PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 26, 2026International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education4 citationsOpen Access

Leveraging generative AI to facilitate peer feedback in collaborative argumentation learning

YCYubei ChangQLQingtang LiuYLYingxue Lu

Key Points

  • The aim is to explore the effectiveness of generative AI in enhancing peer feedback during collaborative argumentation learning.
  • Assigned 45 student teachers into 12 groups for peer feedback conditions.
  • Compared three feedback conditions: peer feedback, GenAI-supported feedback, and prompt-scaffolded GenAI feedback.
  • Conducted Kruskal-Wallis H tests to analyze argumentation performance and feedback quality.
  • GenAI-supported peer feedback groups achieved better argumentation performance.
  • The PS-GenAI PF group excelled in rebuttal data and addressing opposing views.
  • Higher quality feedback was characterized by more explanations and suggestions in GenAI groups.

Abstract

Peer feedback is crucial for promoting deeper thinking and interaction. However, various challenges exist in conducting high-quality peer feedback in collaborative argumentation learning. Generative AI (GenAI) has shown potential for supporting peer feedback, but how GenAI can be efficiently applied to support peer feedback needs to be further explored. In addition, the effect of GenAI-supported peer feedback on argumentation performance and feedback quality remains unclear. To address these gaps, this study compared three peer feedback conditions: peer feedback (PF), peer feedback with GenAI (GenAI-PF), and peer feedback with GenAI supported by prompt scaffolding (PS-GenAI-PF). Forty-five student teachers were assigned to 12 groups of 3–4 students. All groups were randomly assigned to three peer feedback conditions, each including four groups. Kruskal-Wallis H test results showed that the GenAI-supported peer feedback groups performed better in argumentation performance. In particular, the PS-GenAI PF group performed better on “Rebuttal data and warrant” and “Addressing the opposing view”. For feedback quality, the GenAI-supported peer feedback group showed more explanation, suggestions, as well as neutral and negative feedback. The epistemic network analysis revealed that the PS-GenAI PF group had strong associations with negative emotions and higher-order feedback content, such as identification-suggestion and explanation-suggestion. Implications for the instructional design and implementation of GenAI-supported peer feedback in higher education are discussed.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Chang et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69c4cc02fdc3bde44891766fhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00586-w
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1How does peer assessment support students’ self-regulation? A case study in online education2025 · 4 citations
  2. 2Improving metacognition in the classroom through instruction, training, and feedback2015 · 158 citations
  3. 3The Place of Dialogue Theory in Logic, Computer Science and Communication Studies2000 · 74 citations
  4. 4The relationship between student interaction with generative artificial intelligence and learning achievement: serial mediating roles of self-efficacy and cognitive engagement2023 · 139 citations
  5. 5Arguing to learn and learning to argue: design justifications and guidelines2009 · 284 citations