Using Errors To Teach through a Two-Staged, Structured Review: Peer-Reviewed Quizzes and "What's Wrong With Me?"
- Autores: Brian P. Coppola, Jason K. Pontrello
- Localización: Journal of chemical education, ISSN 0021-9584, Vol. 91, Nº 12, 2014, págs. 2148-2154
- Idioma: inglés
- Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
-
Resumen
Using errors as a method of learning has been made explicit through a two-staged peer review and discussion. During organic chemistry discussion sessions, quizzes are followed by a structured peer review designed to help students identify and discuss student errors. After the face-to-face discussion, a second stage of review involves analyzing and commenting on a set of quiz solutions made available by the instructor on the course Web site. Through this �What�s Wrong With Me?� exercise, students are given two solutions to each question in the quiz.
One answer is completely consistent with the course, while the other contains instructor-generated errors and inconsistencies that would be marked �wrong� if graded. Students must post comments explaining solution inconsistencies to earn full credit on the quiz, and they are never told which of the two solutions is correct.
This same strategy is also used for examinations and all practice problems (consisting of old exams and other problems); students never receive a single answer key for anything in the course. Course evaluations indicate strong support for peer-reviewed quizzes as generating a sense of community and facilitating learning and understanding of material. Evaluations also indicate that while frustrating at first, a majority of students find the posting of two solutions for course questions to be valuable in their learning process. This method has been by used by other faculty members, and has been implemented in general chemistry lecture and laboratory courses.
