Student prompt for creating self-feedback GenAI and then a worksheet of their self-feedback

An interactive AI coaching tool that guides students through a structured self-feedback process. Instead of waiting for teacher comments, students actively generate their own feedback by comparing their work to quality exemplars, rubrics, or other resources.

How It Works

The AI coach:

1. Explains the methodology - Introduces students to active self-feedback and its benefits
2. Analyses the assignment - Reviews the student's assignment brief to understand requirements
3. Selects a comparator - Helps students choose what to compare their work against (exemplar, rubric, class notes, AI-generated example, etc.)
4. Asks tailored questions - Generates four reflective questions specific to the assignment, asking them one at a time in conversation
5. Collects responses interactively - Waits for each answer, probing for detail when needed, before moving to the next question
6. Creates a feedback table - Compiles all responses into an organised table that students can use to improve their work

Key Features

✅ Interactive questioning - Questions are asked one at a time in conversation, not as a pre-made worksheet
✅ Personalised to each assignment - Questions are generated based on the specific brief and chosen comparator
✅ Evidence-based pedagogy - Grounded in research on self-feedback, intellectual development, and student agency
✅ Student agency - Students generate their own insights rather than passively receiving feedback
✅ Verbatim responses - Final table preserves students' exact words, maintaining authenticity
✅ Metacognitive development - Includes forward-looking questions about changed understanding

What Students Experience

Step 1: Brief introduction to why self-feedback matters
Step 2: Upload their assignment brief (not their work)
Step 3: Choose a comparator resource
Step 4: Answer four reflective questions one at a time through conversation
Step 5: Receive a completed self-feedback table to guide their redraft

Time required: 15-30 minutes depending on assignment complexity

Educational Benefits

Research shows this approach increases:

• Performance (Nicol and Rose, 2025)
• Intellectual development (Rose and Stoner, 2025)
• Critical thinking (Nicol and McCallum, 2023)
• Student agency (Nicol and Kushwah, 2023)
• Feedback quality (Nicol and McCallum, 2021)

What Makes This Different

Traditional approach:

• Students submit work
• Wait for teacher feedback
• Passively receive comments
• May or may not act on feedback

Active self-feedback approach:

• Students compare their work to quality examples
• Generate their own specific feedback
• Develop judgement and critical thinking
• Take ownership of improvement process

Technical Specifications

Platform: Microsoft Copilot (or ChatGPT)
Format: Text-based interactive conversation
Input required: Assignment brief/rubric
Output: Structured self-feedback table with student responses
Duration: Single session (15-30 minutes)
Reusability: Can repeat with new drafts or different comparators

Important Boundaries

The AI coach: ✅ Does: Facilitate reflection, ask probing questions, clarify assignment requirements, generate example work if requested
❌ Does not: Write or improve student work, complete assignments, provide answers, do work for students

Suitable For

• Academic levels: Undergraduate through postgraduate
• Assignment types: Essays, reports, presentations, case studies, projects, creative work
• Disciplines: Any field where reflection and comparison to standards is valuable
• Use cases: Draft improvement, pre-submission review, skill development, office hour preparation

Instructions for Use

For Students:

1. Copy the provided prompt text
2. Paste it into a new Copilot conversation
3. Paste your assignment brief when asked
4. Choose a comparator
5. Answer each question thoughtfully
6. Use the resulting table to improve your work

For Educators:

1. Introduce the methodology to students in class
2. Share the prompt text or provide access to the tool
3. Demonstrate with an example
4. Encourage students to use before submission
5. Invite students to bring their self-feedback tables to consultations

Support and Attribution

Developed by: Jennifer Rose, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester
Contact: Jennifer.Rose@Manchester.ac.uk
Methodology: Active Self-Feedback framework
Resource: https://assets.manchester.ac.uk/staffnet/files/itl/active-self-feedback-for-staff/#/
Student testimonials: https://youtu.be/WlqWNyjvfUM?si=VsSX_V6gok0EgxU_

Feedback and Improvement

Users are encouraged to:

• Share experiences with Jennifer.Rose@Manchester.ac.uk
• Report any issues or confusion
• Suggest improvements
• Contribute to ongoing research on active self-feedback

Licence and Usage

This prompt is designed for educational use. Educators and students are free to:

• Use it in their courses and assignments
• Adapt it to specific disciplinary contexts
• Share it with colleagues and students
• Cite the methodology in academic work

Please maintain attribution to Jennifer Rose and the Active Self-Feedback research when sharing or adapting.

Common Questions

Q: Do students need to upload their completed work?
A: No - students only upload their assignment brief/rubric. They compare their completed work (which they have in front of them) to a comparator resource.

Q: Can this be used multiple times for one assignment?
A: Yes! Students can repeat with revised drafts or different comparators to deepen their learning.

Q: Does this replace teacher feedback?
A: No - it complements teacher feedback. Students develop self-assessment skills and bring more focused questions to consultations.

Q: How long does it take?
A: Typically 15-30 minutes, depending on assignment complexity and depth of reflection.

Q: What if students struggle to answer questions?
A: The AI coach probes for more detail and can rephrase questions. Students can also ask for clarification.

Q: Is this considered using AI to complete assignments?
A: No - students generate their own reflections. The AI only facilitates the comparison process. The work remains entirely the student's own.

Success Stories

Students report:

• Increased confidence in their work
• Better understanding of assessment criteria
• More focused and productive office hour discussions
• Improved ability to evaluate their own work
• Higher quality final submissions

Teachers report:

• More engaged and prepared students
• Deeper conversations during consultations
• Reduced need for basic feedback on obvious issues
• Students taking greater ownership of their learning
• Better quality submissions overall

For more information or to report issues, contact Jennifer.Rose@Manchester.ac.uk