Student Evaluation of Repeated AI Feedback Across a Semester of Writing
TL;DR
Analysis of reflective essay-feedback-appraisal instances from 283 Estonian bachelor students across one semester contributes descriptive classroom evidence on integration of AI feedback - a fast and scalable way to provide immediate writing advice, but not a self-contained route to better reflection.
Abstract
Generative AI is increasingly used for feedback in higher education, but evidence from repeated classroom use remains limited. This short paper analyses 2988 reflective essay-feedback-appraisal instances from 283 Estonian bachelor students across one semester. Students obtained and assessed feedback from a self-selected AI tool using a uniform prompt. The present analysis of the anonymized text corpus covers essay content, AI feedback, and its perceived helpfulness. Students found feedback helpful and actionable more often than not; about a tenth thought AI unhelpful, more so towards the end of the semester. We also analyzed essay reflection depth, and used a validated AI text classifier to estimate the share of essays that could be treated as likely unaided student writing. The study contributes descriptive classroom evidence on integration of AI feedback - a fast and scalable way to provide immediate writing advice, but not a self-contained route to better reflection. Benefits depend on whether students learn to use AI selectively and critically, without sliding into over-use harmful for the learning process.