The Effectiveness of Full and Focused Structural Feedback on Students’ Knowledge Structure and Learning

Abstract Most STEM classrooms overlook the intrinsic conceptual structure of domain content, strategies for improving students’ conceptual structure have promise for improving STEM learning outcomes. This experimental investigation continues the development of the web-based tool Graphical Interface of Knowledge Structure (GIKS) that provides immediate formative feedback as a network of concepts in the student’s essays alongside an expert referent network for comparison and reflection. What should this feedback network look like, especially, should it be more inclusive or small and focused? And is preexisting domain knowledge important for type of network feedback effectiveness? Undergraduate students in a second year Architecture Engineering course, after completing a 2-weeks long lesson on Building with Wood, were randomly assigned to a summary writing task with either Full feedback (a network with 14 central and 12 peripheral terms) or Focused feedback (a network with only the 14 central terms), and then immediately completed a knowledge structure survey. Two weeks later, they completed an End-of-Unit posttest that consisted of a Central-items and a Peripheral-items subtests. A significant interaction of feedback and domain knowledge was observed for post knowledge structure, the low domain knowledge students in the Focus feedback group had the most central link-agreement with the expert and the least peripheral links agreement. On the End-of-Unit declarative knowledge posttest, there was no difference for the Full or Focused feedback interventions, but the high domain knowledge students in both interventions performed significantly better than the low domain knowledge students on the central-items subtest but not on the peripheral-items subtest. This investigation shows the need for further research on the role of domain-normative central concepts and pragmatically contributes to the design of essay prompts for STEM classroom use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Technology Knowledge and Learning
Published
2025-08-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-025-09892-0
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.44

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Effectiveness of Full and Focused Structural Feedback on Students’ Knowledge Structure and Learning

Ryan Solnosky, Roy B. Clariana, Wang Yu
2 citations
Technology Knowledge and Learning
Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
3.44
article

The Effectiveness of Full and Focused Structural Feedback on Students’ Knowledge Structure and Learning

Ryan Solnosky, Roy B. Clariana, Wang Yu
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Most STEM classrooms overlook the intrinsic conceptual structure of domain content, strategies for improving students’ conceptual structure have promise for improving STEM learning outcomes. This experimental investigation continues the development of the web-based tool Graphical Interface of Knowledge Structure (GIKS) that provides immediate formative feedback as a network of concepts in the student’s essays alongside an expert referent network for comparison and reflection. What should this feedback network look like, especially, should it be more inclusive or small and focused? And is preexisting domain knowledge important for type of network feedback effectiveness? Undergraduate students in a second year Architecture Engineering course, after completing a 2-weeks long lesson on Building with Wood, were randomly assigned to a summary writing task with either Full feedback (a network with 14 central and 12 peripheral terms) or Focused feedback (a network with only the 14 central terms), and then immediately completed a knowledge structure survey. Two weeks later, they completed an End-of-Unit posttest that consisted of a Central-items and a Peripheral-items subtests. A significant interaction of feedback and domain knowledge was observed for post knowledge structure, the low domain knowledge students in the Focus feedback group had the most central link-agreement with the expert and the least peripheral links agreement. On the End-of-Unit declarative knowledge posttest, there was no difference for the Full or Focused feedback interventions, but the high domain knowledge students in both interventions performed significantly better than the low domain knowledge students on the central-items subtest but not on the peripheral-items subtest. This investigation shows the need for further research on the role of domain-normative central concepts and pragmatically contributes to the design of essay prompts for STEM classroom use.

Technology Knowledge and Learning
Pennsylvania State University (US), Mississippi State University (US)
National Science Foundation, Directorate for STEM Education
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
3.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.