Education peer instruction: A teaching method to foster deep understanding

Communications of the ACM

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 27-29

  Simon, Beth ^a   Cutts, Quintin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CORE PHYSICS; LEARNING EFFECTS; MATHEMATICS COURSE; MECHANICAL PROCESS; PEER INSTRUCTION; PI METHOD; TEACHING METHODS;

COMPUTER APPLICATIONS; COMPUTER SCIENCE;

TEACHING;

EID: 84856838395     PISSN: 00010782     EISSN: 15577317     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/2076450.2076459     Document Type: Review

References (7)

1. Crouch, C.H. and Mazur, E. Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics 69, 9 (Sept. 2001), 970-977.
2. Hake, R. Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. 1998 American Journal of Physics v66, 64-74.
3. Herman, G., Louie, M., and Zilles, C. Creating the digital logic concept inventory. In Proceedings of the Forty- First ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Milwaukee, WI, March 10-13, 2010), 102-106.
4. Mazur, E. Farewell lecture? Science 323 (Jan. 2, 2009).
5. Porter, L., Bailey-Lee, C., Simon, B. Cutts, Q., and Zingaro, D. Experience report: A multi-classroom report on the value of peer instruction. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Joint Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE '11) 2011.
6. Porter, L., Bailey-Lee, C., Simon, B., and Zingaro, D. Peer Instruction: Do students really learn from peer discussion in computing? In Proceedings of the 7th International Computing Education Research Conference, Aug. 2011.
7. Tew, A.E. and Guzdial, M. Developing a validated assessment of fundamental CS1 concepts. In Proceedings of the 41st SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, (Milwaukee, WI, 2010), 97-101.