Mazur, E., (1997), “Peer Instruction: A User's Manual”, and PEER-INSTRUCTION Peer-instruction and discussion. Peer Instruction A User's Manual Pdf Peer instruction (PI) is an example of an evidence-based instructional Research-Based Guide to Peer Instruction. Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual is a step-by-step guide for instructors on how to plan and implement Peer Instruction lectures. The teaching methodology is applicable to a variety of introductory science courses (including biology and chemistry). Peer Instruction: A User s Manual by Eric Mazur (Pearson Prentice Hall, 1997). You may use this file for educational purposes only. You have permission to photocopy, or have photocopied, the material in this file. No portion of the file, whether in original.
Peer instruction is an evidence-based, interactive teaching method popularized by Harvard Professor Eric Mazur in the early 1990s.[1] Originally used in many schools, including introductory undergraduate physics classes at Harvard University, peer instruction is used in various disciplines and institutions around the globe. It is a student-centered approach that involves flipping the traditional classroom by moving information transfer out and moving information assimilation, or application of learning, into the classroom. There is some research that supports the effectiveness of peer instruction over more traditional teaching methods, such as pure lecture.[2]
Peer instruction as a learning system involves students preparing to learn outside of class by doing pre-class readings and answering questions about those readings using another method, called Just in Time Teaching.[3] Then, in class, the instructor engages students by posing prepared conceptual questions or ConcepTests that are based on student difficulties. The questioning procedure outlined by Eric Mazur is as follows:
Instructor poses question based on students' responses to their pre-class reading
Students reflect on the question
Students commit to an individual answer
Instructor reviews student responses
Students discuss their thinking and answers with their peers
Students then commit again to an individual answer
The instructor again reviews responses and decides whether more explanation is needed before moving on to the next concept.[1][4]
Peer instruction is now used in a range of institutional types[5][6] around the globe[7][8] and in many other disciplines, including philosophy,[9] psychology,[10] geology,[11] biology,[12] math,[13] computer science[14] and engineering.[8]
References[edit]
^ abEric Mazur (1997). Peer Instruction: A User's Manual Series in Educational Innovation. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJArchived 2011-10-09 at the Wayback Machine
^C. Crouch & E. Mazur (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten Years of Experience and Results, Am. J. Phys., v69, 970-977
^G. Novak et al., (1999). Just-in-Time teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
^C. Turpen and N. Finkelstein (2010). The construction of different classroom norms during Peer Instruction: Students perceive differences, Physical Review Special Topics, Physics Education Research,v6, n2
^A. P. Fagen, C. H. Crouch & E. Mazur (2002). Peer Instruction: Results from a Range of Classrooms Phys. Teach., v40, 206-209Archived 2012-04-01 at the Wayback Machine
^N. Lasry, E. Mazur & J. Watkins (2008). Peer Instruction: From Harvard to Community Colleges, Am. J. Phys., v76, 1066-1069Archived 2012-04-01 at the Wayback Machine
^D. Suppapittayaporn et al. (2008). The effectiveness of peer instruction and structured inquiry on conceptual understanding of force and motion: a case study from Thailand. Research in Science & Technology Education
^ abD. J. Nicol and J. T. Boyle (2003). Peer Instruction versus Class-wide Discussion in the large classes: a comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom, Studies in Higher Education, v28, n4, 458-73
^S. Butchart, T. Handfield & G. Restall (2009). Using Peer Instruction to Teach Philosophy, Logic and Critical Thinking. Teaching Philosophy, v32, n1, 1–40
^S.L. Chew. (2004). Using concepTests for formative assessment, Psychology Teacher Network, v14, n1, 10-12
^D. McConnell, D. Steer, & K. Owens (2003). Assessment and active learning strategies for introductory geology courses, Journal of Geoscience Education, v51, n2, 205-216Archived 2012-09-11 at the Wayback Machine,
^S. Pilzer (2001). Peer Instruction in Physics and Mathematics. Primus, v11, n1, 185-92
^Beth Simon, et al. 'Experience report: peer instruction in introductory computing.' ACM (2010).
See also[edit]
External links[edit]
Peer Instruction Network, co-founded by Eric Mazur and Julie Schell, a global social network for educators interested in peer instruction
Turn to Your Neighbor, the official blog of peer instruction, containing numerous articles on implementation, resources, and use
The PER User's Guide, an implementation guide and numerous resources on peer instruction
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peer_instruction&oldid=878272491'
This activity was selected for the On the Cutting Edge Reviewed Teaching Collection
This activity has received positive reviews in a peer review process involving five review categories. The five categories included in the process are
Scientific Accuracy
Alignment of Learning Goals, Activities, and Assessments
Pedagogic Effectiveness
Robustness (usability and dependability of all components)
Completeness of the ActivitySheet web page
A user manual or an user manual. For more information about the peer review process itself, please see https://serc.carleton.edu/teachearth/activity_review.html.
This page first made public: Feb 25, 2009
Summary
Peer instruction may offer some of the richest opportunities for metacognitive teaching. Reciprocal (peer) teaching forces the instructor to use a whole series of metacognitive processes such as determining what the learner already knows, deciding what is to be taught/learned and how; monitoring comprehension and evaluating the outcome in terms of increased comprehension, which in turn encourages the instructor to reflect upon his or her own thinking processes. By asking the students to defend their answer to a question to another student you are, in effect, moving the role of 'teacher' to the students.
Learning Goals
The goal of this exercise is to promote students' learning metacognitive processes. Just as with cognitive processes students will be encouraged to reflect on their learning strategies through discussions and comparisons with peers.
Context for Use
While peer instruction is a model used for improving cognition it can also be employed to improve metacognition. Just as we might use peer instruction for students to compare their content understanding with peers in class we can also use it to compare learning strategies.
Description and Teaching Materials
The general strategy involves posing a question like 'What strategies do you feel best prepared you for _______ (the exam, the homework, the lab, etc.)?' Ask the students to write a response, then ask them to disclose their list in a group and write down the others' responses. Example
Figure 5. Monthly mean atmospheric carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa Observatory,Hawaii.
Create an activity in which students are asked to debate a question with another student but wrap the discussion in metacognitive questions. One example of a challenge question would be to show Figure 5 from NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory and ask students to:
Individually explain why there are annual variations in CO2 and in what season is it highest.
In teams of two or more share their answers.
After sharing their answers ask them to edit their previous response, underline what they changed, and articulate what makes them think their revised answer is stronger.
Select teams randomly and have them discuss their answers, how the discussion led them to change their initial answer and what lingering doubts remain.
After selecting some number of teams try to point out examples of how the peer discussion changed conceptual understanding, problem-solving skills, and critical thinking.
The expectation is that once students see value in peer instruction they will more fully engage in the process when subsequently presented.
Teaching Notes and Tips
Metacognitive teaching can be facilitated through 'peer instruction' in methods similar to those presented in the analogy activity. This approach, which is employed early in a course, asks the instructor to directly discuss the metacognitive process in class in lieu of discipline content. Describe the value of metacognitive reflection on learning (see, for example, Teaching Metacognition). For example, if you use student response systems (i.e. 'clickers' or web-based tools like LectureTools) tell students why you have them engage in student response with peer instruction. It's not always obvious to students what they should be getting out of these kinds of learning experiences. Some students think the point of these activities is to simply get the 'right' (or at least most popular) answer. Explicitly explain that these activities are usually intended to develop students' conceptual understanding,problem-solving skills, and critical thinking skills, but this only happens if students engage in meaningful discussions with their peers.
Peer Instruction A User's Manual Pdf
Assessment
Peer Instruction A User's Manual Software
At some point later in the course ask students to reflect on if and how the sharing of study strategies affected their own study strategy. Did the process help them reflect on their own methods? Did they learn some additional strategies that they adopted for themselves?