Dynamics of Peer Education in Cooperative Learning Workgroups

Abstract

Many recent studies demonstrate that cooperative learning provides a variety of educational advantages over more traditional instructional models, both in general and specifically in engineering education. Little is known, however, about the interactional dynamics among students in engineering work groups. To explore these dynamics and their implications for engineering education, we analyzed work sessions of student groups in a sophomore‐level chemical engineering course at North Carolina State University. Using conversation analysis as a methodology for understanding how students taught and learned from one another, we found that group members generally engaged in two types of teaching‐learning interactions. In the first type, transfer‐of‐knowledge (TK) sequences, they took on distinct teacher and pupil roles, and in the second, collaborative sequences (CS), they worked together with no clear role differentiation. The interactional problems that occurred during the work sessions were associated primarily with TK sequences, and had to do with students who either habitually assumed the pupil's role (constant pupils) or habitually discouraged others' contributions (blockers). Our findings suggest that professors can facilitate student group interactions by introducing students to the two modes of teaching interaction so group members can effectively manage exchanges of knowledge, and also by helping students distribute tasks in a way that minimizes role imbalances.

Conceding in disagreements during small group interactions in academic writing class

“…For example, while investigating how collaborative peer discussions provided cognitive support for writing laboratory reports, she found that students frequently used peer teaching strategy -either directly imparting information, or facilitating 32 learning for his or her partner‖ (p. 182). Haller et al (2000) also observed a similar interactional feature among sophomores while they were collaboratively solving their engineering problems in groups. Their findings show interesting dynamics of peer interaction that result from asymmetrical distribution of knowledge and technical expertise in the group.…”

Observatorio de la Calidad de la Información en Televisión. A Research and Teaching Project: ‘Cloud’ Analysis of Contents. Collaborative and Interactive Learning

“…While some studies analyze student profiles in order to build ideal groups and improve group performance (Durán, 2006), and others issue recommendations based on different variables (Haller et al, 2000), our project decided to charge professors with assembling work pairs rather randomly, instead of having students deciding who they would like to work with. In general, participants report good group coordination and a good experience in this regard too.…”

Literature Review of the Cooperative Learning Strategy – Student Team Achievement Division (STAD)

“…Ghazi's work shows that teachers' experience is not related to their willingness to implement STAD, but their teaching rationale is. If a researcher assumes the role of a tutor, motivational experiences may perhaps be more accessible (Haller, Gallagher, Weldon & Felder, 2000). …”