Journal of Agricultural Education Volume 52, Number 1, pp. 40–49 DOI: 10.5032/jae.2011.01040 Cultivating Change Through Peer Teaching Jonathan J. Velez, Assistant Professor Oregon State University Jamie Cano, Associate Professor The Ohio State University M. Susie Whittington, Associate Professor The Ohio State University Kattlyn J. Wolf, Assistant Professor University of Idaho The purpose of this qualitative research study was to describe the impact of peer teaching on both the students and the classroom environment. Students, enrolled in two Introduction to Teaching courses in agricultural and extension education, were asked to engage in peer teaching activities. The researchers utilized discourse analysis, textual analysis, individual interviews, and focus group interviews to gather data addressing the research objectives. Overall, participants enjoyed both peer teaching and being taught by peers. The peer teaching environment facilitated student interaction which allowed students to assume the role of active participants. Students laughed, talked, and interacted throughout the lessons, creating a warm and inclusive atmosphere. Specifically, students that engaged in peer teaching displayed elements of metacognition, self-reflection, and career formation, coupled with a classroom environment free from the typical instructional and relational constraints associated with instructor/learner interaction. Keywords: peer teaching, instructional techniques, learner centered instruction, active learning Introduction teaching encourages students to assume a more active role in knowledge acquisition (De Lisi, The engagement of students in the learning 2002; Topping, 2005; Wadoodi & Crosby, process is an important component in successful 2002). De Lisi believed that educational university classrooms. All too often, students practices, including peer learning and peer enter a classroom, take a seat, listen to a lecture interaction, “…should be systematically and leave without engaging in higher order examined and evaluated” (p. 5). Therefore, the thinking skills (Bloom, 1984). Students usually purpose of this research was to examine student remain unmotivated, disconnected, and perceptions of peer teaching and peer-to-peer cognitively disengaged during the lecture interaction. (Brophy, 2004). The 1998 Boyer Commission highlighted the engagement difficulties in Theoretical Foundation college classrooms and stated that: Vygotsky and Piaget developed two widely Some of their instructors are likely to be accepted theories of learning (Piaget, 1985; badly trained or even untrained teaching Vygotsky, 1978) that have made lasting assistants who are groping their way toward contributions to our societal understanding of a teaching technique; some others may be learning, and in the process, developed a tenured drones who deliver set lectures from foundation for peer teaching. Vygotsky yellowed notes, making no effort to engage developed the Sociocultural Theory of Learning the bored minds of the students in front of based on the active involvement of peers, adults, them. (p. 6) and teachers in the learning process. One opportunity to increase student Specifically, Vygotsky believed advanced or engagement is through peer teaching. Peer more knowledgeable peers, teachers, or other 40 Velez, Cano, Whittington, & Wolf Cultivating Change Through… adults greatly aided the learner in the feels a sense of constraint which can alter or construction of knowledge. Adults or peers, with discourage the learning process (Burk, 1996). a greater degree of knowledge, are capable of On the other hand, when learners communicate assisting and directing the learner in such a way with a truly equal peer, a feeling of cooperation as to promote a learning dialogue (O’Donnell & emerges, forming a foundation for significant, O’Kelly, 1994; Palincsar, 1998). As the learner retained learning (De Lisi, 2002). engages with more knowledgeable individuals, Therefore, the theoretical base for peer the learner is able to begin the process of co- teaching encourages the synthesis of both construction of knowledge. Co-construction was Piagetian and Vygotskian theories. Peer teachers defined by Woolfolk (2001, p. 44) as, “A social serve the role of the more knowledgeable peer, process in which people interact and negotiate while engaging in peer-to-peer instruction. (usually verbally) to create an understanding or While the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky are to solve a problem.” During the co-construction often viewed as antagonistic, in the case of peer of knowledge, the learner is able to acquire the teaching, they appear in concert, each lending skills and confidence necessary to begin the valuable insight on the social and cognitive process of concept mastery (Woolfolk, 2001). foundations for peer teaching. Furthermore, Vygotsky believed learning could occur at a greater rate when individuals Conceptual Framework were challenged by a more knowledgeable or capable individual (Hogan & Tudge, 1999). Despite the theoretical basis supporting the Most often, this more knowledgeable individual utilization of peer instruction, the concept of is embodied in the role of adults or teachers; peer teaching did not significantly appear in however, peers, if they hold a higher degree of educational research until the early 1960s subject knowledge, are able to assume the role (Goldschmid & Goldschmid, 1976). The of the more capable individual. Vygotsky’s resurgence of interest in peer teaching can likely theory emphasized the role of peers as be ascribed to two documents: the American knowledge providers, yet held at its foundation Psychological Association 1993 document, The the sociocultural view that learning could not be Learner-Centered Psychological Principles: A removed from the social context (De Lisi & Framework for School Reform and Redesign Golbeck, 1999; Vygotsky, 1978). Hogan and (APA, 1993), and the Boyer Commission’s Tudge (1999) stated that while Vygotsky’s Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A theory emphasized more child-parent/teacher Blueprint for American Research Universities interaction, Vygotsky’s theory also, “. has (The Boyer Commission, 1998). Both tremendous implications for our understanding documents delivered powerful arguments for the of peer collaboration” (p. 40). use of active, peer-involved approaches in Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development education. Peer-involved approaches included (1985) was largely based on the active the synonymous terms of peer teaching and peer involvement of peers. As peers interact with instruction. each other, they challenge the established norms, Peer instruction, as defined by Boud, Cohen, effectively creating a state of learner and Sampson (1999), “refers to the use of disequilibrium (Palincsar, 1998). The state of teaching and learning strategies in which disequilibrium “. forces the subject to go students learn with and from each other without beyond his current state and strike out in new the immediate intervention of a teacher” (pp. directions” (Piaget, 1985, p. 10). Thus, learners 413 - 414). When delivered via a tutoring are challenged to work with others, discuss method, peer instruction has been shown to have ideas, and eventually reach a cognitive positive impacts on both the peer teacher and the equilibrium (De Lisi & Golbeck, 1999; student (De Lisi, 2002; Topping, 2005). Palincsar, 1998). Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) stated that: Piaget believed that interaction between There is both experimental evidence (Semb individuals occurred on a continuum from et al., 1993) and correlational evidence with constraint to cooperation (Piaget, 1965). When appropriate controls for ability (Astin, learners engage in an activity with a person in 1993c) to suggest that tutoring itself can whom they were obligated to obey, the learner have an important, positive impact on Journal of Agricultural Education 41 Volume 52, Number 1, 2011 Velez, Cano, Whittington, & Wolf Cultivating Change Through… knowledge retention. Thus, learning the researcher focus whereby, “determination of material to teach another student may be a meaning is a matter of practical judgment and particularly effective way to increase common sense, not just abstract theorizing” (p. content mastery. (p. 111) 91). Mertens (2005) described hermeneutics as a process where efforts are made to obtain In a further acknowledgement of the positive multiple perspectives that yield better effects of peer interaction, Pascarella and interpretations of meanings. Terenzini (2005) stated that, “Peer interactions, The researchers also employed a theoretical particularly those that extend and reinforce what perspective grounded in discourse analysis. Gee happens in the academic program, appear to (1991) describes discourse analysis as influence positively knowledge acquisition and examining the written text of the story for its academic skill development during college” (p. component parts or assessing the spoken words 121). by looking at intonation, pitch, and pauses as a lens to the meaning of the text. The researchers Purpose and Research Objectives utilized discourse analysis to explore the written and oral thoughts as well as the opinions and The purpose of this qualitative study was to perceptions of the participants. explore student perceptions of peer teaching. The researchers utilized discourse analysis, The research objectives were written to examine textual analysis, individual interviews, and focus qualitatively three distinct aspects of peer group interviews.