Speaker
Abstract section 3: Content/method
Two intact EFL writing classes completed a series of 5-minute writing tasks based on weekly topics. Group A (n = 30) received AI feedback, while Group B (n = 30) received teacher feedback. Feedback targeted content only, rather than form. Students participated in group discussions on the topic, and resubmitted revised responses, which were evaluated by two independent raters. Finally, student questionnaires measured the perceived value of the AI and teacher feedback in the task.
Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions
Given the literature, it was hypothesized that:
1. English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students in Japan would perceive AI feedback as more valuable than teacher feedback when engaged in a year-long series of iterative short writing tasks.
2. EFL students in Japan who received AI feedback on a year-long series of iterative short writing tasks would receive significantly higher writing performance scores than students who received teacher feedback.
Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results
In line with the findings by Xu and Wang (2022), results indicated that students valued AI feedback more highly than teacher feedback. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of the questionnaire. Additionally, results indicated that students in the AI feedback group achieved significantly higher performance scores in their writing tasks than the teacher-feedback group. No significant differences were found between the two raters. The findings suggest that students not only recognize that AI feedback can effectively support meaning-focused writing tasks, but also benefit from it, in terms of enhancing writing proficiency (Mekheimer, 2025).
Abstract section 1: Relevance
Journal writing tasks in language learning are often used as low-pressure tools to improve fluency, vocabulary, and grammar (Yilmaz & Tunay, 2024). They can also function as meaning-focused tasks when learners prioritize idea expression to amplify their voices and perspectives (Shintani & Aubrey, 2020). While feedback is typically provided by the teacher, AI can also serve as an effective tool in improving students’ performance in aspects of language learning, such as iterative writing tasks (Li, 2021; Xu & Wang, 2022). This study informs emerging AI-integrated classroom practice and adds to the research on technology-mediated written feedback.
Abstract section 5: References
Li, Z. (2021). Automated writing evaluation and second language writing: Theoretical perspectives and empirical research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100825
Mekheimer, M. (2025). Generative AI-assisted feedback and EFL writing: A study on proficiency, revision frequency and writing quality. Discover Education, 4, 170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00602-7
Shintani, N., & Aubrey, S. (2020). Effects of feedback type on EFL learners’ grammar development in meaning-focused writing tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 54(3), 689–715. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.552
Xu, Y., & Wang, X. (2022). Learners’ perceptions of AI-based feedback in English academic writing: Comparisons with teacher feedback. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(7), 1487–1509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.2013567
Yilmaz, D., & Tunay, H. (2024). EFL learners’ reflective journal writing and its effects on writing fluency, vocabulary use, and grammatical accuracy. TESOL Journal, 15(1), 58–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.7345
| Title | The Role of AI Feedback in Writing Tasks: Perceptions and Pe |
|---|---|
| Teaching Context | College and university education |