Abstract
The article describes the results of the case study “Implementation of the Peer Instruction method into education in the Czech Republic”, trying to answer one main question: “How is the Peer Instruction method implemented into physics teaching at upper secondary Czech school?”.
The data was collected through interviews with the teacher, lesson observation and questionnaires for the teacher and students. The teacher involved in the study had been interested in the method since 2009. The research findings resulting from lesson observation and students’ opinions are from the 2014/2015 school year, when the method was implemented with students aged 17–18 years in three physics classes taught at an upper secondary school, with the respective numbers of students being 28, 16 and 13. The research generated the following conclusions, among other things: (1) the method should ideally be used immediately after a presentation of a new topic, therefore e.g. once a month, (2) a maximum of two ConcepTest questions should be used within one 45-minute lesson, and (3) students’ responses should be collected by means of ï¬ashcards rather than by an electronic voting system. The teacher starting with the method expected that ConcepTest questions would be simple for students and the work pace would be faster. She tried to hasten the work and therefore sometimes did not give students enough time to think about their responses, occasionally even failing to provide the option of a second answer. Nevertheless, the participating students gave positive feedback on this method, strongly indicating that that they had learned more while using this method. They admitted that using ï¬ashcards during the first answering was a strong incentive that boosted their motivation towards thinking about the answers. This article is intended for people interested in the Peer Instruction method, teachers and researchers in active learning.
The data was collected through interviews with the teacher, lesson observation and questionnaires for the teacher and students. The teacher involved in the study had been interested in the method since 2009. The research findings resulting from lesson observation and students’ opinions are from the 2014/2015 school year, when the method was implemented with students aged 17–18 years in three physics classes taught at an upper secondary school, with the respective numbers of students being 28, 16 and 13. The research generated the following conclusions, among other things: (1) the method should ideally be used immediately after a presentation of a new topic, therefore e.g. once a month, (2) a maximum of two ConcepTest questions should be used within one 45-minute lesson, and (3) students’ responses should be collected by means of ï¬ashcards rather than by an electronic voting system. The teacher starting with the method expected that ConcepTest questions would be simple for students and the work pace would be faster. She tried to hasten the work and therefore sometimes did not give students enough time to think about their responses, occasionally even failing to provide the option of a second answer. Nevertheless, the participating students gave positive feedback on this method, strongly indicating that that they had learned more while using this method. They admitted that using ï¬ashcards during the first answering was a strong incentive that boosted their motivation towards thinking about the answers. This article is intended for people interested in the Peer Instruction method, teachers and researchers in active learning.
References
- Crouch, C. H. & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics , 69(9), 970–977. Search in Google Scholar
- Dvořáková, I. (2014). Active learning in the Heureka Project — teachers in the role of students. ICPE-EPEC 2013 Conference Proceedings. 47–62. Available from http://iupap-icpe.org/publications/proceedings/ICPE-EPEC 2013 proceedings.pdf Search in Google Scholar
- Ghosh, S. & Renna, F. (2006). Technology in support of good pedagogy: Electronic response systems and Peer Instruction in an economics classroom. Social Science Research Network . Available from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=888544 Search in Google Scholar
- Harvard.edu. (2016). APPHY 50A: Physics as a Foundation for Science and Engineering, Part I . Available from https://canvas.harvard.edu/courses/13398 Search in Google Scholar
- Lasry, N. (2008). Clickers or Flashcards: Is There Really a Difference? The Physics Teacher , 46, 242–244. Search in Google Scholar
- Lepil, O. & Široká, M (2001). Sbírka testových úloh k maturitě z fyziky. Prometheus. Search in Google Scholar
- Mazur, E. (2014). Peer Instruction: A user’s manual. Pearson Education Limited. Search in Google Scholar
- Pearson (2016). Learning Catalytics. Available from https://learningcatalytics.com/ Search in Google Scholar
- Penuel, W. R., Boscardin, C. K., Masyn, K. & Crawrord, V. M. (2007). Teaching with student response systems in elementary and secondary education settings: A survay study. Educational Technology, Research and Development , 55(4), 315–346. Available from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11423-006-9023-4 Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
- Rao, S. P. & DiCarlo, S. E. (2000). Peer Instruction improves performance on quizzes. Advantage in Physiology Education , 24(1), 51–55. Search in Google Scholar
- Savinainen, A. & Scott, P. (2002). Using the Force Concept Inventory to monitor student learning and to plan teaching. Physics Education , 37(1), 53–58. Search in Google Scholar
- Schell, J. (2016). Turn to your neighbor. The oï¬cial Peer Instruction blog. Available from http://blog.peerinstruction.net/ Search in Google Scholar
- Šestáková, J. (2016). Peer Instruction. Available from http://peerinstruction.cz/ Search in Google Scholar
- Švaříček, R. & Šeďová, K. (2007). Kvalitativní výzkum. Portál. Search in Google Scholar
Author Biography
Jana Šestáková
Univerzita Karlova v Praze
Matematicko-fyzikální fakulta, Katedra didaktiky fyziky
Downloads
1
- Is Peer Instruction in Primary School Feasible? : The Case Study in Sloveniahttps://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.2.785
0
2
2
Download data is not yet available.