Peer instruction in the appropriation of concepts in a structuring Course of Engineering

Author(s):

Ana Mouraz(presenting / submitting)Diana Urbano Paulo Garcia Andreia Santos Cristiana Cabreira

Conference:

ECER 2014

Network:

22. Research in Higher Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

22 SES 04 JS, Teaching, Learning and Assessment in Higher Education

Paper Session, Joint Session NW 22 and NW 24

Time:

2014-09-03

09:00-10:30

Room:

B030 Anfiteatro

Chair:

Tamás Kozma

Contribution

To sustain the paradigm change concerning pedagogical challenge due to Bologna process has been a target of Higher Education institutions. This objective is still important as these institutions prepare themselves for the 2020 Horizon (Europa, 2020). This requires work with students which does not only refer to a final assessment and certification but is capable of developing and fitting its working methods to promote students development. It is in such context that peer instruction appears as a strategy which is able to promote a more significant and lasting learning for the students involved.

Some of the biggest challenges to pedagogical practices is still the lack of motivation of students in the learning of the content (Pinto et al, 2012). This lack of motivation may be explained by the organization of the teaching models which are still linked to passive forms of transmission which at times give out a message which is disconnected from and without meaning for students. The promotion of meaningful learning above all requires a teaching methodology which leaves room for the student to become involved as a protagonist in their own learning with an increasingly active role distanced from the concept of their being mere receptacles for the content (Dioso-Henson, 2012). From this arise active learning methodologies which favor the realization of this process of change.

The pedagogical method of the Peer Instruction arises as a tool which is based on the understanding and the application of conceptual type learning, itself based on discussion between the students (between equals)as described by Crouch and Mazur (1997).The method is found to result in a better learning outcome than are class-wide discussions (Schmidt, 2011). This teaching methodology seeks to distance itself from traditional teaching methods which as a rule reduce the students to a passive role by introducing a greater degree of interaction to the classroom. With this method it is hoped that there will be interaction between the students so that there is mutual teaching and learning about the concepts to be studied which then are applied to the conceptual matters set out which are translated into greater active involvement in their own learning. (Pinto et al, 2012.

It is in this context that Peer Instruction becomes a strategy which is capable of promoting more meaningful and longer lasting learning for the students involved which is based on the interaction which in turn implies a verbalization and discussion of the concepts acquired. Research suggests that this type of cooperative learning environment can help promote deeper learning, as well as greater interest and motivation (Gok, 2011). Simultaneously Peer Instruction also supports the students in the development of their meta-cognitive capacities as soon as they have managed to verify and recognize when they have failed to understand a concept or where they are unable to explain a topic or concept to their peers during the discussion period.

However, in introductory courses, meaning those that are making the transition between the knowledge acquired during students’ secondary education and higher education, as well as they are transversal (included in various engineering courses), the temptation to go deeper in the subject matter doesn’t aloud time enough for contextualize previous knowledge. Therefore, it is possible to claim for a relationship between the use of the Peer Instruction methodological approach and the students’ improvement of conceptual understanding of subject matters, namely in introductory and transversal. This study aims to establish to what extent this improvement is effective, it is related with enhancing students’ motivation and remains after peer instruction episodes.

Method

This work follows a case study approach. It is sought to evaluate the effect of peer instruction when used as the principal strategy in a Physics Course for the promotion of the learning of theoretical concepts. This is an important feature of the Course as it is designed to beginners as well as it is transversal of all engineering domains. The Course was selected due to the difficulty which students tend to have in accessing its theoretical content. The Course used a peer instruction model linked to the use of a system of synchronous questions and answers which constitute the starting point for peer discussion. The need of such system is justified to assess the immediate impact of peer instruction, to further compare with students’ final marks. Two data collection methods allowing qualitative and quantitative data were used. The data collected are of a quantitative nature and concern the responses obtained from the students in three moments of synchronous response to multiple choice questions, undertaken in a classroom context. Observation permitted the quantification of the correct and incorrect responses which the students gave to multiple choice questions put by the teaching staff before and after peer discussion sessions which the students were invited to undertake on the question and the diversity of the responses counted for the class. The teaching staff often stimulated the students to discuss possible solutions or contrary arguments which could help them to arrive at a more adequate response by themselves. Following these sessions the students were once more invited to respond to the same question, once again counting the number of correct and incorrect responses. Qualitative data was then collected which would characterize the understanding of the students of the effectiveness of the method. Statements were taken from the students using six brief interviews of students of the Course in question. The interviews held were semi-directive in the sense that the questions were not entirely open nor was there a great many exact questions resulting in a greater flexibility respecting the tables of reference and interpretation of the statements. The data was treat in accordance with its nature with recourse to two forms of treatment: the quantitative data was subject to statistical analysis while the qualitative data – the content of the interviews – were analyzed using the NVIVO 10 program.

Expected Outcomes

The study validated the use of peer instruction but the methodology needs to be more systematic to become part of the strategies regularly used by students. If curricular study which demands a more active and inter-active attitude from the students were not required by the university it is difficult to understand how these same students will correspond to the expectations of society: ´university students must think like everyone else are not able to think, they should say what others are unable to say and make what others are unable to make` (Nóvoa, 2011). From the data submitted it can be seen that the students significantly improved their responses after a peer discussion session but then obtained worse results in the final examination. This result is in line with the conclusions of earlier studies reported in the review of the literature (Cummings & Roberts, 2008; Crouch & Mazur, 2001). Similarly it was found that peer discussion is a strategy appreciated by the students, developing other competencies such as the production of arguments and the organization of reasoning which is associated with verbalization and discussion of the concepts acquired which systematizes and extends the conceptual domination of the science to be learned. This result is also reported in the review of the literature (Pinto et al 2012). Furthermore, the structure of the multiple choice tests implies a linguistic and logical domination of the reasoning which – according to some students – makes a Curricular Unit more difficult than it is by its nature in the sense that it is frequently contrary to common sense. It is therefore plausible to consider that these lesser results have their explanation in this epistemological rupture in relation to common sense which some students have still not undertaken.

References

Crouch, C.. & Mazur, E (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69 (9), 970-977. Cummings, K & Roberts, S.. (2008). A study of Peer Instruction Methods with School Physics Students. C. Henderson, M. Sabella & L. Hsu (ed). Physics Education Research Conference (pp. 103-106). sl. American Institute of Physics. Dioso-Henson, L. ( 2012). The effect of Reciprocal Peer Tutoring and non-Reciprocal Peer Tutoring on the performance of students in college physics. Research in education, 97, pp 34-49. Europe 2020, A Europe Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”, European Commission, March 2010, http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/C OMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20- %20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf Gok, T (2011). The Impact of Peer Instruction on College Students’ Beliefs about Physics and Conceptual Understanding of Electricity and Magnetism. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (10): 417-436. Nóvoa, A. ( 2011). Intervenção. 3ª Conferência Nacional do Ensino Superior e da Investigação. Lisboa, 4 e 5 de Novembro ( texto policopiado) Pinto, A., Bueno, M., Silva, M., Sellmann, M., & Koehler, S. (2012). Inovação Didática – Projeto de Reflexão e Aplicação de Metodologias Ativas de Aprendizagem no Ensino Superior: Uma Experiencia com “Peer Instruction”, 15. Schmidt, B (2011). Teaching engineering dynamics by use of peer instruction supported by an audience response system. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(5):413-423.

Author Information

Ana Mouraz (presenting / submitting)

Faculty of Psychology and Sciences of Education

CIIE - Center for Research and Intervention in Education

Porto

Diana Urbano

Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto

Porto

Paulo Garcia

Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Portugal

Andreia Santos

Faculty of Psychology and Sciences of Education, Portugal

Cristiana Cabreira