To my understanding, the reading focused on the reasons for having peer tutoring, as well as why peer tutoring is a beneficial method of teaching. Something I liked in particular about it was the way it questioned, and subsequently answered, why peer tutoring is an effective method of teaching. Not only does this form of teaching benefit those who do not quite understand the material, but in teaching it to others it helps reinforce the material in the minds of the peers doing the teaching. In this way, the text explains to us how peer tutoring is not simply, "the blind leading the blind," but rather students explaining concepts in a language their peers can understand. A question that this poses, however, is the matter of what is the most effective teaching environment if tutoring is such a progressive method of instruction. Does the success of tutoring create a smaller demand for more learned instructors, as all it seems to take is one instructor and several students that grasp the material well enough to relay it in simpler terms to their peers, or is there something more beneficial to the lecture style that many colleges prefer that tutoring does not offer?

Comments

  1. Liam,

    Good start to your reader's blog. In future blogs, I'd like to see summaries of all readings before synthesizing and commenting. Look at your peer's blogs, like Reilly's, for models.

    As for your questions, I don't think that successful peer tutoring reduces the need for instructors. Professors, by virtue of their age and experience, will be needed to help clarify concepts and fill in knowledge gaps.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday: September 10th