In one study, feedback quality significantly predicts revised essay quality under teacher feedback but not under either GenAI feedback condition, though the conditions are not compared directly¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In the teacher condition, feedback quality significantly predicted revised draft quality (β = .53). → Farrokhnia 2026 q3 i? In the Zero-shot condition, feedback quality did not significantly predict revised draft quality. → Farrokhnia 2026 (2) q3 i? In the CoT condition, feedback quality showed a small non-significant negative coefficient for revised draft quality. → Farrokhnia 2026 (3)

Evidence¶

Farrokhnia 2026¶

Farrokhnia, M., Latifi, S., Papadopoulos, P. M., Hogenkamp, L., Gijlers, H., Khosravi, H., & Noroozi, O. (2026). Generative AI offers more, but students revise less: comparing the effects of teacher and AI feedback on student essay revisions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00579-9

q3 · i? · printed figures are a regression coefficient (B = 0.57, β = .53) and model R², not a d-family effect size · causal · r2

Multiple regression in the teacher condition (model F(2, 21) = 9.53, p = .001, R2 = .47) found feedback quality significantly predicted revised draft quality, with "revised draft quality increased by 0.57 points" per feedback-quality point (β = .53).

"Both predictors contributed significantly: for every one‐point increase in feedback quality, revised draft quality increased by 0.57 points (B = 0.57, SE = 0.17, β = .53, t = 3.30, p = .003)"

Farrokhnia 2026 (2)¶

Farrokhnia, M., Latifi, S., Papadopoulos, P. M., Hogenkamp, L., Gijlers, H., Khosravi, H., & Noroozi, O. (2026). Generative AI offers more, but students revise less: comparing the effects of teacher and AI feedback on student essay revisions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00579-9

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Multiple regression in the Zero-shot condition (model F(2, 21) = 9.61, p = .001, R2 = .48) found only initial draft quality significant; feedback quality "did not reach significance" (B = 0.32, β = .29, p = .13).

"The influence of feedback quality, although positive (B = 0.32, β = .29), did not reach significance ( t = 1.56, p = .13)."

Farrokhnia 2026 (3)¶

Farrokhnia, M., Latifi, S., Papadopoulos, P. M., Hogenkamp, L., Gijlers, H., Khosravi, H., & Noroozi, O. (2026). Generative AI offers more, but students revise less: comparing the effects of teacher and AI feedback on student essay revisions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00579-9

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Multiple regression in the CoT condition (model F(2, 19) = 8.80, p = .002, R2 = .48) found only initial draft quality significant; feedback quality showed "a small, non‐significant negative coefficient" (B = −0.50, p = .26).

"Feedback quality showed a small, non‐significant negative coefficient (B = − 0.50, β = − .21, t = − 1.16, p = .26)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Process Writing Improves Writing Quality — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Feedback improves learning by a medium amount on average, but its effect varies widely with the information it carries, and a substantial share of feedback effects are negative — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Students' argumentative essay quality improves substantially from initial to revised drafts regardless of feedback source — related
• GenAI feedback quality correlates with initial essay quality while teacher feedback quality does not — related
• Feedback source does not significantly affect revised essay quality once initial draft quality is controlled — related
• Peer Feedback Improves Writing — related
• Zero-shot GenAI feedback quality is statistically comparable to teacher feedback quality — related
• Revising the feedback prompt toward essay-grounded guidance was associated with more specific feedback in an observational before–after comparison — related
• Revision conditions offering more reader insight produced contrasting benefits for young writers' descriptive revision — related
• Chain-of-thought prompting yields higher-quality GenAI feedback on argumentative essays than Zero-shot prompting and teacher feedback — related
• Dwell time on the essay correlates positively with the quality of revised essays as assessed by professors — related