Peer interaction (PI), and the interplay of different types of research on it

"Peer Interaction" (PI) refers to the important ways that a learner interacting with not a teacher but a fellow student or "peer" can be more productive of learning than interacting with a teacher one-to-one.

There is a long history of publications on peer interaction (PI) in education (although the earliest I will cite is 1982, important points were published in the 19th century and possibly before). Some of this literature was written, and still more has been used and explored, by CCSE members. PI is important and applicable in all disciplines. It has been used quite extensively in computer science, and some of the most powerful uses have been in Maths and in Physics.

One purpose of this talk is to frame education research as to do with universal theories that apply across disciplines, rather than seeing it as a craft that works differently in different disciplines. A second aim is not only to introduce and discuss some of this literature, but also to show the different kinds of research PI has attracted, each with different merits. (Another seminar might care to discuss how we could or should combine some of these types of research into a better overall programme of research on one learning design or one course.)

The talk outlines five contrasting types of contribution to PI in the literature:
a) Insights from theory, suggesting how and why PI can produce better quality and quantity of learning.
b) The variety of successful Learning Designs using PI (examples of different course or lesson plans)
c) The best quantitative evidence of learning gains from PI
d) The wider importance of PI in education and especially in HE: pervasive, but seldom studied or measured.
e) Radical PI: Connectivism, and approaches where learners, not teachers, decide the curriculum and the learning activities.

Slides

To be added. Probably only after the day of the talks.
However I will have a handful of printed copies of the slides if you catch me and ask for one on the day.

References

* (Red stars mark out the most important ten papers (in my opinion) in this list: the chief landmarks.)

(The publications are listed only very approximately in order of publication date.)

Abercrombie,M.L.J. (1960) The anatomy of judgement: An investigation into the processes of perception and reasoning (Free association books: London). Link to library copy

This (small) book concerns just one original learning design (method of teaching), yet this book is a forerunner of other work on the power of peer interaction. Although its title mentions judgement and perception, yet it is an insightful discussion about issues underlying peer interaction and its power in learning. This is because the underlying key point about peer discussion is that different learners see different things in the same text or object, and the doubt which this provokes produces real thought about which is right.

* Hunt, D.P. (1982) "Effects of human self-assessment responding on learning" Journal of Applied Psychology vol.67 no.1 pp.75-82. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.67.1.75

Gardner-Medwin's "confidence-based marking" applied Hunt's simple experiment further into a teaching approach where students' marks in an assessment depended on both their correctness and their confidence in it. See the top of this page for a short introduction to it with references.

* Miyake,N. (1986) "Constructive interaction and the iterative process of understanding" Cognitive Science vol.10 no.2 pp.151-177 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1002_2

Howe's work

* Howe, C.J., Tolmie, A. & Rodgers, C. (1990) "Physics in the primary school: Peer interaction and the understanding of floating and sinking" European J. of Psych of Education vol.5 no.4 pp.459-475 www.jstor.org/stable/23422158

See also years of followup work: Howe,C. (various) A list of some of Howe's publications

Mazur's Peer Instruction

Mazur, Eric (1997). Peer Instruction: A User's Manual (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ)

* Crouch, C.H. and Mazur, E. (2001), "Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results", American Journal of Physics, vol.69, no.9 pp.970-977 10.1119/1.1374249

* * Smith,M.K., Wood,W.B., Adams,W.K., Wieman,C. Knight,J.K., Guild,N. & Su,T.T. (2009) "Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions" Science vol.323 2 Jan. pp.122-124 10.1126/science.1165919

This work is notable not only for showing transfer from Mazur and physics at Harvard to another university and to another discipline, but for introducing the concept of "isomorphic questions", and for collecting details showing the considerable shifts in individual learner opinions, some in the wrong directions but far more in the right direction.

Reciprocal peer critiquing

Morrow,L.I. (2006) "An Application of Peer Feedback to Undergraduate's Writing of Critical Literature Reviews" Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education vol.1 no.2 pp.61-72 The paper

David Nicol (2004 up to the present, and continuing):
Another direction important to look in, is David Nicol's work on feedback: from the student herself, from teachers, and from peers. Nicol argues that these multiple comparisons are productive, and all are or should be comparisons with the learner's own thoughts. The comparisons are near the heart of learning; as is the active mental work triggered in each student by this. This is closely related to the general powers of peer interaction.
Nicol's recent work can be seen here: https://www.davidnicol.net/

Chi's experimental work on the power of Peer Interaction

* Chi,M.T.H., Roy,M. & Hausmann,R.G.M. (2008) "Observing Tutorial Dialogues Collaboratively: Insights About Human Tutoring Effectiveness From Vicarious Learning" Cognitive Science vol.32 pp.301-341 10.1080/03640210701863396

* Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014a). "The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes" Educational Psychologist, 49, 219-243 (lead article). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823

A list of some more of Chi's work

Work on designing entire courses solely around peers teaching each other

The papers listed below are (approximately) in order of publication.

* Illich, Ivan D. (1970) Deschooling Society (Calder & Boyars: London)

* Aronson,E. (1978) The jigsaw classroom (Beverly Hills: Sage). An organisation for Jigsaw users

The jigsaw classroom was originally invented to overcome racial conflict in US school classrooms. It is based on getting students to teach each other i.e. peer teaching. It turns out also to work brilliantly where racial conflicts are not a significant problem. It has been used widely, including at University of Glasgow e.g. in First year philosophy tutorials
If, but ONLY IF, you are fascinated by implementation details of how Jigsaw might be explained to new audiences, or scaled up to huge numbers, then you may look here and here

Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2005) "An on-going journey: Technology as a learning workbench" (University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands) Available free download from https://research.utwente.nl/files/5134457/rede_Collis_Moonen.pdf

For years at the University of Twente, Betty Collis taught courses entirely built by students in the Jigsaw spirit. Although Jigsaw usually is based on student groups studying separate passages from a fixed text and then teaching them to the rest of the class, I believe that Collis' work was more like small teams creating new material as a project and then sharing it with the whole class.

Connectivism: Still further towards courses created, taught, and run by the learners
There is a little known group of people who are attempting a still more radical version of courses wholly run by learners; in the spirit of Illich, but using modern digital applications in radical ways. I have loosely used "Connectivism" as a title here; and offer a handful of references to papers that might give you an idea if you are interested. Wikipedia article on "Connectivism"

Siemens, G. (2005). "Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age" International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning vol.2 no.1 pp.3-10 http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm

Siemens, George (2006) Knowing knowledge (Lulu.com)

Downes, Stephen (2006) "Learning networks and connective knowledge" in Harrison Hao Yang & Steve Chi-Yin Yuen (eds.), Collective Intelligence and E-Learning 2.0: Implications of Web-Based Communities and Networking. (IGI Global) (2010) online copy

Downes, Stephen (2008) "Places to Go: Connectivism & Connective Knowledge" Innovate: Journal of Online Education Vol.5 Iss.1, Article 6. Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol5/iss1/6

* Bali,M. & Honeychurch, S.L. (2014) "Key Pedagogic Thinkers - Dave Cormier" Journal of Pedagogic Development vol.4 no.3 2014 https://www.beds.ac.uk/media/244724/key-pedagogic-thinkers-dave-cormier.pdf

Honeychurch, Sarah and Patrick, Fiona (2018) "Massive Open Online Courses as affinity spaces for connected learning: Exploring effective learning interactions in one massive online community" Research in Comparative & International Education Vol.13(1) 117-134 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745499918768112

Web site logical path: [www.psy.gla.ac.uk] [~steve] [talks] [this page]
[Top of this page]