Feedback Literacy and EFL Learner Engagement With ChatGPT Feedback: Predicting Feedback Uptake and Perceived Usefulness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1511.30Keywords:
feedback literacy, feedback uptake, perceived usefulness, ChatGPT-generated feedback, EFL writingAbstract
The proliferation of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT has transformed feedback provision in EFL writing, offering scalable and immediate support to learners. However, learner engagement with AI-generated feedback remains highly variable, raising questions about the internal mechanisms that shape feedback uptake. This study investigates how feedback literacy predicts both the behavioral adoption and perceived usefulness of ChatGPT-generated feedback among EFL learners, while also examining whether perceived ease of use mediates this relationship. Data were collected from 51 Chinese university students through questionnaires and revision-based tasks across three ChatGPT-supported writing assignments. Results from linear regression and bootstrapped mediation analyses revealed that feedback literacy significantly predicted both successful feedback uptake (R² = .56) and perceived usefulness (R² = .42). Moreover, perceived ease of use partially mediated this relationship, suggesting a layered cognitive-affective mechanism underlying learners’ engagement with algorithmic feedback. These findings extend feedback literacy theory beyond interpersonal contexts to AI-mediated, non-dialogic writing environments. They also refine the Technology Acceptance Model by highlighting learner competence as a critical determinant of usability and value perceptions. Pedagogically, the study underscores the need to cultivate feedback literacy as a prerequisite for meaningful engagement with AI tools in writing instruction.
References
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
Carless, D., & Young, S. (2024). Towards an idealized model of feedback uptake: Longitudinal development of feedback literacy from a social constructivist perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2389436
Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2024). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (7th ed.). Pearson.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
Dai, W., Lin, J., Jin, H., Li, T., Tsai, Y. S., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2023). Can large language models provide feedback to students? A case study on ChatGPT. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 323–325). IEEE.
Davis, F. D. (1989a). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Davis, F. D. (1989b). Technology acceptance model: TAM. In M. N. Al-Suqri & A. S. Al-Aufi (Eds.), Information seeking behavior and technology adoption (Vol. 205, pp. 219–225). IGI Global.
Dawson, P., Yan, Z., Lipnevich, A., Tai, J., Boud, D., & Mahoney, P. (2024a). Measuring what learners do in feedback: The feedback literacy behaviour scale. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(3), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2240983
Dong, Z., Gao, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2023). Assessing students’ peer feedback literacy in writing: Scale development and validation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(8), 1103–1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2175781
Ellis, R. (2010). Epilogue: A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335–349.
Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350
Ginsburg, S., & Stroud, L. (2023). Necessary but insufficient and possibly counterproductive: The complex problem of teaching evaluations. Academic Medicine, 98(3), 300–303.
Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2019). Academic emotions in written corrective feedback situations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 1–13.
Hidayatullah, E. (2024). Evaluating the effectiveness of ChatGPT to improve English students’ writing skills. In Humanities, Education, Applied Linguistics, and Language Teaching: Conference Series, 1(1), 14–19.
Khan, I., Tufail, M., Naseer, M. U., & Shahzad, N. (2025). Investigating how AI tools can assist teachers in refining their pedagogy and enhancing student learning experiences. The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies, 3(2), 383–396.
Kim, J., & Moon, J. (2025). Determinants of usefulness of ChatGPT for learning in technology acceptance model (TAM) using information credibility, fun, and responsiveness and moderating role of fun. SAGE Open, 15(1), 21582440251320173. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251320173
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.
Li, F., & Han, Y. (2022). Student feedback literacy in L2 disciplinary writing: Insights from international graduate students at a UK university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(2), 198–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1908957
Liao, Y.-Y. (2021). Developing and validating the student assessment-based feedback literacy (SAFL) instrument: A mixed-methods approach [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at El Paso]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved May 30, 2025, from https://search.proquest.com/openview/481524f189cdb3ae5efaa7037154ee77/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Lipnevich, A. A., & Panadero, E. (2021). A review of feedback models and theories: Descriptions, definitions, and conclusions. Frontiers in Education, 6, 720195.
Liu, K., & Storch, N. (2023). Second language learners’ engagement with written feedback. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 46(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.20029.liu
Ma, Y., Zuo, M., Gao, R., Yan, Y., & Luo, H. (2024). Interrelationships among college students’ perceptions of smart classroom environments, perceived usefulness of mobile technology, achievement emotions, and cognitive engagement. Behavioral Sciences, 14(7), 565.
Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2020). Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 527–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1667955
O’Connor, A., & McCurtin, A. (2021). A feedback journey: Employing a constructivist approach to the development of feedback literacy among health professional learners. BMC Medical Education, 21(1), 486. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02914-2
Plass, J. L., & Kalyuga, S. (2019). Four ways of considering emotion in cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 339–359.
Polakova, P., & Ivenz, P. (2024). The impact of ChatGPT feedback on the development of EFL students’ writing skills. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2410101. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2410101
Sheikh, F. (2024). AI-powered assessment and feedback: Enhancing student engagement and performance. Journal of AI Integration in Education, 1(4), 30-37.
Smith, J. (1995). Focused attention and noticing. In R. W. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (Vol. 9, pp. 23–45). National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
Tick, A. (2019). An extended TAM model, for evaluating eLearning acceptance, digital learning and smart tool usage. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 16(9), 213–233.
Winstone, N. E., Balloo, K., & Carless, D. (2022a). Discipline-specific feedback literacies: A framework for curriculum design. Higher Education, 83(1), 57–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00632-0
Winstone, N. E., & Boud, D. (2022b). The need to disentangle assessment and feedback in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(3), 656–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1779687
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting learners’ agentic engagement with feedback: A systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
Woo, D. J., Wang, D., Guo, K., & Susanto, H. (2024). Teaching EFL students to write with ChatGPT: Students’ motivation to learn, cognitive load, and satisfaction with the learning process. Education and Information Technologies, 1–28.
Wu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2020). From feedback to revisions: Effects of feedback features and perceptions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101826.
Zhan, Y., & Yan, Z. (2025). Students’ engagement with ChatGPT feedback: Implications for student feedback literacy in the context of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2471821
Zhang, T., & Mao, Z. (2023). Exploring the development of student feedback literacy in the second language writing classroom. Assessing Writing, 55, 100697.
Zhang, Z. V., & Hyland, K. (2018). Student engagement with teacher and automated feedback on L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 36, 90–102.
Zou, S., Guo, K., Wang, J., & Liu, Y. (2025). Investigating students’ uptake of teacher- and ChatGPT-generated feedback in EFL writing: A comparison study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2024.2447279
