Students receiving instructor feedback showed significantly greater improvements in lab assignment scores than students receiving AI-generated feedback, after controlling for initial knowledge¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-17 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? In a randomised controlled trial, students who received instructor feedback improved their lab scores significantly more than students who received AI feedback, controlling for midterm scores (group coefficient −4.97, p = 0.04). → Er 2024
Evidence¶
Er 2024¶
Er, Erkan; Akçapınar, Gökhan; Bayazıt, Alper; Noroozi, Omid; Banihashem, Seyyed Kazem. (2024). Assessing student perceptions and use of instructor versus AI-generated feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13558
q3 · i? · causal · r1
Robust ANCOVA (OLS with HC3 robust standard errors) on 35 students (18 instructor, 17 AI) in a randomised controlled trial, with change in lab scores as dependent variable and midterm scores as covariate. The group coefficient was −4.97 (p = 0.04); the midterm covariate was not significant (0.01, p = 0.83).
"Given the coefficient for the group variable (−4.97) and its statistical significance ( p = 0.04), students who received AI feedback had a significantly lower average change in scores compared to those who received instructor feedback after accounting for their midterm scores."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5 and human instructors in producing feedback containing effective feedback components such as feeding-up and process-level information — related
- Learners receiving ChatGPT-generated hints showed statistically significant learning gains compared to a no-hint control in an online mathematics tutoring experiment — related
- Personalized ChatGPT-supported feedback in an augmented-reality quantum physics laboratory improved learning outcomes and directed visual attention — related
- Students' initial knowledge level (midterm scores) did not significantly influence improvement in lab scores, indicating it did not confound the feedback-source difference — related
- The ChatGPT group achieves significantly greater essay score improvement than the other three groups — related
- Reviews citing one randomised trial (Bastani et al. 2025) report that unrestricted GPT-4 access in high-school mathematics raised assisted practice performance but left students worse off after withdrawal — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
instructor-feedback-greater-lab-score-improvements-than-ai-feedback |
title |
Students receiving instructor feedback showed significantly greater improvements in lab assignment scores than students receiving AI-generated feedback, after controlling for initial knowledge |
description |
Students receiving instructor feedback showed significantly greater improvements in lab assignment scores than students receiving AI-generated feedback, after controlling for initial knowledge |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
source_checked |
2026-10-17 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — er-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.