The Role of Generative AI and Peer Feedback in Cooperative Writing Within a Feedforward Pedagogy: A Study of Iranian IELTS Test Takers

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26817/16925777.2132

Keywords:

Education Quality, Cooperative/collaborative learning, Distance education, online learning, Generative AI–Assisted Feedback, Hybrid Feedback Pedagogy

Abstract

Despite growing evidence for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in writing, little is known about combining Generative AI (GenAI) with peer feedback in L2 writing instruction. This mixed-methods study, grounded in AI-assisted language learning and collaborative learning theory, investigated the hybrid effect of GenAI and peer feedback through cooperative learning on the Writing Task 2 performance of 60 Iranian IELTS candidates. The experimental group received instruction integrating ChatGPT-5 and peer corrective feedback within cooperative activities, while the control group received parallel teacher-led instruction without GenAI feedback or structured peer collaboration. Pre- and posttests, assessed by certified examiners, showed the experimental group improved significantly in grammatical accuracy, lexical range, and discourse organization. Questionnaires and semi-structured interviews revealed that students perceived cooperative learning favorably and found GenAI feedback timely and useful for internalizing corrections, while peer collaboration reduced anxiety and enhanced idea development. Findings underscore the potential of large language models combined with peer feedforward to foster more effective and confident L2 writing, with implications for technology-enhanced instruction in high-stakes test preparation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Amir Ghajarieh, University of Ershad Damavand

Amir Ghajarieh is an Associate Professor of TEFL at Ershad Damavand University (EDU) and a certified English Translator. He leads EDU’s Translation Studies Department and also holds an adjunct professorship at UCSI University. Previously a Research Fellow at the University of Malaya, Ghajarieh was recognized as EDU’s best researcher in 2022 and 2023. His research focuses on language education and translation studies, including methods, teacherpreneur identity, translanguaging, CALL, educational psychology, and ESP. He has published widely in high-impact Scopus and ISI-cited journals

Narges Sardabi, Ershad Damavand University

Narges Sardabi is an Assistant Professor of TEFL at Ershad-Damavand University. She holds a Ph.D. in TEFL from Azad University and an M.A. in the same field from Tarbiat Modares University. Her research primarily focuses on language teacher education, with a specific emphasis on the intersection of teacher identity, agency, and emotion. Sardabi's work has appeared in various peer-reviewed journals, including the International Journal of Instruction and the Journal of Teaching and Learning. Her recent scholarship explores critical pedagogy, oral corrective feedback, and the application of self-determination theory in diverse learning environments.

Shiva Roostan, Ershad Damavand University

Shiva Roostan is a Ph.D. candidate in TEFL at the Islamic Azad University (Central Tehran Branch), where she focuses on advanced pedagogical research. Holding an M.A. in TEFL, she is currently serving as an instructor at Ershad-Damavand University, where she teaches various BA-level courses in the TEFL program. Beyond her academic pursuits, Shiva is a seasoned veteran in high-stakes English proficiency instruction, having extensive experience in teaching IELTS and TOEFL preparation courses. Her expertise extends to the professional development of language educators, as she has facilitated specialized workshops focused on standardized proficiency testing (IELTS/TOEFL).

References

Abdi Tabari, M., & Wang, Y. (2022). Assessing linguistic complexity features in L2 writing: Understanding effects of topic familiarity and strategic planning within the realm of task readiness. Assessing Writing, 52, 100605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2022.100605

Alnemrat, A., Aldamen, H., Almashour, M., Al-Deaibes, M., & AlSharefeen, R. (2025). AI vs. teacher feedback on EFL argumentative writing: A quantitative study. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1614673. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1614673

Asadi, M., & Taheri, R. (2024). Enhancing peer assessment and engagement in online IELTS writing course through a teacher’s multifaceted approach and AI integration. Technology Assisted Language Education, 2(2), 94–117. https://tale.razi.ac.ir/article_3247_a221229d006e6e53049c5986af82bbf9.pdf

Azimi, M., & Farahian, M. (2024). Exploring the effect of corrective feedback through QuillBot on EFL learners’ writing skill. Technology Assisted Language Education,, 2(3), 74–101. https://tale.razi.ac.ir/article_3310.html

Banisharif Dehkordi, M., Riahipour, P., & Rahimi Esfahani, F. (2025). Effects of AI driven written direct and indirect feedback on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ writing complexity. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 17(35), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.22034/elt.2025.66090.2760

Biria, R., & Jafari, S. (2013). The impact of collaborative writing on the writing fluency of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(1), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.1.164-175

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Chan, S. T. S., Lo, N. P. K., & Wong, A. M. H. (2024). Enhancing university level English proficiency with generative AI: Empirical insights into automated feedback and learning outcomes. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(4), ep541. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15607

Cheng, X., & Liu, Y. (2022). Student engagement with teacher written feedback. System, 109, Article 102880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102880

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications.

Crompton, H., Edmett, A., Ichaporia, N., & Burke, D. (2024). AI and English language teaching: Affordances and challenges. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55 (6), 2503–2529. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13460

Dikli, S., & Bleyle, S. (2014). Automated essay scoring feedback for second language writers: How does it compare to instructor feedback? Assessing Writing, 22, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.03.006

Ellis, R. (2010). A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335–349.http://www.jstor.org/stable/44488131

Escalante, J., Pack, A., & Barrett, A. (2023). AI-supported feedback on writing: Insights into efficacy and ENL student preference. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 57.https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00425-2

Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2012). The effects of direct written corrective feedback on improvement of grammatical accuracy of high-proficient L2 learners. World Journal of Education, 2(2), 49–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wje.v2n2p49

Fazilatfar, A. M., Fallah, N., Hamavandi, M., & Rostamian, M. (2014). The effect of unfocused written corrective feedback on syntactic and lexical complexity of L2 writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 482–488.

Ferris, D. (2007). Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.003

Fleckenstein, J., Liebenow, L. W., & Meyer, J. (2023). Automated feedback and writing: A multi-level meta-analysis of effects on students’ performance. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, 1162454. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1162454

Guo, Q., Feng, R., & Hua, Y. (2021). How effectively can EFL students use automated written corrective feedback? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(9), 2312–2331. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1879161

Hattie, J., and H. Timperley. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77 (1): 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.

Kaivanpanah, S., Alavi, S. M., & Meschi, R. (2020). L2 writers’ processing of teacher vs. computer-generated feedback. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 12(26), 175–215.https://doi.org/10.22034/elt.2020.11472

Lee, I. (2019). Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more. Language Teaching, 52(4), 524–536.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000247

Lee, D., Kim, H., & Sung, S. H. (2023). Development research on an AI English learning support system to facilitate learner-generated-context-based learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 71(2), 629–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11423-022-

Link, S., Mehrzad, M., & Rahimi, M. (2022). Impact of automated writing evaluation on teacher feedback, student revision and writing improvement. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 605–634.https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1743323

Lo, J., Wong, C., Ng, A., Wong, P., Cheung, D., & Lai, P. (2026). Stretching AI's reach: Assessing an AI-driven feedback system for extended academic writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, Article 100511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100511

McLeish, K. (2009). Attitude of students towards cooperative learning methods at Knox Community College: A descriptive study [Master’s thesis, University of Technology, Jamaica].

Noroozi, O., Haddadian, G., Gao, X., Schunn, C., Alqassab, M., & Banihashem, S. K. (2025). The value of GenAI for peer feedback provision: Student perceptions and impacts. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22, Article 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00558-6

Patchan, M. M., Hawk, B., Stevens, C. A., & Schunn, C. D. (2013). The effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions. Instructional Science, 41(2), 381–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9236-3

Pham, V. P. H. (2023). The impacts of collaborative writing on individual writing skills. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 52(4), 1221–1236.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-09939-2

Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079

Rahimi, M. (2021). A comparative study of the impact of focused vs. comprehensive corrective feedback and revision on ESL learners’ writing accuracy and quality.Language Teaching Research,25(5), 687–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216881987918

Rezai, A. (2022). Cultivating Iranian IELTS candidates’ writing skills through online peer feedback: A mixed-methods inquiry. Education Research International, 2022, Article 6577979. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6577979

Salavatizadeh, M., & Tahriri, A. (2020). The effect of blended online automated feedback and teacher feedback on EFL learners’ essay writing ability and perception. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 39(3.2), 181–225. https://dx.doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2021.38753.2899

Sardabi, N., Ghajarieh, A., Atar Sharghi, N., & Rahmani, L. (2025). Perceptions on oral corrective feedback: The case of Iranian EFL teachers and students in face-to-face and virtual learning contexts. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 19(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v19i1.8985

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129

Shi, H., & Aryadoust, V. (2024). A systematic review of AI-based automated written feedback research. ReCALL, 36(2), 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344023000265

Thi, N. K., & Nikolov, M. (2022). How teacher and Grammarly feedback complement one another in Myanmar EFL students’ writing. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 767–779.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2

Thi, N. K., & Nikolov, M. (2023). Effects of teacher, automated, and combined feedback on syntactic complexity in EFL students’ writing. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8(6). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00182-1.

Valero Haro, A., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Banihashem, S. K. (2024). How does the type of online peer feedback influence feedback quality, argumentative essay writing quality, and domain-specific learning? Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5459–5478. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2215822

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Yu, Q., & Schunn, C. D. (2023). Understanding the what and when of peer feedback benefits for performance and transfer. Computers in Human Behavior, 147, Article 107857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107857

Wang, Y., Zhang, Z. J., & Zhou, H. (2026). Artificial intelligence in language learning: A twenty-year scoping review of applications, research methods, and outcomes.Research Synthesis in Applied Linguistics, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/29984475.2026.2647961

Ware, P. (2011), Computer-Generated Feedback on Student Writing. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 769-774. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.272525

Zhang, Z., Aubrey, S., Huang, X., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2025). The role of generative AI and hybrid feedback in improving L2 writing skills: A comparative study. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1–19.https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2025.2503890

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2

Downloads

Published

2026-07-16

How to Cite

Ghajarieh, A., Sardabi, N., & Roostan, S. (2026). The Role of Generative AI and Peer Feedback in Cooperative Writing Within a Feedforward Pedagogy: A Study of Iranian IELTS Test Takers . GIST – Education and Learning Research Journal, 32(32). https://doi.org/10.26817/16925777.2132

Issue

Vol. 32 No. 32 (2026): GiST Education and Learning Research Journal

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 GIST – Education and Learning Research Journal

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Altmetric

Article metrics
Abstract views
Galley vies
PDF Views
HTML views
Other views
Escanea para compartir
QR Code
Crossref Cited-by logo

Some similar items: