View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk brought to you by CORE

provided by UNL | Libraries

University of Nebraska - Lincoln

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln

May 2019

Usage of Grammarly – Online Grammar and

Spelling Checker Tool at the Health Sciences
Library, Manipal Academy of Higher Education,
Manipal: A Study
Mahabaleshwara Rao
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, [email protected]

Anita Gain
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal

Shivananda Bhat
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac

Part of the Library and Information Science Commons

Rao, Mahabaleshwara; Gain, Anita; and Bhat, Shivananda, "Usage of Grammarly – Online Grammar and Spelling Checker Tool at the
Health Sciences Library, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal: A Study" (2019). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-
journal). 2610.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2610
Usage of Grammarly – Online Grammar and Spelling Checker Tool at the
Health Sciences Library, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal:
A Study
Anita Gain
Master of Library and Information Science (M.Lib.I.Sc) Student
Department of Library and Information Science
Manipal Academy of Higher Education
Manipal

Dr. Mahabaleshwara Rao*

Associate Professor and Deputy Chief Librarian
Department of Library & Information Science and Health Sciences Library
Kasturba Medical College
Manipal Academy of Higher Education
Manipal – 576 104, Karnataka, India
Phone: 0820 2922609 (O); 9964498288 (M)
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Shivananda Bhat K.

Associate Professor and Chief Librarian
Department of Library & Information Science and Health Sciences Library
Kasturba Medical College
Manipal Academy of Higher Education
Manipal – 576 104, Karnataka, India
E-mail: [email protected]

* Corresponding Author

Abstract
Accurate use of grammar and writing is an essential aspect of any writing. Today various
online grammar spelling checker tools are available for improving writing quality. The
popularity of these platforms is increasing among researchers and academicians every day.
Aim of the present study is to know the opinion, use and satisfaction level among the users of
Grammarly - online grammar and spelling checker tool subscribed by the Health Science
Library, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), Manipal. Structured
questionnaires were distributed among the registered users of Grammarly tool at the Health
Sciences Library. The study observed that almost all the users were aware that the Health
Science Library is subscribing to Grammarly tool. More than half of the users used this tool
because of the limitation of Microsoft word as found in the study. It is also found from the
study that the majority of the respondents who participated in the study were using
Grammarly for Microsoft Office. The study also observed that users are using Grammarly
tool for different purposes like writing research papers, dissertations, theses, books, reports,
and course papers. From the present study, it is also observed that most important advantages
of Grammarly are - it improves the writing skills, catches contextual spelling and grammar
mistakes, integrates with Microsoft Office, shows definitions and synonyms via double-
clicks. Grammarly is one of the tools subscribed by the Health Sciences Library to boost up
academic writing, research, and publication of students, faculty members, and research
scholars of MAHE, Manipal.

Keywords: Writing Quality, Language, Scientific Writing, Information Technology

1
1. INTRODUCTION
In the modern world, English has become the universal language of not only scientific
communications, but also aviation, computing, diplomacy, and correspondence. Accurate use
of grammar and writing is an essential aspect of any writing. However, the use of English as
a standard language creates a threat to people who are not a native speaker of English. In
scientific writing, it is always suggested that a draft should be verified by a person who is a
native speaker of the English language for its grammatical accuracy and editing.
Change in technological advantage offers an online platform for editing,
spellchecking, sentence formation and grammatical accuracy service. These types of the
online platform are available commercially, and most of the library paid a vast amount to
procure it for its users because the information and communication technologies (ICT) have
made a high impact on all functions of academic libraries.
Through scientific writing, researchers communicate their finding to the scientific
community. In a competitive era, a researcher outcome is counted regarding publications and
their impact on scientific society. In the long run, the publication provides a dividend
regarding job position, collaboration, and better funding. Scientific writing plays a crucial
role in the career growth of a researcher and helps gain recognition for them.
The library and information center not only plays an essential role in enhancing the
quality of academic growth, but it also enhances the research environment for academic
activity. The library helps the user to identify and access the knowledge resources in an
academic institution. The rapid changes in the ICT influencing the libraries of today should
fit themselves and shift the tune with the times and technology. The library also supports the
users in their academic activity by providing access to research support tools to its users.
It also poses a responsibility to evaluate its services periodically.

2. DIFFERENT ONLINE GRAMMAR AND SPELLING CHECKER TOOLS

Now a day’s grammar accuracy is crucial for any kind of academic writing, presentation, and
publication. Various online grammar and spelling checker platforms provide facilities for
grammar corrections and spelling check option online. Among those platforms few are free,
some have both free and paid options, and others are only available by paid subscription. The
popularity of those platforms increasing among researchers and academician. All these
online spelling and grammar checker tool presently available are as follows:
• After the Deadline
• Ginger
• Grammar Check
• Grammarly
• Hemingway App
• Language Tool
• Online Correction
• Paper Rater
• Spellcheck Plus
• WhiteSmoke

2
3. GRAMMARLY - ONLINE GRAMMAR & SPELLING CHECKER TOOL
Grammarly is the world’s leading writing support tool for researchers. Grammarly offers
extensive reporting on grammatical and other writing issues. Grammarly’s grammar checker
scans text for hundreds of types of English grammar mistakes. Grammarly helps academic,
research, scholarly staff and students write better. The tool will tackle the issue of writing at
grass root level directly, impacting output on the national scale. Grammarly is used by
researchers, scholars, authors, bloggers, students, business professional’s, etc.; to ensure that
their article is impeccably correct in Form, Style, Structure. Grammarly checks 250+ types
of errors in writing, structure, format, sentences, vocabulary, and wordiness. Grammarly
does not limit itself to giving a report but helps generate automatic citations. Grammarly
helps to get aligned with APA, Chicago of the MLA style which is globally accepted by
international publishers.

Fig. 1: Opening page of Grammarly

4. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
According to the study conducted by Paul Daniels and Davey Leslie (2015)1 entitled
“
Grammar Software Ready for EFL Writers, Japan.”, Grammarly was able to identify the
missing spaces after the periods and the spelling mistakes, including the proper noun and
provide several alternative possibilities for the misspelled words. It also helps to identified
fragments and offered advice about verb form, although often no suggested corrections were
presented and explanations were complex.
Michael Schraudner (2013)2 conducted a study entitled “The Online Teacher’s
Assistant: Using Automated Correction Programs to Supplement Learning and Lesson
Planning.” This study focused on the use of several online software programs that streamline
the process of finding and correcting student errors, helping educators pinpoint critical areas
for instruction. Using smartphones or computers, student input assignments into an online
form and sent as a spreadsheet. The teacher can then quickly assess assignments manually as
well as by using a variety of automated grammar/language tools.
Abdul Shamim (2017)3 in his study entitled “Techno Tools Made Teaching, Learning
Engrossing And Entertaining.” found that LLS assists the learners in speaking a foreign
language with the correct pronunciation. Users can also record their own voice and check
their pronunciation and sentence formation. The students can do the practice independently
sitting in the language lab according to their convenience. The teacher can also record his
lecture on any topic and assignments can also be given to the students to solve. The teacher

3
can check the assignment of the students during the class in the Language Lab and can
provide feedback to the students if they have any. The students really enjoy learning the
English Language with the help of Language Learning Software.
Nivedita S. Bhirud, R.P. Bhavsar, B.V. Pawar (2017)4 conducted a study on
“Grammar Checkers for Natural Languages: A Review, India.” The aim of the survey was to
study various Grammar Checkers on the scale of their features such as types of grammar
errors, weaknesses, and evaluation. The Survey concludes with a study of various features of
grammar checkers thus leading to the future scope for developing grammar checkers for
uncovering languages with a feasible approach. It is observed that most of the professionally
available grammar checkers are available for the English language, while for most other
languages.
Raphael Mudge (2010)5 in his study on “The Design of a Proofreading Software
Service, Washington, DC” observes that grammar and style checker being used is similar to
language tool with the exception that it uses the language model to filter suggestions that
don’t fit the context of the text they replace, similar to work from Microsoft Research.
Alia Nur Dodgson Bt Tariq, Masdinah Alauyah Md. Yusof (2016)6 conducted a study
on “The Secondary School Students’ Usage of English Learning Websites to Self-Correct
Writing Errors, Malaysia.” According to this study using English Language Learning
Websites use as a material to assist students when dealing with indirect corrective feedback
have proven to fill the gap of where students may have no reference to addressing indirect
corrective feedback and self-correction. It implies that technology has given a vast
opportunity for students to identify what they want to learn and obtain the knowledge that
they personally need, leading students to be able to fulfill their own learning needs and learn
by themselves, in other words, becoming autonomous learners.
The study conducted by Abolfazl Qassemzadeh, Hassan Soleimani (2016)7 on “The
Impact of Feedback Provision by Grammarly Software and Teachers on Learning Passive
Structures by Iranian EFL Learners, Iran.” indicated that feedback provision has a statistically
significant impact on learning passive structures by Iranian EFL learners through Grammarly
software and teacher. In other words, the question was answered negatively. Also, it was
found that feedback provision had a statistically significant impact on retaining passive
structures by Iranian EFL learners through Grammarly software and teacher.
Michelle Cavaleri, Saib Dianati (2016)8 in their study on “You want me to check your
grammar again? The usefulness of an online grammar checker as perceived by students,
Australia” states the usefulness and perception of Grammarly, a popular online grammar
checker. Student evaluations of Grammarly were generally in agreement that it is useful and
easy to use, and students stated that Grammarly increased their confidence in writing and
their understanding of grammatical concepts. The findings suggest that students can benefit
from Grammarly”s individual instruction and the self-access nature of the tool.
The study conducted by Brendan O’Regan, Annick Rivens Mompean, Piet Desmet
(2010) “From Spell, Grammar and Style Checkers to Writing Aids for English and French as
9

a Foreign Language: Challenges and Opportunities.” focused on spelling, grammar and style
checkers which have been specifically designed for learners of French and English, some of
them evolving towards real writing aids. They examined the features of the programs on the
market, which characterize this evolution towards real writing aids. This paper examined the

4
capabilities of different writing tools when faced with a corpus of learner written production
and looks the opportunities. The findings present the challenges that lay ahead for an efficient
integration within a foreign language learning environment focusing on written expression.
Reva Potter and Dorothy Fuller (2008)10 in their study on “My New Teaching
Partner? Using the Grammar Checker in Writing Instruction” found the use of grammar
checker tool, grammar beyond the textbook to the individual student’s writing experience. As
per their findings, students became more particular about the influence of the grammar
checker. They were more engaged and more motivated to apply the learning of the specific
grammar units.
Alex Vernon (2000)11 conducted a study on “Computerized Grammar Checkers 2000:
Capabilities, Limitations, and Pedagogical Possibilities, University of North Carolina–Chapel
Hill”. This study found that Word Perfect’s grammar checker is more aggressive. It detects
more errors, suggests changes for more detected errors, wrongly flags more no errors, and
finds more problematic sentences but improperly identifies the problem.
The study conducted by Debela Tesfaye (2011)12 entitled “A rule-based Afan Oromo
Grammar Checker, Jimma, Ethiopia” indicated that Afan Oromo grammar checker had been
developed and tested on real-world errors. Grammar and style checking software has
involved measuring the program's error detection capacity regarding precision (i.e., error
detection correctness) and recall.
Patricia J. McAlexander13 (2000) conducted a study on “Checking the grammar
checker: integrating grammar instruction with writing, Georgia.” This study found grammar
checker project had increased the students' understanding not only of the grammar checker
but of grammar in general.

5. NEED OF THE STUDY

Research has been given due importance in Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE),
Manipal, India. Health Sciences Library is providing a number of research support tools and
services to its users to support research publication activities. Access to Grammarly - an
online grammar and spelling checker is provided by the library to help the users to find and
correct writing mistakes publishing manuscripts, writing theses, dissertations, projects, etc.
It is very much essential to know the opinion, satisfaction level and problems of the
users, who use Grammarly subscribed by the Health Science Library. Further, it is essential
to understand whether users are using various editorial features of Grammarly and also
whether they are facing any problems in using the Grammarly. The Health Sciences Library
is subscribing Grammarly online Grammar and Spelling checker tool for its users since
December 2016. So, there is a need to find out to what extent Grammarly is being used by its
users. The study will also help to find out the usefulness of Grammarly as grammar check
and editing among academicians, researchers, and students too.

6. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The problem is entitled “Usage of Grammarly – Online Grammar and Spelling Checker Tool
at the Health Sciences Library, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal: A Study.”

7. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

5
The specific objectives of the study were:
• To find out the users of Grammarly subscribed by the Health Sciences Library, MAHE,
Manipal.
• To understand the features, facilities, and services available at Grammarly.
• To know the usage of Grammarly by the registered users.
• To find out the satisfaction level about Grammarly by the registered users.
• To recognize the problems faced by users while using Grammarly.

8. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Health Sciences Library is the central library for all health sciences institutions of Manipal
Academy of Higher Education at Manipal campus. The library has provided access to
Grammarly online grammar and spelling checker tool to the faculty members, postgraduate
students, and researchers of the health sciences institutions. The scope of this study is limited
to cover the registered users of Grammarly at the Health Sciences Library, Manipal Academy
of Higher Education, Manipal.

9. METHODOLOGY
For a collection of the data structured questionnaire was distributed among the registered
users of Grammarly online and the spelling checker tool at Health Sciences Library, Manipal
Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. “Google form” tool was used for the distribution
and collection of data.

10. DATA ANALYSIS

10.1 Survey Population
Total population consisted of users of Grammarly in Health Sciences Library. The total study
population consisted of registered 565 users of Grammarly at the Health Science Library. The
questionnaire was distributed to their email addresses. Out of 565 registered users of
Grammarly, e-mail addresses were available for 542 active users. Hence questionnaire was
sent to all 542 active users. Out of 542 users, 22 users mail bounced back. Hence total
questionnaire was sent to 520 users, of which 134 were responded. The total sample size of
this study was 25.76%. The study was conducted during the period from 17th March to 26
April 2018.
Table 1: Population and sample size
Total No. of
No. of E-mail No. of E-mail Total No. of a Percentage
filled-in
Register address Questionnaire bounce questionnaire of responses
questionnaire
users available distributed back distributed (%)
received
565 542 542 22 520 134 25.76%

10.2 Gender-Wise Distribution of Questionnaire

Table 2 depicts that the majority of the respondents are male, i.e., 63.4 % (85) where as 35%
(47) respondents are female.
Table 2: Response rate – Gender-wise
Gender Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Male 85 63.40%
Female 47 35%

6
 Not responded 2 1.49%
Total 134 100.0%

10.3 The Position of the User

Data presented in Table 3 indicates that out of the total respondents who participated in the
study, 79.10% (105) of them were faculty members whereas 12% (16) of respondents are
researchers, and 6% (8) of respondents are postgraduate students and others 3% (4). So the
majority of respondents using Grammarly are faculty members.
Table 3: Response rate – Position-wise
Designation Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Faculty 106 79.10%
Researcher 16 12%
Postgraduate students 8 6%
Others 4 3%
Total 134 100.0%

10.4 Awareness about the Subscription of Grammarly

Data presented in Table 4 indicates that 96% (128) of respondents are aware of Grammarly
facility which is subscribed by the Health Sciences Library.
Table 4: Awareness about the subscription of Grammarly
Variables Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Yes 128 96%
No 4 3%
Not Responded 2 1.49%
Total 134 100%

Further, it is understood from the Table 5 that majority of the respondents (68%) are
aware of Grammarly through the library website, whereas 27.3% users are aware of
Grammarly through the department, 25.8 % of users are aware from their colleagues, and
14.8% users are aware through other sources.
Table 5: Sources of awareness of Grammarly
Sources Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Through library website 87 68%
From the colleagues 33 25.8%
Through the department 35 27.3%
From others 19 14.8%

10.5 Use of Grammarly Functions/Apps

Data presented in Table 6 indicated the user’s response on which Grammarly functions/apps
they are using. The table shows that majority of the respondents 64.9% were using
Grammarly for Microsoft Office. Further, it is understood from the study that the online
platform on Grammarly.com is used by 37.4% of respondents whereas Windows desktop app
is used by 29% of users.
Table 6: Using of Grammarly functions/apps by the users
Functions/Apps Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
The online platform on Grammarly.com 49 37.4%
Grammarly for Windows desktop app 32 29%
Grammarly for Microsoft Office 85 64.9%
Grammarly for Chrome 42 32.1%
Others 2 1.6%

7
10.6 The opinion of the Users about the Use Grammarly
In this study, respondents were asked to indicate whether the Grammarly tool is easy to use.
It is observed from the study that the majority of respondents, i.e., 55.3% (73) are agreed that
Grammarly is easy to use whereas, 37.1% (49) of respondents strongly agreed that
Grammarly is easy to use.
Table 7: Opinion of the users about the user of Grammarly
Opinion – Easy to Use Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Strongly agree 49 37.1%
Agree 73 55.3%
Uncertain 9 6.8%
Disagree 1 0.8%
Strongly disagree 2 1.49%

10.7 Purposes of Using Grammarly by the Users

Table 8 shows that 88.6 % (117) of respondents are using Grammarly for writing research
paper, 29.5% (39) of respondents are using Grammarly for writing dissertations, 36.4% (48)
of respondents are using Grammarly for thesis writing, 9.8% (13) are using the same for
writing books, 53% (70) respondents are using it for writing reports, 14.4% (19) respondents
are using Grammarly for writing course papers, 22.7% (30) are using Grammarly for
preparing presentation, 45.5% (60) are using Grammarly for mailing purpose. It is further
observed that 5.8% (5) of respondents are using Grammarly for other purpose.
Table 8: Purpose of using Grammarly by the users
Purpose Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Writing a research paper 117 88.6%
Writing dissertations 39 29.5%
Thesis writing 48 36.4%
Writing books 13 9.8%
Writing reports 70 53%
Writing course papers 19 14.4%
Preparing presentation 30 22.7%
Writing blogs 7 5.3%
Writing on social networking sites 12 9.1%
Making correspondence 33 25%
Mailing 60 45.5%
Other 5 5.8%

10.8 Advantages of Grammarly

Table 9 shows that 78.8% (104) respondents agree that Grammarly helps improves the
writing skill, 84.1% (111) respondents agree that it helps in catching contextual spelling and
grammar mistakes, 19.7% (26) respondents agree that it helps access documents on multiple
devices, 49.2% (65) respondents agree that it helps Integrate with Microsoft® Office
(Windows only), 37.1% (49) respondents are agree that it helps to see definitions and
synonyms via double-clicks, 22% (29) respondents agree that it helps to add words to the
personal dictionary.
Table 9: Advantages of Grammarly
Total No. of
Advantages Percentage (%)
Respondents
Improves the writing skills 104 78.8%
Catch contextual spelling and grammar mistakes 111 84.1%
Access documents on multiple devices 26 19.7%

8
 Integrate with Microsoft® Office (Windows only) 65 49.2%
See definitions and synonyms via double-clicks 49 37.1%
Add words to the personal dictionary 29 22%
Other 1 0.8%

10.9 Use of Grammarly Editorial Features

Table 10 shows that 54.47% (73) of respondents are using Grammarly editorial features and
43.28% (58) respondents are not using the same.
Table 10: Use of Grammarly editorial features
Editorial Features Total No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Yes 73 54.47%
No 58 43.28%
Others 3 2.23%
Total 134 100%

Further, Table No. 11 shows that 41.9% (36) of respondents are using ‘Document
type’ in Grammarly editorial features. Further it is observed from the study that 96.5% (83)
of respondents are using ‘spelling’, 97.7% (84) of respondents are using ‘grammar’, 83.7%
(72) of respondents are using ‘Punctuation’ 45.3% (39) of respondents are using ‘syntax’,
48.8% (42) of respondents are using ‘style’, 70.9% (61) of respondents using ‘Plagiarism’
and 59.3% (51) of respondents using ‘Vocabulary enhancement’.
Table 11: Using of Grammarly editorial features
Types of Editorial Features Total No. of Respondents Percentages (%)
Document type 36 41.9%
Spelling 83 96.5%
Grammar 84 97.7%
Punctuation 72 83.7%
Syntax 39 45.3%
Style 42 48.8%
Plagiarism 61 70.9%
Vocabulary enhancement 51 59.3%

10.10 Use of Other Editorial Features of Grammarly

With regard to the ‘other’ Grammarly editorial features, it is observed from the study that
majority of the respondent are using “editing” (77.4%), “making a correction” (77.4%), and
“grammar check” (88.7%) this feature during writing an article and study purpose. Other
features like “exporting documents” (15.1%), “document statistics” (9.4%), “professional
proofreading” (25.5%), documents and desktop setting were also used by respondents during
Grammarly use.
Table 12: Use of other editorial features of Grammarly
Editorial Features Total No. of respondents Percentages (%)
Editing text 82 77.4%
Exporting document 16 15.1%
Making corrections 82 77.4%
Grammarly checks 94 88.7%
Document Statistics 10 9.4%
Professional proofreading 27 25.5%
Documents and desktop settings 11 10.4%
Other 1 0.9%

9
10.11 Problems Faced by the Users While Using Grammarly
Table 13 shows that users are facing different problems while using Grammarly. Majority of
the users, i.e., 40.9% (18) stated that they are unfamiliar with its use and services followed by
25% (11) of users are facing a lack of awareness about Grammarly. 15.9% (7) of them are
mentioned that they do not understand correctly Grammarly platform and some of 6.8% (3)
of users are mentioned that they are not sure how to register Grammarly for their day to day’s
work. Further, 20.3% (20) users are mentioned other problem which they are facing while
using Grammarly.
Table 13: Problems faced by the users while using Grammarly
Types of Problems Total No. of Respondents Percentages (%)
Lack of awareness about Grammarly 11 25%
Unfamiliar with its use and services 18 40.9%
Difficulty in understanding
7 15.9%
Grammarly platform
Not sure how to do registration in
3 6.8%
Grammarly
Other problems 18 41.4%

10.12 The Requirement of the Training in Using Grammarly

The study question asked to the users to understand the requirement of training to know and
use Grammarly platform. Table 14 shows that the majority of the respondents, i.e., 63% (85)
expressed that they don’t require training whereas 33% (44) of respondents disclosed that
they required training and 4% (5) respondent are not disclosed their opinion.
Table 14: Requirement of the training in using Grammarly
Variables Total No. of Respondents Percentages (%)
Yes 44 33%
No 85 63%
Others 5 4%
Total 134 100%

10.13 Recommendation of Grammarly to Others

Table 15 clearly reveals answers to the survey query, i.e., the recommendation of Grammarly
to others. 96% (128) participants have recommended Grammarly to others, only 3% (4)
declared that they do not recommend Grammarly to others.
Table 15: Recommendation of Grammarly to others
Variables Total No. of Respondents Percentages (%)
Yes 128 96%
No 4 3%
Others 2 1.49%
Total 134 100%

11 FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Based on survey results, the following are the few significant findings of usage of Grammarly
– Online Grammar and Spelling Checker Tool at the Health Sciences Library, Manipal
Academy of Higher Education, Manipal.
• The study found that more than half of the Grammarly tool users were male (63.4%) and
remaining were female.
• From the data analysis, it is found that more than three fourth users who participated in
the study were faculty members (79.10%) who use Grammarly. At the same time, the
10
 study revealed that postgraduate students who participated in the study are less in number
(6%).
• It is observed from the study that almost all registered users (96%) were aware that the
Health Science Library subscribed Grammarly Tool. It is further observed from the study
that more than half of the respondents (68%) aware of Grammarly tool through the library
website. Other two sources through which users are aware of Grammarly were from their
colleague and department.
• The present study revealed that the majority of users (73.4%) are using Grammarly due to
the limitation of Microsoft word build-in spell check. It is further found from the study
that about 29% of the user were using Grammarly because of recommendation from
colleague/student/staff.
• The study revealed that majority of the respondents (64.9%) were using Grammarly for
Microsoft Office. Further, it is understood from the study that the online platform on
Grammarly.com is used by 37.4% of respondents whereas Windows desktop app is used
by 29% of users.
• It is noted from the study that almost every registered user of the Grammarly was agreed
that Grammarly tool is easy to use.
• The present study on Grammarly indicated that 88.6% of respondents are using
Grammarly for writing a research paper, 53% of respondents are using it for writing
reports and 45.5% of users using Grammarly for mailing purpose. Further study also
observed that registered users of Grammarly are also using the same for writing
dissertations, theses, books; preparing a presentation and writing blog
• Grammarly tool has a lot of advantages which were noticed in the study. The present
study observed from the opinion of the users that most important advantages of
Grammarly are - Grammarly improves the writing skill, catch contextual spelling and
grammar mistakes, integrate with Microsoft Office, shows definitions and synonyms via
double-clicks.
• Grammarly tool has many editorial features. From the study, it is understood that
respondents have used many editorial features like Punctuation, syntax, style, Plagiarism,
etc. in correcting their manuscripts. It is found from the study that 41.9% of respondents
are using ‘Document type’ in Grammarly editorial features. It is further observed that
96.5% of respondents are using ‘spelling,’ 97.7% of respondents are using ‘grammar,’
and 83.7% of respondents are using ‘Punctuation’ features of Grammarly editorial. Other
features of Grammarly editorial are being used by the users are ‘syntax,’ ‘style,’
‘Plagiarism’ and ‘Vocabulary enhancement.’
• More than two-third of users of Grammarly disclosed in this study that they are not facing
any problem while using Grammarly. However, 28% of users disclosed that they are
facing problems like unfamiliarity in using its features and functionality with its use and
services, lack of awareness about Grammarly, not understand the registration process to
access Grammarly tool.
• Finding on the requirement of training for using Grammarly revealed that more than half
of respondents do not require any training for using Grammarly.

11
• Almost all respondents who participated in the study revealed that they would like to
recommend Grammarly for others.

12 SUGGESTIONS
Based on the findings of the study, a few suggestions have been drawn, and they are as follows:
• From the study, it is noted that more number of faculty members have registered themselves
for using Grammarly than postgraduate students. Considering the huge strength of
postgraduate students at Manipal Academy of Higher Education at Manipal, very few of
them have registered to Grammarly to use the same though the Grammarly tool link and
instruction are available in the Health Sciences Library portal/web site. This indicates there
is a need for orientation programme about Grammarly use and benefits among postgraduate
students in regular interval. The online information brochure also needs to circulate through
group mail regarding Grammarly tool and its utility and advantages.
• Though Grammarly is easy to use, the study observed that there is a training requirement for
a small group of users. This indicates the requirement of physical guidance. Health Science
Library can have some provision for demonstration whenever users approach the library for
help.

13 CONCLUSION
The University library is regarded as the backbone of education and research. It plays an
important role in the lives of young students, researchers as well as faculty members. It provides
a number of online and offline resources and services to its users. Hence there is a need to
evaluate the resources and services provided by the library from time to time. Study on the usage
of Grammarly by the registered users of the Health Science Library, Manipal Academy of
Higher Education (MAHE) indicates that only a limited number of potential users are using
Grammarly at present. The library needs to address this issue and take possible steps to increase
its use. Although Grammarly is quite sophisticated and supports a lot in correcting the writings,
users need to take their own decision in incorporating the changes suggested by the tool in their
manuscripts.

REFERENCES
1. Daniels, P., & Leslie, D. (2013). @ CUE Grammar Software Ready for EFL Writers ? 391–401.
2. Schraudner, M. (2014). The online teachers assistant: using automated correction programs to supplement
learning and lesson planning. CELE Journal, 22, 128–140
3. Shamim, Abdul (2017). Techno tools made teaching-learning engrossing and entertaining. Vidyabharti
International Interdisciplinary Research Journal (Special Proceeding Issue), (28-31). Retrieved from http://
http://www.viirj.org/(April).
4. Bhirud, N. S., Bhavsar, R. P., & Pawar, B. V. (2017). Grammar Checkers for Natural Languages: a Review.
International Journal on Natural Language Computing (IJNLC), 6(4). http://doi.org/10.5121/ijnlc.2017.6401
5. Mudge, R. (2010). The Design of a Proofreading Software Service. Computational Linguistics, (June), 24–
32. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.030
6. Dodgson, A. N., Tariq, B., Alauyah, M., & Yusof, M. (2016). The Secondary School Students’ Usage of
English Learning Websites to Self-Correct Writing Errors. Asian TEFL, 1(11), 2503–2569.
http://doi.org/10.21462/asiantefl.v1i1.3
7. Qassemzadeh, A., & Soleimani, H. (2016). The Impact of Feedback Provision by Grammarly Software and
Teachers on Learning Passive Structures by Iranian EFL Learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies,
6(9), 1884. http://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0609.23

12
8. Cavaleri, M., & Dianati, S. (2016). You want me to check your grammar again? The usefulness of an online
grammar checker as perceived by students. Journal of Academic Language & Learning, 10(1), 223–236.
Retrieved from http://www.journal.aall.org.au/index.php/jall/article/viewFile/393/246
9. Regan, B. O., Mompean, A. R., Desmet, P., Leuven, U. C. L. K. U., & O’Regan, B. (2010). From spell,
grammar and style checkers to writing aids for English and French as a foreign language: challenges and
opportunities. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée, 15(2), 67–84.
10. Potter, R., & Fuller, D. (2008). My New Teaching Partner? Using the Grammar Checker in Writing
Instruction. The English Journal, 98(1), 36–41. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40503205.
11. Vernon, A. (2000). Computerized Grammar Checkers 2000: Capabilities, Limitations, and Pedagogical
Possibilities. Computers and Composition, 17(3), 329–349. http://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-4615(00)00038-4
12. Tesfaye, D. (2011). A rule-based Afan Oromo Grammar Checker. IJACSA - International Journal of
Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 2(8), 126–130. Retrieved from www.ijacsa.thesai.org
13. McAlexander, P. J. (2000). Checking the Grammar Checker : Integrating Grammar Instruction. Journal of
Basic Writing, 19(2), 124–140.

13