How does the type of online peer feedback influence feedback quality, argumentative essay writing quality, and domain-specific learning?

Figures & data

Table 1. Elements of a high-quality argumentative essay (left), directed peer feedback strategies (feedback “FB”, feedforward “FF”, and their combination “FB+FF”), and undirected peer feedback strategy (UF).

Elements of a high-quality argumentative essay	Directed Peer feedback			Undirected peer feedback
	Feedback (FB)	Feedforward (FF)	FB+FF	UF
Intuitive opinion on the topic	Did your learning partner present his/her intuitive opinion on the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) present his/her intuitive opinion on the topic? Please explain.	In this condition, students received both question prompts in FB and FF conditions as guidelines to give feedback to their peers.	In this condition, students had the freedom to give their feedback on their peer's essays without following any specific format or guidelines. However, students were required to give comments with a minimum of 350 words and a maximum of 450 words.
Arguments in favor of the topic (pros)	Did your learning partner provide arguments in favor of the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) provide arguments in favor of the topic? Please explain.
Scientific facts in favor of the topic (pros)	Did your learning partner provide scientific facts (evidence, examples, figures, etc.) in favor of the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) provide scientific facts (evidence, examples, figures, etc.) in favor of the topic? Please explain.
Arguments against the topic (cons)	Did your learning partner provide arguments against the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) provide arguments against the topic? Please explain.
Scientific facts against the topic (cons)	Did your learning partner provide scientific facts against the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) provide scientific facts against the topic? Please explain.
Opinion on the topic considering various pros and cons.	Did your learning partner take into account the integration of various pros (arguments in favor of the topic) and cons (arguments against the topic) in forming his/her opinion of the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) form his/her opinion of the topic taking into account the integration of various pros (arguments in favor of the topic) and cons (arguments against the topic)? Please explain.
Scientific facts to support opinion regarding the integration of various pros and cons of the topic	Did your learning partner provide scientific facts to support his/her opinion on the integration of various pros and cons of the topic? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) provide scientific facts to support his/her opinion on the integration of various pros and cons of the topic? Please explain.
Conclusion and statement on the topic	Did your learning partner come to a conclusion on the topic based on his/her arguments? Please explain.	What is your advice to your learning partner to (better) come to a conclusion on the topic based on his/her arguments? Please explain.

Table 2. The procedure of the study and design of the online learning module.

Phase	Estimated time	Start date	Deadline
Introduction	20 min	Sep 20th
Pre-test	35 min	Sep 20th 08:00hrs	Sep 20th 20:00hrs
Write an argumentative essay	105 min	Sep 21st 08:00hrs	Sep 21st 23:30hrs
Peer feedback	90 min	Sep 22nd 08:00hrs	Sep 22nd 23:30hrs
Revise the essay, post-test, and debrief	100 min	Sep 23rd 08:00hrs	Sep 23rd 23:30hrs
Total	350 min

Figure 1. The procedure of the study.

Table 3. Quality of writing argumentative essays scores for the original and revised essays for all conditions.

Conditions		Original essay		Revised essay
	N	M	SD	M	SD
UF	45	10.17	2.09	11.37	2.63
FB	47	8.87	2.63	10.61	2.67
FF	48	8.79	2.39	10.47	2.36
FB+FF	44	9.65	1.79	11.15	1.86

Table 4. Domain-specific knowledge scores for the pre-test and post-test for all conditions. Scores were transformed such that the maximum possible score was 100.

Conditions		Pre-test		Post-test
	N	M	SD	M	SD
UF	41	49.17	9.35	59.00	12.86
FB	45	51.20	9.49	61.04	9.58
FF	48	50.06	11.36	61.98	11.10
FB+FF	42	50.48	9.29	59.57	11.25

Table

Variables	Points	Labels	Descriptions
Intuitive opinion	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on intuitive opinion is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on intuitive opinion is presented but justification for the feedback is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on intuitive opinion is presented and justification for the feedback is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Claims in favor of the topic	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on pro-claim(s)is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on pro-claim(s) is presented but justification for the feedback is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on pro-claim(s) is presented and justification for the feedback is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way
Scientific facts in favor of the topic	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on scientific facts in favor of the topic is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on scientific facts in favor of the topic is presented but justification for the feedback is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on scientific facts in favor of the topic is presented and justification for the feedback is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Claims against the topic	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on con-claim(s)is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on con-claim(s) is presented but justification for the feedback is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on con-claim(s) is presented and justification for the feedback is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Scientific facts against the topic	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on scientific facts against the topic is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on scientific facts against the topic is presented but justification for the feedback is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on scientific facts against the topic is presented and justification for the feedback is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Integration of pros and cons	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on integration of pros and cons is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on integration of pros and cons is presented but justification for the integration is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on integration of pros and cons is presented and justification for the integration is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Conclusion	Zero	Not mentioned	No feedback on conclusion is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Feedback on conclusion is presented but justification for the feedback is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Feedback on conclusion is presented and justification for the feedback is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.

Table

Variables	Points	Labels	Descriptions
Intuitive opinion	Zero	Not mentioned	No intuitive opinion is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Intuitive opinion is presented but it is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Intuitive opinion is presented and it is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Arguments in favor of the topic (pro-arguments)	Zero	Not mentioned	No argument is presented in favor of the topic.
	One	Not elaborated	Only one argument is presented in favor of the topic.
	Two	Elaborated	Multiple arguments (two or more) are presented in favor of the topic.
Scientific facts in favor of the topic (pro-facts)	Zero	Not mentioned	No justification for pro-argument(s) is presented. None of the pro-claim(s) are justified. Pro-argument(s) are just being presented without any back up/support in terms of presenting scientific facts, evidence, examples, figures etc.
	One	Not elaborated	Justification for pro-argument(s) is presented. Pro-argument(s) are being backed up/supported (with scientific facts, evidence, examples, figures etc.) but they are not strongly connected to the pro-argument(s). Justification for pro-argument(s) are not discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Justification for pro-argument(s) is presented. Pro-argument(s) are being backed up/supported (with scientific facts, evidence, examples, figures etc.) and they are strongly connected to the pro-argument(s). Justification for pro-argument(s) are discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Arguments against the topic (con-arguments)	Zero	Not mentioned	No argument is presented against the topic.
	One	Not elaborated	Only one argument is presented against the topic.
	Two	Elaborated	Multiple arguments (two or more) are presented against the topic.
Scientific facts against the topic (con-facts)	Zero	Not mentioned	No justification for con-argument(s) is presented. None of the con-argument(s) are justified. Con- argument(s) are just being presented without any back up/support in terms of presenting scientific facts, evidence, examples, figures etc.
	One	Not elaborated	Justification for con-argument(s) is presented. Con-argument(s) are being backed up/supported (with scientific facts, evidence, examples, figures etc.) but they are not strongly connected to the con-argument(s). Justification for con- argument(s) are not discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Justification for con-argument(s) is presented. Con-argument(s) are being backed up/supported (with scientific facts, evidence, examples, figures etc.) and they are strongly connected to the con-argument(s). Justification for con-argument(s) are discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Integration of pros and cons	Zero	Not mentioned	No integration of pros and cons is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Integration of pros and cons is presented but justification for the integration is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Integration of pros and cons is presented and justification for the integration is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.
Conclusion	Zero	Not mentioned	No conclusion is presented.
	One	Not elaborated	Conclusion is presented but it is not discussed or elaborated on or it is discussed in an insignificant way.
	Two	Elaborated	Conclusion is presented and it is discussed or elaborated on in a significant way.