammarly’s role in prompting error detection and self-correction may have been underutilized by learners lacking sufficient awareness or skills, showing the importance of tailoring feedback tools to learner proficiency and technological literacy. These insights emphasize the complex interplay between learner characteristics, task design, and Grammarly’s functionalities in shaping grammar learning strategies.

Regarding grammar grit, the Grammarly-assisted ICT group demonstrated significant enhancements in both Perseverance of Effort (POE) and Consistency of Interest (COI), while the ICT-only group improved only in COI. This finding aligns with research indicating that automated written corrective feedback fosters self-regulated learning through increased enthusiasm, persistence, and confidence in writing efforts. The enhancement in grammar grit arises from the synergy between real-time feedback from Grammarly and the iterative nature of ICT, which requires cyclical engagement with source texts fostering persistence. Grammarly’s clear corrective suggestions reduce learner frustration and motivate ongoing improvement, concurrently maintaining interest via emotionally engaging materials and creative writing tasks. These outcomes correspond with previous studies highlighting the influence of task complexity, interest, and perceived value on grit development.

The ICT-only group's limited improvement in grit to COI suggests that while self-reflective and cyclical task features maintain learners’ sustained interest, the absence of external corrective feedback hampers their perseverance. This demonstrates the critical role of automated feedback in developing both aspects of grit by providing external reinforcement alongside intrinsic motivation. Prior studies also show that grit in L2 learning develops over time through a combination of internal motivation and external support, emphasizing that effective interventions should incorporate both elements. The chapter underlined the necessity of integrating task characteristics with automated feedback to comprehensively foster grammar grit.

Despite improvements within both groups, no significant differences between the Grammarly-assisted and ICT-only groups were detected in grammar grit, indicating that Grammarly’s feedback did not produce additional gains beyond those enabled by ICT itself. This suggests that while Grammarly supports grammar learning and grit development, factors such as task design, learner proficiency, and engagement with feedback critically modulate its efficacy. The findings highlight the importance of optimizing the integration of automated feedback tools like Grammarly within task frameworks tailored to diverse L2 learner needs to maximize their benefits in fostering grammar learning strategies and grit.

7. Conclusion

This chapter investigated the integration of Grammarly with ICT in Chinese EFL settings, examining effects on grammar learning strategies, grit, and competence using a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest control group design. Grammarly-assisted ICT improved grammar learning strategies, grit, and competence significantly, whereas the ICT-only group showed greater overall gains in grammar competence. Limitations include a small sample size, short intervention period, and lack of consideration for demographic variables such as gender, prior L2 writing proficiency, and technological literacy, all of which may influence interaction with Grammarly. Pedagogical recommendations emphasize combining Grammarly with teacher-led and self-regulated ICT to allocate cognitive resources to advanced writing skills, alongside training learners to effectively navigate feedback through collaborative activities like peer review, teacher mediation, and translation exercises. Future research should explore the timing of Grammarly’s feedback, contrasting delayed versus real-time delivery, and investigate the differential impacts of feedback immediacy on explicit and implicit L2 grammar acquisition to enhance ICT-based grammar instruction.