Search

This study compared the effects of worked example and scripting on students' argumentative peer feedback, essay and learning qualities. Participants were 80 BSc students who were randomly divided over 40 dyads and assigned to two experimental conditions (worked example and scripting). An online peer feedback environment named EduTech was designed and students were tasked with writing an argumentative essay, engaging in peer feedback, and revising their essay. The results indicate that students in the scripting condition benefited more than students in the worked example condition regarding peer feedback quality. Furthermore, the scores of students in both conditions improved from pre-test to post-test in terms of argumentative essay writing and learning. This difference was significant, however, between the two conditions only with regard to argumentative essay writing favoring the scripting condition. We explain how each of these approaches can be used to improve students' argumentative peer feedback and essay writing and learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the impact of an online peer-review script on students' argumentative peer-review quality and argumentative essay writing. A pre- and post-test experimental design was used with 42 undergraduate students in the field of educational science. Students were randomly divided over 21 dyads and assigned to two conditions (unscripted and scripted peer-review). Students were first asked to write an original argumentative essay about the topic at hand. Then, students in the scripted condition had to review their peer's argumentative essay based on a peer-review script while students in the unscripted condition reviewed their peer's essay without the script. Finally, all students had to revise their original essay based on the comments of their peers. Students in the scripted peer-review condition outperformed students in the unscripted condition in terms of quality of their argumentative peer-review and argumentative essay writing. These results are discussed and implications are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the effects of unscripted, scripted and guided online peer feedback on students' argumentative essay writing, argumentative feedback quality and domain-specific knowledge acquisition in the field of educational sciences. Participants were 52 students who were randomly divided over 26 dyads and randomly assigned to three conditions (unscripted, scripted and guided peer feedback conditions). An online peer feedback platform, named EduTech, was designed and these instructional supports were embedded within this platform. Students were asked to write an argumentative essay (individually), to engage in argumentative peer feedback with their learning partner (collaboratively), and finally to revise their essays based on feedback received (individually). The findings indicate that students in the scripted online peer feedback condition outperform the other two conditions in terms of argumentative essay writing, argumentative feedback quality and their domain-specific knowledge acquisition. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study compared the effects of support for peer feedback, peer feedforward and their combination on students' peer learning processes, argumentative essay quality and domain‐specific learning. Participants were 86 BSc students who were randomly divided over 43 dyads. These dyads, in a two‐factorial experimental design, were assigned to four conditions including: peer feedback (n = 22), peer feedforward (n = 22), mixed (n = 20) and control group (n = 22) conditions. An online peer feedback environment named EduTech was designed which allowed us to implement various types of support in the form of question prompts. In this online environment, students were asked to write an argumentative essay on a controversial topic, to engage in peer learning processes and to revise their essay. Overall, the results showed that students in the three experimental conditions (peer feedback, peer feedforward and their combination) benefited more than students in the control group condition (without any support) in term of peer learning processes, argumentative essay quality and domain‐specific learning. However, there was no significant difference among the three experimental conditions. This implies that peer feedforward can be as important as peer feedback in collaborative learning environments which is often neglected both in theory and practice. Practitioner NotesWhat is already known about this topic? Writing argumentative essays is a common practice for higher education students in various disciplines which deal with controversial issues.Writing argumentative essay requires solid argumentation strategies which makes it a challenging task for higher education students.Additional instructional support is needed to help students write high‐quality argumentative essays.What this paper adds? Peer learning is a promising instructional strategy for improving students' argumentative essay writing and learning.Online support in the form of question prompts to guide students during peer learning can improve their argumentative essay writing and learning.Next to the peer feedback, peer feedforward is also a promising instructional approach to support students' argumentative essay writing and learning.Implications for practice and/or policy Given the positive effects of peer learning processes, the use of peer feedback and peer feedforward should be given more attention by teachers to support students write high‐quality argumentative essays for controversial issues.Teachers and educational designers should not only provide opportunities for students to engage in peer feedback processes (how I am doing?) but also in peer feedforward processes (where to next?). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Turkish Journal of Biochemistry / Turk Biyokimya Dergisi is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)