Student experiences of ChatGPT as a feedback tool in higher education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v17i31.144043Keywords:
Generative AI, AI feedback, human-computer interaction, Digital learning, ChatGPTAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence provides both challenges and opportunities for higher education. Few studies to date have accounted for student experiences of purposeful use of generative AI. This article reports on a mixed methods study of two university classes using ChatGPT to generate feedback on written assignments. Students’ attitudes were collected through a survey, lab reports, and in-class discussions. The analyses show that students experienced their role as feedback receiver qualitatively different in the AI feedback situation compared to teacher- and peer feedback, because they themselves had to assume all the responsibility for the critical judgment of prompts and replies. Students felt that asking ChatGPT for feedback was more frustrating but emotionally easier than asking peers or teachers, which points to important differences in the dynamics of sociality and interaction between feedback receivers and human vs. AI feedback givers.
Downloads
References
Bader, M., Burner, T., Iversen, S. H., & Varga, Z. (2019). Student perspectives on formative feed-back as part of writing portfolios. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1564811
Bilquise, G., Ibrahim, S., & Salhieh, S. E. M. (2023). Investigating student acceptance of an aca-demic advising chatbot in higher education institutions. Education and Information Technolo-gies, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12076-x
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260-294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088306289261
Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Dai, W., Lin, J., Jin, F., Li, T., Tsai, Y., Gasevic, D., & Chen, G. (2023, April 13). Can large lan-guage models provide feedback to students? A case study on ChatGPT. Working paper. Available at https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/hcgzj
Dobson, J. E. (2023). On reading and interpreting black box deep neural networks. International Journal of Digital Humanities. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42803-023-00075-w
Driessens, O., & Pischetola, M. (2024). Danish university policies on generative AI: Problems, assumptions and sustainability blind spots. MedieKultur: Journal of media and communica-tion research, 40(76), 31-52. https://doi.org/10.7146/mk.v40i76.143595
Evans, C. (2015). Students’ perspectives on the role of peer feedback in supporting learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 14(1), 110-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.14.1.110
Garg, S. (2023, August 20). 30 Best ChatGPT alternatives in 2023 (Free & Paid). Writesonic. Available at https://writesonic.com/blog/chatgpt-alternatives
Graham, S., Hebert, M., & Harris, K. R. (2015). Formative assessment and writing: A meta-analysis. The Elementary School Journal, 115(4), 523-547. https://doi.org/10.1086/681947
Hadden, A. A., & Frisby, B. N. (2019). Face threat mitigation in feedback: An examination of stu-dent feedback anxiety, self-efficacy, and perceived emotional support. Communication Quarterly, 67(1), 60-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2018.1531043
Hamer, J., Purchase, H., Luxton-Reilly, A., & Denny, P. (2015). A comparison of peer and tutor feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(1), 151-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.893418
Hasse, C., & Bruun, M. H. (2023). ChatGPT minder os om det gode ved uvidenhed. Vi-denskap.dk. https://videnskab.dk/teknologi/chatgpt-minder-os-om-det-gode-ved-uvidenhed/
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Holton, J. A. (2007). The coding process and its challenges. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory (pp. 265–289). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607941.n13
Jacobsen, L. J., & Weber, K. E. (2023, September 29). The promises and pitfalls of ChatGPT as a feedback provider in higher education: an exploratory study of prompt engineering and the quality of AI-driven feedback. Working paper. Available at https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/cr257
Kelly, A., Sullivan, M., & Strampel, K. (2023). Generative Artificial Intelligence: university student awareness, experience, and confidence in use across disciplines. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(6), 12. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.6.12
Kelly, S., Kaye, S.-A., & Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2023). What factors contribute to the ac-ceptance of artificial intelligence? A systematic review. Telematics and Informatics, 77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925
Kim, J., Merrill, K., Xu, K., & Sellnow, D. D. (2020). My teacher is a machine: Understanding stu-dents’ perceptions of AI teaching assistants in online education. International Journal of Hu-man–Computer Interaction, 36(20), 1902-1911. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1801227
Kim, J., Merrill, K., Xu, K., & Sellnow, D. D. (2021). I like my relational machine teacher: An AI in-structor’s communication styles and social presence in online education. International Jour-nal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(18), 1760-1770. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1908671
Liu, B., & Sundar, S. S. (2018). Should machines express sympathy and empathy? Experiments with a health advice chatbot. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(10), 625-636. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0110
Mollick, E. R., & Mollick, L. (2023). Assigning AI: seven approaches for students, with prompts. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4475995
Møgelvang, A., Ludvigsen, K., Bjelland, C., & Schei, O. M. (2023). HVL-studenters bruk og op-pfatninger av KI-chatboter i utdanning. HVL-Rapport. Available at https://hvlopen.brage.unit.no/hvlopen-xmlui/handle/11250/3100624
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2004). Rethinking formative assessment in HE: a theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice. In C. Juwah, D. Macfarlane-Dick, B. Matthew, D. Nicol, D. & Smith, B. (Eds). Enhancing student learning though effective forma-tive feedback. The Higher Education Academy.
Panadero, E., & Alqassab, M. (2019). An empirical review of anonymity effects in peer assess-ment, peer feedback, peer review, peer evaluation and peer grading. Assessment & Evalua-tion in Higher Education, 44(8), 1253-1278. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1600186
Quintilianus. (2002). Institutio oratoria (D. A. Russell, Trans.). In Loeb Classical Library 127. Har-vard University Press.
Savignon, S. J., & Roithmeier, W. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: Texts and strate-gies. Calico Journal, 265-290. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24149395
Steiss, J., Tate, T. P., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., … & Warschauer, M. (2023, Sep-tember 5). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback on students’ writing. Working paper. Available at https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/ty3em
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language learning, 52(1), 119-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179
Taggart, A. R., & Laughlin, M. (2017). Affect matters: when writing feedback leads to negative feeling. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), n2. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2017.110213
Thurlings, M., Vermeulen, M., Bastiaens, T., & Stijnen, S. (2013). Understanding feedback: A learning theory perspective. Educational Research Review, 9, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.11.004
Winstone, N. E., & Carless, D. (2020). Designing effective feedback processes in higher educa-tion: a learning-focused approach (1st ed.). Routledge.
Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3087. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
Yang, L., Wu, Y., Liang, Y., & Yang, M. (2023). Unpacking the complexities of emotional respons-es to external feedback, internal feedback orientation and emotion regulation in higher edu-cation: a qualitative exploration. Systems, 11(6), 315. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11060315
Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the en-hancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education, 45, 477-501. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023967026413
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016). Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014). Language Teach-ing, 49(4), 461-493. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000161
Zilber, A. (2023, August 14). College profs to use paper exams to thwart cheating with ChatGPT: ‘We’re in full-on crisis mode’. New York Post. Available at https://nypost.com/2023/08/14/college-profs-to-use-paper-exams-to-prevent-cheating-with-chatgpt/
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Tommy Bruhn, Franziska Marquart
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the Journal of Learning and Media are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported Licens.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication; simultaneously articles are licensend under the Creative Commons Attribution license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerviatives (by-nc-nd). Read about this license at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
---
At LOM.dk, you will also find articles from the discontinued Journal for the Continuing and Further Education of the Danish Universities (UNEV). Note that special rules apply to UNEV articles:
It is the authors and any other copyright holder who have the copyright of articles published under the auspices of UNEV, and access to the articles is contingent on users acknowledging and complying with the associated legal guidelines:
- Users may download and print one copy of any UNEV publication for private studies or research.
- The redistribution of articles or the use of these for revenue-funded activities or commercial purposes are not allowed.
- It is not allowed to distribute the URLs of UNEV articles.
