Students’ Perceptions of Human versus Artificial Intelligence Feedback in Academic Writing: A Case Study of Undergraduate Students at Ibn Tofail University

Abstract

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into education has created new opportunities for enhancing language learning, particularly in the domain of corrective feedback. This case study explores how learners perceive AI-generated corrections in comparison with peer and teacher-provided feedback. Drawing on a constructivist framework, which views learning as the active construction of knowledge, and a sociocultural perspective, which emphasizes mediation and interaction within the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), the research seeks to explore learners’ preferences and perceptions regarding multi-sourced feedback on their writing pieces. The study involved collecting writing samples from a group of 42 learners. These are first-year students from the English department at Ibn Tofail University. A qualitative research method was adopted as the data were collected through semi-structured group interviews. Students engaged in three stages: first, correcting their samples and those of their peers based on a checklist; second, reviewing the teacher’s corrections; and third, examining revisions generated by ChatGPT. Preferences were recorded and analyzed. The findings were then analyzed thematically, detecting certain patterns regarding students’ preferences. Findings indicated that the majority favored teacher corrections, valuing their clarity, simplicity, and contextual accuracy, particularly the way they highlighted concrete alternatives for improvement. In contrast, only a few students preferred AI-generated corrections, appreciating their immediacy and accessibility. These outcomes suggest that while AI can serve as a supportive tool in language classrooms, teacher feedback remains more trusted and pedagogically effective, showing how AI tools can be positioned as supplementary rather than substitutive. This study contributes to the ongoing debate on balancing technological innovation with the irreplaceable role of teachers in language education.