Effects of adaptive feedback generated by a large language model: A case study in teacher education

Q1 Social Sciences Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-17 DOI:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100349
Annette Kinder , Fiona J. Briese , Marius Jacobs , Niclas Dern , Niels Glodny , Simon Jacobs , Samuel Leßmann
{"title":"Effects of adaptive feedback generated by a large language model: A case study in teacher education","authors":"Annette Kinder ,&nbsp;Fiona J. Briese ,&nbsp;Marius Jacobs ,&nbsp;Niclas Dern ,&nbsp;Niels Glodny ,&nbsp;Simon Jacobs ,&nbsp;Samuel Leßmann","doi":"10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates the effects of adaptive feedback generated by large language models (LLMs), specifically ChatGPT, on performance in a written diagnostic reasoning task among German pre-service teachers (<em>n</em> = 269). Additionally, the study analyzed user evaluations of the feedback and feedback processing time. Diagnostic reasoning, a critical skill for making informed pedagogical decisions, was assessed through a writing task integrated into a teacher preparation course. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either adaptive feedback generated by ChatGPT or static feedback prepared in advance by a human expert, which was identical for all participants in that condition, before completing a second writing task. The findings reveal that ChatGPT-generated adaptive feedback significantly improved the quality of justification in the students’ writing compared to the static feedback written by an expert. However, no significant difference was observed in decision accuracy between the two groups, suggesting that the type and source of feedback did not impact decision-making processes. Additionally, students who had received LLM-generated adaptive feedback spent more time processing the feedback and subsequently wrote longer texts, indicating longer engagement with the feedback and the task. Participants also rated adaptive feedback as more useful and interesting than static feedback, aligning with previous research on the motivational benefits of adaptive feedback. The study highlights the potential of LLMs like ChatGPT as valuable tools in educational settings, particularly in large courses where providing adaptive feedback is challenging.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34469,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100349"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X24001528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of adaptive feedback generated by large language models (LLMs), specifically ChatGPT, on performance in a written diagnostic reasoning task among German pre-service teachers (n = 269). Additionally, the study analyzed user evaluations of the feedback and feedback processing time. Diagnostic reasoning, a critical skill for making informed pedagogical decisions, was assessed through a writing task integrated into a teacher preparation course. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either adaptive feedback generated by ChatGPT or static feedback prepared in advance by a human expert, which was identical for all participants in that condition, before completing a second writing task. The findings reveal that ChatGPT-generated adaptive feedback significantly improved the quality of justification in the students’ writing compared to the static feedback written by an expert. However, no significant difference was observed in decision accuracy between the two groups, suggesting that the type and source of feedback did not impact decision-making processes. Additionally, students who had received LLM-generated adaptive feedback spent more time processing the feedback and subsequently wrote longer texts, indicating longer engagement with the feedback and the task. Participants also rated adaptive feedback as more useful and interesting than static feedback, aligning with previous research on the motivational benefits of adaptive feedback. The study highlights the potential of LLMs like ChatGPT as valuable tools in educational settings, particularly in large courses where providing adaptive feedback is challenging.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大型语言模型产生的自适应反馈效应:教师教育案例研究
本研究调查了大型语言模型(llm)产生的自适应反馈,特别是ChatGPT,对德语职前教师(n = 269)在书面诊断推理任务中的表现的影响。此外,本研究还分析了用户对反馈的评价和反馈处理时间。诊断推理是做出明智的教学决策的一项关键技能,通过写作任务整合到教师准备课程中进行评估。在完成第二项写作任务之前,参与者被随机分配接受ChatGPT生成的自适应反馈或由人类专家事先准备的静态反馈,在这种情况下,所有参与者都是相同的。研究结果表明,与由专家撰写的静态反馈相比,chatgpt生成的自适应反馈显著提高了学生写作中的论证质量。然而,两组之间的决策准确性没有显著差异,这表明反馈的类型和来源对决策过程没有影响。此外,收到法学硕士生成的适应性反馈的学生花了更多的时间处理反馈,随后写了更长的文本,这表明他们对反馈和任务的投入时间更长。参与者还认为适应性反馈比静态反馈更有用、更有趣,这与之前关于适应性反馈激励效益的研究一致。该研究强调了ChatGPT等法学硕士在教育环境中作为有价值工具的潜力,特别是在提供适应性反馈具有挑战性的大型课程中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
50 days
期刊最新文献
Decoding divides: The role of socioeconomic status and personality traits in AI divides and educational inequality Scaffolding critical thinking with generative AI: Design principles for integrating large language models in higher education Opening the blackbox of LLM-based automated essay scoring: Insights into feature weighting patterns and score validity Engagement in LLM chatbot-supported learning: The pivotal roles of GenAI competency and emotion Play with AI (PL-AI): A play-centered, design-based curriculum for AI literacy in pre-K and kindergarten
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1