AI partner versus human partner: comparing AI-based peer assessment with human-generated peer assessment in examining writing skills

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F62690094%3A18450%2F25%3A50022495" target="_blank" >RIV/62690094:18450/25:50022495 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://languagetestingasia.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40468-025-00383-8" target="_blank" >https://languagetestingasia.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40468-025-00383-8</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40468-025-00375-8" target="_blank" >10.1186/s40468-025-00375-8</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

AI partner versus human partner: comparing AI-based peer assessment with human-generated peer assessment in examining writing skills

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

This paper delves into the critical role of feedback in students’ peer assessment, highlighting its variability across different educational settings and its profound potential to enhance learning outcomes, particularly within traditional and AI learning environments. It explores the evolution of feedback influenced by technological advancements such as AI, focusing on their application to improve EFL college students’ writing skills through peer assessment. Using a rigorous a qualitative-dominant mixed method approach by integrating both quantitative and qualitative data, the study contrasts the effectiveness of traditional peer assessment (group A) with AI-based assessment using ChatGPT (group B) among fourth-year students from two different contexts, namely the University of Diyala, Iraq, and the University of Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic. While group A shows consistent improvement in writing skills, group B demonstrates slightly lower scores but offers quicker, accurate, and more precise feedback. The results of the study reveal significant differences between group A, utilizing traditional peer assessment, and group B, employing ChatGPT for AI-based assessment. In both contexts, group A’s students demonstrated consistent improvement in writing skills, with final scores ranging from 7 to 14 out of 15. Group B also showed improvement, albeit slightly less pronounced, with scores ranging from 6 to 12 out of 15. Teachers’ evaluations indicated that while group A benefited from reciprocal learning processes (writing and assessment), and greater social and cognitive engagement, group B experienced more accurate, quicker, and comprehensive feedback during peer assessment process from AI, albeit with less emotional and cognitive engagement. Ultimately, both methods contributed positively to students’ writing skills, highlighting the strengths and trade-offs between human and AI feedback mechanisms.Correction (publisher&apos;s corrections - author names and affiliations: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001528974100001 ; Accession NumberWOS:001528974100001

Název v anglickém jazyce

AI partner versus human partner: comparing AI-based peer assessment with human-generated peer assessment in examining writing skills

Popis výsledku anglicky

This paper delves into the critical role of feedback in students’ peer assessment, highlighting its variability across different educational settings and its profound potential to enhance learning outcomes, particularly within traditional and AI learning environments. It explores the evolution of feedback influenced by technological advancements such as AI, focusing on their application to improve EFL college students’ writing skills through peer assessment. Using a rigorous a qualitative-dominant mixed method approach by integrating both quantitative and qualitative data, the study contrasts the effectiveness of traditional peer assessment (group A) with AI-based assessment using ChatGPT (group B) among fourth-year students from two different contexts, namely the University of Diyala, Iraq, and the University of Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic. While group A shows consistent improvement in writing skills, group B demonstrates slightly lower scores but offers quicker, accurate, and more precise feedback. The results of the study reveal significant differences between group A, utilizing traditional peer assessment, and group B, employing ChatGPT for AI-based assessment. In both contexts, group A’s students demonstrated consistent improvement in writing skills, with final scores ranging from 7 to 14 out of 15. Group B also showed improvement, albeit slightly less pronounced, with scores ranging from 6 to 12 out of 15. Teachers’ evaluations indicated that while group A benefited from reciprocal learning processes (writing and assessment), and greater social and cognitive engagement, group B experienced more accurate, quicker, and comprehensive feedback during peer assessment process from AI, albeit with less emotional and cognitive engagement. Ultimately, both methods contributed positively to students’ writing skills, highlighting the strengths and trade-offs between human and AI feedback mechanisms.Correction (publisher&apos;s corrections - author names and affiliations: https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001528974100001 ; Accession NumberWOS:001528974100001

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60203 - Linguistics

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Language Testing in Asia

ISSN

2229-0443

e-ISSN

2229-0443

Svazek periodika

15

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

30

Strana od-do

"Article Number: 38"

Kód UT WoS článku

001528974100001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-105010229254