  Prior research has examined the use of Social Question and Answer (Q&A)
websites for answer and help seeking. However, the potential for these websites
to support domain learning has not yet been realized. Helping users write
effective answers can be beneficial for subject area learning for both
answerers and the recipients of answers. In this study, we examine the utility
of crowdsourced, criteria-based feedback for answerers on a student-centered
Q&A website, Brainly.com. In an experiment with 55 users, we compared
perceptions of the current rating system against two feedback designs with
explicit criteria (Appropriate, Understandable, and Generalizable). Contrary to
our hypotheses, answerers disagreed with and rejected the criteria-based
feedback. Although the criteria aligned with answerers' goals, and crowdsourced
ratings were found to be objectively accurate, the norms and expectations for
answers on Brainly conflicted with our design. We conclude with implications
for the design of feedback in social Q&A.
