Abstract
This article reports on a novel higher-education course format exploiting choreographed peer reviews and self corrections so as to reduce to a minimum the teachers’ involvement. The novel course format was motivated by the necessity to run examinations for all courses during all terms, even though almost all courses are offered only every second term. As a consequence and because of a very high students to teacher ratio, many students have to prepare for examinations without sufficient assistance. This article describes the novel course format and reports on its evaluation in a case study. The evaluation indicates that most students benefit from the novel course format but that it is less efficient than traditional formats based on a much higher teachers’ involvement. The major weakness of the novel format is an insufficient dedication of some students to their reviewing. The article suggests and discusses possible measures to address that weakness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
This assumption is reasonable for short Haskell programs beginners can write.
References
Bathini, P.P., Sen, S.: Impact of integration through peer instructed lectures. Int. J. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. 6(6), 1293–1296 (2017)
Benè, K.L., Bergus, G.: When learners become teachers: a review of peer teaching in medical student education. Fam. Med. 46(10), 783–787 (2014)
Bester, L., Muller, G., Munge, B., Morse, M., Meyers, N.: Those who teach learn: Near-peer teaching as outdoor environmental education curriculum and pedagogy. J. Outdoor Environ. Educ. 20(1), 35 (2017)
Burch, N.: The Four Stages for Learning any New Skill. Gordon Training International, CA (1970)
Carrell, S.E., Sacerdote, B.I., West, J.E.: From natural variation to optimal policy? the importance of endogenous peer group formation. Econometrica 81(3), 855–882 (2013)
Cho, K., MacArthur, C.: Learning by reviewing. J. Educ. Psychol. 103(1), 73 (2011)
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Sluijsmans, D.: The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: a review. Stud. High. Educ. 24(3), 331–350 (1999)
Falchikov, N., Goldfinch, J.: Student peer assessment in higher education: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Rev. Educ. Res. 70(3), 287–322 (2000)
Fischer, K.W.: A theory of cognitive development: the control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychol. Rev. 87(6), 477 (1980)
Gartner, A., et al.: Children Teach Children: Learning by Teaching. ERIC (1971)
Goldschmid, B., Goldschmid, M.L.: Peer teaching in higher education: a review. High. Educ. 5(1), 9–33 (1976)
Hanrahan, S.J., Isaacs, G.: Assessing self-and peer-assessment: the students’ views. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 20(1), 53–70 (2001)
Hattie, J., Timperley, H.: The power of feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 77(1), 81–112 (2007)
Jones, S.P., Hall, C., Hammond, K., Partain, W., Wadler, P.: The glasgow haskell compiler: a technical overview. In: Proceedings UK Joint Framework for Information Technology (JFIT) Technical Conference. vol. 93 (1993)
Jumaat, N.F., Tasir, Z.: Instructional scaffolding in online learning environment: a meta-analysis. In: 2014 International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering (LaTiCE), pp. 74–77. IEEE (2014)
Kruger, J., Dunning, D.: Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 77(6), 1121 (1999)
Lundstrom, K., Baker, W.: To give is better than to receive: the benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. J. Sec. Lang. Writ. 18(1), 30–43 (2009)
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., Breslin, C.: Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 39(1), 102–122 (2014)
Ramdass, D., Zimmerman, B.J.: Effects of self-correction strategy training on middle school students’ self-efficacy, self-evaluation, and mathematics division learning. J. Adv. Acad. 20(1), 18–41 (2008)
Rohrer, D., Taylor, K.: The shuffling of mathematics problems improves learning. Instr. Sci. 35(6), 481–498 (2007)
Schwartz, M.S., Fischer, K.W.: Building vs. borrowing: The challenge of actively constructing ideas in post-secondary education. Lib. Educ. 89(3), 22–29 (2003)
Seenan, C., Shanmugam, S., Stewart, J.: Group peer teaching: A strategy for building confidence in communication and teamwork skills in physical therapy students. J. Phys. Ther. Educ. 30(3), 40–49 (2016)
Shaughnessy, J.J.: Long-term retention and the spacing effect in free-recall and frequency judgments. Am. J. Psychol., 587–598 (1977)
Topping, K.: Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Rev. Educ. Res. 68(3), 249–276 (1998)
Williams, E.: Student attitudes towards approaches to learning and assessment. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 17(1), 45–58 (1992)
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to Elisabeth Lempa for her contribution to assessing the quality of reviews and to coding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Heller, N., Bry, F. (2020). Peer Teaching in Tertiary STEM Education: A Case Study. In: Auer, M., Tsiatsos, T. (eds) The Challenges of the Digital Transformation in Education. ICL 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 916. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11932-4_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11932-4_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11931-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11932-4
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)