Does Learning from Giving Feedback Depend on the Product Being Reviewed: Concept Maps or Answers to Test Questions?
Open accessAbstract
Giving feedback to peers can be a valuable learning experience for a feedback provider. However, different types of products require different types of feedback, which, in turn, may lead to different learning outcomes. The current study investigates the effect on the learning of feedback providers of reviewing different types of products. Secondary school students (n =127) were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions: giving peer feedback on either concept maps or answers to open-ended test questions. Both types of product, created by the researchers, were comparable with regard to content: they included the same misconceptions and were both of average quality. Giving peer feedback was part of a chemistry lesson delivered in an online inquiry learning environment. Students’ post-test scores, their own learning products, and the quality of the provided feedback were analysed to check for an effect on learning. There was no difference in post-test scores between the conditions, but the quality of the provided feedback predicted post-test scores. This indicates that it is not the type of product reviewed that matters, but the effort that students put into giving feedback. Possible implications for practice and further research directions are discussed.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003 · Cited by 2,119 · see citing works
Self-citationPatchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x · Cited by 181 · see citing works
The role of technology-facilitated peer assessment and supporting strategies: a meta-analysis
Zheng, L., Zhang, X., & Cui, P. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1644603 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
The Power of Giving Feedback and Receiving Feedback in Peer Assessment.
Li, L., & Grion, V. (2019) · All Ireland Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.62707/aishej.v11i2.413 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wang, X.-M., Wang, J.-L., Xu, S.-Y., & Xu, S.-J. (2025) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-025-00554-2 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“…assessed short-term effects (Disch et al., 2023; Haugwitz et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2013), a limitation that may be attributed to the fact that the duration of the experiment in the classroom setting is strictly limited by various objec-tive factors (Dmoshinskaia et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2022).”
- Authors
- Dmoshinskaia, N., Gijlers, H., & de Jong, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Twente (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Dmoshinskaia, Natasha
- Venue
- Journal of Science Education and Technology
- Published
- 2021-09-30
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 166-176
- ISSN
- 1059-0145 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1839
- OpenAlex
- W3204150401
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 1.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Science Education and Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- H2020 LEIT Information and Communication Technologies (731685)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- peer feedback, concept maps, feedback quality, misconceptions, chemistry education, high school students
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
