Formative feedback is feedback given while students can still act on it, and it is one of the most effective ways to improve writing. In a Chinese literature course that includes Guo Moruo's The Goddesses, students benefit enormously from comments on a draft before they submit a final essay. The obstacle is time, since reading and commenting on every draft in a large class can take days.

AI-assisted feedback offers a way to speed up this process by providing a first layer of comments aligned with the teacher's rubric. Within minutes of submitting a draft, a student can learn that their thesis is descriptive, that a quotation lacks explanation, or that a paragraph drifts from the main argument. Quick turnaround means students can revise while the material is still fresh in their minds.

This approach works best when the feedback is clearly formative, meaning it does not carry a grade and is meant to guide revision. Students are more willing to engage honestly with comments when they know that mistakes in the draft will not count against them. The final grade remains a human decision based on the revised essay.

Set up the process with a clear workflow

A reliable workflow starts with a deadline for a complete draft, followed by automated feedback, a short revision period, and a final submission. Teachers can add a checkpoint where students submit a brief note describing what they changed in response to the comments. This structure builds accountability and gives the teacher insight into how students use feedback.

• Students submit a complete draft by a set deadline.
• Feedback aligned with the rubric is returned within a day.
• Students revise and write a short note explaining their changes.
• The teacher reviews the final essay and adds personal comments.
• The class discusses common revision patterns in a brief session.

Keep the teacher in the loop

Even in a formative setting, teachers should review a sample of the automated feedback to ensure it is accurate and appropriate. If the comments misread a student's interpretation or oversimplify historical context, a quick correction maintains trust. Teachers can also add personal notes on the drafts that most need human attention.

Regularly reviewing the feedback also helps teachers refine their rubrics. If the same confusing comment appears on many drafts, the rubric language may be unclear. Treating the system as a source of information about the course, not just a time saver, leads to continuous improvement.

Support students in using feedback well

Receiving feedback is not the same as knowing what to do with it. Teachers can model the process by showing a draft, the comments it received, and a revised version in class. Walking through how a specific comment led to a specific change helps students see revision as a skill they can practice.

Encouraging students to prioritize comments is also important. Not every suggestion carries equal weight, and students who try to address everything at once may lose the thread of their argument. A simple instruction to start with the comments about thesis and evidence usually produces the largest gains.

Maintain integrity and transparency

Students should understand that the tool provides feedback on their writing and does not write it for them. A clear explanation in the syllabus of how feedback is generated, how it is used, and what remains the student's responsibility prevents confusion. It also reinforces the idea that the essay and the thinking behind it belong to the student.

When used thoughtfully, formative AI feedback can raise the quality of student drafts and reduce the volume of basic errors that reach the final submission. Teachers then spend less time repeating the same comments and more time engaging with ideas. That shift can make grading more rewarding for everyone involved.