Generative artificial intelligence as an enabler of student feedback engagement: a framework

被引:4
作者
Zhan, Ying [1 ]
Boud, David [2 ]
Dawson, Phillip [2 ]
Yan, Zi [1 ]
机构
[1] Educ Univ Hong Kong, Curriculum & Instruction, 10 Lo Ping Rd, Tai Po Campus, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[2] Deakin Univ, CRADLE, Melbourne, Australia
关键词
Generative AI; feedback engagement; feedback literacy; ecological perspective; self-regulation; WRITTEN-CORRECTIVE-FEEDBACK; TECHNOLOGY;
D O I
10.1080/07294360.2025.2476513
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Despite the recognised importance of feedback in enhancing student learning, feedback practices in higher education have not achieved the expected effects. A primary issue lies in student disengagement, exacerbated by contextual constraints such as large classes and limited curriculum space and time. The advent of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) may help overcome these contextual constraints. However, GenAI also poses substantial challenges and ethical dilemmas during the feedback process. Meanwhile, it is essential to recognise that the feedback environment created by GenAI inevitably interacts with students' personal factors, especially their feedback literacy, to jointly influence feedback engagement. Therefore, a question remains whether GenAI can be an effective enabler of student feedback engagement. To answer the question, based on a literature review and theoretical synthesis, we scrutinise student engagement with GenAI in three stages of the feedback process and discuss the interplay of student feedback literacy and the GenAI context. We suggest that the extent to which students are engaged with feedback depends on their degree of feedback literacy as orchestrated in the GenAI context. Finally, we propose a cyclical feedback framework consisting of feedback forethought, feedback control and feedback retrospect to enable student feedback engagement in a GenAI world.
引用
收藏
页码:1289 / 1304
页数:16
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]  
Ali F., 2023, Learn. Res. Pract, V9, P135, DOI DOI 10.1080/23735082.2023.2258886
[2]   The impact of large language models on university students' literacy development: a dialogue with Lea and Street's academic literacies framework [J].
Anson, Daniel W. J. .
HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, 2024, 43 (07) :1465-1478
[3]   Hierarchy, "Kreng Jai" and Feedback: A Grounded Theory Study Exploring Perspectives of Clinical Faculty and Medical Students in Thailand [J].
Areemit, Rosawan S. ;
Cooper, Cynthia M. ;
Wirasorn, Kosin ;
Paopongsawan, Pongsatorn ;
Panthongviriyakul, Charnchai ;
Ramani, Subha .
TEACHING AND LEARNING IN MEDICINE, 2021, 33 (03) :235-244
[4]   Developing evaluative judgement for a time of generative artificial intelligence [J].
Bearman, Margaret ;
Tai, Joanna ;
Dawson, Phillip ;
Boud, David ;
Ajjawi, Rola .
ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2024, 49 (06) :893-905
[5]   Learning to work with the black box: Pedagogy for a world with artificial intelligence [J].
Bearman, Margaret ;
Ajjawi, Rola .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 54 (05) :1160-1173
[6]   On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? [J].
Bender, Emily M. ;
Gebru, Timnit ;
McMillan-Major, Angelina ;
Shmitchell, Shmargaret .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2021 ACM CONFERENCE ON FAIRNESS, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND TRANSPARENCY, FACCT 2021, 2021, :610-623
[7]  
Bozkurt A., 2020, Asian J. Distance Educ, V15, pi, DOI DOI 10.5281/ZENODO.3778083
[8]   The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback [J].
Carless, David ;
Boud, David .
ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2018, 43 (08) :1315-1325
[9]   Reconsidering student feedback literacy from an ecological perspective [J].
Chong, Sin Wang .
ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2021, 46 (01) :92-104
[10]  
Creswell JW., 2011, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, V4