INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHANGES IN EDUCATION
Research Article
Aug 09, 2026 158 72

Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education

Qianshan Chen 1 *
1 School of Foreign Language Studies, Hangzhou Dianzi University, China* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(3), 2026, 305-315, https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580
Online publication date: Jun 13, 2025
Publication date: Aug 09, 2026
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Collaboration between humans and artificial intelligence (AI) has the power to transform education, but research has yet to fully address how students engage cognitively with AI-powered feedback. Although studies suggest that AI can improve writing, few explore how students perceive and interact with AI tools. To fill this gap, the present study investigated Chinese university students’ perceptions and experiences of using AI-powered English writing feedback tools: automated writing evaluation, generative AI, and corpora. Two hundred and ten student reflective journals were subjected to qualitative thematic analysis using NVivo software, along with analysis of classroom observations and students’ writing. The students evaluated AI-powered feedback tools in three dimensions: content quality, delivery method, and overall effectiveness. They felt that these tools provided better grammar correction, instant feedback delivery, and an enhanced user experience, but challenges included vague explanations, limited emotional connection, and risks of overreliance. Based on these insights, this study introduces the Student-Teacher-AI Collaboration Model for feedback writing, which is designed to enhance collaboration between students, teachers, and AI in foreign language education. The findings have practical implications for the integration of AI tools into writing instruction and will inform policymaking in the rapidly evolving educational field.

KEYWORDS

artificial intelligence automated feedback student perceptions

CITATION (APA)

Chen, Q. (2026). Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education. International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(3), 305-315. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580
Harvard
Chen, Q. (2026). Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education. International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(3), pp. 305-315. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580
Vancouver
Chen Q. Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2026;3(3):305-15. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580
AMA
Chen Q. Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2026;3(3), 305-315. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580
Chicago
Chen, Qianshan. "Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education". International Journal of Changes in Education 2026 3 no. 3 (2026): 305-315. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580
MLA
Chen, Qianshan "Students’ Perceptions of AI-Powered Feedback in English Writing: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education". International Journal of Changes in Education, vol. 3, no. 3, 2026, pp. 305-315. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52025580

REFERENCES

  1. Sun, W. (2004). Yīng yǔ zhuān yè xué shì lùn wén xiě zuò xiàn zhuàng fēn xī [An analysis of the current situation of English major undergraduates’ BA thesis writing]. Foreign Language World, 3, 59–64.
  2. Yang, L. (2015). Jiào shī zhǐ dǎo yǔ xué shēng xué shù yīng yǔ xiě zuò néng lì fā zhǎn—“xué shù yīng yǔ yuè dú yǔ xiě zuò kè chéng” de fǎn sī xìng jiào xué yán jiū [Instructor’s guidance and students’ academic English writing competence development: Reflective classroom research on an academic English reading and writing course]. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 5, 29–35.
  3. Hutson, J. (2025). Human-AI collaboration in writing: A multi-dimensional framework for creative and intellectual authorship. International Journal of Changes in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52024908
  4. Teng, M. F. (2024). “ChatGPT is the companion, not enemies”: EFL learners’ perceptions and experiences in using ChatGPT for feedback in writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100270
  5. Teng, F. (2024). A systematic review of ChatGPT for English as a foreign language writing: Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 6(3), 36–57. https://doi.org/10.58304/ijts.20240304
  6. Brown, N. B. (2024). Enhancing trust in LLMs: Algorithms for comparing and interpreting LLMs. arXiv Preprint: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.01943
  7. Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17
  8. Wen, Q. (2024). Will foreign language education in the AI era undergo a disruptive revolution? Modern Foreign Languages, 47(5), 722–731.
  9. Yan, L., Sha, L., Zhao, L., Li, Y., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Chen, G., ... & Gašević, D. (2024). Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic scoping review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 90–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13370
  10. Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100745
  11. Esmaeil, A. A. A., Dzulkifli, D. N. A. K., Maakip, I., Matanluk, O. O., & Marshall, S. (2023). Understanding student perception regarding the use of ChatGPT in their argumentative writing: A qualitative inquiry. Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication, 39(4), 150–165. https://doi.org/10.17576/JKMJC-2023-3904-08
  12. Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
  13. Pudasaini, S., Miralles-Pechuán, L., Lillis, D., & Llorens Salvador, M. (2024). Survey on AI-generated plagiarism detection: The impact of large language models on academic integrity. Journal of Academic Ethics, 1–34. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-024-09576-x
  14. Stokel-Walker, C. (2022). AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays—Should professors worry? Nature News Explainer. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7
  15. Teng, M. F. (2023). Scientific writing, reviewing, and editing for open-access TESOL journals: The role of ChatGPT. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 5(1), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.58304/ijts.20230107
  16. Wen, Q., & Liang, M. (2024). Rén jī hù dòng xié shāng néng lì: ChatGPT yǔ wài yǔ jiào yù [Human-AI interactive negotiation competence: ChatGPT and foreign language education]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 56(2), 286–296. https://doi.org/10.19923/j.cnki.fltr.2024.02.006
  17. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2019). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (2nd ed.). UK: Cambridge University Press.
  18. Ngo, T. T. N., Chen, H. H. J., & Lai, K. K. W. (2024). The effectiveness of automated writing evaluation in EFL/ESL writing: A three-level meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(2), 727–744. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2096642
  19. Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410607201
  20. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  21. Hyland, K. (2013). Student perceptions of hidden messages in teacher written feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(3), 180–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.06.003
  22. Guo, Q., Feng, R. L., & Hua, Y. F. (2023). ChatGPT zài yīng yǔ xué shù lùn wén xiě zuò yǔ jiào xué zhōng de yìng yòng jí qián zài wèn tí [Using ChatGPT in English academic writing: Benefits and issues]. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education, 2, 18–23. https://doi.org/10.20139/j.issn.1001-5795.2023.02.003
  23. Zhang, Z. V., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.02.004
  24. Lee, I. (2014). Feedback in writing: Issues and challenges. Assessing Writing, 19, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.009
  25. Er, E., Dimitriadis, Y., & Gašević, D. (2021). Collaborative peer feedback and learning analytics: Theory-oriented design for supporting class-wide interventions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(2), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1764490
  26. Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 38(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688206076157
  27. Guo, K., & Wang, D. (2024). To resist it or to embrace it? Examining ChatGPT’s potential to support teacher feedback in EFL writing. Education and Information Technologies, 29(7), 8435–8463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0
  28. Stevenson, M. (2016). A critical interpretative synthesis: The integration of automated writing evaluation into classroom writing instruction. Computers and Composition, 42, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2016.05.001
  29. Chen, C. F. E., & Cheng, W. Y. E. C. (2008). Beyond the design of automated writing evaluation: Pedagogical practices and perceived learning effectiveness in EFL writing classes. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 94−112. https://doi.org/10125/44145
  30. Varnosfadrani, A. D., & Basturkmen, H. (2009). The effectiveness of implicit and explicit error correction on learners’ performance. System, 37(1), 82–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.04.004
  31. Qian, L., Zhao, Y., & Cheng, Y. (2020). Evaluating China’s automated essay scoring system iWrite. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(4), 771–790. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119881472
  32. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  33. Biggs, J. B., & Tang, Catherine. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. UK: Open University Press.
  34. Lu, L. (2016). Jī yú zì dòng píng jià xì tǒng de dì èr xiě zuò guò chéng yán jiū [A study of the second writing process based on an automated essay evaluation tool]. Foreign Language World, 2, 88–96.
  35. Zhang, S., & Xu, J. (2019). ZPD shì jiǎo xià zài xiàn zì dòng fǎn kuì duì yīng yǔ bù tóng shuǐ píng xué xí zhě xiě zuò de yǐng xiǎng [The effect of online automated feedback on English writing across proficiency levels: From the perspective of the ZPD]. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 5, 30–39. https://doi.org/10.13458/j.cnki.flatt.004617
  36. Zhang, Z. (2020). Engaging with automated writing evaluation (AWE) feedback on L2 writing: Student perceptions and revisions. Assessing Writing, 43, 100439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100439
  37. Zhang, R. (2023). The impact of generative artificial intelligence technology on education—An interview on ChatGPT. E-Education Research, 2, 5–14.
  38. Song, C., & Song, Y. (2023). Enhancing academic writing skills and motivation: Assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted language learning for EFL students. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1260843. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1260843
  39. Deng, J., & Lin, Y. (2023). The benefits and challenges of ChatGPT: An overview. Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems, 2, 81–83. https://doi.org/10.54097/fcis.v2i2.4465
  40. Chen, M., & Lü, M. (2024). ChatGPT huán jìng xià de dà xué yīng yǔ xiě zuò jiào xué [College English writing instruction in a ChatGPT context]. Contemporary Foreign Language Studies, 24(1), 161–168.
  41. Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
  42. Wilson, O., & Billam, J. (2023). ChatGPT in June 2023: An annotated bibliography for all professionals. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 17(1), 9–15.
  43. Javier, D. R. C., & Moorhouse, B. L. (2024). Developing secondary school English language learners’ productive and critical use of ChatGPT. TESOL Journal, 15(2), e755. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.755
  44. Xu, L., Hu, J., & Su, Y. (2024). Rén gōng zhì néng fǔ zhù xué shù yīng yǔ xiě zuò de xué xí zhě rèn zhī jí xíng wéi yán jiū [EFL students’ perceptions and practices of AI-assisted English academic writing]. Foreign Language World, 3, 51–58.
  45. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. UK: Pergamon Press.
  46. Casanave, C. P., & Vandrick, S. (2003). Writing for scholarly publication: Behind the scenes in language education. UK: Routledge.
  47. Benson, P. (2013). Teaching and researching: Autonomy in language learning. UK: Routledge.
  48. Crosthwaite, P. (2017). Retesting the limits of data-driven learning: Feedback and error correction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(6), 447–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1312462
  49. Quinn, C. (2015). Training L2 writers to reference corpora as a self-correction tool. ELT Journal, 69(2), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu062
  50. Tono, Y., Satake, Y., & Miura, A. (2014). The effects of using corpora on revision tasks in L2 writing with coded error feedback. ReCALL, 26(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401400007X
  51. Yoon, H., & Hirvela, A. (2004). ESL students toward corpus use in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(4), 257–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.06.002
  52. Boulton, A. (2009). Data-driven learning: Reasonable fears and rational reassurance. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 81–106.
  53. Jiang, L., & Yu, S. (2020). Appropriating automated feedback in L2 writing: Experiences of Chinese EFL student writers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(7), 1329–1353. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1799824
  54. Xu, F. (2021). Wǒ guó èr yǔ xiě zuò yán jiū de ruò gān zhòng diǎn wèn tí [Some major issues in second language writing in China]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 53(4), 571–581.
  55. Guo, K., Chen, X., & Qiao, S. (2022). Exploring a collaborative approach to peer feedback in EFL Writing: How do students participate? RELC Journal, 55(3), 658–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221143192
  56. Creswell, W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2020). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. UK: Pearson Education.
  57. Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. UK: Routledge.
  58. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
  59. Bai, L., & Hu, G. (2017). In the face of fallible AWE feedback: How do students respond? Educational Psychology, 37(1), 67–81. http://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2016.1223275
  60. Koltovskaia, S. (2020). Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 44, 100450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450
  61. Ilin, V., Ke, J., & Nuanla-Or, S. (2024). Influence of culture on Chinese university students’ interaction with feedback. International Journal of Changes in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42022828
  62. Yang, M., Badger, R., & Zhen, Y. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004
  63. Ren, W., Liu, Y., & Xie, Y. (2024). Yīng yǔ xiě zuò jiào xué zhōng ChatGPT yǔ jiào shī fǎn kuì de duì bǐ yán jiū [A comparative study of ChatGPT and teacher feedback in English writing instruction]. Foreign Language Learning Theory and Practice, 4, 30–38.
  64. Hartono, W., Nurfitri, N., Ridwan, R., Kase, E., Lake, F., & Zebua, R. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions in English language teaching: Teachers-students perceptions and experiences. Journal on Education, 6(1), 1452–1461.
  65. Li, J., & Chen, Q. (2025). Rén jī tóng xíng zhì néng xiě zuò fā zhǎn yǎn jìn fēn xī yǔ qǐ shì [Human-machine collaborative intelligent writings: Its evolution and implications]. Contemporary Foreign Language Studies, 25(1), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2025.01.008
  66. Akinwalere, S., & Ivanov, V. (2022). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. Border Crossing, 12(1), 1–15.
  67. Ouyang, F., & Jiao, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: The three paradigms. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100020
  68. Mizumoto, A., Shintani, N., Sasaki, M., & Teng, M. F. (2024). Testing the viability of ChatGPT as a companion in L2 writing accuracy assessment. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100116

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.