{
  "title": "Peer learning exchange survey",
  "questions": [
    "What did a peer explanation clarify?",
    "What question remained unanswered?",
    "What structure would improve the exchange?"
  ],
  "question_notes": [
    "Identify the concept or task a peer’s explanation made clearer and what part of that explanation helped. Check its accuracy before reuse; perceived clarity does not establish authoritative guidance.",
    "An unanswered question reveals the limit of a peer explanation or a topic needing qualified follow-up. Direct it to an appropriate resource, without assuming peers should supply authoritative answers beyond their knowledge.",
    "Turn the requested improvement into a testable next step. One illustrative action is: add a facilitated question review."
  ],
  "answer_guidance": [
    {
      "question": 1,
      "format": "Optional short text",
      "reason": "Retain the specific point or condition described; avoid replacing it with an unexplained rating."
    },
    {
      "question": 2,
      "format": "Optional written explanation",
      "reason": "Keep context that distinguishes different experiences. Peer explanations still require accuracy checks."
    },
    {
      "question": 3,
      "format": "Optional improvement suggestion",
      "reason": "Keep the suggested change separate from whether it has been tested. Add a facilitated question review."
    }
  ],
  "respondent_instruction": "If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.",
  "field_protocol": null,
  "editorial_sections": [],
  "note": "Examples to adapt. Not a validated instrument; manual editorial data, not a product import payload."
}