APPLICATION OF PEER-INSTRUCTION CONCEPTS TO ENGINEERING
EDUCATION
Timothy A. Wilson
1
1
Timothy A. Wilson, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Department of Computing and Mathematics, LB 152, 600 S. Clyde Morris Blvd., Daytona
Beach, FL 32114–3900, wilsonti@erau.edu
Abstract æ This paper describes exploitation of Mazur's
Peer Instruction ideas in the context of engineering education, specifically introductory subjects in linear circuit analysis and design. Mazur's approach to teaching introductory undergraduate physics emphasizes: (1) use of the textbook as the primary method of introducing new material, and (2) understanding of concepts in addition to the ability to find numeric answers to problems. Retained from the peer-instruction approach are the use of reading quizzes and concept tests; added are active learning teambased problem-solving and design exercises.
Index Terms æ Active learning, peer instruction, reading quiz, concept test.
PEER INSTRUCTION
In his Peer Instruction: A User's Manual [1], Eric Mazur

presented his peer instruction approach to teaching introductory physics. The approach replaces the usual lecture component of instruction with mini-lectures followed by intervals of student interaction (the peer instruction). The peer instruction takes place in the context of what Mazur calls "ConcepTests" (just "concept tests" in the sequel), multiple choice tests over material in the just concluded mini-lecture. Students respond to the concept tests twice:
Initially with answers formed individually, and then later after the period of interaction during which each student is to try to convince nearby students whose answer is different from her or his own to change answers. Only after the second responses does the instructor explain the correct answer to the concept test.
Because less classroom time is available for direct presentation of information, only selected topics are covered with the mini-lecture, concept test, and peer instruction. The course text is treated as the primary source for all information and reference for covered topics. Student reading of required material is motivated through the use of reading quizzes held at the beginning of class meetings.
The basic motivation that peer instruction should lead to increased learning is that students who have just learned the

material, from some combination of the required reading and the mini-lecture, are better able to explain that material to their peers. Mazur found that student performance on the
Force Concept Inventory exam, the Mechanics Baseline
Test, and his own examinations improved with the use of peer instruction.
I have applied aspects of the peer-instruction approach to instruction in several linear circuit analysis courses, currently at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and previously at the University of Memphis. The overall framework is the same: (1) required reading covering all the new material, tested by reading quizzes, and (2) minilectures, concept tests, peer instruction, and explanation of the concept test over featured elements of the new material.
My implementation of the reading quiz has been a single multiple-choice question of low value in overall determination of term grade designed largely to ensure that the student has read the material. The emphasis here is simply to get the student to have an initial exposure to the current material and to know where to look for reference, not to ensure that the material is perfectly understood.
My implementation of the mini-lecture plus concept test has largely followed Mazur’s. The mini-lecture is usually brief, five to ten minute in length. It covers aspects of a

single topic. The concept test is a single short -answer, multiple-choice question that focuses on the ideas in the justcompleted presentation.
Students' initial answers to the concept test are formed quickly and independently of discussion with other students. Initially, answers were not recorderd, but in the past academic year, student repsonses were recorded on machine gradable Scantron forms.
PROBLEM SOLVING
While the peer-instruction approach develops conceptual and qualitative reasoning, engineering education requires additional development of quantitative and design aspects.
The peer-instruction approach was supplemented with inclass problem solving and design elements. The activelearning approach was carried over to those elements, with problems for analysis and/or design assigned to groups of students. Students made brief presentations of their results at the end of the analysis and design exercises.
Examination of student feedback suggests that activelearning approaches were appreciated and valued over traditional lecture-recitation formats, but there was a perception that problem-solving skills suffered at the expense of qualitative reasoning. An attempt to address that situation involved out-of-class problem-solving sessions.
REFERENCES
[1] Mazur, Eric, Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual, Prentice Hall, Upp