Overview
- Implementation Guide
- About This Method
- Implementing This Method
Indicates a research-demonstrated benefit
Overview
A method for creating more interactive engagement in large lecture classes by replacing lectures with small group discussions of conceptual questions, followed by whole-class discussions, with mini-lectures between questions. Students first think about and answer these questions individually; then discuss the explanations for their answers with their neighbors and come to agreement on the underlying physics.
 |
Type of Method | Instructional strategy |
|---|---|---|
 |
Level |
Designed for:
Intro College Calculus-based , Intro College Algebra-based
Can be adapted for: High School , Intermediate Undergraduate, Advanced Undergraduate, Astronomy, Other Science, Teacher Preparation, Teacher Professional Development, Intro College Conceptual, Graduate
|
 |
Setting |
Designed for:
Lecture - Large (30+ students)
Can be adapted for: Lecture - Small (<30 students) , Recitation/Discussion Session, Studio
|
 |
Coverage | Many topics with less depth, Requires more in-depth coverage of individual topics than a traditional lecture, so lecture cannot cover as many topics, but it is still possible to cover a lot of material by assigning reading and/or homework on topics not covered in lecture. |
 |
Topics | Mechanics, Electricity / Magnetism, Waves / Optics, Thermal / Statistical, Modern / Quantum, Mathematical, Astronomy, Other Science, Pedagogy |
 |
Instructor Effort | Low, (If suitable ConcepTests are already available, "low" is appropriate; if the instructor needs to write his/her own ConcepTests, then it requires more effort. There are many databases of ConcepTests in a wide variety of subjects.) |
 |
Resource Needs | Multiple choice questions and polling method. A projector, clickers, and TAs/LAs are helpful but not required. |
 |
Skills |
Designed for:
Conceptual understanding of physics content, Connecting conceptual and mathematical understanding
Can be adapted for: Problem-solving skills , Enjoyment of physics, Coherent framework for physics, Understanding how physics relates to the real world, Think like a scientist, Reflecting on one's own learning, Self-confidence around physics, Representing knowledge in multiple ways
|
 |
Research Validation |
Based on research into:
how students learn Demonstrated to improve: scores on multiple choice conceptual tests ,
scores on written conceptual tests,
traditional problem-solving ability,
beliefs about physics,
attitudes about physics,
retention of studentsStudied using: conceptual pre/post exams ,
beliefs pre/post exams,
classroom observations,
research conducted at multiple institutions,
research conducted by someone other than developers,
problem-solving pre/post exams,
student interviews,
video of students |
 |
Compatible Methods | PhET, UW Tutorials, JiTT, Ranking Tasks, ILDs, CGPS, Physlets, Context-Rich Problems, RealTime Physics, TIPERs, ABP Tutorials, SCALE-UP, OSP, SDI Labs, OST Tutorials, Thinking Problems, Workbook for Introductory Physics, LA Program, CAE TPS, Lecture-Tutorials, Astro Ranking Tasks, MBL, New Model Course, CPU, SCL, TEFA, CU Modern, CU E&M, CU QM, QuILTs, IQP, Thermal Tutorials, Mechanics Tutorials, Paradigms, Tools for Scientific Thinking, PI QM, M&I, Tutorials, Clickers, MOP, Responsive Teaching |
 |
Similar Methods | ILDs, Workbook for Introductory Physics, CAE TPS, TEFA, PI QM, Clickers |
 |
Developer(s) | Eric Mazur, Catherine H. Crouch, and colleagues |
 |
Website | http://www.peerinstruction.net/ |
 |
Intro Article | Peer Instruction: Engaging Students One-on-One, All at Once |
