IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v15y2025i3p21582440251363298.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving CSCL Performance: A Quasiexperimental Study with Control and Intervention Groups Comparing Informative and Suggestive Feedback

Author

Listed:
  • Lanqin Zheng
  • Kaushal Kumar Bhagat
  • Miaolang Long
  • Nitesh Kumar Jha

Abstract

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) has been broadly utilized in the field of education. However, learners often face difficulties in improving CSCL performance, including improved knowledge elaboration, knowledge convergence, and coregulation. Therefore, the present study aims to compare the effects of automated informative feedback and knowledge graph-based suggestive feedback on knowledge elaboration, knowledge convergence, and coregulation. This study adopted a convenience sampling method, and a total of 104 undergraduate students registered in a mandatory course voluntarily participated in a quasiexperimental study. The students in experimental Group 1 adopted knowledge graph-based suggestive feedback, the students in experimental Group 2 adopted automated informative feedback, and the students in the control group adopted traditional online collaborative learning without any feedback. The findings revealed that knowledge graph-based suggestive feedback significantly improved group performance, knowledge elaboration, knowledge convergence, and coregulated behaviors compared to informative feedback and traditional online collaborative learning without any feedback. This study has theoretical and practical implications for feedback design and implementation in CSCL practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Lanqin Zheng & Kaushal Kumar Bhagat & Miaolang Long & Nitesh Kumar Jha, 2025. "Improving CSCL Performance: A Quasiexperimental Study with Control and Intervention Groups Comparing Informative and Suggestive Feedback," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(3), pages 21582440251, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:15:y:2025:i:3:p:21582440251363298
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440251363298
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440251363298
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440251363298?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:15:y:2025:i:3:p:21582440251363298. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.