Truace
Subscribe
70/100

Moderate evidence

Cite
More
Export CSVExport JSONEmailLinkedInX

AI feedback raised student achievement in a review of 36 studies

Study title: Can Generative AI Feedback Effectively Enhance Learning Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis of 36 Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies

Evidence type
Systematic review or meta-analysis
Sources
1 sourcePeer-reviewed
Published
2 min read
Truvace record
TRV-2026-2785cite or check it

Study title: Can Generative AI Feedback Effectively Enhance Learning Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis of 36 Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies

A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA 2020 guidelines pooled 36 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published between 2023 and 2025, yielding 72 effect sizes. It found that generative AI feedback had a moderate positive effect on academic achievement (g = 0.61).

Read the study abstract

Although generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) feedback shows promise for educational applications, its actual impact on learning outcomes and the factors influencing its effectiveness remain unclear. This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of GenAI feedback and identify key moderating factors. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we reviewed 36 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published between 2023 and 2025, yielding 72 effect sizes. The results…

Can Generative AI Feedback Effectively Enhance Learning Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis of 36 Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies
"Students on Tulane University Campus, New Orleans, October 2010" by Tulane Public Relations, CC BY 2.0.

The gain

A meta-analysis of 36 experimental and quasi-experimental studies (72 effect sizes, 2023 to 2025) found generative AI feedback had a moderate positive effect on academic achievement (g = 0.61).

In brief

The size of the benefit depended on how students were taught. Effects were stronger in learner-centered settings that promote active construction of knowledge than in teacher-centered, receptive instruction. Educational level, discipline, intervention duration and the role the AI played showed no significant moderation.

Benefits were strongest for cognitive outcomes, promising but less established for metacognitive development, and modest for non-cognitive outcomes. The authors say AI feedback should complement constructivist teaching and that teacher emotional support should be preserved.

Main points

  1. The review covered 36 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published between 2023 and 2025, producing 72 effect sizes.
  2. The pooled effect on academic achievement was moderate and positive (g = 0.61).
  3. Teaching method significantly moderated results, with stronger effects in learner-centered environments than in teacher-centered instruction.
  4. Educational level, discipline, intervention duration and the AI's role showed no significant moderation.
  5. Cognitive outcomes improved most; metacognitive benefits were promising but less established, and non-cognitive effects were modest.
  6. A three-level random-effects model accounted for dependencies among effect sizes, correcting the underestimated standard errors of conventional two-level models.

The full story

The authors followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines and pooled 36 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published from 2023 to 2025. Because many studies reported several outcomes, the analysis used a three-level random-effects model to handle the 72 dependent effect sizes.

The overall result was a moderate positive effect on academic achievement (g = 0.61). Subgroup analysis showed that learner-centered teaching, where students actively construct knowledge, amplified the effect compared with receptive, teacher-centered instruction.

By outcome type, the largest impact was on cognitive outcomes, with promising but less established gains in metacognitive development and modest effects on non-cognitive outcomes. The authors recommend using AI feedback as complementary scaffolding within constructivist pedagogies and preserving teacher emotional support to foster students' non-cognitive development.

Sources

1 on file
  1. Education Sciencesdoi:10.3390/educsci16060816
    Peer-reviewed2026-05-22

Talk it over

Four questions to start onWho gets this benefit, and who was left out of the study or story?

Start with a question

AI feedback raised student achievement in a review of 36 studieshttps://truvace.com/item/can-generative-ai-feedback-effectively-enhance-learning-outcomes-a-meta-analysis

  1. Who gets this benefit, and who was left out of the study or story?

    The gain A meta-analysis of 36 experimental and quasi-experimental studies (72 effect sizes, 2023 to 2025) found generative AI feedback had a moderate positive effect on academic achievement (g = 0.61).

    Answer in the thread

  2. How do we know? What can this kind of evidence show, and what can’t it?

    The evidence This rests on a systematic review or meta-analysis, from Education Sciences.

    Answer in the thread

  3. What does it leave open? What else would you want to know before acting on it?

    The record’s own caveat Benefits for metacognitive development are described as promising but less established, and effects on non-cognitive outcomes were modest, so the authors call for further research on those outcomes.

    Answer in the thread

  4. Have you seen AI used this way where you study, work or live? Did it go the same way?

    Answer in the thread

The questions are the same on every record. The details under them are taken from this record as written.

What readers say

More from Education