Expressed helpfulness of AI feedback showed no association with next essay reflection depth¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? An ordinal mixed model found no association between expressed feedback helpfulness and next observed reflection depth after controls. → Andres Karjus 2026

Evidence¶

Andres Karjus 2026¶

Andres Karjus, Janika Leoste, Tiia Õun. (2026). Student Evaluation of Repeated AI Feedback Across a Semester of Writing. arXiv:2607.16115 [cs.CY]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.16115 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.16115

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Ordinal mixed-effects model with a student random intercept on the semester corpus (RQ3). No statistically detectable association was found; equivalence was not tested. Supplementary coefficients for helpfulness on next depth are reported without p-values.

"An ordinal mixed model showed no association between expressed helpfulness and next observed reflection depth after controlling current depth, position, andpromptversion(RQ3)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Most student essays remained at a descriptive reflection level despite repeated AI feedback — related
• Students found AI feedback helpful and actionable more often than not across a semester of reflective writing — related
• Thematic coding of student reflections shows peers seen as understanding context and AI feedback seen as actionable, with one quarter of reflections expressing skepticism of AI — related
• Feedback source does not significantly affect revised essay quality once initial draft quality is controlled — related