Inside the Conversation: Exploring the Impact of Scripting on Peer Feedback Dialogues During Computer‐Supported Collaborative Inquiry Learning.
Background: Existing research on peer feedback has largely overlooked the potential of scripting in computer‐supported settings to facilitate peer feedback dialogues. Traditional peer feedback approaches in these environments often lead to surface‐level exchanges, limiting opportunities for meaningf...
| Published in: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 42; no. 3; pp. 1 - 28 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
| Format: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jun2026
|
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=194050905&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 194050905 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jun2026 vid: 42 iid: 3 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 194050905 194050905 194050905 10.1002/jcal.70261 194050905 ppf: 1 ppct: 27 formats: tig: atl: Inside the Conversation: Exploring the Impact of Scripting on Peer Feedback Dialogues During Computer‐Supported Collaborative Inquiry Learning. aug: au: Van Hoe, Amber Joel, Wiebe Jim, Slotta Tijs, Rotsaert Tammy, Schellens affil: VIVES University of Applied Sciences, Kortrijk, Belgium sug: subj: Computer-Assisted Instruction Learning Methods Feedback Students, High School Online Education Discussion Student Performance Appraisal Human Funding Source Canada Male Female Child Adolescence Quasi-Experimental Studies Thematic Analysis Data Analysis Software Interrater Reliability Descriptive Statistics Collaboration Learning Environment Child: 6-12 years Adolescent: 13-18 years Male Female ab: Background: Existing research on peer feedback has largely overlooked the potential of scripting in computer‐supported settings to facilitate peer feedback dialogues. Traditional peer feedback approaches in these environments often lead to surface‐level exchanges, limiting opportunities for meaningful critique and improvement. This study addresses this gap by introducing structured support through a peer feedback tool that incorporates scripting to guide computer‐supported dialogues. Objectives: This study explores how a computer‐supported peer feedback tool, using scripting through role assignments and dynamic sentence starters, facilitates the dynamics and content of peer feedback dialogues. Methods: A quasi‐experimental design was employed involving 230 students from grades 9 and 10, working in a computer‐supported collaborative inquiry learning environment. Students were divided into control and experimental groups. In the experimental group, a computer‐supported peer feedback tool was used to structure peer feedback dialogues with assigned roles and dynamic sentence starters. Results and Conclusions: The results showed that the scripted peer feedback tool led to more directive and focused feedback exchanges, facilitating clearer and more structured feedback. Students in the experimental condition provided more critical and actionable feedback, leading to improvements in their inquiry outputs. This study demonstrates the potential of scripting to facilitate peer feedback dialogues and suggests its implementation can enhance computer‐supported learning environments. Lay Summary: What is currently known about this topic? ○Peer feedback can enhance collaborative learning in educational settings.○Unstructured peer feedback dialogues often result in shallow exchanges and missed learning.○Computer‐supported learning environments can offer tools to guide peer feedback.○Scripting can help structure peer feedback.What does this paper add? ○Introduces a computer‐supported tool that uses scripting for peer feedback dialogues.○Shows that scripting leads to more focused and actionable peer feedback exchanges.○Demonstrates how structured feedback improves the depth of peer dialogue content.○Highlights how structured roles activate both the assessor and assessee in feedback dialogues.Implications for Practice/or Policy ○Scripting peer feedback can make feedback more focused and constructive in classrooms.○Scripting in peer feedback dialogues may improve student collaboration and critical thinking.○Teachers can use scripting tools to ensure both assessors and assessees participate fully.○Educators might integrate computer‐supported tools to better structure peer feedback dialogues. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|