Developing EFL Learners’ Feedback Literacy through AI-Assisted Dialogic Interactions in English Academic Writing: A Mixed-Methods Study
Lei Hong
Anhui Normal University
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
Feedback literacy—the understandings, capacities, and dispositions needed to make sense of feedback and use it While existing research has extensively examined AI-generated feedback in terms of writing product outcomes, the process of how learners develop feedback literacy through sustained interaction with AI remains insufficiently understood. Moreover, Carless and Boud’s (2018) framework was developed for human-to-human interaction, leaving open how its core dimensions translate into AI-mediated contexts and what AI-specific competencies might be required. To extend understanding in this area, we developed a GPT-4-based feedback bot, WriteWise, and engaged 45 Chinese EFL university students in a three-week mixed-methods experiment. We measured AI affordance for feedback literacy strategies by analyzing learner-bot conversations and evaluated effectiveness through pre-post-delayed feedback literacy tests, essay writing and revision tasks, and semi-structured interviews. Our findings suggest that AI afforded 14 sub-strategies across four main feedback literacy dimensions (Appreciating, Judging, Acting-on, and Generating feedback) plus one meta-level strategy. Appreciating and Acting-on strategies were most frequently used and significantly predicted feedback literacy knowledge and quality of English academic writing, though Appreciating strategies showed marginal significance (p < .10) for feedback literacy knowledge. However, Generating strategies (creating feedback for peers) were least utilized due to cognitive complexity and AI response limitations. We identified AI features influencing strategy frequency and effectiveness and offered implications for implementing AI-assisted feedback literacy instruction in English writing education.
逐年被引趋势
暂无年度引用数据
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
计算机 / AIAI in Service Interactions
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education