Linda SELLOU1*, Mark CHONG2, Sarada BULCHAND3, Mei Hui LIU4, Hui Ting CHNG5, Stephen TAY En Rong6, Matthew TAN Chiang Wang5, ZHANG Ye7, Nicholas CAI Xianhui8, Francis CHONG Yuan Yi9, Janelle Claire TEOH Gi Yan10
1Special Programme in Science
2Department of Biomedical Engineering
3Duke-NUS Medical School
4Department of Food Science & Technology
5Department of Pharmacy
6Department of the Built Environment
7Department of Architecture
8Department of Philosophy
9Department of Chemistry
10Faculty of Arts and Social Science
Sellou, L., Chong, M., Bulchand, S., Liu, M. H., Chng, H. T., Tay, S. E. R., Tan, M. C. W., Zhang, Y., Cai, N. X., Chong, F. Y. Y., Teoh, J. C. G. Y. (2023). Peer partnership in interdisciplinary settings: A learning community’s experience [Lightning talk]. In Higher Education Campus Conference (HECC) 2023, 7 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecc2023proceedings/peer-partnership-in-interdisciplinary-settings-a-learning-communitys-experience/
SUB-THEME
Communities and Education
KEYWORDS
Learning communities, interdisciplinary education, best practices
CATEGORY
Lightning Talks
BACKGROUND
In this lightning talk, we will share our experiences and lessons learnt from our Learning Community (LC) which started in April 2022. Our LC sought to explore “Peer partnership in interdisciplinary settings” and started off with asking two key questions:
1. How can students from different disciplines and backgrounds learn from one another effectively?
There is a demand for interdisciplinary education and/or training in interdisciplinary settings. Particularly in higher learning settings, however, existing monodisciplinary structures often limit the effectiveness of interdisciplinary efforts. It follows that the “undifferentiated” students themselves—as active partners in learning, in both self-directed and peer settings—may be key to providing effective interdisciplinary education. The frameworks to do so, however, are not well-established.
2. How can students provide effective feedback to one another?
Peer learning is commonly employed in academic settings, with documented benefits of greater ownership over learning and deeper learning (Boud et al., 1999). More recently, the ability to provide feedback to peers has emerged as an important tool in the modern workplace (Di Fiore & Souza, 2021). Despite these various merits, effective deployment of peer learning and feedback remains challenging.
In light of the above, this LC aims to better understand the perceptions of both students and faculty in this shared learning process, focusing on three key areas:
- Challenges in peer learning, appraisal, and review in the interdisciplinary space (SETTINGS)
- Specialised tools in blended learning spaces (PLATFORMS)
- Faculty as supporters / mediators (PEOPLE)
LC STRUCTURE
Our LC has been engaging diverse stakeholders from students to faculty across disciplines. Specifically, the community started with nine (and have now grown to 11) members comprising students and faculty from eight (now ten) different departments in Design and Engineering, Science, and Medicine. This was a reflection of our deliberate efforts to increase breadth and representation, in order to better approach interdisciplinary learning. In our meetings, we explored best practices to implement peer appraisal, review and reflection, by consolidating challenges in design and implementation, brainstorming solutions, and identifying areas for adoption and utility. A unique aspect of the LC is the formation of two sub-working groups, focusing on the following “mini-projects”:
- Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes in Interdisciplinary Teams
Through review of literature and reflections from faculty, the sub-group seeks to explore:
(1) What knowledge, skills, and attitudes (K/S/A) are required to work effectively in an interdisciplinary team? (2) Do the K/S/A differ depending on the types of disciplines that work together?
- Peer Feedback: Student-generated Questions and Peer-to-peer Critique
Through sharing of personal practices and conduct of comparative studies, the sub-group explores the strengths and areas for improvement of peer teaching tools being used in our classes. This can lead subsequently to the abstraction of key factors and considerations in the design of tools in peer instruction.
Currently, both groups have completed preliminary literature reviews and have sought ethics board approval for the “mini-studies”, sharing their reports and updates at the bi-monthly meetings.
CENTRAL MESSAGE/WHY YOU SHOULD ATTEND THIS PRESENTATION
This presentation provides a summary and anecdotal sharing of our experiences in the LC: besides factors contributing to favourable outcomes, we will also discuss pitfalls encountered that other LCs can avoid. Specific to our LC, this may serve as a platform to attract like-minded members, who may be able to benefit from and contribute towards the diversity and dynamism of the LC.
REFERENCES
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240405
Di Fiore, A., & Souza, M. (2021, January 12). Are peer reviews the future of performance evaluations? Harvard Business Review Online. https://hbr.org/2021/01/are-peer-reviews-the-future-of-performance-evaluations
