AI FEEDBACK VS. HUMAN FEEDBACK IN WRITTEN AND SPOKEN EXERCISES
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15568373
Kalit so‘zlar
AI feedback, human feedback, language learning, humanistic approach, writing and speaking skills, personalized learning.Annotasiya
This article explores the differences between AI feedback and human feedback in written and spoken exercises, focusing on their impact on learner development. While AI provides instant, consistent, and objective response, human feedback offers emotional support along with contextual understanding and motivation. The research highlights the strengths and limitations of each approach, emphasizing the need for a balanced integration. A humanistic perspective is adopted to value empathy, encouragement, and personalized learning in language education.
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar ro‘yhati
Bitchener J., & Ferris D.R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203832400
Braun V., & Clarke V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
British Educational Research Association (BERA). (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research (4th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018
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
Chen X., Zou D., & Xie H. (2020). Artificial intelligence in adaptive learning technology and education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(3), 625–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09495-5
Creswell J.W., & Plano Clark V.L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dörnyei Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press.
Hyland F., & Hyland K. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Li Y., Link S., & Hegelheimer V. (2022). Automated writing evaluation and feedback: Learner engagement and perceptions. Language Learning & Technology, 26(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10125/73485
Mercer N. (2016). Dialogue, thinking together and digital technology in the classroom: Some educational implications of a continuing line of inquiry. International Journal of Educational Research, 75, 162–171.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2015.07.014
Nicol D.J., & Macfarlane‐Dick D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Ranalli J., Link S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen E. (2017). Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(7), 598–619. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1304965
Vygotsky L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
