Online peer feedback that improves argumentative essays
A structure-focused online peer feedback module improved university students’ argumentative essay quality across courses and degree levels.
Source
Design, implementation, and evaluation of an online supported peer feedback module to enhance students' argumentative essay quality
Study at a glance
- Design
- Other — Pre–post evaluation of a structure-focused online peer-feedback essay module
- N
- N=284 · 284 of 330 students across five courses completed the module
- Population
- Bachelor and master students at Wageningen University across course domains
- Outcome
- Argumentative essay quality before vs after guided peer feedback
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
Online peer feedback that improves argumentative essays
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
What learning outcome did the online peer feedback module target?
To what extent does the supported online peer feedback module affect students’ argumentative essay writing performance?
What happened to essay quality from pre-test to post-test?
the argumentative essay writing performance of all students has significantly improved from pre-test to post-test
What they did
Researchers designed an online supported peer feedback module centered on argumentative essay structure and implemented it at Wageningen University across bachelor and master courses in several domains. Students wrote essays, exchanged guided peer feedback online, and revised; essay quality was scored before and after the module on recognized argument elements.
What they found
Essay performance improved significantly from pre-test to post-test with a large effect size, including gains across recognized elements of high-quality argumentative writing. Improvements held across course domains and for both bachelor and master students, with only limited level-specific differences on some elements.
The limits
What it doesn't show
Without a no-feedback or alternative-feedback control group, the study cannot isolate peer feedback from practice, instructor effects, or other course activities. Results come from one Dutch research university and may not generalize to other writing genres or less structured online setups.
Key terms
- Peer feedback
- Learners review and comment on each other’s work to support revision and learning.
- Argumentative essay
- A written text that takes a position and supports it with claims, evidence, and responses to opposing views.
- Scalability
- Whether an instructional tool works across many courses, domains, and learner levels—not just one class.
- Pre-test/post-test
- Measuring the same performance before and after an intervention to track change.
- Partial eta squared
- An effect-size statistic describing how much variance an effect explains in multivariate analyses.
Flashcards
0 of 12 answers reviewed
Research intelligence for this paper
See its role on concept claims, tensions it is part of, placement history, and related discoveries.
Quiz yourself
What was the primary dependent measure in this study?
Common questions
Did the module only help students in writing-heavy social science courses?
No. Gains appeared across the sampled science and social-science domains, with no significant overall domain differences in improvement.
Did master’s students benefit more than bachelor’s students?
Overall essay-quality gains did not differ significantly by level, though master’s students improved more on some justification elements.
What made this peer feedback “supported”?
The module guided students with structure-oriented prompts tied to argumentative essay elements rather than leaving feedback fully open-ended.
Was improvement only in overall grades?
No. Gains were reported for the overall essay and for the recognized elements of high-quality argumentative writing.
More on Feedback