the pilars
stipps logo
  PEER LEARNING
go to layer4

Vygotskyan Peer Learning

vygotskyan peer learningVygotsky (1978) saw mediation as central to the development of higher psychological functioning. He emphasised the essential nature of social dimensions to learning.  ‘Every function in the child’s (cultural) development appears twice: first on the social level and later on the individual level – first between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child (intrapsychological).’(p56). The importance of peer learning was emphasised in the development of the notion of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) defined as ‘the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers’ (p57). Central to functioning within the ZPD are the principals of intersubjectivity leading to more effective intra-psychological functioning. Intersubjectivity can be thought of the extent to which two subjects can engage in conversation and dialogue that transcends their own worlds/minds. Adults can find it difficult to make that transcendence to the world of the child (Donaldson,1987). Therefore, peers may form a better context for intersubjectivity to facilitate cognition. Vygotsky’s psychological model emphasised the role of dialogue in mediated cognitive growth and suggested that learners were able to ‘perform...in collaboration with one another that which they have not mastered independently’ (p87). Vygotsky concluded that peer interaction in the learning process was essential to allow internalisation and long term cognitive growth. The peer questions, discusses, debates and extends the thinking of their partner. Topping and Ehly (1998) provide a theoretical model as to how peer learning promotes cognitive gains when Vygotsyan co-construction occurs(Figure 2). The model addresses organizational/structural features of the learning interaction, such as:

  • maximising time on task and time engaged with task,
  • the need for helper and helped to elaborate goals/plans,
  • the individualization of learning and immediacy of feedback possible within the one-on-one situation,
  • the excitement and variety of a different kind of learning interaction.

 

In the model peer learning involves tutoring, support and scaffolding from a peer, necessitating management of activities within the ZPD. The peer tutor acts to provide support/scaffolding which results in co-construction (the peer acts as co-learner and the potential damaging excess of challenge are minimised).

Training will be provided for pupils to increase their potential ability to manage and modulate the information processing demands upon the learner so they are neither too much, nor too little. The tutor provides a cognitive model of competent performance. However, the cognitive demands upon the tutor are great. They have to monitor learner performance and detect, diagnose, correct and manage misconceptions and errors. Herein lies much of the cognitive challenge, exercise and benefit for the tutor. Heavy demands are made upon the communication skills of both tutor and tutee. Both might never have truly grasped a concept until they had to explain it to the other, thereby embodying and crystallizing thought into language.

The affective component of peer learning might also prove powerful. A trusting relationship with a peer who holds no position of authority might facilitate self-disclosure of ignorance and misconception. This should facilitate diagnosis and correction. Modelling of enthusiasm and competence by the tutor could influence the self-confidence of the tutee. A sense of loyalty and accountability to each other might help to keep the pair motivated and on-task. The research will attempt to assay the contribution to development in the affective domain by assessing the children’s self-esteem, attitudes towards science and sense of social connectedness with children in their class.

These sub-processes feed into a larger onward process of extending each other's declarative knowledge, procedural skill, and conditional and selective application of knowledge and skills, by, adding to and extending current capabilities (accretion), modifying current capabilities (re-tuning), and rebuilding new understanding (restructuring in areas of completely new learning or cases of gross misconception or error) (Rumelhart & Norman,1983). These are somewhat similar to Piagetian concepts of assimilation and accommodation. This should lead to the joint construction of a shared understanding between tutor and tutee–which is inter-subjective. The understanding might not represent ‘absolute truth’, is firmly situated within the current context of application (Lave & Wenger,1991;Derry & Lesgold,1996), but forms a foundation for further progress.

Peer learning might also enable and facilitate a greater volume of engaged and successful practice, leading to consolidation, fluency and automaticity of core skills. Much of this might occur implicitly, i.e. without the tutor or tutee being fully aware of what is happening. As this occurs, both tutor and tutee give feedback to each other, implicitly and/or explicitly. Implicit feedback is likely to occur spontaneously in the earlier stages. The quantity and immediacy of feedback to the learner is likely to increase. Explicit reinforcement might stem from within the partnership or beyond it, by way of verbal and/or non-verbal praise, social acknowledgement and status, official accreditation, or even more tangible reward e.g. teacher assessment.

As the learning relationship develops, both helper and helped should begin to become more consciously aware of what is happening in their learning interaction, and consequently more able to monitor and regulate the effectiveness of their own learning strategies. This development into fully conscious explicit and strategic meta-cognition is likely to promote more effective onward learning. It should also make both tutor and tutee more confident that they can achieve even more, and that success is the result of their own efforts.  The inevitable conclusion of this is that the process is not actually a linear model. Instead the affective and cognitive outcomes should feed back into the originating sub-processes–forming a continuous iterative process and a virtuous circle. As the peer relationship develops, the process should continue to apply as the learning moves from the surface level to the strategic and on to the deep level, and from the declarative into the procedural and conditional.

Video of children co-constructing