This study evaluates a “feedback-only,” constrained-generative AI tool designed to support revision without generating or rewriting student text. StoryCoach was developed for a business communication elective and grounded in cognitive apprenticeship with principles of feedback literacy. The tool generated structured feedback: one strength, one opportunity, and one reflective question per submission. Analysis of 57 paired drafts showed significant gains in feature-specific rhetorical execution, with vividness as the primary quantitative indicator (Cohen’s d  = 1.39), supported by independent reader judgments and student reflections. Findings demonstrate that constrained-generative AI can function as a pedagogical partner that strengthens rhetorical awareness and preserves authorship integrity.

In a cross-institutional study, this article shares research findings about business student perceptions and experiences using an automated writing assistant program based on traditional artificial intelligence. Using a mixed-methods approach, we share student responses to Grammarly’s suggested revisions and provide insight into students’ confidence levels and correctness in workplace written communication. Finally, this study concludes with a discussion of the implications of this work related to business communication education and research, as well as possibilities for the future.

What characterizes the language choices of untrained student peer reviewers? Undergraduate students ( N = 83) were randomly assigned to provide peer feedback on persuasive presentation manuscripts to three peers from their same and/or different course section. A total of 233 peer reviews were analyzed in terms of politeness, quality, and valence. Content and statistical analyses revealed similar politeness levels and quality regardless of the assessors’ identified gender or section of the assessee. However, students produced significantly more positively valenced reviews for same-section classmates, suggesting that students soften feedback through warmer language for peers with whom they have frequent interaction.

Using an evaluative approach within a professional communication service course, we used student documents and instructor feedback to uncover how students and instructors were understanding the rhetoric student learning outcome (SLO). Because rhetoric is central to the course, our driving questions were, Can we locate language that actualizes the rhetoric SLO in student documents? How does faculty feedback articulate the rhetoric SLO to facilitate effective revision? Overall, we found that whether identifying rhetoric in student documents or instructor feedback, the interpretation was varied and opens up room in pedagogical practices. We offer three implications for teaching: enhancing attention to teaching rhetoric, improving assignment design, and focusing on professional development for faculty.

Effective writing is a soft skill that is highly in demand in today’s workforce. This qualitative study examines student perceptions of a revise and resubmit policy aimed at increasing student engagement with an instructor’s writing feedback and ultimately improving students’ writing skills. Students across three business communication courses were offered bonus points if they made revisions and documented those revisions. The findings suggest that students were willing to complete a revision even if given only a small grade incentive. While some expressed negativity toward the extensive feedback, others viewed the revision option as a rare but valuable opportunity.

This study examines previously untested variables that influence social loafing in professional and technical communication group projects by determining the influence of communication quality and task cohesion on social loafing. A set-up factors model, which included group size, peer review, project scope, and method of team formation, was also tested for means of comparison. The results indicated the communication quality and task cohesion model significantly reduced social loafing, explaining 53% of the variance in social loafing. The model of set-up factors only explained about 4% of the variance. The article discusses instructional strategies that foster quality communication to reduce loafing.