Quote 1 Reciprocal Teaching

1. Quote 1ReciprocalTeaching “In a classroom using the Reciprocal Teaching approach, a student working in a small group reads aloud a brief passage of text and immediately generates a question, such as, Why did the main character do what he did? To form the question, the student must make sense of the text and process information automatically. After other members of the group have answered several questions, the student tries to clarify any difficult words or phrases. Clarifying helps a child develop the ability to self-monitor, an essential component of independent reading. The student then generates a summary that identifies and describes the main ideas of the text. Finally, the student predicts what is likely to occur next and provides evidence from the text to support the prediction.” Palinscar and Brown (1984)

2. Quote 2DiscussionWeb “Too often, only a few students are willing to contribute and as a result they monopolize the conversation. What starts out as a discussion ends as a dialogue between the teacher and a handful of students. Meanwhile the rest of the class sits passively-either not listening to or not paying attention to what is being said. However, the Discussion Web (Alvermann, 1991) is a strategy designed to include all students in active participation in class discussion.” Buehl (2001)

3. Quote 3Collaborative Concept Mapping “Concept mapping with slips of paper, or within Inspiration software, provides an arena for discussion of knowledge. It is a place where students can point to concepts tangibly, and discover ways of expressing relationships between ideas. If used in conjunction with cooperative learning strategies, Inspiration software provides an opportunity for purposeful student interaction and movement.”  Roth and Roychoudhury (1992)

4. Quote 4PeerInstruction “Lectures are interspersed with conceptual questions, called ConcepTests, designed to expose common difficulties in understanding the material. The students are given one to two minutes to think about the question and formulate their own answers; they then spend two to three minutes discussing their answers in groups of three to four, attempting to reach consensus on the correct answer. This process forces the students to think through the arguments being developed, and enables them (as well as the instructor) to assess their understanding of the concepts even before they leave the classroom.” Mazur Group (2004)

5. Peer Instruction (Eric Mazur: Prentice Hall, 1997) The Method Students are given reading assignments for each class: what was previously covered in a lecture. Start class with a ~ 5 minute review of main points (a) to remind students what was read, and (b) to emphasize what are the main points.

6. Peer Instruction (Eric Mazur: Prentice Hall, 1997) Rest of class time is used for: usual demonstrations which provide the connection between the theoretical concept and thephysical world, and (b) small group discussion of either qualitativeconceptual problems, or simple analyticalproblems that require strong conceptual understanding.

7. Peer Instruction (Eric Mazur: Prentice Hall, 1997) Use overhead to present a short, multiple-choice question, designed to develop understanding. Initially the choices are not presented. Students try individually to answer the question, then try to convince their neighbours in ~ 5minute discussion. In this time, I address individual concerns one-on-one. After ~ 5 minutes, I provide the choices and class votes for the answer.

8. Peer Instruction (Eric Mazur: Prentice Hall, 1997) The Vote Display cards with choice A ... F Instant feedback on comprehension, to student and me. Then I give the correct reasoning, addressing both right and wrong answers: often generatesquestions by students who voted for the incorrect answer, because they have thought seriously abouttheir answer and are having conceptual problems. A group response – even if incorrect – gives confidence to ask questions.

9. Quote for ReflectionThink-Pair-Share “The think-pair-share structure gives all learners the opportunity to discuss their ideas. This is important because learners start to construct their knowledge in these discussions and also to find out what they do and do not know. This active process is not normally available to them during traditional lectures. After several minutes the instructor solicits comments to be shared with the whole group. The responses received are often more intellectually concise since learners have had a chance to reflect on their ideas. The think-pair-share structure also enhances the student's oral communication skills as they discuss their ideas with one another and with the whole group.” Lymna, F. (1981)

10. Beyond Peer Instruction The Peer Instruction method works with concepts, but it may also be used in other ways: • Use Rating Scales to learn about student viewpoints. • Use Aikenhead’s Views on Science Technology Society (VOSTS) to teach students about connections.

11. Peer Instruction Let’s examine Peer Instruction from these perspectives: Teaching Strategies/Curriculum/Assessment Teaching Strategies:Passive Active Transmissive Reflective Curriculum: QuantitativeQualitative Assessment: ?_________ ?_________

12. Websites Project Galileo • http://galileo.harvard.edu/home.html Mazur Group • http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/education/educationmenu.php

13. For further reading • Alvermann, D.E. (1991). The discussion web: A graphic aid for learning across the curriculum. The Reading Teacher, 45, 92-99 • Buehl, D. (2001).Classroom Strategies for Interactive Learning, International Reading Association, Newark, Delaware, Second Edition. • Crouch, C. and Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: TenYears of Experience and ResultsAm. J. Phys., 69, 970-977. • Lymna, F. (1981). "The responsive classroom discussion." In Anderson, A. S. (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest, College Park, MD: University of Maryland College of Education. • Mazur, E., Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual. Prentice Hall, Upper SaddleRiver, NJ, 1997. • Palinscar, A. & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, I (2), p. 117-175. • Roth, W. and Roychoudhury, A. (1992) The social construction of scientific concepts or the concept map as conscription tool for social thinking in high school science. Science Education, 76, 531-557.