Interested in conducting research with schools/boards but unsure where to start or what they might expect of you? Your search is over! Come meet our expert researchers representing four Ontario school boards. They will discuss important aspects of building university/public education research relationships and strategies on how to sustain them. Lots of time for discussion so please bring your questions!

Session will be facilitated by professors James and Gillian Parekh.

Panelists:

°ä³ó°ù¾±²õÌý°ä´Ç²Ô±ô±ð²âÌýis the Manager of Research and Strategic Analytics with the Durham District School Board and has a focus on making research meaningful, enlightening, and timely.

¶Ù²¹±¹¾±»åÌý³¢²¹²Ô±ðÌýis the Executive Manager of Research and Organizational Transformation at the Waterloo Region District School Board where his primary responsibilities include board improvement and equity planning and research-informed decision-making.

´¡³¾¾±±ðÌý±Ê°ù±ð²õ±ô±ð²â is a senior researcher and co-chair of the external research review committee at the Toronto District School Board.

²Ñ²¹°ù³¦±ð±ô±ô±ðÌý²Ñ³¦³§³ó¾±²Ô±ð-²Ï³Ü²¹´Ç is the Research Manager at the York Catholic District School Board, with over 30 years of experience leading equity-focused research and data-driven system improvements.

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

The post Building and Sustaining Research Relationships with School Boards appeared first on Faculty of Education.

This study examines the types, revision impact, and perceived value of feedback from three sources (GenAI, peers, and teacher) in an ESL writing context. Drawing on a recognition-based framework that distinguishes recognitive and extra-recognitive feedback, the study investigates: (1) what types of feedback students receive from each source, (2) what types of revisions they make in response, and (3) how they perceive the value, effectiveness, and motivational impact of different feedback sources. Data were collected from 36 junior English majors across multiple drafting rounds and analyzed through NVivo coding of feedback function and focus, revision operations and levels, and student survey responses. Results show that GenAI feedback was overwhelmingly form-focused and functionally dense, frequently bundling evaluation, explanation, and suggestion within single comments. Teacher feedback exhibited greater meaning-level engagement and a more distributed functional structure, while peer feedback was primarily affective-relational. Revision patterns shifted from surface-level substitutions in early drafts to increased meaning-level additions and deletions in later rounds. Students rated teacher feedback highest in value, effectiveness, and motivational impact, followed by peer feedback, with GenAI rated lowest. Findings highlight the complementary but distinct pedagogical roles of human and AI-generated feedback.

Xiaosa Li graduated from Nanjing University with a PhD degree in applied linguistics. She now teaches in Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology. Her research interests include L2 writing, feedback literacy, and translation didactics.

The post Investigating the place and value of GenAI feedback in instructed ESL writing: A comparison with peer and teacher feedback appeared first on Faculty of Education.