Satu Öystilä 2015

Peer Learning and Ethical Principles of a Teacher

Eduta Oy

Tel. +35850 564 4887

satu.oystila@eduta.fi www.eduta.fi

Peer learning

The human being needs a reclection

(a mirror) in order to learn

Learning

Dales pyramid

• Dales pyramid shows, how active learning processes and methods create best circumstances and environments to learning.

• Panadero, C. F., Roman, J. V. & Kloos, C. D. 2010. Impact of learning experiences using LEGO Mindstorms in engineering courses, IEEE Education Engineering (EDUCON), 503–512.

The Elements of Collaborative Learning

• Peer learning• To take care of the stages of group development• Dialogue• Teacher as an authority (not authoritarian)• The development of self-confidence and self-

knowledge• Interpersonal skills

Peer learning

• Peer learning means using of such learning strategies, where students can learn from and with each other. Teachers have to organize the process and create a structure for it, but otherwise they keep on the background and do not controll the process.

Liabilities of peer and collaborative learning

Please, list the barries of peer learning!

Liabilities of peer and collaborative learning I Fear of losing control Fear, that there is no time to handle all content Teachers don´t have the ability to use collaborative

methods Lack of suitable learning material Difficulty to assess peer learning

Liabilities of peer and collaborative learning II

Students’ resistance to change (it is so easy to listen to lectures)

Experiences of the non-functional groups Students experience peer assessment too

challenging and unpleasant According to students peer assessment can be

unreliable Fear that interpersonal relationships in the group

affect too much.

Liabilities of peer and collaborative learning III

Students are not used to peer learning and peer assessment

Many students are not used to give feedback with their own names. You think in many universities, that the feedback has to be given anonymously.

The students are loyal to each other and don´t want to give criticisism.

Also teachers may think, that they lose the reliability of assessment.

Liabilities of peer and collaborative learning IV

”The teachers don´t do their teaching work” Group size is too large Unsuitable classrooms

Liabilities of peer and collaborative learning V

Teachers are too careful with students assuming that learning atmosphere gets worse

Teachers can not use transparent criteria for peer assessment, and the target of assessment might obscure (right measures).

Assets of peer and collaborative learning

Please, list assets of peer and collaborative learning!

Assets of peer and collaborative learning I

Development of:Full understanding of the substanceMetakognitive skills Self-directed learningInterpesonal skillsSelf-knowledge and self-confidenceCritical reflectionTo feel comfort and safe during studies

• Generic skills• Acting later in working life• Motivation• Ability to tolarate diversity• Argumenting skills• Creating new ideas

Assets of peer and collaborative learning II

Teachers’ activities as a facilitator of peer learning

How teachers can promote peer learning?

Teachers have to take care of I

• The aim of the learning process• Group cohesion• Ground rules• The safe atmosphere• Getting to know each other

Teachers have to take care of II

• The presentation of him-/herself, practices, agenda…

• The own aims of students• Use time to teach peer learning processes• Transparent assessment criteria (assessment matrix)

Teachers have to take care of III

• Authority, but shared leadership• The assessment of ground rules• Solidarity and dialogue• Openness

Which are suitable peer learning methods?

Eduta Oy

Puh. +35850 564 4887

info@eduta.fi www.eduta.fi

Ethical Principles of teaching

The Values lying behind Ethical Principles (OAJ)• Human Worth: every student is unique and capable of

thinking and learning• Truthfulness: search for the truth and honesty to oneself and

to others and mutual respect in all interactions with other people

• Fairness: promotion of equality and the avoidance of discrimination and favouritism, also in the handling of conflicts and in the evaluation of learners

• Rights and Responsibilities: teachers are entitled to their own values and opinions, but are bound by the norms, legislation and the curriculum.

Ethical Principles of a teacher (OAJ)Teacher and student •The teacher accepts the student as an unique human being•The teacher respects students´ rights and treats students fairly and humanely•The teacher tries to understand students´ thinking and opinions•The teacher behaves with discretion concerning students´personality and privacy.

Ethical Principles of a teacher

A teachers´s relationship to his or her work•Teachers perform their task in a responsible manner, develop their work and professional skills and reflect their own activities. They realize that their own personality plays an important part in their teaching and they have both a right and a duty to develop that personality.

Ethical Principles of a teacher The working community Teachers value the work they are doing and show respect for their colleagues. Teachers and other interest groupsTeachers collaborate with others who are responsible Teachers and societyTeachers promote the growth and upbringing of learners and defend their rightsTeachers in a pluralistic world

Kirjallisuus I • Anderson, H. 1999. Collaborative Learning Communities. Teoksessa S. McNamee & K.

J. Gergen. 1999. Relational Responsibilty. Resources for Sustainable Dialogie. London: SAGE Publications.

• Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. 1993. Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago, IL: Open Court.

• Bonk, C. J. & Cunningham, D, J. 1998. Searching for Learner-Centered, Constructivist, and Sociocultural Components of Collaborative Educational Learning Tools.

• Boud, D. 2007. Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In Boud, D. & Falchikov. 2007. Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 14-25.

• Brew, A. 2003. Teaching and Research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research & development, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1-13.

• Divarahan, S. & Atputhamasy, L. 2002. An attempt to enhance the quality of cooperative learning through peer assessment. Journal of Educational Inquiry Vol. 3, No. 2, 72-83.

Kirjallisuus II • Exley, K. & Dennick, R. 2004. Small Group Teaching. Tutorials, seminars and beyond.

Key Guides for effective Teaching in higher education. London: Routledge Falmer.• Falchikov, N. 2007. The place of peers in learning and assessment. In Boud, D. &

Falchikov. 2007. Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 128-143.

• Falchikov, N. & Goldfinch, J. 2000. Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 70, No. 3, 287-322.

• Hanrahan, S. J. & Isaacs, G. 2001. Assessing self- and peer-assessment: The students´ view. Higher Education Research and Development Vol. 20, No. 1, 53-70.

• Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

• Light, G. & Cox, R. 2001. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. The Reflective Professional. London: Sage Publication.

• Papinczak, T., Young, L. & Groves, M. 2007. Peer Assessment in Problem-Based Learning: A Qualitative Study. Advances in Health Sciences, Education 12, 169-186.

Kirjallisuus III • Poikela, E. & Vuorinen, H. 2008. Yliopisto-opiskelun laatu. Arviointi oppimisen ja

opettamisen kehittäjänä. Teoksessa E. Poikela & S. Poikela. Laatua opiskeluun. Oppiminen ja opetus yliopistossa. Rovaniemi: Lapin yliopistokustannus.

• Reiter, H. I., Eva, K. W., Hatala, R. M. & Norman, G. R. 2002. Self and peer assessment in tutorials: Applications of a relative-ranking model. Academic Medicine Vol. 77, No. 11, 1134-1139.

• Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. 1996. Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. Teoksessa S. Vosniadou, E. De Corte, R. Glaser & H. Mandi (Eds.) International Perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

• Segers, M. & Dochy, F. 2001. New assessment forms in problem-based learning. The value-added of the students´ perspective. Studies in Higher Education Vol. 26, No. 3, 327-343.

• Seppänen-Järvelä, R. 2005. Johdanto: Vertaisuuteen perustuvat kehittämis- ja arviointimenetelmät: innovatiivisia ratkaisuja. Teoksessa R. Seppänen - Järvelä (toim.) Vertaismenetelmät kehittävän arvioinnin välineinä. 2/2005. Hyvät käytännöt. Helsinki: Stakes.

Kirjallisuus IV

• Sluijmans, D. M. A., Moerkerke, G. Merrienboer, J. J. G. van & Dochy, F.J. R. C. 2001. Peer assessment in problem-based learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation Vol. 27, No. 2, 153-173.

• Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I. & Elliot, A. 2000. Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol. 25, No. 2, 146-169.

• Vygotskij, L. S. 1978. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 90