Supporting Instructors Adoption of Peer Instruction
Pages 1662 - 1663
Abstract
Peer Instruction (PI) is a learning activity that lets students solve a difficult multiple-choice question individually, submit their answer, discuss with peers to solve the problem collaboratively, and then submit the 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 are willing to adopt the tool, but less than half did after a semester. 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.
References
[1]
Dennis Bouvier, Ellie Lovellette, John Matta, Jing Bai, Jacqueline Chetty, Stan Kurkovsky, and Jia Wan. 2019. Factors Affecting the Adoption of Peer Instruction in Computing Courses. In Proceedings of the Working Group Reports on Global Computing Education. 1--25.
[2]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, Vol. 3, 2 (2006), 77--101.
[3]
Catherine H Crouch and Eric Mazur. 2001. Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American journal of physics, Vol. 69, 9 (2001), 970--977.
[4]
Catherine H Crouch, Jessica Watkins, Adam P Fagen, and Eric Mazur. 2007. Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Research-based reform of university physics, Vol. 1, 1 (2007), 40--95.
[5]
Paul Denny, John Hamer, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, and Helen Purchase. 2008. PeerWise: students sharing their multiple choice questions. In Proceedings of the fourth international workshop on computing education research. 51--58.
[6]
Barbara J Ericson and Bradley N Miller. 2020. Runestone: A Platform for Free, On-line, and Interactive Ebooks. In Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. 1012--1018.
[7]
James S Fairweather. 2005. Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. The journal of higher education, Vol. 76, 4 (2005), 401--422.
[8]
Jennifer K Knight and William B Wood. 2005. Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell biology education, Vol. 4, 4 (2005), 298--310.
[9]
Cynthia Bailey Lee, Saturnino Garcia, and Leo Porter. 2013. Can peer instruction be effective in upper-division computer science courses? ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), Vol. 13, 3 (2013), 1--22.
[10]
Leo Porter, Cynthia Bailey Lee, and Beth Simon. 2013. Halving fail rates using peer instruction: a study of four computer science courses. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. 177--182.
[11]
Leo Porter, Cynthia Bailey Lee, Beth Simon, Quintin Cutts, and Daniel Zingaro. 2011. 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. 138--142.
[12]
Leo Porter and Beth Simon. 2013. Retaining nearly one-third more majors with a trio of instructional best practices in CS1. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. 165--170.
[13]
Kate Sanders, Marzieh Ahmadzadeh, Tony Clear, Stephen H. Edwards, Mikey Goldweber, Chris Johnson, Raymond Lister, Robert McCartney, Elizabeth Patitsas, and Jaime Spacco. 2013. The Canterbury QuestionBank: Building a Repository of Multiple-Choice CS1 and CS2 Questions. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE Working Group Reports Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education-Working Group Reports (Canterbury, England, United Kingdom) (ITiCSE -WGR '13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 33--52. https://doi.org/10.1145/2543882.2543885
[14]
Beth Simon, Julian Parris, and Jaime Spacco. 2013. How we teach impacts student learning: peer instruction vs. lecture in CS0. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. 41--46. io
Index Terms
- Supporting Instructors Adoption of Peer Instruction
Recommendations
Peer+: A Tool to Support Peer Instruction in Interactive Ebooks
ICER '23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research - Volume 2Decades of research have provided evidence of the effectiveness of Peer Instruction (PI) in many fields, including computing. PI involves an instructor displaying a hard multiple-choice question that students answer individually, then discuss with peers ...
Peer Instruction in Computing: A Focus on Student Learning (Abstract Only)
SIGCSE '16: Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science EducationRecent work in computing has converged on a collection of complementary findings suggesting the value of the Peer Instruction (PI) pedagogy. Compared to lecture, PI has been shown to decrease fail rates, increase final exam grades, and increase ...
A Multi-Institution Exploration of Peer Instruction in Practice: (Abstract Only)
SIGCSE '18: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationPeer Instruction is an active learning pedagogy that has been shown to improve student outcomes in computing, including lower failure rates, higher exam scores, and better retention in the CS major. A key classroom mechanism for Peer Instruction is the "...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
March 2024
2007 pages
ISBN:9798400704246
DOI:10.1145/3626253
- General Chairs:
- Ben Stephenson,
- Jeffrey A. Stone,
- Program Chairs:
- Lina Battestilli,
- Samuel A. Rebelsky,
- Libby Shoop
Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 15 March 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Poster
Funding Sources
Conference
SIGCSE 2024
Sponsor:
SIGCSE 2024: The 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
March 20 - 23, 2024
OR, Portland, USA
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%
Upcoming Conference
SIGCSE TS 2025
- Sponsor:
- sigcse
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 53Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)53
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 28 Dec 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in