Jul 2026· Learning Futures and Emerging Technologies· pp. 1-16· 0 citations· 40 references
Abstract
This study aims to systematically synthesize empirical evidence on the effects of GenAI-mediated feedback on EFL writing, students’ uptake of such feedback, and the ethical issues associated with its use.
Following PRISMA, this review synthesized English-language, peer-reviewed studies published between 2023 and 2025. Searches were conducted in Scopus, ERIC and selected publisher platforms. Two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data using a piloted form, while risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, ROBINS-I and JBI tools. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted when at least three comparable effect sizes were available; otherwise, the evidence was synthesized narratively with harvest plots.
The review shows that GenAI-mediated feedback is most effective when implemented as a dialogic, multi-draft and criteria-aligned practice moderated by teachers. Students tend to adopt local corrections more readily than global revisions unless tasks explicitly require justification and verification. Human–AI agreement appears sufficient for low-stakes screening and formative diagnosis, but construct coverage remains uneven and subgroup differences emerge in some contexts, indicating the need for human oversight, transparent criteria and routine bias audits.
The evidence base remains fragmented across contexts, designs and reporting practices, which limits comparability and cumulative interpretation. Future research should standardize reporting, examine fairness across learner groups and evaluate the long-term pedagogical effects of GenAI-mediated feedback at scale.
EFL programs should develop prompt templates that elicit explanations and examples, incorporate verification routines, use public rubrics and exemplars and position teacher-curated co-feedback as a central component of implementation. Clear boundaries are also needed between formative and summative uses, together with disclosure requirements for AI-supported feedback.
This review provides a timely synthesis of recent evidence on GenAI-mediated feedback in EFL writing by integrating learning outcomes, uptake patterns and assessment fairness considerations within a single analytical framework.
The findings suggest that the educational value of GenAI in higher education may depend less on AI access per se than on whether feedback environments preserve student agency, evaluative judgment, and ownership during revision.
Hüseyin Ateş· International Journal of Edu...· 2 citations
Although peer feedback has been widely used in second language (L2) English writing instruction, its pedagogical value is often constrained by vague comments, limited understanding of evaluation criteria, low learner confidence, weak peer trust, and insufficient uptake of revision. Guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework, this systematic literature review identified and synthesized empirical studies published from 2016 to 2025 on peer feedback training in English as a Foreign Language and English as a Second Language writing contexts. Database searches in Scopus, Educational Resources Information Center, and Web of Science were followed by deduplication, title and abstract screening, full-text eligibility assessment, and quality appraisal. Nineteen empirical studies were included in a narrative thematic synthesis focusing on instructional design, reported learning outcomes, and implementation challenges. The synthesis suggests that peer feedback is more effective when supported by rubrics or checklists, teacher modeling, guided peer-review tools, peer dialogue, AI-supported scaffolding, and revision-reflection tasks. Reported outcomes included improvements in feedback quality, revision uptake, writing performance, feedback literacy, motivation, self-efficacy, engagement, and self-regulated writing. Recurring implementation challenges included uneven learner readiness, limited feedback specificity, insufficient peer trust, time constraints, and the need for teacher monitoring and systematic guidance. Based on these findings, the review proposes a lightweight peer feedback training framework for L2 writing instruction and future intervention research.
Jing Wang, M. Yunus, Nur Ainil Binti Sulaiman· International Journal of Lea...· 0 citations
English writing proficiency among EFL learners in Indonesia remains below regional benchmarks, and despite growing interest in learner-centered pedagogies, there is limited synthesis comparing the effects of inquiry-based learning (IBL) and contextual teaching and learning (CTL), particularly regarding their combined impact. This study addresses this gap through a PRISMA-guided systematic literature review of empirical studies published between 2015 and 2025. Searches were conducted across major databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Taylor & Francis, yielding 35 eligible studies for analysis. A narrative synthesis complemented by a quantitative summary of comparable studies indicates that both IBL and CTL produce significant positive effects on students’ English writing performance, with a pooled effect size of approximately d ≈ 0.81 (95% CI [0.65, 0.97]), suggesting a moderate-to-large overall impact. IBL consistently enhances cognitive dimensions of writing, such as idea generation, organization, and critical thinking, whereas CTL demonstrates strong effects on engagement, contextual understanding, and learner motivation. However, direct comparative and hybrid studies remain limited, although preliminary evidence suggests additive benefits when both approaches are integrated. These findings imply that EFL teachers and curriculum designers should consider combining inquiry cycles with context-based writing tasks to simultaneously develop cognitive and affective dimensions of writing. Future research should prioritize rigorous comparative and longitudinal designs to validate the effectiveness of integrated IBL–CTL models across diverse EFL contexts.
Sapto Sugiharto, Merry Lapasau, W. Widodo et al.· Journal of Languages and Lan...· 0 citations
Although online cooperative learning has been widely examined in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education, it is often conceptually blurred with less structured forms of collaborative learning. This review synthesised empirical articles on online cooperative learning in EFL contexts, focusing on study characteristics, reported outcomes, the operationalisation of Johnson and Johnson’s five elements, and implementation challenges. PRISMA 2020, Eric, Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest were searched for empirical English-language journal articles published up to June 2026. Twenty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and were appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Mixed-methods designs were the most common (56%, n = 14), university settings dominated the studies (80%, n = 20), and writing was the leading focus (40%, n = 10). Of the 17 studies using inferential tests of language-related performance, 16 reported statistically significant positive gains or associations, although the strength of evidence varied. Positive interdependence was explicitly reported in 20 studies and implied in 5. In contrast, small-group skills and group processing were explicitly reported in only[1] 3 and 7 studies, respectively. The main implementation challenges involved weak technological–pedagogical alignment, insufficient instructional scaffolding, and uneven participation and accountability. The findings suggest that online cooperative learning should be conceptualized not according to named cooperative structures alone, but according to how the online cooperative EFL learning environment, instructional configuration, and the five core cooperative learning elements are integrated. Future research should design clearly structured online cooperative EFL courses across more diverse educational settings, language areas, and learner groups, particularly for learners with lower language proficiency or limited digital literacy.
Ai-Jia Zhang, M. Yunus, Nur Syafiqah Yaccoba· International Journal of Lea...· 0 citations
Research on feedback in English language education has grown rapidly. Nevertheless, its findings remain scattered across studies that each address a single aspect, such as corrective feedback types, peer feedback, or Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated commentary, in isolation. Teachers and researchers seeking an integrated understanding must assemble it from separate sources. This article presents a narrative literature review that draws these strands into a single reference covering five dimensions: the definition and nature of feedback, the characteristics that mark it as effective, its functions and benefits, its types across five classification lenses (source of provision, correction variation and timing, modality, skill context, and nature of the message), and the challenges of implementation. Sources published between 2020 and 2026 were retrieved through the Consensus academic search engine and screened for relevance to the English as a foreign language (EFL) context, with seminal pre-2020 works retained as conceptual anchors. Across all five dimensions, the literature converges on one distinction: feedback supports learning when it treats the learner as an active participant rather than a passive recipient of judgment. Benefits such as accuracy gains and feedback literacy depend on that participation, and expanding the supply of feedback through automated tools does not, by itself, produce learning. The review closes by mapping underexplored areas, including descriptive versus evaluative feedback and under-researched EFL contexts such as Eastern Indonesia.
J. Patty, Felicia Miranda Lekatompessy· Jurnal Riset Multidisiplin d...· 0 citations
GenAI is most educationally defensible when integrated as a guided formative-feedback resource rather than as a substitute writer or replacement for teacher expertise, as well as for assignment design, AI-use disclosure, feedback literacy, prompt literacy, and process-based assessment.
Bùi Thị Hương Thảo· International journal of soc...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
