The present study aimed to shed light on students' appraisal and reported learning gains in two differently-tutored learning environments (i.e. directively and facilitatively tutored). In order to investigate this, a quasi-experimental study was set up in the context of a clinical skills learning environment. Not only were participating students asked to rate their appraisal of the tutored learning environment, but they were also interviewed in-depth about their learning gains and experiences within both tutored learning environments. Results showed that directively-tutored students were more positive about the tutored learning environment. With regard to experienced learning gains, it was found that, although both groups of students experienced practical learning gains, only facilitatively-tutored students acknowledged gains in their clinical understanding. Also, in terms of deep-level learning and self-efficacy beliefs, different trends between both groups emerged. Finally, diverse approach-specific strengths and drawbacks were experienced by students. While directively-tutored students were generally more positive about their learning environment, facilitatively-tutored students were more critical about their peer tutors' approach to tutoring because this led to a lack of clarity and overview. Nevertheless, these latter students reported more deep-level learning and thinking. The current results urge educators to take into account several practical implications, both with respect to peer tutors and to students.