A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF CHATGPT, GEMINI, AND PERPLEXITY FEEDBACK FOR B1-B2 EFL LEARNERS
Abstract
In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become an increasingly influential component of educational practice, particularly in language learning. AI-powered tools are now capable of offering immediate, personalized, and contextually sensitive support, helping learners develop writing accuracy, critical thinking, and revision strategies. In EFL contexts, AI enhances access to highquality feedback and reduces teachers’ workload by automating lower-level tasks, allowing instructors to focus on formative guidance. This study investigates the expanding role of AI in EFL writing instruction, with a special focus on grammar feedback generated by ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity. The case study involved 16–17-year-old learners from a military-academic lyceum, representing B1–B2 proficiency levels. Using researcher-designed rubrics, AI-generated feedback was evaluated across three key dimensions: technical accuracy, pedagogical clarity, and linguistic appropriacy. The results show that ChatGPT provides human-like, detailed, and supportive explanations that foster understanding, while Gemini delivers concise and structured feedback that suits more autonomous learners. Perplexity, in contrast, offers factual but brief comments, emphasizing accuracy over elaboration. These findings suggest that while AI tools can enhance feedback speed and consistency, their pedagogical value depends heavily on teacher mediation and careful prompt design. The study concludes that AI should not replace the teacher’s role but rather complement it acting as a co-pilot that supports learners through timely, personalized guidance. The research contributes to AI-informed pedagogy by linking feedback theory, rubric-based evaluation, and classroom practice.
Full text article
References
Alnemrat, A., Aldamen, H., Almashour, M., Al-Deaibes, M., & AlSharefeen, R. (2025). AI vs. teacher feedback on EFL argumentative writing. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1614673. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1614673
Alpar, Ö. (2025). Evaluating generative AI tools for improving English writing skills: A preliminary comparison of ChatGPT-4, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(3), 1775–1787.
Alsofyani, A. H., & Barzanji, A. M. (2024). The effects of ChatGPT-generated feedback on Saudi EFL learners’ writing skills and perception at the tertiary level: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Educational Computing Research. Advance online publication.
Amoush, K., & Alhosban, A. A. (2025). Mastering EFL writing with ChatGPT: A systematic review of benefits, challenges, and best practices. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 15(8), 3843–3852.
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. Routledge.
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
British Council. (2024). AI and language learning: The British Council’s vision. https://www.orsys.fr/orsys-lemag/en/ia-language-learning-vision-britishcouncil/
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
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, D. L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., & Sharma, S. K. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. Journal of Business Research, 154, Article 113353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113353
Han, J., & Li, M. (2024). Exploring ChatGPT-supported teacher feedback in the EFL context. System, 126, Article 103401.
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. (2004). Genre and second language writing. University of Michigan Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Liu, S. (2024). Effects of metalinguistic corrective feedback on novice EFL writers. British Journal of Educational Technology. Advance online publication.
Prensky, M. R. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Corwin Press.
Steiss, J., et al. (2024). Comparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing. Learning and Instruction, 91, Article 101894.
Wu, J., Li, J., Ge, Z., Xu, M., Lin, L., & Zhang, R. (2025). Effectiveness of generative AI in automated written corrective feedback with prompting. Journal of Educational Computing Research. Advance online publication.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Zeevy-Solovey, O. (2024). Comparing peer, ChatGPT, and teacher corrective feedback in EFL writing: Students’ perceptions and preferences. Technology in Language Teaching & Learning, 6(2), Article 1482.
Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International License
(CC BY 4.0).
Copyright © by author(s).