AI enhanced feedback literacy intervention for academic success beyond first year in tertiary education.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56433/n1gd8x49Keywords:
first-year transitions, Feedback Literacy, Generative AI, Peer Feedback, Dialogic SupportAbstract
This study examines the integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in academic skills teaching to enhance first-year students’ feedback literacy and emotional resilience. In an undergraduate Academic Skills module, feedback literacy was embedded as a core topic, and GenAI tools were leveraged to design scaffolded learning activities targeting key stages of the feedback process. Nineteen first-year students participated in a focus group and five in follow-up interviews to share their experiences with four GenAI-enabled feedback literacy activities. Using Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis, qualitative data were analysed to identify patterns in student perceptions and outcomes.
The findings indicate that incorporating GenAI-driven activities fostered greater learner engagement, self-regulation, and autonomy in the feedback process. Students reported improved ability to receive feedback constructively, internalise feedback by reflecting on its implications for their work and identity, and act on feedback through concrete revisions and goal-setting. The dialogic and interactive nature of the activities co-created with GenAI helped create a safe learning environment where students could practice giving and receiving feedback. Participants highlighted increased confidence in interpreting feedback and reduced anxiety in applying it, pointing to strengthened emotional resilience. For example, students described feedback as “a tool for improvement and gaining perspective,” noting the value of having “someone else with a different insight… tell you what could be improved.” They also emphasised the importance of peer dialogue and openness, with one remarking, “The more open someone was with their feedback, the more advantage I had… I was able to analyse the activity through their lens.”
This article reflects on the implications of these innovations for curriculum design. It offers practical insights into how GenAI can be harnessed to cultivate feedback literacy and resilient learning dispositions in first-year students.
References
Brown, S., & Sambell, K. (2025). Meeting the challenges of implementing feedback: Moving towards active dialogic practices in higher education. LTHE Chat. https://lthechat.com/2025/01/06/lthe-chat-313-meeting-the-challenges-of-implementing-feedback-moving-towards-active-dialogic-practices-in-higher-education/
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
Bozkurt, A. (2024). Why Generative AI Literacy, Why Now and Why it Matters in the Educational Landscape? Open Praxis, 16(3), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.3.739
British Educational Research Association. (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research (4th ed.). BERA.
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
Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Yan, Z., & Carless, D. (2021). Self-assessment is about more than self: the enabling role of feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(7), 1116–1128. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.2001431
Chong, S. W. (2020). “Reconsidering student feedback literacy from an ecological perspective.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1730765.
Henderson, M., Ryan, T., & Phillips, M. (2019). The challenges of feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(8), 1237–1252. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1599815
Holmes, W., & Tuomi, I. (2022). State of the art and practice in AI in education. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 542–570. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12533
Kern, M., Krumholz, M., & Takeda, J. (2023). Generative AI in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Integrity. British Journal of Biomedical Science, 14(4), Article 14048. https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048
Mamad, A. (2023). Key capabilities for promoting student feedback literacy. Hungarian Educational Research Journal, 13(2), 298-315. https://doi.org/10.1556/063.2022.00164
Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2020). Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 527–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1667955
Pitt, E. & Norton, L. (2017). “‘Now that’s the feedback I want!’ Students’ reactions to feedback on graded work and what they do with it.” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(4), 499-516. doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1142500.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
Saini, A. K., Tzirides, A. O., Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., & Searsmith, D. (2025). Generative Ai and the Next Generation of Feedback Systems: A Hybrid Approach for Higher Education. In Rajala, A., Cortez, A., Hofmann, R., Jornet, A., Lotz-Sisitka, H., & Markauskaite, L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th International Conference of the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2025 (pp. 2120-2124). International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2025.631446
Tang, K. S., & Putra, G. B. S. (2025). Generative AI as a dialogic partner: Enhancing multiple perspectives, reasoning, and argumentation in science education with customized chatbots. Journal of Science Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-025-10240-1
Woitt, S., et al. (2023). Students’ feedback literacy in higher education: an initial scale validation study. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(1), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2023.2263838
Winstone, N. E., Mathlin, G., & Nash, R. A. (2019). Building feedback literacy: Students’ perceptions of the Developing Engagement With Feedback Toolkit. Frontiers in Education, 4, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00039
Winstone, N. E., & Nash, R. A. (2016). The Developing Engagement with Feedback Toolkit (DEFT). Higher Education Academy. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/developing-engagement-feedback-toolkit-deft
Winstone, N. E., & Carless, D. (2019). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. Routledge.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nurun Nahar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice has made best effort to ensure accuracy of the contents of this journal, however makes no claims to the authenticity and completeness of the articles published. Authors are responsible for ensuring copyright clearance for any images, tables etc which are supplied from an outside source.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
