Vietnamese EFL Students’ Perceptions and Preferences for ChatGPT, Peer, and Teacher Feedback in Writing Revision
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54855/callej.262729Keywords:
Writing revision, Teacher feedback, Peer feedback, ChatGPT feedback, Feedback integrationAbstract
Providing effective feedback is central to the development of academic writing skills for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. This explanatory sequential mixed-methods study investigated Vietnamese university students’ perceptions of and preferences for ChatGPT, peer, and teacher feedback in writing revision. Questionnaire data were collected from 110 third-year English majors and followed by semi-structured interviews with 10 purposively selected participants. Descriptively, teacher feedback received the highest composite rating (M = 4.15, SD = 0.49), whereas ChatGPT feedback was valued for availability and peer feedback for collaboration. Independent-samples t-tests showed no statistically significant differences between students with prior ChatGPT experience and first-time users across the five composite scores (all p > .05). The only significant correlation was between feedback preferences and integration/future use (r = .274, p = .004). Qualitative findings showed that teacher feedback was trusted despite timeliness concerns, ChatGPT was appreciated for immediacy but questioned for complex academic tasks, and peer feedback was constrained by face-saving concerns. Most participants supported combining all three sources and requested explicit training. The findings support systematic feedback literacy instruction, culturally responsive peer-review training, and guided AI use in writing courses.
References
Abdullaev, D., Abdazimov, A., Khusainova, Z., Makhmudov, S., & Sagdullaeva, D. (2025). A phenomenological study on the impact of personalized AI feedback on writing quality: Insights from EFL students in Uzbekistan. Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 26(7), 162-186. https://callej.org/index.php/journal/article/view/816
Almanea, M. (2025). Less is not more for learners: EFL learners’ preferences and perceptions of teachers’ written corrective feedback. Acta Psychologica, 255, 104926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.104926
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bui, H. P. (2023). Vietnamese university EFL teachers’ and students’ beliefs and teachers’ practices regarding classroom assessment. Language Testing in Asia, 13(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-023-00220-w
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
Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90012-0
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE. https://collegepublishing.sagepub.com/products/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research-3-241842
Dang, T. H. N. (2024). EFL students’ perceptions of peer feedback in writing classes at a university in Ho Chi Minh City. International Journal of Language Instruction, 3(2), 18-28. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijli.24322
Ha, Y. N., & Ho, N. P. (2025). EFL postgraduate students’ perceptions on the use of Grammarly and peer feedback to improve their academic writing skills. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 5(1), 25-49. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.25512
Haddadian, G. (2024). Comparing the effects of teacher feedback, automated feedback, and integrative feedback on EFL learners’ writing accuracy and writing apprehension. Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 25(3), 124-147. https://callej.org/index.php/journal/article/view/436
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444806003399
Jacobs, G. M., Curtis, A., Braine, G., & Huang, S.-Y. (1998). Feedback on student writing: Taking the middle path. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 307-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90019-4
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk & H. G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp. 11-30). Cambridge University Press.
Kazemi, M., Abadikhah, S., & Dehqan, M. (2018). EFL students’ perceptions of teacher feedback and intra-feedback in writing essays. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 21(2), 26-49. https://doi.org/10.5782/2223-2621.2018.21.2.26
Le, M. T. T., & Tran, K. V. (2024). Vietnamese university students’ perceptions of ChatGPT for homework assistance. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 18(15), 190-204. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v18i15.48819
Meniado, J. C., Huyen, D. T. T., Panyadilokpong, N., & Lertkomolwit, P. (2024). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Experiences and perceptions of EFL learners in Thailand and Vietnam. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100313
Mun, C. (2024). EFL learners’ English writing feedback and their perception of using ChatGPT. STEM Journal, 25(2), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.16875/stem.2024.25.2.26
Nguyen, T. H., Fehring, H., & Warren, W. (2015). EFL teaching and learning at a Vietnamese university: What do teachers say? English Language Teaching, 8(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n1p31
Nhung, N. N. T., & Ngan, N. T. B. (2024). Vietnamese EFL students’ perceptions and preferences for teachers’ written feedback. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research, 8(3), 23-29. https://www.ajhssr.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/B248032329.pdf
OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774
Pham, M. T., & Cao, T. X. T. (2025). The practice of ChatGPT in English teaching and learning in Vietnam: A systematic review. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 5(1), 50-70. https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.25513
Pham, T. N., Lin, M., Trinh, V. Q., & Bui, L. T. P. (2020). Electronic peer feedback, EFL academic writing and reflective thinking: Evidence from a Confucian context. SAGE Open, 10(1), Article 2158244020914554. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020914554
Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
Teng, M. F. (2024). “ChatGPT is the companion, not enemies”: EFL learners’ perceptions and experiences in using ChatGPT for feedback in writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100270
Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00022-9
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674576292
Zeevy-Solovey, O. (2024). Comparing peer, ChatGPT, and teacher corrective feedback in EFL writing: Students’ perceptions and preferences. Technology in Language Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 1482. https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v6n3.1482
Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90010-1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Author and CALL-EJ
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright of articles is retained by authors and CALL-EJ. As CALL-EJ is an open-access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings. Sources must be acknowledged appropriately.
