Peer feedback can be a valuable learning and assessment tool. But not all feedback is equal; vague comments such as “good structure” or “work on grammar” offer little value to an English for academic purposes student looking to improve their writing. Unsurprisingly, students often ignore them and continue to make the same mistakes.
To make peer feedback a meaningful learning activity, we must treat it as a core skill. Generative AI (GenAI), when used with caution, can also support.
Teach students what good feedback looks like
We often expect students to give feedback without showing them how. Before setting the task, introduce a framework that breaks it down into the following:
- Affective comments that acknowledge strengths and establish a supportive tone
- Descriptive comments that summarise the overall performance
- Specific issues (along with location and error type)
- Justification for why something does or doesn’t work in relation to the marking criteria
- Constructive suggestions for revision.
You can illustrate these with examples. For instance, an affective comment such as “Your argument is well organised and easy to follow” can precede more constructive suggestions.
To deepen understanding, show students examples of weak feedback and ask them to highlight what is missing. You may find students quickly recognise when comments are too general, not supported with examples or lacking suggestions for improvement. They can then revise them using the framework.
Train students to read the marking criteria like assessors
Even well-structured feedback can be ineffective if students do not understand the assessment criteria. Instead of explaining it, ask students to examine it carefully in small groups. Encourage them to compare different performance levels and identify the differences between them. For example, what does an “in-depth analysis” look like? What does “topic-specific vocabulary” mean in practice? These questions help students focus on evidence over their personal responses to the work.
You can also have students analyse exemplar essays and discuss which performance band they belong to, using the rubric to explain their reasoning. Another activity where you ask students to swap vague descriptors with concrete examples – for example, “a wide range of sources” for “at least six sources” – encourages a deeper understanding of assessment criteria.
- Spotlight guide: Student support in the university classroom
- Spotlight guide: The practicalities of co-creation with students
- Peer feedback: a burden for students or route to better academic writing?
Structure peer feedback carefully
Once students understand their roles and the criteria, you can begin the feedback activity. Although this structured approach may take longer than informal peer feedback, clear guidelines help students focus on specific aspects of the writing, significantly improving the quality of the feedback. This process also encourages students to read their partner’s work more carefully, leading to more relevant and useful comments.
Use GenAI to extend student judgement
Rather than asking students to have AI check the essay, help them use it to complement their judgement.
One way to do this is to allow students to use a custom GPT that you have trained by inputting relevant course materials, assessment rubric and task requirements into the tool.
When the AI tool generates feedback, students can review it and identify suggestions they had not thought of and that they agree with. They can then add these points to their feedback using a different colour or label. This makes the authorship of comments transparent and encourages students to compare their judgement with the tool’s suggestions.
Another option is to design an agent that evaluates the quality of student feedback rather than the essay itself. In this case, the GenAI comments on whether the feedback meets key criteria such as clarity, justification and constructiveness.
Turn feedback into a conversation
Peer feedback should not end with written comments. Time to discuss the feedback can significantly improve the learning value of the activity.
Encourage students to ask questions about the comments and to explain their intentions as writers. These discussions often reveal misunderstandings and prompt deeper reflection about both the feedback and the writing.
This stage also allows you, as the teacher, to intervene when necessary. If students disagree about the accuracy or usefulness of certain comments, you can guide them to refer back to the marking criteria, the task requirements or specific textual evidence. These moments help students learn how experienced assessors evaluate feedback critically.
When we teach students to give feedback this way, comments such as “this essay is good” become less common and students learn to justify their evaluations using specific examples.
When pedagogy leads and technology supports, peer feedback stops feeling like a chore and becomes a powerful learning tool for students giving and receiving it.
Jiashi Wang is a language lecturer at the English Language Centre at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University in China.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
comment