See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267822388

Designing peer learning

Article · January 2001

CITATIONS READS

19 1,468

4 authors, including:

David Boud Ruth Cohen

Deakin University Bar Ilan University
257 PUBLICATIONS   22,525 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   1,546 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Uncovering Learning at Work View project

Investigating the invisibility of writing practices in the engineering curriculum View project

All content following this page was uploaded by David Boud on 27 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Designing peer learning

Jane Sampson, David Boud, Ruth Cohen and Fran Gaynor

Faculty of Education
University of Technology, Sydney

This paper examines design issues related to the use of reciprocal peer learning activities
into university courses. Reciprocal peer learning involves students working together to
learn with and from each other. The paper presents key outcomes of a study conducted in
1998 which extends an earlier investigation of four peer learning processes. The use of
peer learning activities is examined through case studies in subjects in the areas of law,
business, computing, education and design. Participants represented a diverse body of
students ranging from young adults to experienced workers and involving both
undergraduate and postgraduate study.

Outcomes point to the need for careful design of peer learning processes, including the
preparation and orientation of staff and students. The subject and course context,
teaching organisation, approaches to teaching and learning adopted by staff and prior
experience in collaborative work were identified as significant factors to be considered.
Congruence between assessment tasks and peer learning approaches underpin attainment
of specific and generic learning outcomes.

Introduction

Peer learning activities are increasingly being included as formal components of

university courses. The ability to work with peers is highly valued by workplaces and for
many students at university the opportunity to learn with others is often a preferred
learning approach. Where students may once have assisted each other informally, the
new structures of courses and the paid work demands on students have tended to reduce
this as a possibility. Formalising peer learning addresses some of these issues while also
providing a way for students to develop skills and competencies such as teamwork and
the development of interpersonal skills needed both for university learning and for the
workplace.

The way in which peer learning is formalised within academic courses presents its own
set of issues. In this paper we examine some of the design features we have found
important as we have worked with peer learning in subjects in five different faculties. We
begin by discussing peer learning with particular reference to reciprocal peer learning,
before describing the project and the key outcomes of a study conducted in 1998 which
extends an earlier investigation of four peer learning processes. The use of peer learning
activities is examined through case studies in subjects in the areas of law, business,
computing, education and design.

Peer learning

Peer learning has always been a part of students’ university experience. Traditionally this
has meant students interacting informally with each other outside formal teaching
sessions, but in more recent times peer learning has been included as part of an organised
learning process with students being asked to work together to achieve a variety of
learning outcomes. Within many structured learning programs peers work together for a
short period of time, usually for a class session or part thereof on a problem solving
activity or discussing and debating issues in a tutorial. In this paper we examine design
issues relating to formalised reciprocal peer learning where students are expected to
work together with relatively little involvement of staff over a semester or a whole year.

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 1

Sampson, Boud, Cohen & Gaynor

Reciprocal peer learning is about students learning with or from each other in both
formal and informal ways. It involves notions of interdependence and mutual benefit
where students take responsibility for each other’s learning in a setting which is often
constructed by the students. Reciprocal peer learning may also incorporate self and peer
assessment whereby students actively develop criteria for assessment and learn to give
and receive feedback on their written and oral work and their skills in working
effectively in groups.

Peer learning includes concepts of peer tutoring and peer mentoring. Reciprocal peer
learning differs from peer tutoring in that the power and status of the students is similar
and the emphasis is on learning together. Cooperative learning and collaborative learning
are other terms often used in relation to peer learning. While these terms have been
almost interchangeably in recent literature, their use has emerged from different
educational perspectives and often emphasised different outcomes. Cooperative learning
grew out of a context of cognitive, social and developmental psychology. Attention was
focussed on the processes of group interaction, individual skill development, social
learning and management of the educational environment. These activities took place
within an established body of knowledge/discipline, and authority for knowledge was
vested in the teacher (Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 1991).

Collaborative learning had its genesis with in a context of the learning of adults and
adolescents with an emphasis on participation. Learning is the key concept, not
education or teaching. The implicit assumption is that learners are experienced social
beings who can act in a collaborative manner, organise themselves, have some intrinsic
motivation or developmentally imposed motivation and do not require the imposed
structures of the facilitator to inspire learning. The lecturer acts more as a facilitator,
negotiating the learning and evaluation with learners and sharing control. It is the sense
of making learning personal that signifies collaborative learning. An emphasis on critical
thinking, problem solving, personal transformation and the social construction of
knowledge are features of collaborative learning. (Bruffee, 1993, 1995; Rubin &
Herbert, 1998). More recently feminist thinkers have drawn attention to the relationship
between collaborative learning, negotiation and learning theories and its relevance to
feminist praxis. (Schneider, 1989; Hoffman & Stake, 1998; Clark & Watson, 1998).

Reciprocal peer learning can be regarded as a sub-set of collaborative learning. As we

have used it is characterised by a primary focus on students learning with and from each
other, students acting interdependently with responsibility for managing their academic
learning. It acknowledges the contribution which current knowledge and skills of
students make to the learning of peers. The teacher plays a less direct, more facilitative,
but nevertheless crucial, role in student learning although on many occasions teachers
may not be present when students meet.

Formalising peer teaching and learning in a systematic way can help students to learn
more effectively. Both aspects of this learning experience—the development of the
learner and the development of the group are important for education and work. Peer
learning offers students the opportunity to teach and learn from each other, and it gives
them practice in working collaboratively, taking responsibility for their own learning and
more broadly learning how to learn.

While our interest as educators has been primarily focused on prompting learning,
pressure on funding has influenced universities to seek cost-effective approaches to
assist student learning without increasing staff workload. With a changing student
profile, classes increasing in size and staff numbers declining, and the reduction or

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 2

 Designing peer learning

removal of small group tutorials there has been renewed interest in the use of peer
learning approaches. These enable students to interact in ways that may previously have
been available in tutorial sessions directed by lecturers which provided a meeting place
to engage in formal and informal discussion, review and analyse ideas, critically appraise
readings in the literature, and practise presenting viewpoints. Peer learning approaches
also provide opportunities to develop skills and competencies valued in the workplace
within existing courses that may have been absent form traditional university tutorials.
These include working effectively with others in small groups or work teams,
interpersonal communication, time management, project planning and skills related to
the organisation of one’s work.

Background to the project

Within the Faculty of Education at UTS peer learning processes have been widely used
in both undergraduate and postgraduate programs for many years. We have found these
approaches effective with adult students. From their work and life backgrounds they
bring extensive and relevant practical experience to their learning, experience that can
benefit other learners. Providing a forum for peer learning in which they can get to know
other students and learn together has helped them in their study and added a dimension
to their experience of university life they would otherwise have missed. Experience with
the use of peer learning strategies shows that they also suit some students better than the
traditional individualistic teaching and learning practices found in many courses.

In 1996 as part of a CUTSD project we selected four of the peer learning processes used
in the Faculty and documented good practices in their use. In 1998 this project was
extended to include four other Faculties (Business; Law; Design, Architecture and
Building; and Mathematics and Computing) with the aim of adopting one of these
practices and adapting it to their needs or developing others forms of peer learning more
suited to their own context. They were influenced by the design principles that had been
defined through our earlier work in our own Faculty. Their students included working
adults and those direct from high school, in undergraduate and postgraduate courses.
Peer learning strategies were implemented in these Faculties and the processes involved
were evaluated and documented. The contexts required to support the activity were
analysed and features of the practices that facilitated learning were identified.

The introduction of peer learning into a course or subject can be met with a range of
markedly different responses usually dependent upon the students’ or staff members’
previous experiences of such strategies. When such processes are suggested to students
it is not unusual to hear the response—'oh no, not that group stuff again' and university
colleagues have responded similarly 'you mean small groups, oh we've done that—it
never works'. These reactions are often based on just one negative experience, which
may even outweigh several positive experiences. However students and staff do
acknowledge there are a considerable number of very worthwhile reasons for using peer
learning strategies. What has emerged from our discussions with students engaged in
peer learning suggests that the introduction of the processes needs to be carefully
planned and progress monitored if these experiences are to be productive and enjoyable
for the students and if they are to achieve the outcomes promised.

Our work to date has pointed to the need for the careful design and implementation of
peer learning processes (Sampson, Cohen, Boud, & Anderson 1999). It is not a simple
matter of hearing about an interesting new approach which students appear to like and
reproducing it in one’s own course. Without an understanding of the factors which
contribute to its success, it is not likely to be very effective. When we were working only

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 3

Sampson, Boud, Cohen & Gaynor

with students in our own Faculty we were aware of the particular character of our
context. Students were adults employed in the field they were also studying, and the
teaching and learning processes already in use within the faculty supported interactive
and experiential approaches to learning. The context was clearly relevant. Our
recognition of the importance of context was a key motivator for our interest in working
with other faculties (Boud and Walker 1998). Hence it is not surprising that what has
emerged from working with the four faculties is the importance of the context in which
the peer learning takes place, the nature of the subject as well as the course, and the
ways in which teaching and learning is practised.

Another factor which had an impact on the effectiveness of the peer learning approaches
used was the readiness of staff and students for this different learning culture. The prior
experiences of staff and students in peer learning and their willingness to engage in a
different learning culture from the didactic one dominant in many courses had a
significant effect on their motivation. The congruence between the assessment tasks and
the learning approaches in order to meet desired specific and generic learning outcomes
was also identified as contributing significantly to the effectiveness of the peer learning
strategies. As might be expected, evaluation and re-design was regarded as important
throughout, and having different cohorts of students adding suggestions and
amendments assisted the redevelopment of the peer learning approaches used.

After examining our practice we realised that the introduction of teaching and learning
strategies is often identified as only being part of the instructional plan, just one element
in any program-planning model. It has become clear to us, however, that other factors
usually considered in program planning (Sork & Caffarella 1990) must also be addressed
when introducing peer learning, if they are to provide an effective learning experience for
the students. These factors include context analysis, learning needs and objectives, the
resourcing and management of the program and the evaluation plan.

Practices in different faculties

In the last two years reciprocal peer learning has been implemented in a number of
faculties at UTS—Education, Business, Computing, Law, and Design, Architecture and
Building. Before discussing principles of design, it is important to give an indication of
variations in the practice of peer learning which arose in the different faculties. The
extent of these variations focused our attention on the importance of designing for
context as well as features the different practices shared.

The Faculty of Education has been using a range of reciprocal peer learning strategies
for many years in most of its courses. The most widely used strategies include learning
partnerships, study groups, workshop planning groups and learning exchanges
(Sampson, Cohen, Boud & Anderson, 1990). The first two strategies emphasise students
providing support for their peers, although they may be engaged in specific learning
projects. The last two involve the students in planning and presenting to their peers,
topics relevant to the course. Using any of these strategies students are usually required
to consider issues that arise about learning in groups, because that is relevant to their
work as educators. They learn about peer learning from the peer learning experience.

However for this project, peer learning was introduced to the Doctor of Education
program for the first time. The intention was to create Study Groups, groups of 6 to 8
students who would be able to assist each other through their two semesters of
coursework. It was intended to establish an informal but structured learning community
in order to overcome the isolation often experienced by students in a research program.

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 4

 Designing peer learning

The use of peer learning strategies in the other faculties was essentially based on small
groups working together over a semester or a year. Within each faculty the ways in
which the groups worked varied, as did their reasons for using peer learning.

In the Faculty of Business peer learning groups were used in a post graduate subject
where the purpose of the group work was to reflect the content of the subject while also
taking into account the very mixed backgrounds of the students. There were a large
number of students who had completed their undergraduate education overseas, and
many of whom had limited work experience, particularly little experience of Australian
managed businesses. However there were also a large number of students with extensive
work experience in Australian organisations.

Intended learning outcomes were directly related to the subject content in Managing
People. Working in small groups, co-ordinating weekly meetings and planning a group
presentation, was likely to raise some of the ‘people’ issues often experienced in the
workplace. So topics being discussed as theories in the lecture, could be recognised and
acted upon in practice within the small groups. The diverse backgrounds of the students
and their different levels of experience in the workplace were also reasons for using peer
learning in the Faculty of Business. A significant objective was to increase the
communication opportunities between students who had extensive workplace
experience, particularly in Australia, with those who were new to the field.

In the Faculty of Mathematics and Computing, the purpose of using peer group learning
was to model ‘real work’ experience in the computing industry. The subject was
modelled on projects that might be expected in the workplace. In the group project, a
third year subject, students were required to manage and report on the group's progress
in the same way they might be in 'real work' situations. The assessed learning was to
design and implement an operational software project that would meet user
specifications. The learning objectives were to integrate the academic and interpersonal
skills that students needs to operate in the professional context.

In Design, peer learning groups were used in the second semester of the first year, in the
undergraduate degree subject, Design Project. The purpose of the groups was to extend
the students' knowledge of peer learning and to support their social, academic, and
professional development. The students had been introduced to peer learning in their
first semester so this was the next stage. In these peer learning groups students worked
collaboratively, providing a support mechanism for each other while they produced
independent design work. The skills developed included both academic and professional
skills and skills that are very important in the professional practice of a designer because
the designer's role is to work to a client's requirements with professionals from other
discipline areas.

A key feature of the peer learning groups in Design was to develop a structure where
students could support their peers while also helping them learn more about design and
about themselves as designers. There was also an objective to increase the students
understanding of how to work effectively in groups because this is a feature of
professional practice in design. A further objective was to assist the diverse student
group, particularly the overseas students, in their acculturation to Australian university
life.

In Law the students were introduced to peer learning activities within a first year subject
in the undergraduate degree. Some students had already completed other undergraduate
degrees or had been working in related fields, but for the most part students were in their

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 5

Sampson, Boud, Cohen & Gaynor

first year of the undergraduate degree. The study demands within a law course were
recognised as requiring students to cover a great deal of material, in a limited time,
sometimes restricting the depth at which students approached topics. These demands
were also likely to limit the social interaction between students. The main reason for
introducing peer learning processes was to develop in students, at an early stage of their
university study, an awareness of their personal learning styles. This was in order to
bring about a deeper approach to learning, independence, autonomy, and a greater ability
in students to manage their study.

Students worked in small groups and were required to meet for at least eight hours,
outside scheduled class times. The groups had to contribute to two assessment tasks as
well as researching and commenting on current literature relating to a specified area of
law. Assessment was based on individual work and some group work, with individual
performances within the group also being awarded marks on the basis of levels of
individual contributions.

Implications for design

While the approaches adopted in each faculty have been specific to the needs of their
students and the learning outcomes sought, key design principles have emerged as
important for success. We have noted the similarity between the key principles we have
identified and those frequently discussed in program planning models (Sork and
Caffarella 1990).

The key principles that have emerged from our study for successful implementation of
peer learning are:
• attending to the context in which the peer learning strategy is to be introduced
• focussing on learning outcomes and objectives and matching these to peer learning
strategies
• ensuring congruence between the peer learning strategies and assessment tasks
• preparing staff and students for different learning approaches, roles and
responsibilities
• introducing peer learning strategies and managing the process
• creating positive conditions for learning

These principles are not independent, but need to be linked to form a coherent learning
approach. They must also be supported by structural changes in course administration.

Attending to context

The first principle in designing peer learning strategies is to give particular consideration
of the context into which the strategy is to be introduced. As part of this is a focus on
the educational philosophies and beliefs about learning, both espoused and practised, in
the faculty or course in which the peer learning activity is proposed. Consideration of
context includes taking account of the political, economic, social, technical, and
professional environment, recognising what students and staff bring to the faculty and
the course, as well as what they may take to their workplace. It includes noticing and
working with cultural and gender differences and accommodating these in the new
approach. (Boud and Walker 1998).

The significance of the context emerged as a defining factor in each of the faculties, and
in the Faculty of Mathematics and Computing, preparing students for the professional
environment was an obvious feature in the design of the peer learning strategy.

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 6

 Designing peer learning

There are a number of features most likely to effect the successful implementation of
peer learning. They are the structures and designs of existing programs, and the
educational values held and represented in teaching and assessment practices. A
structural feature of a course which is 'content' driven is usually the way time is allocated
to theory and practice, with theory sessions being conducted as lectures and the practical
sessions being focussed on designated tasks and the development of particular skills. In
such a context the content, the knowledge and skills to be learned, and the process, the
way in which it will be learned, are determined and controlled by the teacher. However a
significant feature of many peer learning strategies is that students are given the freedom
to determine how they might proceed with their learning and even what they might learn
within a particular framework. In some courses they may be asked to follow a particular
process or to address a particular content area, but the teacher does not direct the
specific subject content outcomes. Within any one peer learning structure some students
may be learning more from the experience of the process, while others might be learning
more from the topic they are exploring. The students are directing much of their
learning.

If the dominant philosophy of learning in a faculty or course regards learning as a

competitive and individual activity, with the emphasis on students being taught and
assessed rather than focussing on a commitment to learning, then the acceptance of peer
learning strategies might be quite limited. A program with this perspective would
probably require that high levels of content were 'transmitted' to the students in the
limited time available and students would be expected to assimilate this on an individual
basis rather than collaborating or cooperating with others. Assessment may still be
regarded as a competitive process notwithstanding an institutional shift to criterion-
based assessment. The context would not obviously support peer collaboration and may
even have processes in use that could limit the benefits of such activities. Such a climate
is likely to make the introduction of the experiential approach to learning reflected in
peer learning strategies quite difficult. The range of peer learning approaches fruitfully
adopted in such a context is limited.

Ironically, extremely competitive and selective courses can foster informal peer learning
among students, for the reason that informal approaches are typically exclusionary. In
such a context, formal approaches intended to be inclusive may face resistance from
those whose dominant role is likely to be challenged.

We do not suggest that peer learning structures can only survive in an ideal context with
the 'correct' educational philosophy and practices. Where there are obvious differences in
the values reflected in peer learning strategies and in course philosophy, the introduction
of peer learning needs to be taken carefully. It is important to ensure that staff and
students have time to adjust to the different learning opportunities and to their own
changed roles within the processes, whilst being mindful of possible disruptions from
those whose position is threatened.

Focussing on learning outcomes

The second principle involves the fitting or matching of the peer learning strategy to
desired learning outcomes, and, necessarily, to the group of students and their future
learning. When selecting any teaching and learning strategy it is obviously important to
ensure that the strategy will enable the students to achieve what is intended and that
students are informed about what is expected of them. This is no less the case with peer
learning, but is more likely to be overlooked if peer learning is seen solely as something
which is ‘generally helpful’ to students. There needs to be clarification about just what

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 7

Sampson, Boud, Cohen & Gaynor

knowledge should be acquired, what skills need to be developed, whether they are skills
directly related to the topic area or more generic learning skills, and what affective
change is desired. The very nature of peer learning processes, involving the student fully
in an experience, means that many things might be learned from it. This was very much
the case in the Faculty of Business, where the learning objectives were built into the peer
learning experience and interwoven with the subject content. Being clear about the
desired outcomes, both specific and general, is obviously necessary. As many of the
learning outcomes pursued by peer learning activities tend to be generic rather than
subject-specific, they can easily be lost or assumed as developed ‘elsewhere’.

In using particular peer learning strategies the achievement of some objectives are of
higher priority than in others. Some objectives will be foregrounded by assessment tasks,
while others will be achieved in order to complete the necessary assessment
requirements but remain in the background. Some learning outcomes will be assessed
while others may remain important to the overall development of the learner, but may
not be formally assessed. For example generic learning outcomes often resulting from
peer learning experiences include interpersonal communication skills, negotiation skills,
teamwork, presentation and oral presentation skills. In a particular peer learning
experience only one of these, like presentation skills, might be assessed, yet students may
have learned and developed relevant skills in the other areas which are not directly
assessed.

As learning is increasingly viewed from a lifelong perspective, further consideration in

regard to learning outcomes extends to the transfer of the learning, how this learning
might be used in other contexts and how it might contribute to further learning. Learning
how to learn with and from peers is in itself a skill that contributes to lifelong learning.
When students begin their practice in their chosen professions, they depend on learning
extensively from their more experienced peers.

Ensuring congruence between peer learning strategies and assessment tasks

Assessment can challenge the principles of peer learning by creating an inappropriately

competitive environment. The absence of assessment can devalue the process by failing
to provide acknowledgment of the learning that the peer process encourages. In planning
to implement peer learning practices and linked directly to consideration of the learning
outcomes is the need to consider the congruence of the peer learning practices and the
intended assessment tasks (Boud, Cohen & Sampson, accepted for publication).

The peer learning strategy used in Design, was primarily intended for students to provide
support for each other while engaged in individually assessed tasks. The nature of that
support was to ensure that students were working on their assessment tasks, and for
their peers to give them constructive feedback on their progress. Being able to give and
receive constructive feedback is an important ability in most fields but it is critical in the
professional practice of design. Students helped each other develop these skills while
also assisting each other to improve the quality of the work they were presenting for
assessment. The peer learning strategy produced outcomes that were very beneficial to
the individual members because they assisted them in completing their assessment tasks.

If the assessment task selected requires the combined efforts of peers, the student
experience of working in this way is more obviously worthwhile. It is also important that
guidelines for assessment are clear and equitable because in systems where grades or
marks are allocated to individuals and the criteria for their distribution are not
transparent, the assessment system can have a divisive effect. It can work against the

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 8

 Designing peer learning

purpose of peer learning and undermining the development of learning outcomes such as
the development of teamwork skills. A common concern is that only some of the
students do the work that is rewarded. Yet others may have been responsible for
maintaining the relationships in the peer group which enabled the group to function and
achieve the assessment tasks. Assessment tasks must be created which respond to this
challenge. This typically involves working through the consequences of existing
assessment tasks and modifying them accordingly. It is rare to get such tasks well
adjusted at the first attempt, so a progressive refinement of assessment tasks over
cohorts is to be expected.

Peer learning strategies are personally and intellectually demanding so it is important for
students to see that the energy and efforts they contribute to making these processes
work is valued. There also needs to be an agreed approach determined early in the
activity identifying all the learning outcomes and how they will be valued. Similarly it
needs to be clear how students who do not contribute to the task or group process will
fare.

Preparing staff and students to work with peer learning approaches

Another key principle concerns establishing the readiness of staff and students to work in
this way. From a staff perspective working with peer learning may involve a considerable
change in their role, requiring a very different set of skills to lecturing or conducting a
tutorial. Peer learning processes raise new expectations of their roles and responsibilities,
and in many cases a different understanding of ways of approaching teaching and
learning. Regretfully, some staff hold a conception of teaching which makes it unlikely
that they will be able to meet the challenge.

The staff role in peer learning focuses more on programming and facilitation, though this
does not necessarily involving direct facilitation in groups. The staff member is initially
responsible for designing the peer learning strategy, linking the learning outcomes and
assessment tasks to the process and then working with students to help them benefit
from this way of learning and introducing processes which might help them learn from
the overall experience. Acting as a resource person, and providing the necessary
monitoring and support to ensure the process works, are major on-going responsibilities
of the staff member. It requires knowledge and skills about learning in groups as well as
knowledge and expertise in the subject area. For members of staff used only to
delivering a weekly lecture the transition could be very dramatic, whereas for staff who
work with interactive and experiential learning processes peer learning strategies will be
very familiar.

Students also need an opportunity to learn to learn this way. Their readiness for this way
of learning is often assumed because it is anticipated that they are already familiar with
informal peer learning experiences with friends. However once the process becomes
formalised within a subject or course structure, students need to be oriented to the
process because it no longer involves only their immediate needs. There are other
dimensions to consider when it is an explicit part of the course, such as all students
meeting certain outcomes. Students need to be very clear about what is expected of
them and what is expected of them in their interactions with others, that is their peers,
who may not be people they would necessarily have chosen to work with.

Each of the faculties involved in this project produced some written materials discussing
peer learning and group processes for the students and staff. The main emphasis was on
what was expected of the students with details of the assessment tasks and assessment

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 9

Sampson, Boud, Cohen & Gaynor

criteria. In Education and Mathematics and Computing some session time was also spent
with students discussing peer group processes and the group projects.

From our experience of working with these processes in different faculties it has become
clear that students appreciate guidelines for how to proceed in the initial stages. We have
also found that this material can shorten the time needed for groups to become
productive. It is best if these guidelines are documented as it makes them more
accessible for discussion, and tends to help clarify many of the issues. Once students
have been introduced to peer learning and the experience has proven itself as a valuable
way to learn; they are able to work with other peer learning strategies more easily.

Introducing peer learning strategies and managing the process

Finally, how peer learning strategies are introduced in a course is important in creating a
positive attitude towards them and a learning-orientation on the part of students. If
students in a particular course are unfamiliar with these ways of learning it is usually
wise to proceed cautiously, introducing one strategy initially and ensuring that it is well
established before introducing the next. In doing this the strategy can be evaluated and
adapted as students and staff suggest improvements and the necessary support structures
can be installed.

In the Faculty of Law students were being introduced to peer learning strategies in their
first semester. In the first few weeks the peer learning strategy was discussed in class and
then the groups were formed and began work in week four. Peer learning was being
introduced in the first semester in order to help students mix with a greater number of
students from the beginning of their course. Eventually other peer learning strategies
may be introduced at later stages of the course.

The more gradually peer learning is achieved the more likely it is that the necessary
support structures will become established. For instance in some subjects with large
student numbers there may be a number of staff responsible for supporting the peer
learning groups. Many staff may find using a forum to discuss what has been learned
from using the strategies for the first time of benefit and enable issues arising in the
groups to be aired and discussed. The learning is developmental for both staff and
students.

In considering the implementation of peer learning strategies the plan may be to develop
a sequence of strategies that will build one upon another, year by year, or semester by
semester. If students know that these approaches are embedded in the longer-term
program they are more likely to devote effort to the new approach. For instance, in their
first semester, opportunities may be created for students to work extensively in small
groups week to week but without continued commitment to the same group. In semester
two the peer learning activities may be extended to working with the same group to
achieve a particular task related to the subject area but also to begin to provide some
support for each other. In a later year this may be extended to a yearlong commitment
and a major project with one group or perhaps a learning partnership where students
assist just one other student over a semester or a year. The nature of this relationship is
usually more difficult for students than working in a small group hence the suggestion
that it might come at a later date.

Planning the use of strategies in this way provides for the development of skills in
working and learning with peers to progress each year. The transition is more gradual
for the student and this in turn reduces the responsibility of staff members in helping

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 10

 Designing peer learning

students learn to learn this way. As the peer learning processes become accepted, they
take on their own identity and create a momentum of their own. Many of the issues that
arise are intrinsic to innovations in education, and a thoughtful developmental process
can alleviate some of the natural tensions that emerge.

In faculties or courses where peer learning strategies are not widely used, if a strategy
works well the student network will ensure that the next group of students is prepared
and eager for the experience. Conversely if it is not well supported and students are
dissatisfied with the experience the next group of students are likely to resist. It is
important to implement the strategies thoughtfully, considering the issues and preparing
ways to work with the processes.

Conclusion

Good design of peer learning strategies takes very careful note of the circumstances in
which they are being introduced and adapts them accordingly. There will always be
unexpected occurrences and issues arising, but peer learning is no different in this regard
than any other approach to teaching and learning. If students are learning productively
together then other problems with the course can be addressed more effectively. Most
effort goes into ensuring that activities are well set up well, that students are prepared
and that they know why they are engaged in these activities. The price to be paid for not
attending to design is frustrated students and an extra workload for staff, acting as
trouble-shooters as problems arise.

References

Boud, David, Cohen, Ruth and Sampson, Jane. (accepted for publication). ‘Assessment
and peer learning’. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education.

Boud, David. & Walker, David. (1998). ‘Promoting reflection in professional courses:
the challenge of context’. Studies in Higher Education, 23, 2, 191-206.

Bruffee, Kenneth A (1995) ‘Sharing our toys: cooperative learning versus collaborative
learning’. Change , Jan-Feb 1995 27(1) 12-19

Bruffee, Kenneth A. (1993) Collaborative Learning: Higher Education,

Interdependence, and the Authority of Knowledge. The Johns Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore

Clark, M. Carolyn and Watson, Denise B. (1998) ‘Women’s Experience in Academic

Collaboration’ in Iris M. Saltiel, Angela Sgroi and Ralph G. Brockett (eds) The Power
and Potential of Collaborative Learning Partnerships, New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education. Jossey-Bass Inc Publishers, San Francisco

Hoffman, Frances L. & Stake, Jayne E. (1998) ‘Feminist pedagogy in theory and
practice: an empirical investigation’. NSWA Journal Spring 1998 10 (1) 79-98

Johnson, Davis W., Johnson, Roger T. and Smith, Karl A. (1991) ‘Cooperative
Learning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity’, ASHE - ERIC Higher
Education Report No 4. The George Washington University, Washington DC

Rubin, Lois and Herbert, Catherine (1998) ‘Model for active learning: collaborative peer
teaching’. College Teaching, Winter 1998 46 (1) 26-31

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 11

 Sampson, Boud, Cohen & Gaynor

Sampson, J., Cohen, R., Boud, D.& Anderson, G.(1999) Peer Learning: a guide for
staff and students. University of Technology, Sydney.

Schneider, Helen M (1989) ‘The Peer Approach to Adult Learning’, Equity and
Excellence. Fall 1989 24(3) 63-66

Sork, Thomas J. & Caffarella, Rosemary S. (1990) Planning Programs for Adults in
Sharan B. Merriam & Phyllis M. Cunningham (eds) Handbook of Adult and Continuing
Education. Jossey-Bass Inc Publishers, San Francisco.

HERDSA Annual International Conference, Melbourne, 12-15 July 1999 12

View publication stats