Students perceived instructor feedback as significantly more useful than AI-generated feedback, with no significant differences on fairness, developmental value or encouragement¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? Mann–Whitney U tests revealed a significant difference in usefulness scores between the instructor-feedback and AI-feedback groups (U = 191.0, p = 0.04), but no significant differences for fairness, development or encouragement. → 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
Survey of 17 instructor-feedback and 16 AI-feedback students using Strijbos et al. (2010) and Lizzio and Wilson (2008) subscales; Cronbach's alphas ranged 0.80–0.94. Instructor feedback was rated higher on all four dimensions, but only the usefulness difference was statistically significant.
"The Mann–Whitney U test revealed a significant difference in usefulness scores between the groups ( U = 191.0, p = 0.04), suggesting that students perceived the usefulness of instructor feedback differently from AI feedback. No significant differences were found for fairness (U = 179.0, p = 0.11), development (U = 163.0, p = 0.34) or encouragement ( U = 180.5, p = 0.10) scores."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Both instructor and AI-generated feedback were perceived positively, with instructor feedback rated higher descriptively on all four perception dimensions — related
- AI multimodal feedback is rated higher than educator feedback on specificity, clarity, simplicity, motivation, satisfaction, and lower mental effort, with comparable correctness, trust, and acceptance — reports the opposite
- Under blind conditions, students rated GenAI feedback more positively than tutor-generated feedback, with a statistically significant difference only on Genuineness favouring GenAI — reports the opposite
- Students rated AI-generated and instructor-created lecture slides as similar in quality in a real course — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
instructor-feedback-perceived-more-useful-than-ai-feedback |
title |
Students perceived instructor feedback as significantly more useful than AI-generated feedback, with no significant differences on fairness, developmental value or encouragement |
description |
Students perceived instructor feedback as significantly more useful than AI-generated feedback, with no significant differences on fairness, developmental value or encouragement |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
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.