Human vs. machine feedback: Evaluating ChatGPT-4 in the assessment of secondary EFL Learners’ writing

This mixed-methods study compared ChatGPT-4 generated feedback with teacher feedback in assessing secondary school EFL learners’ writing. Conducted in a state secondary school in Istanbul, Türkiye, the study involved 53 5th-grade students who completed weekly writing tasks over six weeks. One class received teacher feedback, while two classes received feedback from ChatGPT-4. Students revised their texts based on the feedback, and changes in writing performance were analysed quantitatively. In addition, semi-structured interviews with 45 students were conducted to explore their feedback preferences and perceptions. The quantitative findings showed that both feedback types supported improvement in students’ writing, although teacher feedback produced more consistent gains across the six-week period. A strong positive correlation was found between ChatGPT-4 and teacher scores in both pre- and post-feedback assessments, suggesting that AI-generated scoring aligned closely with human evaluation. However, the qualitative findings revealed that students generally preferred teacher feedback, describing it as more personal, motivating, and easier to trust. ChatGPT-4 feedback was appreciated for its speed, clarity, and accessibility, but was also seen as less detailed and less emotionally engaging. The findings suggest that generative AI can serve as a useful formative feedback tool in EFL writing instruction, but it does not replace the pedagogical and relational strengths of teacher feedback. A hybrid model that combines the efficiency of AI with the contextual sensitivity of human feedback may offer the most effective approach for supporting writing development in secondary language classrooms.