this topic is indeed a crucial one. John D. wrote:
"Peer instruction needs to be closely supervised ... especially at
first (but not just at first). Ditto for "inquiry" in general."
I definitely agree. I have used forms of peer instruction (Mazur's MCQ format is one of them) over a decade and I am confident that peer instruction can be very beneficial. I like the notion of *guided* peer instruction as it is indeed important to monitor that students stay in focus. The feedback must be immediate and I ask them to compare their explanation with mine.
Here is one question that I quite frequently ask. After completing together a long derivation of a new result (to students :-)) or a multiple-step problem solving usually involving multiple representations I require them to explain the key steps in pairs: "explain what we did in each step and why [in terms of physics principles] we did it?" I explicitly tell them that this is a reflection part and I tell them to ask any clarifications if need be. I also explain that this is how an expert works: he/she can monitor and reflect his/her own thinking process and have skills to spot errors. (There is a fancy name for this: metacognitive skills.)
Regards,
Antti
Antti Savinainen, Ph.D., B.Ed.
Adjunct Professor (University of Jyväskylä)
Senior Lecturer in Physics and Mathematics
Kuopion Lyseo High School
Finland
E-mail: <antti.savinainen@kuopio.fi>
Website: <http://kotisivu.dnainternet.net/savant/>
--
*************************************************************************
Viesti on tarkastettu roskapostinsuodatus- ja virustorjuntaohjelmistolla.
*************************************************************************