Enhancing peer feedback provision through user interface scaffolding: A comparative examination of scripting and self-monitoring techniques

Abstract

Despite its perceived benefits, peer feedback provision is often associated with challenges such as superficial comments, poor content quality, and students’ unwillingness to criticise their peers’ work. This study explores the effects of two well-established scaffolding strategies — scripting and self-monitoring on students’ engagement, quality of peer feedback, and evaluative judgement. A total of 149 higher education students from a course that utilises a peer feedback tool were randomly divided into two conditions: one leveraging an interface for peer feedback provision that incorporates scripted instruction and the other using an interface implemented to support self-monitoring. Results suggest a significant distinction between the two scaffolded strategies. Students in the scripted condition provided longer and superior-quality feedback and also exhibited a more critical perspective in their evaluations compared to the self-monitoring condition. This study unfolds two significant contributions. First, it enriches the growing body of empirical evidence on educational design principles in peer feedback provision by expanding our understanding of the individual scaffolding tool effects, specifically in the context of scripting and self-monitoring. This contribution is crucial as it lays the groundwork for more nuanced explorations into optimal strategies for their application in future research. Second, the study contributes to the burgeoning interest in developing theory-based digital learning environments. We discuss the implications of these findings, including highlighting potential long-term advantages associated with the employment of the self-monitoring approach despite its seemingly less effective performance in the short run.