3. 6849-26020-1-CE.pmd EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Journal homepage: http://jurnal.unmer.ac.id/index.php/enjourme/index Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagementIntegrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagementIntegrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagementIntegrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagementIntegrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium usersthrough Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium usersthrough Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium usersthrough Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium usersthrough Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi NugrohoFajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi NugrohoFajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi NugrohoFajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi NugrohoFajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Jl. Lidah Wetan, 60231, Surabaya, Indonesia Corresponding author: fajriyah.20055@mhs.unes.ac.id ARTICLE INFO Received 02 December 2021 Accepted 29 April 2022 Available online 15 July 2022 Keywords: Self-directed learning, writing skill, Grammarly, premium users DOI: 10.26905/enjourme.v7i1.6849 How to cite this article (APA Style): Wardatin, F.N., Setiawan, S., Mustofa, A., & Nugroho, H.A. (2022). Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users. EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English, 7(1) 32-46, d o i : h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 2 6 9 0 5 / enjourme.v7i1.6580 ABSTRACT This present study sought to explore the writers’ perceptions toward the use of Grammarly. It also concerned the challenges they might face while utilizing the features provided by the system. The descriptive analysis was elaborated with supporting the statistic data from a 6-point Likert scale questionnaire, including the needs of Grammarly use in connection with its advantages and practicality, and also covered three dimensions of self-directed learning, such as self-management, moti- vation, and self-monitoring. The respondents were twenty-three male and female writers who have experienced subscribing as a premium users. To get a comprehen- sive investigation, the respondents were required to perceive their views in the form of short comments of open-ended questions. Although most writers viewed positive responses towards the use of Grammarly, two main problems faced during the use of Grammarly were covered on technical issues and unoptional usage of particular features. Interestingly, the writers also considered that the role of teach- ers could not be replaced despite all the growing technological sophistication and implementation of self-learning, which is currently becoming a relatively dominant need in terms of learning independently. EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No, 1, July 2022, Page 32–46 1. Introduction In this developing time, the rapid changes widely open almost in many aspects of life. One of the apparent enhancements can be seen in the education sphere. Currently, the field of education has experienced a lot of significant improvement; one of the most intense is the integration of technol- ogy-based learning methods. It is not only an aspiration of the development of the times but also the demands of the situation that must be implemented. In the English Language Teaching (ELT) con- text, the integration of technology-based learning has been widely developed, ranging from listening, ©2022 The Authors. Published by University of Merdeka Malang This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho | 33 | speaking, reading, and writing skills. This integration certainly makes it easier for students to improve each skill they want to enhance more freely. The ease obtained from the advanced technology will significantly impact students’ engagement in the learning process. This reasonably massive change is undoubtedly related to innovation in the context of teaching and learning procedures. It covers learning tools, instruments, and techniques of a relatively new method in current conditions. The digital learning environment is one of the implementations ap- plied in a particular scope of technological-based involvement. Wedell (2009) addressed four aspects that should be considered towards the innovation in ELT: (i) an in-depth analysis of the innovation environment is crucial, (ii) adoption in particular features is more likely to be effective in the innova- tion, (iii) the success of an innovation is determined by how it is executed, and (iv) innovation must be sufficiently systemic. It indicates that innovation in ELT puts an essential role in enhancing the quality of learning outcomes than hitherto. Related to innovation in this context, the ease of utilizing the tool is one of the innovation elements that must be underlined—the suited collaboration between sophisticated technology and the internet drive to be complete elements of online facilities. Moreover, the teaching and learning activities model is diverted into distance learning, requir- ing learners to engage with online methods. In Indonesia, online learning methods have been imple- mented as part of implementing emergency curricula during pandemic times. The government has carefully considered these alternatives that can be done optimally to continue the teaching and learn- ing process. Principally, the online learning model has more or less given personal opportunities to learn independently. In this context, self-directed learning has led the learners to improve motivation, self- regulation, personal responsibility, and autonomy (Brandt, 2020). Self-directed learning is one of the alternatives that is considered to be integrated into nowadays learning circumstances. It leads the learners to gain knowledge widely since it gives them a wide chance to explore. Moreover, the imple- mentation of self-directed learning contributes to the learning continuum that strongly correlates with 21st-century learners’ needs (Morris, 2019). It indicates that self-directed learning is vital to be integrated with today’s condition since it addresses the learners to be responsible for self-learning, progress, style, and evaluation (Khiat, 2017; Moradi, 2018). The implementation of self-learning and enhancement of technology unconsciously have sig- nificantly impacted the quality of learning engagement, such as writing skills. The sophisticated tech- nology has changed writing primarily (Crystal, 2011 as cited in Bush, 2020). Assignments in most current writing programs are frequently digital. A learning management system (LMS) will be used to publish a work, which will be completed on a computing device and then submitted online. Today’s learners are more technologically savvy than earlier generations (Lin et al., 2019, cited in Bush, 2020). The change is directly proportional to the rapid development of technology concerning the perfor- mance of writing skills. Many researchers agree that writing is essential to be engaged than other skills since it is meant to deliver ideas, thoughts, facts, and opinions easily and lucidly (Ramadhani et al., 2020; Tu, 2021). EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 34 | This present study examines an adequately new approach in utilizing technology to get auto- matic feedback on writing. The application is called ‘Grammarly,’ which provides some appropriate features needed by the writers. Using Grammarly directs the writers to avoid the fear of errors in writing. It allows the writers to explore freely to express what they want to write. Also, it exerts a significant influence on the writers’ improvement in grammar knowledge since it provides automatic corrections with some appropriate alternatives. Up to this point, Grammarly offers three versions of users: (i) free version, (ii) premium version, and (iii) business version. To some extent, it provides an entirely different feature to use. Some basic features, including punctuation, word spelling, and gram- mar, are provided for the free version. While the premium version has covered more exclusive fea- tures, such as correctness, clarity, engagement, delivery, deactivated suggestions, language style, and plagiarism detection. The business version covers the premium features with other advanced features, involving an admin panel, centralized billing, priority email support, single sign-on, and style guide (Barrot, 2020). Many researchers have been investigated thoroughly related to the use of Grammarly. It starts with Karyuatry et al. (2018), who aim to figure out the innovative and effective way to teach writing skills. Also, it is purposed to find out the effectiveness of using Grammarly related to the students’ improvement in composing descriptive writing. Toward their action research, it addresses that 32 out of 40 students passed the passing grade. It means that the use of Grammarly in teaching descriptive could have a significant influence on the students writing enhancement. Anoter study by Ghufron & Rosyida (2018) showed that the students who intensively use Grammarly in their works have a significant reduction in their error than the students whose work is evaluated manually by indirect corrective feedback through teachers. In addition, Nova (2018) agreed that Grammarly had provided proportional features to ease users composing their writing since it offered helpful colour-coded feedback with explanations and examples. It also provides a high rate of evaluation speed and facilitates users to access the account effortlessly. Thus, it indicates that Grammarly has adequately brought some benefits to writers in assisting their writing. Also, Ventayen and Ventayen (2018) explored the students’ perceptions of using Grammarly compared with non-Grammarly students. It shows that the students who have received direct feedback from Grammarly responded positively regarding the grammar advice and their satisfaction. These findings have slightly related to Zhang et al. (2020), who compared the use of Grammarly with face-to-face tutoring at the writing centre. It shows that participants prefer to use Grammarly concerning the practicality and the variety of opportunities rather than visiting the writ- ing centre. Dizon and Gayed (2021) compared Grammarly use with unassisted mobile writing regarding the students’ works. It covers grammatical accuracy, lexical richness, writing fluency, and syntactic complexity. Towards the descriptive statistics, the researchers show that students produced more lexi- cal variation and wrote fewer grammatical errors by using Grammarly on their writing assistance. Then, Fahmi and Cahyono (2021) designed the research qualitatively by formulating an appropriate questionnaire to examine the students’ perceptions of the use of Grammarly. The research findings suggest that the students perceived positively in utilizing Grammarly and teacher feedback. Further- Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho | 35 | more, compared with their English proficiency level, it shows that the students do not correlate with the utilization of Grammarly in composing their works. Considering several studies that conduct a similar interest in researching Grammarly, this study focuses on the perception of the writers who have subscribed as Grammarly premium users. In addi- tion, it aims to determine the extent of users’ engagement in composing their writing since it offers more exclusive features provided by the application. Therefore, this study further investigates the writers’ engagement as premium users, linked with the integration of self-directed learning. Furthermore, this study is conducted to answer the ques- tions: (i) how do the writers perceive the use of Grammarly in facilitating their engagement concern- ing self-directed learning? (ii) what challenges are faced by the writers during the use of Grammarly based on their own experience? Self-directed Learning Referring to the concept of self-learning, one of the focus outcomes of the learner is to create individuals who have high motivation in learning. On the basic concepts of andragogy theory, Knowles (1975) maps the process of self-directed learning based on individual abilities in 5 (five) components, namely initiatives with or without the help of others, formulating learning goals, identifying learning needs, selecting and implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning outcomes (ditto). In substance, self-learning provides breadth and independence to each individual in choosing what suits learning needs (Francis, 2017; Mahlaba, 2020). Self-learning represents an individual, targeted, and developing learning concept Morris, (2019), which is not only a short-term but rela- tively self-directed continuum (Brandt, 2020). There are at least 4 (four) dimensions in the scaffold- ing of self-learning, namely self-regulation, motivation, individual responsibility, and learning au- tonomy (ditto). In the context of self-directed learning, autonomy becomes one of the essential scaffoldings to be covered. It is because of the integrating technology and self-directed learning strongly correlates with learner independence, which leads learners to have vast opportunities to gain knowledge in their particular space or pace (Bosch & Goede, 2019; Mentz et al.; Silamut & Petsangsri, 2020). In this case, Jiao (2005) offers four compelling arguments in favour of English learners autonomy: (i) it boosts the learner’s motivation and makes learning more efficient, (ii) it gives learners additional possibilities to communicate in English in a non-native setting, (iii) it meets the unique needs of students at all levels, and (iv) it has a long-term impact. From the same perspective, Chan (2001) portrayed the responsibility towards the autonomous learners, such as setting learning objectives, identifying and implementing learning techniques to meet those objectives, creating learning strate- gies, evaluating one’s development, reflecting on learning, locating and selecting appropriate resources. Some researchers agreed that self-directed learning could be applied effectively with technology integration concerning enhancing writing skills (Bosch & Goede, 2019; Ramadhani et al., 2020). In line with this regard, writing puts its position as a crucial skill that an individual can process (O’Neill EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 36 | & Russell, 2019; Bush, 2020). It is because writing enables the permanent recording of experiences. It also allows the writers to reflect on their experiences and hash out their thoughts and feelings without the strain of face-to-face dialogue (Wells, 1981 cited by Schwienhorst, 2012). Through technology integration, writing skills are leading to a more digital direction with the convenience offered. Princi- pally, in the context of language instruction, self-learning and technology have a potentially intimate relationship (Lee et al.; Smith, 2017; Ko, 2018). In line with this regard, Garrison (1997) promoted one of the self-directed learning models, which involve three overlapping dimensions. Moreover, in the case of self-learning, those dimensions are firmly connected, which is concurrently considering the others. Garrison tied the term self-man- agement with the behavioural implementation of learning intention. This element is concerned with the performance of learning objectives and the management of learning materials and assistance. Furthermore, self-monitoring, in this case, has a strong correlation with the responsibility to con- struct meaning. It indicates that self-monitoring is linked with the external management of learning tasks and activities. It might be characterized as updating or adding to existing knowledge structures and enhancing them. At the same time, motivation plays an essential role in maintaining efforts to learn and initiating cognitive goal achievements. Also, it creates to portray the measurement of constructive self-directed learning implementation. Table 1 presents the dimention of self-directed learning. Figure 1. Dimension of Self-directed Learning Writing Technology Tools Over the conventional writing environment, web-based writing has more promising to increase writers’ engagement in completing their works (many researchers). In connection with this regard, Lin (1997 cited in Karyuatri et al., 2018) highlighted five fundamental advantages which can be opti- mized in integrating a web-based environment, comprises (i) allowing students to peer review and learn from one another, (ii) allowing students to provide and receive feedback, (iii) allowing students to publish their work, (iv) providing a decent editing environment for students, and (v) creating a Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho learning environment. Furthermore, regarding the recent technology advancement, several digital tools emerged in providing computer-mediated corrective feedback since grammar’s critical role in enhancing students’ writing ability has been deniable. One of the tools is Grammarly, which identifies errors in grammar, language style, mechanics, and vocabulary (Barrot, 2020) Grammarly Inc. is the corporation that owns the application. The software automatically detected possible errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, word choice, and writing style. It is an online tool that allows users to upload a document or file, automatically detects text mistakes, and suggests possible fixes. It has been commercially accessible since 2009, and it is software created by Alex Shevchenko and Max Lytvyn (Ventayen & Ventayen, 2018; Bailey & Lee; Pratama, 2020). Grammarly premium is a paid upgrade that includes over 400 different checks and capabilities, such as checking for grammatical problems, suggesting vocabulary enhancements, detecting plagiarism, and suggesting citations. It is the ultimate tool for ensuring that users can compose their writing on the internet to be engaging, precise, and easy to read (Grammarly, 2020) Current empirical findings support the utility of Grammarly as a language learning aid. Accord- ing to O’Neill and Russell (2019), Grammarly provided good grammatical guidance in various learning environments, whether they involved foreign or local students or were utilized online or face-to-face. In addition, Grammarly increased participants’ cognitive and metacognitive functions through noticing (Koltovskaia, 2020). She further said that it might be a good writing resource, especially when learners are engaging. For that reason, Barrot (2020) agreed that Grammarly’s annotations enable students to engage in meaningful self-directed learning, receive personalized guidance, and practice grammar indi- vidually or collaboratively, face to face or remotely without human interaction. 2. Method This research was designed as suited as descriptive statistics analysis (covered mean and stan- dard deviation), including twenty-three premium users volunteer. The questionnaire was given in the form of a 6-point Likert scale that covered six significant aspects of statements beginning from strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), slightly disagree (3), slightly agree (4), agree (5), and strongly agree (6). This technique was selected to avoid neutral responses to get more targeted results (Bush, 2020). In addi- tion, the researcher also provides open-ended questions at the end of the central section to strengthen students’ perceptions. In the process of collecting the data, there are two stages to be completed. At the first stage, the personal participants’ information such as gender, age, and use of Grammarly was covered in participants’ demography. Then, the participants were required to respond to all state- ments from the provided questionnaire. The research instrument was modified from O’Neill and Russell (2019) and Bush (2020) in this study. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Results The results obtained from the questionnaire analysis explore writers’ perceptions of using Grammarly as automated written corrective feedback. To recognize writers’ engagement toward using | 37 | EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 38 | the written corrective application, they were questioned to determine their degree of agreement or disagreement with several particular statements about the benefits of optimizing the application as their writing assistance. The views of their challenges are also provided in thorough elaboration. Figure 2. The extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of need for Grammarly use Figure 2 presents the summary on the question the level of need for Grammarly use. The provided statistic shows that premium users dominantly perceived positive responses toward the usage of Grammarly. More than 82% agreed that the offered automated written corrective feedback benefits their writing process. Also, it relates to the subsequent statement that 52% of users examined the advantages of corrective feedback. They agreed that their writing composition could be adequately organized. Another significant benefit gained by the users is the detailed corrections recommended by the system. Almost 50% of users qualified to gain such corrective feedback by focusing on their main errors. It brings them to keep the focus on accomplishing the writing engagement. Those beneficial aspects can be optimally gained since it provides the apparent correct recommendation, getting the users to complete the writing undoubtfully. Approaching 50% of favourable agreements from users, the appropriate suggestions offered by the system addresses them to enrich their grammar knowledge on doing their writing. The expansion of various responses toward the need for Grammarly use are elaborated as follows: It is beneficial to justify grammar in my writing because I have not been able to correct myself (W2) Easier to apply than manually, easier to understand, and faster (W4) Very helpful in practicing any corrected errors (W10) Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho | 39 | Its advantages are easy to use, easy to improve writing not only on the web but integrated with other apps (W11) Get feedback, vocabulary choices, coherence, so forth (W12) Autocorrect and fast, so I can immediately reevaluate the writing (W20) It can correct English sentence writing well, and there is a plagiarism check feature as well (W22) Figure 3. The extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of practicality for Grammarly use Figure 3 depicts the summary on the extent of which the writers agree or disagree with the level of practicality for Grammarly use. The comprehensive responses stated in the Figure 3 are adequately present the positive outcome towards the use of Grammarly. Approximately 70% of users thought that it was effortless to use. It was because the system has appropriately functioned while assisting their writing accomplishment (52%). The dominant positive responses are also given toward the statement of user autonomy represented in the third statement. It is stated that the users did not need a technical person to help them as guidance (57%). It addresses that the users masterly use the system well and independently. Other positive responses were referred to user improvement regarding their complementary assistance (39%). It showed that the directed corrective feedback recommended by the system puts an essential role in enhancing the users writing engagement (48%). It brings a slightly similar response toward the linked statements provided in the chart. The following comments are gained from the respondents’ answers to the open-ended questionnaire. EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 40 | It is adequately practical, because it is easy and it is not challenging to use it (W1) There is no need to use proofreading services to get started (W4) It is very practical because it is easy to use, easy to install, and also easy to integrate with other applications (W11) It is easy to use in improving writing quickly (W13) Practical. Can automatically adjust to the opened web (W19) The toolbar provided is also complete and precise; also, the language given to correct is very easy to understand (W21) Grammarly helps me improve grammar and improper use of vocabulary (W22) Figure 4. The extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of self-management for Grammarly use Figure 4 describes on the extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of self- management for Grammarly use. The data shows that users dominantly prefer to state their agree- ment toward the featured offered by the system, such as highlighting some errors, giving alternative word choices, so forth (39-43%). Also, 39% of users thought positively toward the statement of capability on understanding the main feedback given by the system. Then, the following views were negatively perceived by the users concerning the technical problems. There are 26% of users disagreed with that statement. It indicates that the users are not significantly distracted by technical issues. At the same time, over 48% of users perceived negative responses toward the inability to catch how the features work. It shows that the users have adequately optimized the appropriate components. How- ever, 30% of users disagreed with the statement of the possibility of rechecking their writing in ac- complishing their writing. It signifies that they do some self-corrections after using Grammarly. The following responses will support it: Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho | 41 | It is needed for academic activities (W4) Correction recommendations are pretty clear (W6) It takes a lot of time and energy when I learn writing conventionally, so Grammarly this is an effective and efficient way to overcome these obstacles (W11) There are feature updates to adjust I needs (W12) It is quite effective to support good writing (W13) Grammarly can help correct the writing, give the author of frequent mistakes, and be more careful in writing (W22) It provides feedback directly without waiting long, and we can do it ourselves (W23) Figure 5. The extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of motivation for Grammarly use Figure 5 shows the extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of motivation for Grammarly use. Improving the users’ motivation of using Grammarly is portrayed in the apparent presenting data above. The dominant responses are given to the statement of their significant en- hancement of organizing the writing skills. Up to 44% of users perceived positively toward this view. Moreover, more than 56% of users perceived improving their writing quality since it offers some pivotal complementary writing assistance. Furthermore, Grammarly guarantees the users’ engage- ment for a short-term and a long-term period (44%). It was because the users were comprehensively gained the appropriate qualification for how to compose good writing. 48% of users also strongly agreed that it could enhance their confidence for the long term. However, 35% of users also believed that manual correction plays a significant role in revising errors effectively. It proves by these answers: EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 42 | Confident and helpful (W4) I feel more confident because I believe in Grammarly correction and recommendation (W11) Honestly, I feel more confident because the process of writing becomes faster (W16) I am glad to be able to improve my writing ranging from grammar, typos to punctuation. With this, I also feel more confident in my writing (W22) I feel more confident in my writing organization (W23) Figure 6. The extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of self-monitoring for Grammarly use Figure 6 presents the extent to which the writers agree or disagree with the level of self-moni- toring for Grammarly use. The data shows that dominantly the users are adequately satisfied with the system offered in Grammarly. The percentage proves that 45% of users have been satisfied since it supports some appropriate grammar recommendations. Therefore, it brings them to qualify for a better result. In line with the previous views, the users perceive a strongly positive attitude (48%) toward the Grammarly guidance. Then, approximately 35% of users believed that they enjoy auto- mated written corrective feedback provided through Grammarly. In the case of taking time while doing the writing, the data shows that the users perceived a similar dominant category, such as dis- agree and agree. Therefore, it indicates that the users take their particular perception on spending time concerning Grammarly used. Then, in the last statement, they decided to say that Grammarly made them more confident in the results of the writings they made (57%). I am quite satisfied (W2) I am satisfied (W6) I only use Grammarly and am pretty satisfied ………….(W22) I use it the only one. It’s quite satisfied (W23) Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho 3.2. Discussion The research findings in this study were constant with the results of various studies (Ghufron & Rosyida; Karyuatri et al.; Nova; Ventayen & Orlanda-Ventayen, 2018) in connection with the users’ enhancement of using Grammarly as their writing assistance. The researcher asserted that Grammarly is a reasonably reliable system for adequate writing guidance (O’Neill & Russell, 2019; Bailey & Lee, 2020). The result of this study revealed that dominantly, Grammarly premium users perceived five advantages highlighted toward the use of Grammarly, including their needs, the prac- tical system, self-management, motivation, and self-monitoring. As the vital concept of implement- ing self-directed learning on this digital integration, this study was attempted to link the connectivity of autonomous learners. Regarding the writers’ engagement in writing, Grammarly successfully served them in a de- cent guidance system. Barrot (2020) argued that Grammarly could be a powerful tool connected to the recent technological investment in writing. Their needs and the practical approach cover two vivid advantages gained by the writers. First, the optimistic view of its offered features was repre- sented in several elements: engagement, delivery, clarity, correctness, auto-correction, and recommen- dation. Moreover, those features were completed with the support of a plagiarism checker. Second, the commanding positive responses were concerning the practical system. It covered several reasons, such as independence, time efficiency, ease of access, and understanding of feedback. Furthermore, concerning the self-directed learning model, this study has a dependable re- search framework with the result of Morris (2019), who asserted that self-directed learning is posi- tioned as a vital skill for people living in today’s environment when social context conditions are continually changing. Three aspects of self-directed learning have been perceived positively toward the users’ responses, including self-management, motivation, and self-monitoring. It was connected with the findings of Moradi (2018), who highlighted the main features of self-directed learning and technology relation. The dominant reactions show that the users are adequate to access their learning needs with the appropriate system support. It aligns with Garrison’s (1997) dimensions of self-man- agement, which was concerned with implementing learning goals and managing learning resources to support their learning objective independently. The motivation dimension scaffolded in Garrison’s (1997) model was portrayed in this study’s result. Dominantly, they perceived that using Grammarly motivates them to compose a better writing composition. It also has a strong correlation with the frameworks of Brandt (2020), who declared that motivation in self-directed learning is the desire to engage in the activity without any coercion that appears from the inherent enjoyment. Furthermore, the last dimension of self-directed learning, self-monitoring, is mainly connected with constructing personal meaning and awareness (Garrison, 1997). The provided data showed that predominantly the users were aware of their self-learning advantages gained from the system, such as confidence, satisfaction, and enchantment. However, apart from those positive responses on Grammarly use in this study, the users faced challenges. Two main obstacles were covered in technical problems and essential features. In the case of technical issues, unstable internet connections, error accounts, and trouble applications are the main factors included. It proved by the users’ responses, such as “it is just a technical issue, sometimes | 43 | EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 44 | it can not be used and must reinstall the application” “heavy applications loaded in laptops and Ms word”, “accounts that frequently errors” “lousy internet networks”. Other problems faced by the users were concerned with the features, including unsuited auto-correction, inconsistent feedback, and blank recommendation. Again, it showed on these responses, such as “when I split tricky sen- tences, sometimes Grammarly does not provide the suggestions. So we have to think hard about how he became a simple sentence”, “connections and feedback changes make me uncomfortable”, “some- times Grammarly has identified the number of errors in writing, but the correction column is blank”, “when auto-correction is on, it’s very annoying”. It indicates that not all offered facilities in this system are accepted well by the users. Interestingly, Grammarly users assumed that the sophisticated integration of technology with self-learning implementation could not replace a writing teacher’s role as connectivity to self-learning. They agreed that sophisticated media and technology could not replace teachers in particular ways. For example, perceiving their responses by stating, “I can’t entirely agree if Grammarly can replace teachers since they can give a more comprehensive elaboration of the situation using words and sentences”, “nothing can replace teachers in every aspect”, “the role of teachers is vital in teaching and learning activities, especially in providing affection and motivation to students about reasonable writing procedures”, “although Grammarly helps improve writing auto- matically, the teacher’s role is also significant in explaining errors in the essay”, “oral feedback given from the teacher or the lecturer has not been replaced”. They perceived that writing teachers play a pivotal role in enriching their comprehensive knowledge toward the profound elaboration and expla- nation in an accessible way. 4. Conclusion In brief, integrating advanced technology in self-learning plays a pivotal role in improving the quality of writers’ engagement concerned with the final writing version. This regard is closely related to the development obtained while enhancing their writing with their desired results. Further- more, this study proved that the use of Grammarly can promote the writers’ autonomy in monitoring their learning goals and engagements. It indicates that integrating the technological environment and implementing self-learning is strongly linked to nowadays learning needs. However, apart from as- pects that result from the interrelationship of these two things, the role of a teacher remains essential in stimulating the development, improvement, and motivation needed for a particular occasion that cannot be exclusively gained from others. This study demonstrated that integrating self-directed learning is becoming more targeted at facilitating writers’ engagement because the role of teachers will become more accessible in providing a milder correction. It can also be obtained with a lot of convenience and preoccupation for writers without fear of grammar. To that end, learning English, especially writing skills, would be more exciting and challenging because it can make the writing more comprehensive works with the help of Grammarly. Furthermore, researchers who have a similar interest in doing the research investigation are proposed to enrich the research instrument, research design, and research demographic to gain comprehensive and various research findings. Integrating self-directed learning in facilitating writers engagement through Grammarly: Exploring the perceptions of premium users Fajriyah Novi Wardatin, Slamet Setiawan, Ali Mustofa, Him’mawan Adi Nugroho | 45 | 5. 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), 4–27. Barrot, J. S. (2020). Integrating technology into ESL/EFL Writing through Grammarly. RELC Journal, 1– 5. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220966632 Bhandari, B., Chopra, D., & Singh, K. (2020). Self-directed learning: Assessment of students’ abilities and their perspective. Advances in Physiology Education, 44(3), 383–386. https://doi.org/10.1152/ADVAN.00010.2020 Bosch, C., & Goede, R. (2019). Self-directed learning: A conceptual overview (Vol. 1). https://doi.org/10.4102/aosis.2019.bk134.01 Brandt, W. (2020). Measuring student success skills: A review of the literature on Self-directed Learning. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment. Bush, J. C. (2020). Using screencasting to give feedback for academic writing. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15(5), 473–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2020.1840571 Chan, V. (2001). Readiness for learner autonomy: What do our learners tell us?. Teaching in higher education, 6(4), 505-518. Dizon, G., & Gayed, J. M. (2021). Examining the impact of Grammarly on the quality of mobile L2 Writing. JALT CALL Journal, 17(2), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.29140/JALTCALL.V17N2.336 Fahmi, M. A., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849 Francis, H. (2017). The role of technology in self-directed learning. December. Garrison, D. R. (2014). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quar- terly, 48(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171369704800103 Ghufron, M. A., & Rosyida, F. (2018). The role of Grammarly in assessing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Writing. Lingua Cultura, 12(4), 395. https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v12i4.4582 Grammarly. (2020). FAQ | Grammar check. Retrieved from https://www.grammarly.com/grammar-check Jiao, L. J. (2005). Promoting EFL learner autonomy. Sino-US English Teaching, 2(5), 27-30. Karyuatri, L., Rizqan, M.., & Darayani, N.. (2018). Grammarly as a tool to improve students’ Writing quality: Free online-proofreader across the boundaries. JSSH (Jurnal Sains Sosial Dan Humaniora), 2(1), 83. https://doi.org/10.30595/jssh.v2i1.2297 Khiat, H. (2017). Academic performance and the practice of self-directed learning: The adult student perspective. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 41(1), 44–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2015.1062849 Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Follet Publishing Com- pany Chicago. Ko, H. (2018). Self-directed learning and English proficiency by Korean learners. English Teaching, 73(1), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.73.1.201803.49 EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English Vol. 7, No. 1, July 2022, pp. 32–46 | 46 | Koltovskaia, S. (2020). Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) pro- vided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 44(September 2019), 100450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450 Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Ip, T. (2017). University English language learners’ readiness to use computer technology for self-directed learning. System, 67, 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.05.001 Mahlaba, S. C. (2020). Reasons why self-directed learning is important in South African during the COVID-19 pandemic. South African Journal of Higher Education, 34(6), 120–136. https://doi.org/10.20853/34-6-4192 Mentz, E., Bailey, R., Bosch, C., Breed, B., Bunt, B. J., Chigona, W., De Beer, J., de Lange, M., du Toit-Brits, C., Geduld, B., Grosser, M., Jagals, D., Laubscher, D., Mdakane, M., Petersen, N., Sekano, K. G., Uys, W. F., van Zyl, S., & Verster, M. (2020). Self-directed learning research and its impact on educational practicenull (Vol. 3). https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/48739/1/9781928523451.pdf Moradi, H. (2018). Self-directed learning in language teaching-learning processes. 8(2007), 59–64. Morris, T. H. (2019). Self-directed learning: A fundamental competence in a rapidly changing world. International Review of Education, 65(4), 633–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-019-09793-2 Nova, M. (2018). Utilizing Grammarly in evaluating academic Writing: A narrative research on EFL students’ experience. Premise: Journal of English Education, 7(1), 80. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v7i1.1332 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 Pratama, Y. D. (2020). The investigation of using Grammarly as online Grammar checker in the process of Writing. English Ideas: Journal of English Language Education, 1(1), 46–54. Ramadhani, Y. R., Safriyani, R., Siregar, R. K., Tambunan, E. E., & Harputra, Y. (2020). Investigating the influence of self-directed E-learning toward students’ academic Writing ability. 434(Iconelt 2019), 143–147. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200427.029 Schwienhorst, K. (2012). Learner autonomy and CALL environments. Routledge. Silamut, A. acha, & Petsangsri, S. (2020). Self-directed learning with knowledge management model to enhance digital literacy abilities. Education and Information Technologies, 25(6), 4797–4815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10187-3 Smith, K. (2017). Teachers as self-directed learners: Active positioning through professional learning. In Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices. Tu, I. J. (2021). Developing self-directed learning strategies through creative writing: Three case studies of snowball writing practice in a college Chinese language classroom. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41(April), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100837 Ventayen, R. J. M., & Orlanda-Ventayen, C. C. (2018). Graduate students’ perspective on the usability of Grammarly® in one ASEAN state university. Asian ESP Journal, 14(7), 9–30. Wedell, M. (2009). Innvation in ELT. ELT Journal, 63(4), 397–399. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp053 Zhang, J., Ozer, H.., & Bayazeed, R. (2020). Grammarly Vs face-to-face tutoring at the Writing center: ESL students writers’ perceptions. 17(2). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/8523