Feedback should point to the student's work
Dr. Steve Troyer · October 20, 2026
Teachers, around half of students who got AI feedback on their writing didn't change a single character afterward.
That comes from researchers at Leibniz-IPN, who looked at 655 writing tasks created by teachers on an edtech platform, with 14,236 students in grades 1-12. In their words, "around half of the students did not revise a single character in the text after receiving feedback." The rate was about the same across grade levels, task types and kinds of feedback (Leibniz-IPN).
A second study points the same way. In a randomized study with 70 graduate students, AI feedback written with a step-by-step prompt was rated higher quality than teacher feedback. The revisions weren't significantly better, though. Teacher feedback "resulted in comparable gains," and the authors conclude that "feedback quality alone is insufficient" (Springer).
Neither study is the final word. The first measured whether students changed anything, not whether the writing improved, and the second is small and isn't K-12. I still think they say something useful about AI student feedback. Better wording on its own didn't get students to revise. I think 2 things have a better chance: feedback a student can act on, and class time to act on it.
Feedback a student can act on points to something in their work: this sentence, this paragraph, this step in the problem. That kind of comment is hard to write when the rubric itself says "strong evidence" or "clear organization." So this workflow starts with the rubric. If you read the edition on deciding what good looks like before asking AI, this is the same idea applied to grading.
Let AI draft the rubric from your assignment
If your school uses Google Classroom with Gemini, the Rubrics section of the assignment editor can now generate a rubric "based on their assignment." Google says educators "review and edit the proposed rubric criteria before adding it to the assignment" (Google). It's available on Education Fundamentals, Standard and Plus for users over 18, and it's on by default when your school has Gemini in Classroom turned on. A June update also converts an existing rubric file, or a photo of a paper rubric, into a Classroom rubric you can edit before saving (English only) (Google).
Not on Google? Paste the assignment directions into whichever AI tool your school has approved. The assignment is all it needs. Leave out student work and names; the class data edition covers that boundary in more detail.
Rewrite each criterion into something you can see
This is the step that matters most, and it's yours. Read every criterion and ask: could I put my finger on the place in a paper where this shows up? "Strong evidence" fails that test. "Uses 2 pieces of evidence from the text and explains how each one supports the claim" passes it.
Here is my assignment and a draft rubric. Rewrite each criterion so it describes something a student would have on the page if they met it, in words a [grade] student can understand. Keep the same number of criteria and don't add new requirements. For each level, describe what is present or missing in the work. Avoid levels that only change the adjective. Flag any criterion you couldn't make observable so I can decide what to do with it.
Write feedback that points to the work
Now each comment can do 2 things: name the place in the student's writing, and give 1 next step tied to a criterion. AI can help with the frame. You read the paper and find the line.
Using these rubric criteria, write a short comment frame for each one. Each frame should have a blank where I quote the student's line, 1 sentence on what that line does or doesn't do yet for the criterion, and 1 next step the student can finish in class. Keep each frame under 40 words.
You fill in the blanks from the student's paper yourself. That keeps the pointing with the person who actually read the work, and it keeps student writing out of the AI tool.
What you should get back
A rubric where each level describes what's on the page, a short list of criteria the AI couldn't make observable, and 1 comment frame per criterion. Read the flagged list first. A criterion that can't be described on the page is a decision for you: reword it, or ask whether it belongs on this rubric at all.
How to check an AI-drafted rubric
- Hold each criterion against your assignment. It should ask for what the assignment asks for and nothing extra.
- Read the levels in order. Something on the page should change from one level to the next. If only the adjective changes (excellent, good, fair), rewrite it.
- Read it the way a student would. Could a [grade] student tell what to fix?
- Try 1 comment on a real paper before you use the frames for the whole class.
Give students time to revise
Hand the feedback back with time in class to act on it, in the same period: 10 minutes, 1 next step each. Then check the simplest thing the Leibniz-IPN study measured. Did the student change anything? Count how many did. If it's around half, that matches what the researchers saw, and now you have your own number to work on. The same habit of using what you collect to decide tomorrow's lesson is at the center of the AI formative assessment edition.
My one warning
A rubric Gemini drafts from your assignment will look finished. It'll have neat rows, levels and points, and that's exactly why it's easy to attach as is. Google's own instruction is to review and edit it before you add it. Do that. If you can't point to a criterion on a student's page, the student can't either.
Which criterion on your rubrics is hardest to point to on the page? Reply and tell me. I may build a future edition around it.
Gemini and Google Classroom are products of Google. EdTeacherAI is not affiliated with or endorsed by Google.
Every workflow in the series, with the prompts and the review steps, in the free Field Guide.
Get the Field Guide, freeCommon questions
- Do students revise after getting AI feedback?
- Often they don't. A Leibniz-IPN study of 14,236 students in grades 1-12 found that around half did not change a single character after receiving generative AI feedback on their writing.
- Can Google Classroom make a rubric with Gemini?
- Yes. In the assignment editor's Rubrics section, Gemini can draft a rubric based on the assignment, and Google says teachers should review and edit the criteria before adding it. It's on Education Fundamentals, Standard and Plus for users over 18.
- How do I make a rubric more specific with AI?
- Give the AI your assignment and draft rubric, and ask it to rewrite each criterion as something a student would have on the page if they met it. Then check that each level changes what is on the page, not just the adjective.
- Should I paste student work into an AI tool to get feedback?
- You don't need to for this workflow. The AI sees only the assignment and the rubric and writes comment frames; you read the student's paper and fill in the line you're pointing to.