Peer instruction has been popularized by Mazur. It can be quite a powerful method when used in the appropriate way. We believe that students who tutored and helped other students in study periods, or as a more formal tutor, have learned how powerful and how useful it is trying to teach someone else something. As a tutor you learned the material so much better yourself, it is often one-on-one, or in a small group which helps discussion and personal coaching, and you can use relevant language and examples to help the student you are instructing.

Peer instruction is complementary to think-pair-share in that the pairing portion can have a peer instruction component as each student tries to explain what they are thinking, suggesting. You can also do peer instruction without the full think-pair-share element. There is a grey zone here. In theory, peer instruction implies that one student knows more than the other student and can actually instruct. This may or may not be true in a think-pair-share situation.

Like all methods it requires “thinking it through”, and matching the method to the content, students, instructor. Peer instruction can occur in many formats and situations. For example, peer instruction can occur as part of assignments, team projects, labs, tutorials, primary lecture breakouts, and possibly even content delivery in a senior course.

Our observations…

• Peer instruction can be done in pairs, small groups, and even in a full class setting where one student takes the lead and helps explain, tutor their classmates using their language, concepts in a relatable way that the instructor cannot do.
• When pairing up, it is possible to have a number of scenarios which will affect the learning and outcome of the peer instruction; the material in the activity must anticipate this and have safeguards and mechanisms in place.
• The pairing could result in two students who really don’t know the material, two students who do know the material, or the situation where one can truly help the other. This is important to remember!
• The pairing could also result in different combinations of dominant personalities, confidence, and willingness to actually engage or care about the activity; they may like or dislike each other as students often develop a history with each other during the course of a program.
• Appropriate time must be given for the activity so that the students can do a full learning cycle which would include some deliberate practice and more than one question or activity to allow for the initial probe, discussion, and re-attempt.
• The topic or activity must be designed so that the learning outcome is achievable for most of the pairings; note, the learning outcome can be having the students learn what they do not know, or explore at method that will be discussed and enhanced by the instructor.
• The peer instruction can be used after the instructor presents a method or concept and then asked the students to apply the material, or the situation can be flipped with the peer instruction activity having the students do the initial dive and initial exploration.

• After the peer instruction activity, the instructor needs to deal with the sub optimal learning outcomes that some pairings will have achieved.
• The instructor needs to wrap the peer instruction activity with appropriate discussion, feedback, and the opportunity to either correct or to reinforce the consolidated learning.
• There is the potential danger of bad learning, and it is very difficult to actually change or correct a situation where the peers inadvertently damage each other; an extra effort might be necessary to ensure that there is a positive activity immediately after a peer instruction activity to address bad learning as soon as possible.
• When done in a classroom, lab, or tutorial there is likely to be a high noise level as students discuss and teach each other; this can be loud enough that it can impact adjoining classrooms, or workspaces.
• The design of the classroom will also impact the opportunity for peer instruction, as some layouts and table chair arrangements are better suited for pairs or small groups of students to work together; it might take time to rearrange the classroom before and after the peer instruction, and the activity around the students can be so noisy and hectic that little instruction is actually achieved.
• There will be a learning curve for the students as they learn how to manage the situation and help each other; until the students develop the comfort level, and know how to work together in such a way, the learning outcomes will be limited
• Junior students might need a short workshop or be provided guidance on how to work with and help each other.
• It is not clear if it is best to randomly pick the students who will work together, leave it to students to work with their study buddies, keep the same pairings for a number of peer instruction activities, and when to change the peer pairings during a term; there are benefits that arise from keeping the same pairings, there are also benefits from keeping and not keeping study buddy teams.
• In a senior seminar style class, it is possible to have students actually prepare a lecture or tutorial on a subject as part of a team assignment as the students will have to teach each other on the team the material and then teach the rest of the class; this does require the material to be suitable, and the instructor must be prepared to gently correct the students and deal with possible errors in delivery and understanding.
• There are also impromptu opportunities for peer instruction. For example, if the class is doing an exercise in class and some of the class finish early, they can be asked to help out, answer questions, help others.

Further reading

• https://mazur.harvard.edu/research-areas/peer-instruction