Tutorial: The
'Peer Teaching in teams of 3'
strategy
An engaging, collaborative peer-teaching competition for your students.
Ideal for revising or reteaching units of work.
We learn 10% of what we hear and 90% of what we teach
We have all heard this before - we learn 10% of what we hear and 90% of what we teach. I read recently someone taking objection to this mantra, saying there is insufficient data to back it up. I'd say, speaking from experience, the principle is true. Is it 90%-10%? Who knows? Who cares? The fact is if you want to learn something, then teach 'that thing' to someone. Then you’ll know the thing backwards. It's the best way. Ask anyone who has taught anything - there is definitely truth in the mantra.
For this reason, fostering peer teaching among students is an educationally sound strategy to employ. For those wanting to use peer teaching more regularly it helps to first have students regularly engaged in collaboration. This is because collaboration forms the foundation for a great deal of peer-teaching.
But the peer-teaching may be wrong!
Some educators express concern that the result of peer teaching can be students teaching other students incorrectly. However, rather than seeing the possibility of instructional errors as prohibitive, we can manage the risk by putting some processes in place to check for correct procedures and understanding throughout a given unit of work. As teachers we simply need to show some professional common sense in this matter. And in any case, even if there is a risk of ‘incorrect teaching’, one can argue that the rewards outweigh the risks.
For this reason, fostering peer teaching among students is an educationally sound strategy to employ. For those wanting to use peer teaching more regularly it helps to first have students regularly engaged in collaboration. This is because collaboration forms the foundation for a great deal of peer-teaching.
But the peer-teaching may be wrong!
Some educators express concern that the result of peer teaching can be students teaching other students incorrectly. However, rather than seeing the possibility of instructional errors as prohibitive, we can manage the risk by putting some processes in place to check for correct procedures and understanding throughout a given unit of work. As teachers we simply need to show some professional common sense in this matter. And in any case, even if there is a risk of ‘incorrect teaching’, one can argue that the rewards outweigh the risks.
Peer teaching: 'Organic' or organised?
'Organic' Peer teaching
I'm using the term 'organic', above, to refer to peer teaching that occurs incidentally and spontaneously within lessons. By allowing for and encouraging students to discuss and collaborate peer teaching will tend to occur naturally. I’ve had many classes where most students give or receive peer instruction on a regular basis throughout any given series of lessons.
Teachers who foster peer teaching will tend to manage a balance between organised peer-teaching and organic peer-teaching.
Teachers who foster peer teaching will tend to manage a balance between organised peer-teaching and organic peer-teaching.
Organised Peer Teaching
Organised peer teaching is usually facilitated by sitting students in specific groups or by pairing students for a specific purpose.
Examples of organised peer teaching include:
Examples of organised peer teaching include:
- Sitting all students in pairs/groups based on the need for ongoing peer-teaching.
- Placing certain students together in pairs as the need for peer-teaching arises.
- The 'Teams of Three' peer-teaching competition. This is an excellent activity and explained in the video below.
Turning this 'Peer Teaching in teams of 3' activity into a revision task
As explained in the video, the 'Peer Teaching in Teams of 3' activity was clearly designed to be a substitute for the teacher (me) reteaching a unit of work after two-thirds of the class under-performed in an assessment task. But what if you simply wanted to use the activity as a revision exercise? Simple! Here's how:
The Pre-test/Post test version
Alternatively, you could align the activity more closely to the one in the video by commencing with a pre-test.
- Split the class into three categories. You could do this by having students randomly select one of three cards. However, to maximise the chance of creating the groups evenly it would be better if you privately ranked the students and then created the groups based on your rankings.
- Each group chooses a leader.
- Allocate 1-4 lessons for the groups to revise the work. You may need to provide some scaffolding for the learning.
- The competition could be of the type 'The teams with the best total score on the assessment task win the prizes'.
- Note, there would be no numeracy challenge for this version.
The Pre-test/Post test version
Alternatively, you could align the activity more closely to the one in the video by commencing with a pre-test.
- The pre-test needs would be run first, prior to any mention of the competition - you don't want students to engage in 'tanking' so that they can more easily improve their score in the post-test!
- Once the pre-test has been collected, announce the competition.
- Base the make-up of the groups according to their test scores.
- Then run the activity as per the video.
Organic peer teaching requires greater student collaboration; student collaboration tends to be noisy!
Dealing with working noise
Organic peer teaching and the associated student collaboration will generate low level working noise that always threatens to escalate. Therefore, some strategies for 'keeping the noise down' will be required. This can be a challenge given that one of the main causes of escalating working noise within engaged classrooms is the enthusiasm of the students, a quality we do not want to curb.
Dealing with off-task talking
With healthy levels of collaboration and organic peer-teaching comes the risk of students 'wandering' off-task. When a few students get off-task, the big trap to avoid is the all-too-common strategy of responding by silencing the whole class. The reason I call this 'a big trap' is because the students who suffer the most from this strategy are the engaged students who should not be held responsible for the behaviour and noise levels of their colleagues.
The 'Localised silence strategy'
There is a better way to deal with the 'a few students off-task' scenario. It is to use localised silence for a limited time. This is the process of calling out the few students who are off-task (with a big, genuine smile on your face) and 'putting them on silence' for a few minutes.
What? Wait! - But how do I prove that these few students are off task? How can I be absolutely certain - in full view of the entire class - that I am correct in my assessment that students A, B and C were off-task in a classroom where there's more than a low level of working noise?
One mistake teachers often make with the off-task noise issue is to assume that in order to call out 2-3 students for being off-task they have to be able to 'prove' that the students were indeed off-task, and this can lead to confrontation. It therefore appears easier to impose blanket silence on the whole class - sometimes with the mistaken idea that penalising and annoying the better students will somehow cause them to put pressure on the offenders so as to curb their behaviour in the future.
In my view, the need for 'proof' of a few students being off-task is the wrong way of looking at the situation.
Firstly, this isn’t a court room. We are not putting students on detention or handing out any sort of punishment. We are simply saying “Danny, Sunny, you two are off task. That’s my call. So for the next 5 minutes neither of you can make a sound and no one else can talk to you. If anyone breaks this rule then a (named, minor) consequence will result".
The aim of the 'Localised silence strategy' is ONLY to arrest the escalating noice levels and to ensure that all students are on-task. That’s it. To quote Python, this isn't a 'Spanish Inquisition'!
Now, about that issue of ‘proof’
I don’t know the science behind this, I only know it to be true. The fact is that the noise emanating from a couple of off-task students is of a distinctly different tone to the noise emanating from the other 25+ students who happen to be on-task at the same time!
This is a fascinating phenomenon. I’m not convinced I was able to discern the difference between off-task noise and working noise within a busy classroom during my first year of teaching and I can’t state at what point during my career this difference became so obvious but it is true - off-task noise has a distinctly different tone to it and can easily be distinguished amongst a whole lot of working noise, often without even looking!
Don't play the judge
However, if you try playing the judge you will lose! Maybe you won't lose the lesson but certainly you will lose some rapport, and probably rapport with students with whom you can least afford to lose it.
Therefore, when calling out the students don’t play Judge Judy. In fact, don’t use any accusational tone in your voice whatsoever. You are simply making an observation. “John, Lucy, I hear off task noise and I say it’s coming from you. How am I going with my assessment thus far? I’m right aren’t I?” No judgement, no threat, just a statement made using a slightly frivolous-but-I-mean-it tone.
The reason I'm labouring this point is because, for authoritarian-style teachers, making the transition from a quiet, students-work-in-silence classroom to a collaborative, it's-OK-for-students-to-make-some-noise classroom is quite a paradigm shift to make.
On this site there are comprehensive online learning journeys which guide teachers through such a transition, however, for now, consider this tutorial a 'taste' of what is possible.
For those who are a little unsure of how localised silence might play out in a classroom check out the example dialogue below.
Rapport
Note that this strategy is predicated on good rapport between teacher and students. If rapport with your students is something that you lack then it would be a great idea for you to have as your next aim to developing quality rapport with your students. It will make your task as teacher much easier and more enjoyable. It will also improve the way your students learn from you.
The 'Localised silence strategy'
There is a better way to deal with the 'a few students off-task' scenario. It is to use localised silence for a limited time. This is the process of calling out the few students who are off-task (with a big, genuine smile on your face) and 'putting them on silence' for a few minutes.
What? Wait! - But how do I prove that these few students are off task? How can I be absolutely certain - in full view of the entire class - that I am correct in my assessment that students A, B and C were off-task in a classroom where there's more than a low level of working noise?
One mistake teachers often make with the off-task noise issue is to assume that in order to call out 2-3 students for being off-task they have to be able to 'prove' that the students were indeed off-task, and this can lead to confrontation. It therefore appears easier to impose blanket silence on the whole class - sometimes with the mistaken idea that penalising and annoying the better students will somehow cause them to put pressure on the offenders so as to curb their behaviour in the future.
In my view, the need for 'proof' of a few students being off-task is the wrong way of looking at the situation.
Firstly, this isn’t a court room. We are not putting students on detention or handing out any sort of punishment. We are simply saying “Danny, Sunny, you two are off task. That’s my call. So for the next 5 minutes neither of you can make a sound and no one else can talk to you. If anyone breaks this rule then a (named, minor) consequence will result".
The aim of the 'Localised silence strategy' is ONLY to arrest the escalating noice levels and to ensure that all students are on-task. That’s it. To quote Python, this isn't a 'Spanish Inquisition'!
Now, about that issue of ‘proof’
I don’t know the science behind this, I only know it to be true. The fact is that the noise emanating from a couple of off-task students is of a distinctly different tone to the noise emanating from the other 25+ students who happen to be on-task at the same time!
This is a fascinating phenomenon. I’m not convinced I was able to discern the difference between off-task noise and working noise within a busy classroom during my first year of teaching and I can’t state at what point during my career this difference became so obvious but it is true - off-task noise has a distinctly different tone to it and can easily be distinguished amongst a whole lot of working noise, often without even looking!
Don't play the judge
However, if you try playing the judge you will lose! Maybe you won't lose the lesson but certainly you will lose some rapport, and probably rapport with students with whom you can least afford to lose it.
Therefore, when calling out the students don’t play Judge Judy. In fact, don’t use any accusational tone in your voice whatsoever. You are simply making an observation. “John, Lucy, I hear off task noise and I say it’s coming from you. How am I going with my assessment thus far? I’m right aren’t I?” No judgement, no threat, just a statement made using a slightly frivolous-but-I-mean-it tone.
The reason I'm labouring this point is because, for authoritarian-style teachers, making the transition from a quiet, students-work-in-silence classroom to a collaborative, it's-OK-for-students-to-make-some-noise classroom is quite a paradigm shift to make.
On this site there are comprehensive online learning journeys which guide teachers through such a transition, however, for now, consider this tutorial a 'taste' of what is possible.
For those who are a little unsure of how localised silence might play out in a classroom check out the example dialogue below.
- Teacher: "George and Dom, I'd say you two are off-task. How am I going?"
- Students: "Umm, well … "
- Teacher: "You're trying to tell me all that noise was working noise?"
- Students: "No ... no sir ... we were off task"
- Teacher: "Ahh … A virtual Mars Bar for honesty. (No judgement, no threat) OK class here's the deal … for the next 5 minutes George and Dom, you don't talk at all, and nobody can talk to George or Dom. If anyone breaks this rule you'll see me at lunch” (or other appropriate consequence).
Rapport
Note that this strategy is predicated on good rapport between teacher and students. If rapport with your students is something that you lack then it would be a great idea for you to have as your next aim to developing quality rapport with your students. It will make your task as teacher much easier and more enjoyable. It will also improve the way your students learn from you.
Do you like this style of tutorial?
Hopefully, you found this Peer-Teaching tutorial to be practical, 'down to earth' and easy to understand.
If you enjoyed this style of tutorial and are looking for more like it then check out the online professional learning offerings on this site. Some cater for all middle and high school teachers and some cater specifically for teachers of mathematics. If you have questions, please send through a contact message below.
If you enjoyed this style of tutorial and are looking for more like it then check out the online professional learning offerings on this site. Some cater for all middle and high school teachers and some cater specifically for teachers of mathematics. If you have questions, please send through a contact message below.
|
Save the url of this tutorial
Thanks for working through this tutorial. Note that this page is a hidden page on the website learnimplementshare.com - i.e. the tutorial is not listed in the website menu nor is it linked from any other page. Therefore you might want to save the url. We really, really would love your feedback!
A comment below &/or the 30-second survey Let's have a discussion!What did you like about this tutorial? Do you have questions or suggestions? Please share below ...
|
|
