Writing for a Grade: Verbosity, Confidence, and Fluency in a Korean University EFL Classroom

Writing for a Grade: Verbosity, Confidence, and Fluency in a Korean University EFL Classroom

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between text length and perceived confidence, fluency, and investment in English writing among first-year EFL students at a South Korean university. Drawing from end-of-semester self-assessment essays in an English for Specific Purposes (ESP) course, we explore whether verbosity correlates with confidence in requesting high grades, and whether longer essays reflect greater fluency or investment. Using word count as a preliminary proxy, we found that verbosity does not consistently align with confidence or linguistic sophistication. This study contributes to discussions about learner identity in EFL writing and cautions against surface-level assumptions about textual performance, especially in the context of increased AI-assisted writing.

Keywords: EFL writing assessment; Cultural deference; Verbosity; Self-advocacy; Korean university students

By Maria Lisak EdD (How to cite this) With over 30 years of EFL experience, Maria Lisak, EdD works at Chosun University, where she teaches social entrepreneurship in English using experiential learning and sociocultural approaches. Her work integrates constructivist and emancipatory frameworks, with research focusing on funds of knowledge, Gwangju as Method, and social justice education. She also designs educational technologies and materials for diverse ESP contexts, linking classroom practice with community needs. Her current interests include literacy, culture, and language education, and participatory frameworks for teacher wellbeing. Her interdisciplinary work invites reflection on multimodal pedagogies, material making, and context-driven innovation in borderland spaces.

Introduction

Picture this: You're grading a stack of self-assessment essays where students justify the grades they believe they deserve. Student A writes 75 crisp words confidently requesting an A+. Student B submits 412 words of apologetic hedging, ultimately asking for "maybe a B, but not too high." Which student would you assume is more confident? More invested in their learning? More fluent in English?

If you guessed Student A, you'd be right—but that intuition runs counter to how we often interpret student writing. In classrooms where we encourage reflection, teachers frequently rely on written expression as evidence of engagement, competence, and confidence. We see a long, detailed response and think: This student really cares. They're putting in effort. They must be confident in their abilities.

But what if length and fluency aren't reliable proxies for those qualities—especially in EFL contexts where learners navigate complex cultural expectations about formality, deference, and appropriate academic tone?

This paper challenges the assumption that verbosity equals confidence, fluency, or investment through data from grade justification essays written by Korean university students. The findings reveal how cultural context complicates our interpretations of student writing and offer practical guidance for EFL educators trying to assess authentic student voice in an era of AI-assisted writing.

The Cultural Context of Academic Writing

In Korean university settings, student writing is deeply influenced by Confucian values emphasizing respect for authority, humility, and the demonstration of effort over results (Yum, 1987; Robinson, 2003). When students write to their professors—particularly in English—they must navigate not only linguistic challenges but cultural expectations about appropriate academic discourse.

This creates a fascinating tension (Lee, 2021; Kim,2017). Western academic writing often rewards directness, critical thinking, and confident argumentation. Korean academic culture, however, values deference, modesty, and careful attention to hierarchical relationships. When Korean students write in English, they're essentially code-switching between two sets of cultural and linguistic expectations.

This study examines three interconnected concepts through this cultural lens:

Confidence - students' academic self-efficacy in second language writing, particularly how assertively they advocate for themselves in grade requests (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 2003).

Fluency - not merely quantity of language produced, but quality of lexical choices and syntactic structures that demonstrate communicative competence (Ellis, 2003; Skehan, 2009).

Investment - the sociocultural and emotional stakes learners attach to their language use and identity construction (Norton, 2000; Ushioda, 2011).

What the Research Says (and Doesn't Say)

Previous research has established word count as a common proxy for writing fluency (Lu, 2012), while other studies suggest that verbosity might actually signal anxiety, repetition, or strategic padding rather than genuine competence (Ortega, 2003). Measures like lexical diversity and syntactic complexity have emerged as stronger indicators of L2 proficiency (Lu, 2011; Malvern et al., 2004).

However, few studies connect these linguistic features to student confidence or investment, particularly in reflective genres like self-assessment. Even fewer examine how cultural context shapes the relationship between verbosity and confidence in EFL writing.

This gap matters because teachers make consequential decisions based on their interpretations of student writing. If we misread cultural deference as lack of confidence, or mistake anxious padding for engaged investment, we may inadvertently reinforce inequitable assessment practices.

The Study: Grade Appeals as Windows into Student Identity

Participants and Context

The data comes from 75 first-year students in an ESP course for welfare administration majors at a Korean university. These students were learning disciplinary English with a non-Korean instructor who had over a decade of experience in Korean higher education—crucial context for understanding the cultural dynamics at play.

The Task

At semester's end, students wrote five-paragraph essays justifying their desired grades. The prompt asked them to provide specific examples from their participation, assignments, and growth throughout the course. This genre—the grade appeal—creates a unique rhetorical situation where students must advocate for themselves while maintaining appropriate respect for instructor authority.

Analysis Approach

Rather than relying solely on statistical correlations, this study takes a narrative approach to understanding the data. Word and character counts were calculated for each essay, then high and low word count responses were examined qualitatively for patterns in tone, structure, and argumentation strategies. Grade requests were coded (A/A+, B/B+, or lower) and analyzed for alignment with essay length and rhetorical approach.

Findings: When More Words Mean Less Confidence

The Range of Expression

Student essays ranged dramatically in length—from 75 to 463 words, with character counts spanning 417 to 2,787. This variation alone suggests that students approached the task with very different strategies and comfort levels.

The Short and Assertive

Consider this 75-word essay that directly requested an A+:

"I hope to get an A+ grade. I performed the tasks, wrote the blog every week, and presented well."

The student then provided specific examples in equally concise language. Despite its brevity, this essay demonstrated remarkable confidence—the student made a clear request, supported it with concrete evidence, and showed no hedging or apologetic language. The writing was well-organized and purposeful, suggesting that conciseness reflected strategic communication rather than limited English ability or low investment.

The Long and Hesitant

In stark contrast, consider this excerpt from a 412-word essay:

"I always tried hard, even when the work was difficult. I know that sometimes my English is not perfect, but I think that I should get a good grade, although not too high. I am sorry if I made mistakes."

This pattern continued throughout the essay—extensive hedging, repeated apologies, emphasis on effort over achievement, and ultimate reluctance to specify a desired grade. The length came not from detailed evidence or sophisticated argumentation, but from cultural performance of humility and anxiety about appearing presumptuous.

Linguistic Patterns

Analysis of lexical and syntactic features revealed that longer essays often contained:

• Significant repetition of ideas and phrases

• Lower lexical diversity despite higher word counts

• Fewer complex syntactic structures

• Extensive use of hedging language and apologies

Meanwhile, shorter essays frequently demonstrated:

• More precise vocabulary choices

• Clear use of modal verbs ("I should," "I deserve")

• Direct argumentation without excessive padding

• Confidence in making specific grade requests

Understanding the Cultural Performance

These patterns reflect the complex cultural work Korean students perform when writing in English to authority figures. The lengthy, hesitant essays weren't necessarily products of limited English proficiency—they were carefully constructed performances of appropriate academic deference.

Korean students learn early that direct self-advocacy can appear disrespectful, particularly in academic contexts. The cultural concept of nunchi—social awareness and sensitivity to others' feelings—influences how students present themselves in writing. A student who writes "I deserve an A+" might worry about appearing arrogant or disrespectful, even when their work genuinely merits that grade.

This creates a paradox for EFL teachers: the students who need the most encouragement to advocate for themselves may be those whose cultural backgrounds make such advocacy feel inappropriate or uncomfortable. Meanwhile, students who write confidently and concisely may be demonstrating not just English proficiency, but cultural code-switching abilities.

Implications for the AI Era

These findings take on new significance as AI writing tools become ubiquitous in educational settings. Teachers increasingly scrutinize long, polished student writing for signs of artificial assistance. However, this research suggests that authentic student verbosity—particularly from EFL learners—has distinctive characteristics:

• Messiness over polish: Real student writing shows repetition, anxiety, and cultural code-switching rather than smooth sophistication

• Emotional labor: Authentic lengthy writing often contains extensive hedging, apologies, and cultural performance rather than pure content

• Cultural patterns: Extended writing may reflect deference rather than confidence, challenging assumptions about AI detection

Understanding these patterns helps teachers distinguish between authentic student voice and AI assistance while avoiding cultural bias in assessment.

Practical Recommendations: A Framework for EFL Educators

Based on these findings, here's a practical rubric for interpreting word count and verbosity in EFL student writing:

Confidence Assessment Framework

High Confidence Indicators (regardless of length):

• Clear, specific grade requests or goals

• Direct argumentation with concrete evidence

• Minimal hedging or apologetic language

• Strategic use of modal verbs

• Organized structure with purposeful examples

Cultural Deference Patterns (often appear as low confidence):

• Extensive hedging and qualification

• Emphasis on effort over achievement

• Apologetic language and self-deprecation

• Reluctance to make specific requests

• Length driven by cultural performance rather than content

Low Investment/Engagement Indicators:

• Generic examples without specificity

• Repetitive content without development

• Lack of personal reflection or growth narrative

• Minimal connection between examples and claims

Assessment Strategies

1. Look beyond word count: Evaluate the purposefulness of length rather than length itself

2. Recognize cultural code-switching: Understand that deference may mask confidence

3. Value strategic concision: Don't penalize students who communicate efficiently

4. Provide explicit instruction: Teach students about appropriate academic advocacy in different cultural contexts

5. Differentiate feedback: Address both linguistic development and cultural navigation skills

Conclusion

Word count alone tells us remarkably little about student confidence, fluency, or investment. In EFL contexts, cultural factors profoundly shape how students express themselves in writing, often in ways that contradict Western academic expectations.

For educators, this research offers both a caution and an opportunity. The caution: our intuitive interpretations of student writing may reflect our own cultural biases rather than student realities. The opportunity: by developing more nuanced frameworks for understanding student expression, we can better support learners as they navigate complex linguistic and cultural demands.

As AI tools reshape writing pedagogy, understanding authentic student voice becomes even more critical. The messy, anxious, culturally complex nature of real student writing—with all its hesitations and cultural performances—offers a baseline for recognizing genuine learning and growth.

The Korean students who wrote confidently in 75 words and those who hedged anxiously across 400 words were both demonstrating important competencies. Our job as educators is to recognize, value, and nurture both types of expression while helping students develop the cultural and linguistic flexibility to succeed in diverse academic contexts.

References

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

Kim, E. Y. J. (2017). Academic writing in Korea: Its dynamic landscape and implications for intercultural rhetoric. TESL-EJ, 21(3).

Lee, M. (2021). Effects of culture on L2 writing: A case study of Korean university students. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 59-85. https://doi.org/10.25256/PAAL.25.2.4

Lu, X. (2011). A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers' language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 36-62.

Lu, X. (2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners' oral narratives. Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 190-208.

Malvern, D., Richards, B., Chipere, N., & Durán, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development. Palgrave Macmillan.

Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. Longman.

Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518.

Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158.

Robinson, J. (2003). Communication in Korea: playing things by eye. Intercultural Communication: A Reader. 57-64.

Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532.

Ushioda, E. (2011). Language learning motivation, self and identity: Current theoretical perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(3), 199-210.

Yum, J. (1987). Korean philosophy and communication. Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspectives. San Diego, Academic Press.