An official website of the United States government
Despite evidence of its effectiveness, Peer Instruction (PI) has not been widely adopted by undergraduate computing instructors. In PI, an instructor displays a hard multiple-choice question that students answer individually, then discuss their answer with peers, then answer again, and finally an instructor leads a discussion of the question. Even though the benefits of PI are well documented, it can be difficult to convince computing instructors to move away from passive lectures. Major reasons why instructors do not adopt PI include a lack of awareness, lack of time, and concerns over their ability to cover content. We hypothesized that we could encourage the adoption of PI by creating Peer+, a free tool in an ebook platform, a searchable question bank, and running summer instructor workshops. We offered a three-day in-person summer workshop to a total of 37 instructors in 2022 and 2023. Instructors completed a pre-survey, immediate post-survey, and a follow-up post survey after the fall semester. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with 17 instructors. On the immediate post-survey most (33/37, 89%) instructors reported that they were very likely or likely to use the tool in the fall. However, on the follow-up survey, less than a quarter (6/26, 23%) actually did. The number one reason for not using the tool was a lack of time (18/26, 69%). Notably, all of the instructors who used Peer+ planned to use it again. This work informs efforts to increase the adoption of evidence-based pedagogical approaches in computing.
more »
« less
Supporting Instructors Adoption of Peer Instruction
Peer Instruction (PI) is a lecture-based active learning approach that has students solve a difficult multiple-choice question individually, submit their answer, discuss their answer with peers, and then submit their answer again. Despite plentiful evidence to support its effectiveness, PI has not been widely adopted by undergraduate computing instructors due to low awareness of PI, the effort needed to create PI questions, the limited instructional time needed for PI activities during lectures, and potential adverse reactions from students. We hypothesized that we could allay some of these concerns by hosting a three-day summer workshop on Peer Instruction for instructors and building and sharing a free tool and a question bank that supports PI in an open-source ebook platform. We invited eighteen instructors to attend an in-person three-day workshop on PI in the summer of 2022. We collected their feedback by using pre and post surveys and conducting semi-structured interviews. We report on the effect of the three-day summer workshop on instructor attitudes towards and knowledge of PI, the barriers that prevented instructors from adopting the free tool, and feedback from instructors who used the tool. The results show that most workshop attendees reported that they planned to use the tool in the fall semester, but less than half actually did. Responses from both users and non-users yield insights about the support instructors need to adopt new tools. This research informs future professional development workshops, tool development, and how to better support instructors interested in adopting Peer Instruction.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2043207
- PAR ID:
- 10510820
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2
- ISBN:
- 9798400704246
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1662 to 1663
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Portland OR USA
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Substantial research indicates that active learning methods improve student learning more than traditional lecturing. Accordingly, current studies aim to characterize and evaluate different instructors' implementations of active learning methods. Peer Instruction is one of the most commonly used active learning methods in undergraduate physics instruction and typically involves the use of classroom response systems (e.g., clickers) where instructors pose conceptual questions that students answer individually and/or in collaboration with nearby peers. Several research studies have identified that different instructors vary in the ways they implement Peer Instruction (e.g., the time they give students to answer a question and the time they spend explaining the correct answer); however, these studies only take place at a single institution and do not relate the implementation of Peer Instruction to student learning. In this study, we analyze variation in both the implementation and impacts of Peer Instruction. We use classroom video observations and conceptual inventory data from seven introductory physics instructors across six U.S. institutions. We characterize implementation using the Framework for Interactive Learning in Lectures (FILL+), which classifies classroom activities as interactive (e.g., clicker questions), vicarious interactive (e.g., individual students asking a question), or non-interactive (e.g., instructor lecturing). Our preliminary results suggest that instructors who use both interactive and vicarious interactive strategies may exhibit larger student learning gains than instructors who predominantly use only one of the two strategies.more » « less
-
Peer assessment, as a form of collaborative learning, can engage students in active learning and improve their learning gains. However, current teaching platforms and programming environments provide little support to integrate peer assessment for in-class programming exercises. We identified challenges in conducting such exercises and adopting peer assessment through formative interviews with instructors of introductory programming courses. To address these challenges, we introduce PuzzleMe, a tool to help Computer Science instructors to conduct engaging in-class programming exercises. PuzzleMe leverages peer assessment to support a collaboration model where students provide timely feedback on their peers' work. We propose two assessment techniques tailored to in-class programming exercises: live peer testing and live peer code review. Live peer testing can improve students' code robustness by allowing them to create and share lightweight tests with peers. Live peer code review can improve code understanding by intelligently grouping students to maximize meaningful code reviews. A two-week deployment study revealed that PuzzleMe encourages students to write useful test cases, identify code problems, correct misunderstandings, and learn a diverse set of problem-solving approaches from peers.more » « less
-
Cook, S; Katz, B P; Melhuish, K (Ed.)This preliminary report shares an outcome from a summer professional development (PD) activity with university instructors. Instructors participated in four PD meetings, then immediately taught a five-day summer workshop using inquiry, working primarily with first-generation minoritized students. While instructor participants’ exit interviews of the project identified their experience in the summer PD as pivotal to their development, we know little of how students experienced the instructors’ teaching during the workshop. Our analysis focuses on two items from student post-workshop survey wherein students shared their feedback of their instructor and their experiences more broadly. This analysis allowed us to get a good sense of the instructors’ individual practices and revealed convergence in their practices. Pedagogically, instructors utilized group work and deemphasized direct instructions, while prioritizing students’ engagement in discussions and struggling through conceptual ideas. Relationally, instructors were responsive to students’ mathematical needs and created a respectful, safe, and welcoming classroom environment.more » « less
-
Cook, S; Katz, B; Moore-Russo, D (Ed.)In this report, we share the design of a year-long professional development program for university math instructors that we developed and refined as the Anti-deficit Learning and Teaching Project (Adelante). The program is a community learning project wherein minoritized students, STEM peer mentors, and math instructors (graduate students and instructional faculty) build relationships as they share their knowledge and experiences with race, gender, and mathematics. Culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billing, 1995) frames the goals of the community learning in terms of deep mathematical knowledge, cultural knowledge, and sociopolitical consciousness. The program activities are inspired by the Funds of Knowledge for Teaching project (Moll et al., 1992) wherein teachers are offered opportunities to build meaningful relationships with students and their communities. An anti-deficit perspective (Adiredja et al., 2020) guides the learning experience for all participants. Not only are minoritized students assumed to have cultural and intellectual assets for learning, but the project also aims to dismantle deficit master narratives (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002) about these students and their capacity to learn. Instructors worked on explicitly challenging deficit narratives about their students as they engaged in the program’s activities. The project also takes an anti-deficit approach to instructor development, focusing on their individual growth and agency, joy in teaching, and mental health. We also position ourselves as learners to the experience and wisdom of the staff and students at the university cultural centers. The core activities for the PD engage teachers to: (a) participate in five PD meetings on anti- deficit teaching and Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) teaching method; (b) lead a five-day math summer bridge workshop in Pre-Calculus, Calculus I, II, Vector Calculus, or Linear Algebra immediately following the meetings; (c) participate in critical conversations about race and gender in STEM with students at the cultural centers; (d) conduct a semi-structure interview with one of their students from the summer workshop about their STEM experience; and (e) participate in group reflection meetings debriefing their experience in the activities. Preliminary analysis of two of the three cohorts of participants found that most instructors developed a more humanizing approach to their teaching and their students (Gutiérrez, 2018). IBL helped instructors to explicitly challenge deficit narratives about minoritized students in the classroom, wherein most observed their students engaging in deep mathematical reasoning. Interviewing one of their students also shifted deficit narratives that developed in the classroom for some instructors. The workshop served as a space to try out previously learned teaching ideas (student centered teaching) without constraints from curriculum and assessments. Doing so reinvigorated many instructors’ passion for teaching, especially those who are more experienced.more » « less
