Peer Interaction

Peer interaction, often referred to as peer learning, is a collaborative educational approach where students actively engage with one another to enhance their understanding and skills. This interactive learning method shifts the traditional classroom dynamics from a teacher-centered model to one where learners support each other, facilitating deeper cognitive processes. Research indicates that peer interactions significantly contribute to both academic and social outcomes across various age groups and learning styles. Active learning during peer interactions allows students to exchange knowledge, clarify misunderstandings, and develop critical thinking skills while receiving emotional support from their peers.

There are several models of peer interaction, including peer tutoring, peer instruction, and class-wide peer tutoring, each tailored to different educational contexts and content areas. Within these frameworks, roles are often defined, with tutors guiding their peers (tutees) through structured learning processes. The benefits of peer interaction extend beyond academic achievement; they also foster the development of social skills, confidence, and a supportive classroom environment. Overall, peer interaction stands as an effective method to promote engagement, collaboration, and meaningful learning experiences among students.

Published in: 2023

By: Smith, Tricia

Subject Terms

Peer Interaction

Peer learning is a form of collaborative learning that capitalizes on active learning. Children's interactions with peers in early childhood have been consistently linked to their academic and social outcomes (Rudasill et al., 2013). When involved in peer interaction, students help each other learn new content or skills. While peer interaction has always existed, the concept of students learning from one another has become more prominent in the classroom in the twenty-first century. During the peer interaction process, the tutor manages the content or skills and modifies the material so that the tutee learns new content or skills. The tutor benefits through monitoring the learning process, as the tutor learns to detect, diagnose and correct misconceptions or understanding. Peer learning has been found effective for all ages, kindergarten through college, all learning styles and disabilities, and across all content areas (Topping, 1996).

Keywords Active Learning; Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models; Collaborative Learning; Heterogeneous Groups; Homogeneous Groups; Interteaching; Metacognition; Peer Grouping; Peer Instruction; Peer Learning; Peer Review; Peer Tutoring; Scaffolding; Schemata; Tutee; Tutor; Zone of Proximal Development

Overview

The action of giving and taking information that results in knowledge construction and cognitive development can be accomplished through peer-to-peer interaction (Lim, 2012). Peer interaction (or peer learning) is a term that represents a form of collaborative learning that capitalizes on active learning within a classroom. During peer interaction, there is a definite shift away from the traditional lecture format of instruction to a more personal experience and efficacy in learning (Saville, Zinn & Elliott, 2005). While the lecture disseminates information to the student, in peer interaction, the student is actively involved in the learning process. Through peer learning, students acquire knowledge and skill through active helping and supporting among status equals or matched companions (Topping, 2005). Students help each other to learn and learn themselves during the process. Tutors gain increased control over subject matter, develop self-esteem and social skills, and improved attitudes about school. Tutees receive extra attention and emotional support during the learning process (Anderson, 2007).

While peer interaction has always existed, the concept of students learning from one another has gained greater prominence as a classroom methodology in the past 25 years. In prior models of peer interaction, peers were used to assist the teacher in teaching to students who were less knowledgeable. This linear model of transmission of knowledge was transferred from the teacher to the student and then re-taught by that student to another student. Teachers chose only the most knowledgeable students to act as “pseudo-teachers.” The model has shifted, as teachers scaffold peers to teach one another important concepts or skills (Topping, 2005). Peer learning originally targeted core skill areas such as reading and mathematics (Topping, 1987; Topping & Branford, 1998). However, as teachers began to see the benefits in peer interaction, peer learning began to appear in lessons across the content areas. Peer interaction or learning has now become a theory with strong implications in classroom practice.

Research by Lev Vygotsky (1978) supports peer learning theory. Palincsar and Brown (1984) promote the using of scaffolding to reach Vygtosky's concept of the “zone of proximal development.” Vygotsky's concept of the zone of proximal development is involved in the peer learning process. By scaffolding students, students can activate schemata, organize and retrieve knowledge, and monitor, evaluate and reflect on their learning (Palincsar, 1986). Learning becomes socially constructed during interaction and activity among peers (Vygotksy, 1978).

The Interaction Process

Topping (2005) describes this process. The tutor manages the content or skills and modifies the material so that the tutee learns new content or skills. The tutor benefits through monitoring the learning process, as he or she learns to detect, diagnose and correct misconceptions or understanding. As Topping (2005) suggests, tutors can acquire valuable skills through tutoring, such as "listening, explaining, questioning, summarizing, speculating, and hypothesizing" (p. 637). In turn, the tutees benefit from trusted relationships with peers who have no authority over them. Both tutor and tutee add to and extend their capabilities by modifying that which they know and then building new understandings.

King (2002) suggests that it is important to match the peer learning approach a teacher chooses to the requirements of the learning task. The nature of the cognitive process is the critical trigger for selecting a strategy. While some tasks require primarily recall and repetition, other learning tasks require critical thinking, problem solving and/or decision making. Higher level cognitive processing in peer learning may involve "making inferences, drawing conclusions, synthesizing ideas, generating hypotheses, comparing and contrasting, finding and articulating problems, analyzing and evaluating alternatives, and monitoring thinking" (King, 2002, p. 34). Peers learn to exchange ideas, information, perspectives, attitudes and opinions (King, 2002; Cohen, 1994).

Conditions for positive peer interaction include shifting methodologies from a focus on individual achievement to creation of classroom environments that promote genuine collaboration. Challenging problem-solving must be "beyond the comfort zone of student knowledge in order to promote discussion," and teachers need to carefully select groups "to ensure respectful working relations" (Blair, 2004, p. 38). They also need to provide immediate feedback through quality discussion time.

Types of Peer Interaction

There are many types of peer interaction:

Peer Tutoring

Peer interaction shifts the nature of instruction in such models as peer tutoring. Peer tutoring exists when two students take on specific roles as tutor and tutee. The focus is on learning content and is driven by a defined process of application. The tutor is trained by the teacher and is given structured materials or is taught to follow a certain process for tutoring a peer. This model can be used in any content area. Topping (2001) states that teachers must consider certain elements for there to be successful peer tutoring sessions. While the tutee learns specific content or skills, the tutor benefits from the experience, as well. The tutor's social and communication skills are enhanced during the process.

The most simplistic form of peer tutoring is drill and practice, peer assisted rehearsal, or recall and repetition of material. Often this form is used when students are learning factual material. Students learn to work together, as they master skills or content (King, 2002). Through drill and practice, students are scaffolded with one another. Tutors and tutees communicate with one another by practicing a certain skill and provide feedback for one another during practice of the skill. They reinforce understanding or skill level (Topping, 2005).

Peer Assistance

Peer assistance is another simpler form of peer interaction, as peers aid students with disabilities by helping them read directions, gather classroom materials, or take notes for them. Mastropieri, Scruggs, and Berkeley (2007) point out that peers who assist those with disabilities "promote social responsibility and stronger understanding of other's needs" (p. 2).

Peer Instruction

Peer instruction is defined as "an instructional method aimed at exploiting student interaction during lectures by focusing students' attention on underlying concepts" (VanDijk, VanderBerf, & VanKuelen, 2001, p. 4). The teacher presents key points in lecture form and the students are given questions to answer individually. The students then pair off or work in small groups, discussing their answers with one another. This form of peer interaction breaks up the traditional lecture, as students think through the concepts presented (Mazur, 1997).

Peer Grouping

Peer grouping (also called interpretive communities) is an effective group strategy often seen in writing classes. Weaver, Robertson and Smith (1999) state that peer grouping provides students the opportunity to investigate how their writing might impact readers. Teachers who are committed to peer grouping during writing workshops must develop community skills within their students, allowing time for students to develop trust in one another and provide supportive and useful feedback (Weaver, Robertson & Smith, 1999).

Peer Review Editing

Peer review editing also involves the writing process. In this process, students edit and respond to one another's writing. The teacher is freed from the task of reading and editing every student paper (Karegianes, Pascarella, & Pflaum (1980). Students are thrust into the role of being responsible for one another's success in writing.

Peer Questioning

Peer questioning is often used to promote high-quality questioning among peers. There are several types of questioning approaches such as strategic questioning. In strategic questioning, students are provided with strategic questions that specifically develop problem solving (King, 2002). Pairs squared develops reasoning skills in argumentation (King, 1995). In guided reciprocal peer questioning, the teacher structures peer interaction that promotes high-level cognitive processing. Question starters are given to peers in the form of formatted questions that promote student thinking during discussion (King, 2002).

Interteaching

Interteaching is defined as "a mutually probing, mutually informing conversation between two people" (Boyce & Hineline, 2006). In this type of active learning methodology, the teacher designs and distributes guides that lead students through course material. Questions are in the guide and trigger the learning process, with some questions focusing on factual knowledge and others emphasizing application and synthesis. Students pair with one another and discuss the questions and their answers. The teacher acts as a mentor, clarifying questions, evaluating student understanding, and supporting the students in this interactive process (Saville, Zinn, & Elliott, 2005; Boyce and Hineline, 2002).

Peer Monitoring

Peer monitoring occurs when peers support one another's learning behaviors by "observing and checking" the behaviors of group members during the process of peer group interaction (Brown, Topping, Hennington & Skinner, 1999). Students evaluate the processes and products of their peers in a group through peer assessment, assessing products through evaluation or grading.

Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models

Class-wide peer tutoring models are instructional options used throughout classrooms for enhancing reading skills, such as fluency and comprehension, as well as basic skills across content areas. In these models, students are placed in groups either randomly or through rank-ordering (based on pre-test results). The academic content of the materials are developed by the teacher, and they support community among peers. Class-wide peer tutoring (CWPT) is used to improve basic skills in lower performing students (Salend, 2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies (PALS) are used in improving reading skills. In class-wide student tutoring teams (CSTT), the teacher develops study guides or concept cards and peers take turns reading and responding to the materials (Harper & Maheady, 1999). Jigsaw peer models promote common goals, as peers work on individual contributions to group activities. Each group has members completing the same task as another member in another group (Aronson, Blaney, Stephan, Sikes, & Snapp, 1978).

Literature Circles

Literature circles are small groups of students who work collaboratively "to share their reactions to and discuss various aspects of books that all group members have decided to read" (Salend, 2005, p. 425). The student ownership and peer interaction in literature circles are critical in enhancing children’s literacy development and helping them cultivate the skills to become lifelong readers (Marchiando, 2013). Each member of the literature circle has a specific role, such as:

• The discussion leader, the peer who monitors and fosters discussion;

• The passage reader, the peer who reads key passages aloud;

• The connector, the peer who links content to students' experiences;

• The definer, the peer who looks up and explains key vocabulary;

• The summarizer, the peer who reviews key points and the sequence of action; and,

• The illustrator, the peer who develops corresponding graphics (Salend, 2005, p. 425).

Advantages of Peer Interaction

No matter which peer interaction model is activated in the classroom, teachers maintain a supportive role during the peer interaction process. They structure the groups and give explicit guidance in how to collaborate effectively so that high-quality thinking and discussion are ensured (King, 2002; Cohen, 1994). Teachers establish specific goals for the sessions, planning specific activities that reflect these goals (Salend, 2005).

In general, peer interaction has been found to be advantageous to student learning in a number of ways. Webb and Palincsar (1996) state that the process of providing and receiving explanations from peers can help students engage in deeper cognitive processes. Through peer interaction, students clarify thinking, reorganize information, correct misconceptions, and develop new understanding. Through the concepts and skills acquired during the process of peer interaction, students can successfully transfer these skills to other activities (Webb & Palincsar, 1996). Students also respond more frequently in peer interaction than in class discussion. Peer interaction also results in more time on task (Stenhoff & Linnugaris, 2007).

All in all, peer interaction or learning leads "to consolidation, fluency and automaticity of core skills." Through peer learning, students are more able to monitor and regulate "the effectiveness of their own learning strategies," thus enhancing their metacognitive skills (Topping, 2005). Peer learning has been found effective for all ages, kindergarten through college, all learning styles and disabilities, and across all content areas (Topping, 1996). As Stenhoff and Linnugaris (2007) point out, peer tutoring arrangements provide students with another option for helping all students access the general curriculum.

Applications

Training Effective Tutors

Carnine (2002) suggests several ways to train effective tutors. Teachers should establish expectations by modeling instructional and presentation behaviors with the tutors. Through role-playing, tutors can shape their corrective feedback techniques and performance-monitoring strategies. Through workshop settings, tutors can practice problem-solving scenarios, as well. Teachers should be particularly cognizant of matches between tutors and tutees. Allsopp (1997) emphasizes the importance of pairing tutors and tutees, choosing carefully to pair students of differing skills and abilities. Jenkins and Jenkins (1988) suggest that personal characteristics should also factor in the pairing of tutors and tutees. Haisley, Tell and Andrews (1981) advocate that tutees who are difficult to manage should be paired with tutors who are more aggressive so they will not be intimidated by these tutees.

Types of Peer Groupings

Peers act as instructional agents for other students when peer tutoring is presented as a model in the classroom. Stenhoff and Linnugaris (2007) suggest several variations to peer groupings:

• In heterogeneous groups, peers are taught by tutors who are in the same grade-level but who possess a higher level of knowledge or skill.

• In homogeneous groups, tutors teach peers who possess similar skills.

• In cross-age tutoring groups, tutors teach younger students.

• In reverse-role tutoring groups, students with disabilities tutor other students who do or do not have disabilities (p. 10).

Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models

Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models provide academic intervention across the classroom. Heron, Villareal, Ma, Christianson, and Heron (2006) suggest that there are common characteristics found within these evidence-based instructional models. Such commonalities include:

• Actively engaging all peers within the classroom simultaneously;

• Providing highly structured and evidence-based components by well-trained peers and diligent teachers;

• Developing reading and reading-related activities for all demographic groups;

• Training peers in tutor and tutee roles, such as presenting instructional items, evaluating performance, providing positive feedback, and correcting behaviors, when necessary; and,

• Assessing progress through formative assessment (p. 69).

Interteaching

Interteaching is defined as "a mutually probing, mutually informing conversation between two people" (Boyce & Hineline, 2002). In this type of active learning methodology, the teacher designs and distributes guides that lead students through course material. Questions are in the guide that leads students through the learning process, with some questions focusing on factual knowledge and others emphasizing application and synthesis. Students pair with one another and discuss the questions and their answers. The teacher acts as a mentor, clarifying questions, evaluating student understanding, and supporting the students in this interactive process (Saville, Zinn, & Elliott, 2005; Boyce & Hineline, 2002). Saville, Zinn, and Elliott (2005) suggest that discussion makes up about 75% of the class period. Students assess their understanding of their learning by compiling an interteaching record that alerts the teacher about which questions they found difficult to answer, which ones they would like to have reviewed in class discussion or lecture, and which ones they found useful. The teacher can use this information for exploring ways to further enhance learning opportunities.

While interteaching is often used in lecture type classrooms, this active experience is an effective supplement to lecture classrooms. There are many benefits to the use of this model in the classroom. Interteaching promotes active learning; immediate social reinforcement from peers and the teacher; a cooperative learning environment; and retention of material (Saville, Zinn, & Elliott, 2005).

Peer Tutoring

Peer tutoring exists when two students take on specific roles as tutor and tutee. The focus is on learning content and is driven by a defined process of application. The tutor is trained by the teacher and is given structured materials or is taught to follow a certain process for tutoring a peer. This model can be used in any content area. Topping (2001) states that teachers must consider certain elements for there to be successful peer tutoring sessions. Teachers can assure purpose and integrity in peer tutoring if there are:

• Clear contexts for using peer tutoring;

• Objectives that are clear and concise;

• Defined curriculum areas for its use;

• Participants who are clearly identified;

• Clearly defined methods of peer tutoring;

• Appropriate materials readily available;

• Adherences to time on task;

• Differentiation for diverse learners;

• There is a clearly defined training process;

• Processes that are closely monitored and evaluated;

• Tutors and tutees who are assessed regularly; and,

• Feedback sessions that are geared to improving future tutoring sessions.

While the tutee learns specific content or skills, the tutor benefits from the experience, as well. The tutor's social and communication skills are enhanced during the process. For these benefits to occur, teachers must watch for any differential in the learners, as too great a differential can cause lack of learning by either parties in the peer tutoring model (Topping, 2001).

Viewpoints

Criticism of Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models

Class-wide peer tutoring models are instructional options used throughout classrooms for enhancing reading skills, such as fluency and comprehension, as well as basic skills across content areas. In these models, students are placed in groups either randomly or through rank-ordering (based on pre-test results). The academic content of the materials is developed by the teacher, and teachers support community among peers. However, teachers often face impediments to the learning process. Non-responders can be a problem in the peer interaction process. Also, if teachers are not properly trained in the model, they may provide unchallenging materials or fail to adhere to planned procedures. Other common problems in these models are increased noise levels, bickering among peers, and grade inflation (Greenwood, Terry, & Arreaga-Meyer, 1993).

Terms & Concepts

Active Learning: Active learning is a term used in teaching methodology that refers to allowing students ample opportunities to clarify, question, apply, and consolidate new knowledge. Group discussions, problem solving, case studies, role plays, journal writing, and structured learning groups are strategies that are often associated with active learning.

Collaborative Learning: Collaborative learning is the grouping and pairing of students for the purpose of achieving an academic goal. In addition, the success of one student helps other students to be successful.

Heterogeneous Groups: Heterogeneous groups are groups where students have varying abilities.

Homogeneous Groups: Homogeneous groups are groups where students have similar interests or abilities.

Metacognition: Metacognition is an important concept in cognitive theory that is defined as a learner's awareness of his or her own learning process. Learners who are aware of their own learning process are able to monitor their learning progress and make changes to their process.

Scaffolding: Scaffolding occurs when students are paired with other students to support them in their learning.

Schemata: Schemata are a mental bundle of knowledge in the brain that holds everything a student knows about a topic. Learning occurs when learners integrate new knowledge with prior knowledge stored in this long-term memory, or schemata.

Tutee: A tutee is a student who is the recipient of the support of a tutor.

Tutor: A tutor provides expertise, experience, and encouragement to a tutee that needs this sort of support in learning.

Zone of Proximal Development: The zone of proximal development is the distance between a student's actual developmental level and the level of potential of a student.

Bibliography

Allsopp, D. (1997) Using classwide peer tutoring to teach beginning algebra problem-solving skills in heterogeneous classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 18 , 367-379. Retrieved December 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9712126198&site=ehost-live

Anderson, L. (2007). A special kind of tutor. Teaching Pre-K, 37 , 56-57. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=23896812&site=ehost-live

Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Blair, R. (2004, March). Peer interaction. MT: Mathematical Teaching, 186, 36-38. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=13020588&site=ehost-live

Boyce, R., & Hineline, P. (2006). Interteaching: A strategy for enhancing the user-friendliness of behavioral arrangements to the college classroom. The Behavior Analyst, 25 , 215-226.

Brown, C., Topping, K., Henington, C., & Skinner, C. (1991). Peer monitoring of learning behavior: The case of "checking chums." Educational Psychology in Practice, 15 , 174-182. Retrieved December 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=6449889&site=ehost-live

Carnine, D. (2002). Elements of effective reading tutoring programs. Washington, D.C.: US Department of Education.

Cohen, E. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64 , 1-35.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., Mathes, P., & Simmons, D. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Making classrooms more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 36 , 62-94.

Greenwood, C., Terry, C., &Arreaga-Mayer, C. (1992). The classwide peer tutoring program: Implementation factors moderating students' achievement. Journal for Applied Behavior Analysis, 25 , 101-116.

Haisley, E., Tell, C., & Andrews, J. (1981). Peers as tutors in the mainstream: Trained "teachers"

of handicapped adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 14, 224-226.

Harper, G., & Maheady, L. (1999). Classwide student tutoring teams: Aligning course objectives, student practice and testing. Proven Practice: Prevention and Remediation of School Problems, 1, 55-59.

Heron,T., Villareal, D., Ma, Yao, Christianson, R., & Heron, K. ( 2006). Peer tutoring systems: Applications in classroom and specialized environments. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 22 , 27-45. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18711054&site=ehost-live

Jenkins, J., & Jenkins, L. (1988). Peer tutoring in elementary and secondary programs. In E.L. Meyer, G. L. Vergason, & R.J. Whelan (Eds.), Effective Instructional Strategies (pp. 335-354). Denver: Love.

Karegianes, M., Pascarella, E., & Pflaum, S. (1980). The effects of peer editing on the writing proficiency of low-achieving tenth grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 73 , 203-207. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=4904116&site=ehost-live

King, A., (1995). Pairs squared: Peer learning for increasingly complex tasks. Unpublished manuscripts and materials. San Marcos, CA: California State U.

King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory Into Practice, 41 , 34-41. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=6437541&site=ehost-live

Lim, E. (2012). Patterns of kindergarten children's social interaction with peers in the computer area. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7, 399-421. Retrieved December 19, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=78641308&site=ehost-live

Marchiando, K. (2013). Creating lifelong readers: Student ownership and peer interaction in literature circles. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 41, 13-21. Retrieved December 16, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=87877487&site=ehost-live

Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, E., & Berkeley, S. (2007). Peers helping peers. Educational Leadership, 64 , 54-58. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=23996914&site=ehost-live

Mazur,E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

O'Donnell, A., & King, A. (1999). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. (1984).Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 171-175.

Palincsar, A. (1986).The role of dialogue in providing scaffolded instruction. Education Psychologist, 21, 73-98.

Rudasill, K., Niehaus, K., Buhs, E., & White, J. M. (2013). Temperament in early childhood and peer interactions in third grade: The role of teacher–child relationships in early elementary grades. Journal of School Psychology, 51, 701-716. Retrieved December 19, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=92644375&site=ehost-live

Salend, S. (2005). Creating inclusive classrooms: Effective and reflective practice for all Students (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson.

Saville, B., Zinn, T., & Elliott, M. (2005). Interteaching versus traditional methods of instruction: A preliminary analysis. Teaching of Psychology, 32 , 161-163. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=17753475&site=ehost-live

Stenhoff, D., & Linnugaris, B. (2007). A review of the effects of peer tutoring on students with mild disabilities in secondary settings. Exceptional Children, 74 , 8-30. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=26361614&site=ehost-live

Topping, K. (1987). Peer-tutored paired reading: Outcome data from ten projects. Educational Psychology, 7 , 133-145.

Topping, K. (1996). The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A topology and review of the literature. Higher Education, 32 , 321-345.

Topping, K., (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and university. Review of Educational Research, 68 , 249-276.

Topping, K. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A practice guide for teachers. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Topping, K. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25 , 631-645. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18786911&site=ehost-live

Topping, K., & Branford, J. (1998). The paired maths handbook: Parental involvement and peer tutoring in math. London: Fulton.

VanDijk, L. VanDerBerg, G., & Van Keulen, H. (2001). Interactive lectures in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 26, 15-28.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Weaver, C., Robertson, A., & Smith, B. (1999). Interpretive communities. In A. Robertson & B. Smith (Eds.), Teaching in the 21st Century. (pp. 201-211). Routledge Palmer. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from EBSCO online database Literary Reference Center. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=17349619&site=ehost-live

Webb, N., & Palincsar, A. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D.C.Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 841-873). New York: Simon and Schuster MacMillan.

Peer Interaction

On this Page

Subject Terms

Peer Interaction

Overview

The Interaction Process

Types of Peer Interaction

Peer Tutoring

Peer Assistance

Peer Instruction

Peer Grouping

Peer Review Editing

Peer Questioning

Interteaching

Peer Monitoring

Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models

Literature Circles

Advantages of Peer Interaction

Applications

Training Effective Tutors

Types of Peer Groupings

Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models

Interteaching

Peer Tutoring

Viewpoints

Criticism of Class-Wide Peer Tutoring Models

Terms & Concepts

Bibliography

Suggested Reading