Evaluating GenAI ‐produced feedback on undergraduate bioscience essays against good higher education feedback practice

The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has led to substantial interest in its potential to support student learning and assessment in higher education. In particular, GenAI's ability to provide immediate and iterative formative feedback on the quality of students' work has substantial potential to enhance student learning and attainment. However, for feedback to be impactful and useful, the quality and utility of feedback generated by GenAI needs to accurately reflect the quality of the work and align with principles for good feedback provision. This study evaluated the feedback that an undergraduate student might obtain from a single, unscaffolded interaction with a GenAI platform (ChatGPT4o), without tutor input, applied to 30 Year 1 Bioscience essays. Using a bespoke rubric for feedback quality alongside qualitative and quantitative analyses, the GenAI-generated feedback was evaluated for alignment to established hallmarks of good feedback practice. Overall, GenAI-authored feedback had useful elements but was limited in scope. While feedback tended to be accurate, specific to the essay, with a strong focus on content and substantial elements of feed-forward advice, critical guidance and motivational feedback were limited. Within the feedback test, neutral observations focused mostly on structure and use of figures. Positive feedback focused mainly on use of language, and areas for improvement mostly on structure, missing content, and citations/references. These findings suggest that GenAI may have some potential to provide instant, formative guidance to students, but its use may require substantial scaffolding by educators in order to be effective.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
FEBS Open Bio
Published
2026-09-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/2211-5463.70339
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating GenAI ‐produced feedback on undergraduate bioscience essays against good higher education feedback practice

Nigel Francis, Stephen Rutherford, Annabel Court, Andrew Shore
FEBS Open Bio
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Evaluating GenAI ‐produced feedback on undergraduate bioscience essays against good higher education feedback practice

Nigel Francis, Stephen Rutherford, Annabel Court, Andrew Shore
article en

Abstract

The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has led to substantial interest in its potential to support student learning and assessment in higher education. In particular, GenAI's ability to provide immediate and iterative formative feedback on the quality of students' work has substantial potential to enhance student learning and attainment. However, for feedback to be impactful and useful, the quality and utility of feedback generated by GenAI needs to accurately reflect the quality of the work and align with principles for good feedback provision. This study evaluated the feedback that an undergraduate student might obtain from a single, unscaffolded interaction with a GenAI platform (ChatGPT4o), without tutor input, applied to 30 Year 1 Bioscience essays. Using a bespoke rubric for feedback quality alongside qualitative and quantitative analyses, the GenAI-generated feedback was evaluated for alignment to established hallmarks of good feedback practice. Overall, GenAI-authored feedback had useful elements but was limited in scope. While feedback tended to be accurate, specific to the essay, with a strong focus on content and substantial elements of feed-forward advice, critical guidance and motivational feedback were limited. Within the feedback test, neutral observations focused mostly on structure and use of figures. Positive feedback focused mainly on use of language, and areas for improvement mostly on structure, missing content, and citations/references. These findings suggest that GenAI may have some potential to provide instant, formative guidance to students, but its use may require substantial scaffolding by educators in order to be effective.

FEBS Open Bio
The University of Melbourne (AU), AgriBio (AU), Cardiff University (GB)
Cardiff University
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.