Chapter 2: Peer Learning Pros, Cons, and Contextual Factors in Higher Education
Literature is essential in every study on a strategic plan for a new pedagogy, especially in the boundaries of informed grounded theories based on the iPEAR research. The literature review is the academy’s cornerstone, aiming to connect the dots, map uncharted territories and frame theories. However, it is a very complex task due to the fast pace of research and the interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary perspective of technology-enhanced learning. Resources are abundant in peer learning. In March 2023, 4,770,000 results were available only in Google Scholar. Technology-enhanced learning considers developments in educational research, cognitive psychology, brain science and technologies, to name a few. The most common approaches to literature review are systematic, semi-systematic and integrative or narrative. A systematic perspective to review existing studies is not appropriate for multidisciplinary research questions (Snyder,2019).
In some cases, a research question requires a more creative collection of data; an integrative/narrative review approach can be useful when the purpose of the review is not to cover all articles ever published on the topic but rather to combine perspectives to create new theoretical models (Snyder, 2019 p.334).
Thus, this is an integrative approach starting with a research question. The first research question of this study in reviewing the literature is: How could P2P learning be used in Higher education (advantages, disadvantages and contextual factors? Hence, the integrated/narrated research focused on keywords such as benefits, advantages, pros, and cons to inform the readers about the potential and challenges of peer learning.
The integrative narrative is based on papers in the Norwegian University of Science and Technology library resources, Google Scholars and the Journal of Peer Learning. This open-access journal publishes research articles about peer learning, predominantly in higher education, across various contexts and continents. While revising the book, it was evident that more and more publications and the concept of peer learning as mentoring (peer instructions), reciprocal learning or collaborative approaches were available.
First, we need to define peer learning, which is problematic. There are different social dynamics while working with peers in different disciplines and levels of education (undergraduates, postgraduates, etc.) and different terms, such as peer-assisted learning (PAL), peer instruction (Mazur, 1997), peer-tutoring, peer modelling, monitoring, mentoring and peer assessment both, both reciprocal and non-reciprocal, in schools and institutions of higher education, as well as in the workplace (Topling,2023). In this context, “peers” refer to individuals who share a familiar learning environment, such as students, colleagues, or participants in a specific educational program. It does not mean that individuals have all similar knowledge or skill levels, but they come together to learn from and with each other.
Boud, Cohen, and Sampson define it “as the use of teaching and learning strategies in which students learn with and from each other without the immediate intervention of a teacher “(1999, p. 413). This definition is too generic because the educator could decide how much assistance the students need to reach the learning outcome (student’s level of autonomy or digital skills to use AR tools). In technology-enhanced learning approaches, the students may not need the educator’s intervention about the content, but hands-on assistance may be necessary to enhance their digital skills.
Palmer and Blake (2018) note in the Harvard Business Review that peer-to-peer learning fits naturally with how we naturally acquire new skills with the Learning Loop: People gain new skills best in any situation that includes all four stages of what we call the “Learning Loop”: gain knowledge; practice by applying that knowledge; get feedback and reflect on what has been learned. Peer-to-peer Learning encompasses all of these (para.5).
One of the most known approaches is Peer Instruction. Eric Mazur introduced the “Peer Instruction” concept in his book “Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual,” published in 1997. Peer Instruction is an interactive teaching method designed to promote active learning and improve student understanding of complex concepts in science and engineering courses.
In this teaching approach, the instructor poses a multiple-choice question related to the topic. After presenting the question, the students are given time to think about their answers individually. Next, instead of immediately revealing the correct answer, the instructor instructs the students to discuss the question with their peers in small groups. During these discussions, students are encouraged to explain their reasoning and persuade others to consider their viewpoints.
The purpose of the peer discussion is to engage students in active learning and allow them to grapple with the concepts, which can lead to a deeper understanding of the material. It also creates an environment where students learn from each other’s perspectives and insights.
After the peer discussion phase, the instructor collects the students’ answers (usually through a show of hands or electronic response systems). If many students still have misconceptions or incorrect answers, the instructor facilitates a whole-class discussion to address those misconceptions and clarify the correct understanding.
The fundamental principles of Peer Instruction, as outlined by Eric Mazur (1997), include:
Active Learning: Students actively engage with the material through discussion and critical thinking rather than passively receiving information.
Peer teaching: Students learn from each other by explaining concepts and debating ideas within their groups.
Identifying misconceptions: The instructor uses students’ answers to effectively identify and address common misconceptions.
Real-time feedback: The peer and class-wide discussions provide immediate feedback to both students and the instructor about the level of understanding in the class.
Of course, there are more models of peer learning, such as apprenticeship or mentoring, in which an individual, known as an apprentice, works under the guidance of a skilled and experienced mentor. For this book, peer learning refers to students of more or less the same background knowledge. However, mentoring is usually part of peer learning, especially when digital skills are integral to the inclusive culture.
Many universities worldwide, such as Harvard University (USA) and the Frederick University (Cyprus), organise peer tutoring centres to help students cope with the challenges of academia. The student helpers are students who are employed by the university and who have excelled in the courses they tutor. Their goal is to assist students with the course content and to help them develop strong academic habits. Another interesting initiative is the peer observation approach orchestrated by Cambridge Assessment. Peer observation is when a teacher observes another teacher to develop their classroom practice. A peer can be any colleague willing to support you. They may be from a different department, have recently joined teaching, or be senior leadership members. Peer observation is a two-way process that can benefit both the observer and the teacher being observed to improve learning and teaching.
Having defined peer learning and considering the latest development, the next section will develop a cohesive narrative about the approach’s benefits.
2.1 Advantages
The latest edition of the Journal of Peer Learning editorial (Power et al., 2022) focuses on peer leaders and peer teaching in different national and disciplinary contexts. All cases present advantages in the deployment of the approach.
Cofer et al.’s article (2022) similarly focuses on peer educators. The context for this article is predominantly learning centres in the United States and includes some comparison between two different modalities of peer educators: peer tutors and supplemental instruction leaders. The researchers employed a survey to explore the perceived gains of peer educators across three subcategories, including academic performance and learning, non-cognitive skillsets, and self-confidence and fulfilment. The findings show that the three subcategories had significant gains. Based on these findings, greater resource allocation for educators is recommended to enable ongoing training and reflection.
The article by Rawson and Rhodes (2022) reports on a study investigating the motivations and perceived benefits for students who volunteered to become online peer-assisted Learning (PAL) leaders at the University of Derby in the U.K. Their study draws on theory and research related to the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of students who study by distance. However, they have identified a gap in the research that specifically relates to what motivates online students to volunteer as PAL leaders. This has, of course, gained urgency because of COVID-19. Their study identified that intrinsic motivation was related to an altruistic and empathic approach to helping other students adapt to online research. Extrinsic motivation included the potential for PAL leaders to improve their study skills, gain transferable work-related skills, and the possibility of an award to acknowledge their involvement. While admitting that they drew on a small sample, their study includes some exciting suggestions from participants, such as providing digital badges or other tangible rewards, which could serve as incentives and aid in recruiting new leaders. Their study ultimately provides an equitable and inclusive experience for online students.
Szeto et al.’s article (2022) concentrates on a General Education Foundation (GEF) Programme at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. To help students read classic texts and discuss challenging topics, Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) were piloted as part of the programme. The programme’s interdisciplinary nature makes this an unusual context for PASS. Szeto et al.’s article examines how PASS could improve student learning in seminar-style courses through a mixed-method study from a student perspective. The results show that PASS successfully improved students’ understanding of the course content at a cognitive level, that it assisted and motivated them to prepare better for the seminar discussions, and that it also improved confidence and motivation.
Safari et al. (2022) examine the experiences and attitudes of midwifery student tutors and tutees as part of a reciprocal peer tutoring program that involves a certain degree of role-playing. In this peer learning approach, students can assume the role of a teacher in the classroom, followed by group Q&A sessions and case reporting to assess the overall efficacy of the exercise. In addition, this article discusses how the alternation of roles from student to teacher and vice-versa can lead to rich and insightful learning and teaching. The authors argue that this reciprocal peer tutoring approach can enhance motivation and positive attitudes towards the learning and teaching process while increasing multi-channel interactions between students and instructors.
Simulation-based learning has proven to be a valuable learning tool in many practice-based disciplines. In their article, Dennis et al. (2022, as cited in Power et al., 2022) present the findings of an investigation that combined simulation-based learning with peer-assisted learning to address a scarcity of clinical placements for physiotherapy students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their study utilises a prospective qualitative observational design using feedback from peer learners concerning the efficacy of the peer-assisted learning approach. In addition, the authors discuss the enablers and barriers towards a successful learning and teaching experience while pointing out how this combination of simulation and peer-assisted learning model can be further improved. This approach has the potential to become a sustainable solution when health systems worldwide struggle to cope with extraordinary demand due to a range of challenges on multiple fronts.
As a teaching praxis, when students interactively teach each other, they share a sense of empathy- know how to micro-scaffold information and fully understand the learning difficulties (Mazur, 1997; Gupta, 2020). Educators feel relieved from the workload of overexplaining subject matter and share a feeling of professional salience when they see their students learning effectively and enjoyably with their classmates’ assistance. Research on peer mentoring revealed that structured peer interaction could positively impact both sides of a peer program partnership (Tredinnick, Menzies, & Van Ryt, 2015).
A good example is the Peer Mentoring Project at Kent State University. The program has increased students’ academic performance, social skills, self-efficacy, and ability to realise their professional preferences. More importantly, P2P learning creates a relational approach to education, and mentoring connects learners on a university campus and diminishes transactional distance by associating with each other. (Gurjee, 2020).
Another study showed (Hayes and Fulton,2019) that P2P could positively impact PhD candidates, who narrated enhanced confidence and a sense of social inclusion and belonging to the university.
Being facilitated by students who had experienced the same academic pathway was perceived to have widened networking opportunities and positively impacted the capacity of the participants and leaders to build relationships and prepare skills of direct relevance to the requirements of an employer, such as teamwork and initiative (Hayes and Fulton, 2019, p.1)
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the P2P approach provided a supportive alternative to monotonous and alienated distance courses based on lectures (Vergroesen, 2020). Students were allowed to co-create content, share personal experiences, analyse, evaluate and retain knowledge while working with peers. Peers were an antidote against the passive learning approach (online lecturing) and loneliness of the two-meter society. Studies (Cohen, Kulik, Kulik, 1982; Freeman, Eddy, McDonough, Smith, Okoroafor, Jordt, & Wenderoth, 2014) provided some evidence that students had more chances to pass the class and a better understanding of the subject matter if they were working with others. Student-led seminars, peer reviews, and discussion topics in breakout sessions are peer-to-peer active learning approaches that have become popular in remote teaching. Students enjoy personalised attention from their peers and take more responsibility for their personal growth (Vergroesen, 2020).
Peer feedback was a reliable source for scalable learning under two conditions. Firstly, the students had to use rubrics and templates that were easy to comprehend successfully, and the activity of reviewing was with an optimal level of difficulty. Secondly, the people within the peer culture were willing and able to teach each other. The students should have built trust, and a learning community spirit must be evident in online and offline social interactions. Another concept is feedforward, which illustrates constructive criticism to students and focuses on general advice about future efforts. (Baker & Zuvela, 2013; Walker & Hobson, 2014).
The Kukulska-Hulme et al. Open University report (2021,p.36) on innovative pedagogy recommends four ways to enforce active Learning: The report suggests the students could be representatives, consultants, co-researchers and pedagogical co-designers in online curricula. The roles of students are similar to the theoretical background of communities of practice where people join forces and meet regularly to improve their skills and commit to learning and a shared interest. “Students and teachers working in such a community can experience more of a peer-based working relationship, and it can lead to greater empowerment of students, reducing hierarchy between teachers and students” (p.36). In the report, telecollaboration for peer-to-peer language learning provided real-life examples of how learners can design activities and teach each other within a community of practice.
Another angle worthy of consideration is the rise of peer production and organisational structure as a driving force in society and the economy – the so-called Social Capital. Peer instruction and co-creation are social competencies needed in the post-digital community. Bauwens talks to Jandric (2021. pp. 576-577) about P2P as “a relational dynamic that allows any individual in the world to connect to any other individual through digital networking to self-organise or create new value streams. P2P is not just about communications; it is about the capacity to organise beyond the physical level and the open, collaborative systems that allow such an organisation. We are no longer in a world of competing entities: we now have ecosystems, where people can come in and out, and contribute or not”. He explains that we need to consider a new form of humanism. We realise a human identity is an extended form of our interdependence for communities of learning and practice to produce, innovate and continue learning. Social collaboration is a new value system as capital that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn profit from our collaboration with friends and peers or strangers.
Peer-to-peer gaming also prepares students for active, concerned citizenship, uptake of necessary emotional intelligence competencies, and increased ethical leadership (Ferreira et al., 2019; Rojas, 2017; Sutton & Allen, 2019). A new paradigm for higher education could emerge in the coming years if institutions could shift their paradigm from professor-centric to learner-centric andragogy (adult education). Game-based P2P learning has a unique opportunity to become the centre of focus in online education, which will continue after the pandemic but must be revamped.
Robert Frank (2020), author of the book: “Under the Influence: Putting Peer Pressure to Work” explained the potential of P2P learning for social values. The author claims that ideas, behaviours, aesthetics, and perceptions disseminate quickly and influence all of us in epidemics. Still, we could use it effectively to uphold social values and avoid conflicts such as polarisation. Similarly, Bunting (2020) considers peer learning as a process of sharing aesthetic experiences- aesthetics can also describe immersive and transformative experiences.
According to Woolhouse and Nicholson (2020), peer learning between students or professionals can not only advance knowledge and skills but also create stronger relationships that offer emotional support and an “alternative framework for understanding the nature of contemporary higher education”, as advocated by Tight (2004, p. 398). In response, a growing field of research calls for ethical approaches to engaging in professional relationships and co-working within academic circles (see Ball, 2015; Duckworth, Lord, Dunne, Atkins, & Watmore, 2016; Tight, 2008). In doing so, the authors (re)conceptualise how research within the field of education can frame effective changes in practice through the lens of social justice.
Topping (2023) demonstrates the advantages of peer learning based on a literature research approach comparing online with face-to-face learning, which proves difficult enough. In this systematic review, two research questions were identified:
- Which research studies on peer tutoring, assessment, and feedback directly compare the effectiveness of online and offline teaching and learning? Overall, there was some evidence that online learning was better than offline learning—studies found that online was better or that online and offline were equal. None found that offline was better.
- Is there evidence of effectiveness, and if so, what proportion of this research solely depends on student and teacher perceptions, and how much of it uses other indicators? Much of the evidence used only subjective perceptions, with the other portion using more objective or triangulating measures. In cognitive terms, online peer-assisted learning (including peer tutoring and peer assessment) is at least as effective as offline PAL and probably modestly more effective in many contexts. From a socio-emotional perspective, online has more advantages than offline PAL, although both have disadvantages. Students’ responses to PAL may be affected by cultural values and/or initial conservatism in the first instance.
Donald and Ford (2023) and Hockings et al. (2018) observed that the most decisive influence on successful independent learning was the support, collaboration and advice of other (more experienced) students in non-assessed scenarios. They view more experienced students as not necessarily just students in more advanced years of study but also those with additional levels of human capital within the same group. Therefore, they demonstrate the benefits of peer learning for social mobility and employability by adopting Donald et al.’s (2019b as cited in Donald and Ford, 2023) model of self-perceived employability. This incorporates career ownership and human capital comprising six types of capital: social, cultural, psychological, scholastic, market-value, and skills.
Taking ownership of one’s career can increase self-perceived employability, foster life-wide and lifelong learning, and act as an antecedent to a sustainable career (Cole and Donald 2022; Donald, Baruch, and Ashleigh 2019a, 2019b as cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). As a result, peer learning can enhance social mobility and employability through self-reflection, identifying areas for self-improvement, and enhancing learner autonomy.
Moreover, it can help students articulate and signal their employability to prospective employers (Tomlinson and Anderson, 2021, as cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). The additional personal resources, combined with a deeper understanding of the recruitment process and the world of work, can help to operationalise self-perceived employability, leading to enhanced employment outcomes. These prospects are especially significant for students engaged in peer leader roles who experience real leadership opportunities, exposure to intercultural communication, and improved conflict resolution abilities (Ford et al. 2015, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023).
The authors above also believe that peer learning can enhance social, cultural, and psychological capital and that these gains will be most significant in students with the lowest base levels. The COVID-19 pandemic reduced opportunities to interact in person, resulting in decreased subjective wellbeing and calls from students for more opportunities for peer interaction (Donald and Jackson, 2022). Peer learning can play a vital role in addressing these concerns since it offers a collaborative approach to learning and facilitates social cohesion by providing a safe space for exposure to students from different backgrounds and cultures (Chilvers, 2014, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). Moreover, there is the potential for peer learning to occur virtually via video call. However, this relies on students having access to the necessary technology and infrastructure, which may require university funding, particularly for students from disadvantaged backgrounds (Donald, Ashleigh, and Baruch, 2021, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023).
Peer learning has also been effective in increasing the performance and retention of student groups with historically lower levels of participation in higher education by providing a sense of belonging and an increased understanding of academic conventions (Hoiland, Reyes, and Varelas, 2020, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). Additionally, peer learning can improve the HERO dimensions of psychological capital, including Hope, Self-Efficacy, Resilience, and Optimism (Nimmi et al., 2021, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). The sharing of experiences and the opportunity to give and receive feedback can improve confidence in student cohorts and provide formative opportunities to practice and evaluate their performance against their peers (Keenan 2014, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023).
Cumulatively, career ownership and these six types of human capital can address academic integration, professional integration, and social integration from established models for student retention and success. The benefits of peer learning apply to those providing and receiving it (Donald and Ford, 2023).
Despite the overwhelming narrative on the advantages of P2P learning that promotes creativity, empathy, social skills, motivation, engagement, social support, employability and HERO dimensions, the disadvantages cannot be ignored.
2.2 Disadvantages
Inclusion and diversity as social values are prerequisites for using P2P learning. In addition, the Open University report (2021) highlights the importance of facing obstacles that hinder social learning perspectives. These challenges may be a lack of students’ commitment, teachers’ reluctance to employ the new methods or educators’ sense of control of the learning process. Moreover, people working in peer-to-peer learning need to have interpersonal skills and intercultural awareness to provide feedback in a non-judgmental way and be aware of the different learning obstacles students face (Garcia-Melgar, East, and Meyers, 2015).
Despite the enormous advantages, there are precautions to be considered. To start with, uneven participation could make learning less inclusive. Some students may dominate discussions in peer learning activities, while others might be passive or disengaged, leading to unequal learning opportunities (Johnson & Smith, 2018).
Misinformation and Misunderstandings: Students may inadvertently provide incorrect information to their peers, leading to misconceptions and misunderstandings if not corrected by the instructor (Brown et al., 2019).
Lack of Expertise: Peers may not always possess the same level of expertise or knowledge, which could result in the dissemination of incomplete or inaccurate information (Robinson & Davis, 2020).
Social Dynamics: Group dynamics can sometimes lead to conflicts or interpersonal conflicts that hinder productive learning interactions (Williams & Johnson, 2017). While some students enjoy peer learning, other students are less satisfied with this approach due to an increased perceived workload (Hall and DuFrene 2016, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023), power dynamics between students (Adachi, Tai, and Dawson 2018 cited in Donald and Ford, 2023) and a perceived lack of instructor availability (Brewer and Movahedazarhouligh 2018 cited in Donald and Ford, 2023).
Furthermore, managing conflicts between students or providing additional guidance and support to the students delivering the sessions may be necessary. This highlights the need to value specialist supervisors in education-focused roles and offer pathways to progress alongside research-focused colleagues to benefit academics and their students (Smith and Walker 2021, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023).
Peer learning also relies on students to have the social confidence to interact with one another and embrace the opportunity to be critical thinkers. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic caused adverse outcomes in students, including feelings of isolation, reduced mental and physical health, difficulties undertaking degree studies, and concerns for labour market competitiveness (Donald and Jackson, 2022). Yet, the same research offers some hope since students asked universities to provide more interaction opportunities with peers and flexible study options to overcome lost opportunities during the pandemic. Thus, offering flexible options for peer learning, such as an in-person, virtual, or blended approach, may help to overcome a lack of social confidence and increase student engagement. This further emphasises the potential for peer learning to promote social mobility by sharing lived experiences and exposure to various cultures. It also indicates that peer learning can improve employability through personal skill development (e.g. teamwork, conflict resolution, intercultural communication, giving/receiving feedback, and critical thinking).
Time Constraints: Peer learning activities may take longer to complete than traditional teacher-centred instruction, potentially affecting the coverage of course material (Baker & Turner, 2016). Donald and Ford (2023) express the view that there is a risk that faculty administrators perceive peer learning as an opportunity to reduce the workload of lecturers. However, peer learning is most effective when it supplements classroom-based instruction (International Centre for Supplemental Instruction 2021). Peer learning often requires more time and resources, albeit differently from traditional learning approaches (Adachi, Tai, and Dawson, 2018, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). At either the school level, faculty level or via a central university service, this may require formal accredited training for supervisors who can subsequently source and train students to offer peer learning. The opportunity for students to lead and own peer learning initiatives may also help overcome lecturers’ difficulties in engaging students outside of a traditional classroom setting (Brewer and Movahedazarhouligh 2018 cited in Donald and Ford, 2023).
Lack of Guidance: While peer learning emphasises student-led discussions, some students may struggle without sufficient guidance from the instructor, especially when faced with challenging concepts (Smith & Jones, 2018).
Difficulty Addressing Complex Topics: Peer learning may not be as effective for highly complex or technical subjects that require more in-depth explanations or expertise from an instructor (Clark & White, 2019).
Unequal Student Preparedness: Students might enter peer learning activities with varying levels of preparation, making it challenging to adequately cater to everyone’s needs (Thomas et al., 2020).
Limited Feedback Quality: While peers can provide feedback, it might not be as comprehensive or accurate as feedback from an experienced instructor (Harris & Lee, 2017).
Disruptions and Distractions: Peer learning environments might be susceptible to disruptions and distractions, hindering the focus and concentration of some students (Murray & Green, 2018).
Szeto et al. (2022) also identify significant challenges, including differences in peer leaders’ approaches and organisational difficulties. Peer learning is inherently collaborative, where students search for knowledge, solutions, and deeper meanings, but they must sufficiently organise their study time.
Educators providing peer learning need to be capable of communicating the benefits of participation to other students (Ajjawi and Bould, 2017, cited in Donald and Ford, 2023). Since mandating, they must convince students that peer learning is more beneficial than just watching recorded lecture content online.
There is also little awareness about the implications of peer learning within online communities of practice: the degree of invisible understanding and interactions and the transformative powers that make individuals more social and change their roles and identities (Merry & Orsmond, 2020).
Despite the overwhelmingly positive evidence about peer learning, there is a massive gap between what research has shown and what educators know about peer learning. It is a time-consuming, labour-intensive and training-required method.
2.3 Contextual factors
The contextual factors based on iPEAR research findings and literature review that strongly affect peer-to-peer instructions are:
Class Size: The size of the class or learning group can impact the dynamics of peer learning. Larger groups might make it challenging for all students to actively participate and engage in meaningful discussions.
Cultural Diversity: Students from diverse cultural backgrounds may have different communication styles and learning preferences, which can affect how they engage in peer learning activities.
Subject Matter Complexity: The subject’s complexity and nature can influence the effectiveness of peer learning. Some topics may be better suited for collaborative learning, while others require more individualised instruction.
Learning Environment: The physical learning environment, such as classroom layout and seating arrangements, can influence interactions and group dynamics during peer learning activities.
Time Constraints: The amount of time available for peer learning activities can impact the depth and scope of discussions and collaborative tasks.
Technology and Resources: Access to technology, such as computers, internet connectivity, or educational tools, can influence the implementation and effectiveness of online peer learning activities.
Teacher Support and Involvement: The teacher’s level of guidance and support during peer learning can significantly impact students’ engagement and learning outcomes.
Student Readiness and Skills: Students’ readiness and prior knowledge can affect their ability to actively participate and contribute meaningfully during peer learning activities.
Group Composition: The composition of peer learning groups, such as the mix of student abilities and personalities, can influence the effectiveness of group collaboration and communication.
Assessment and Grading: How peer learning is integrated into the assessment and grading system can impact students’ motivation and dedication to participating in collaborative activities.
Institutional Policies and Support: Institutional support for peer learning initiatives, including training for teachers and students, can contribute to successfully implementing collaborative learning methods.
Student Attitudes and Beliefs: Students’ attitudes toward peer learning and their beliefs about its effectiveness can influence their level of engagement and willingness to actively participate.
Trust: The need to develop trusting and respectful relationships, empowerment, and giving voice to all students (Woolhouse & Nicholson, 2020).
Understanding and considering these contextual factors is essential for instructors and educators when designing and implementing peer learning activities. By considering these factors, educators can create more effective and inclusive peer learning experiences catering to their students’ unique needs and characteristics.
It is essential to think about the universality of P2P Learning (Balta, Michinov, Balyimez, Ayaz, 2017). Countries can be broadly framed as collectivist or collaborative, active learning approaches according to their educational system and social studies. Hofstede’s (1980) famous classification of countries ranked on their level of individualism on a scale of 0 to 100 (Hofstede, 1986; Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010). For example, on the Hofstede scale of the countries: 20 for Thailand, 37 for Turkey, 38 for Brazil, 46 for Argentina and Japan, 63 for Finland, 71 for France, 74 for Denmark, and 90 for the USA and Australia. According to the meta-analysis (Balta, Michinov, Balyimez, Ayaz, 2017), educational systems higher on the individualistic scale may not benefit from P2P learning as in countries with more collective behaviours where students are used to helping each other as social behaviour. On the other side of the argument, although Finland and Denmark score individualism scores high, they favour a collaborative approach and collective thinking in their educational institutions. Future social norms and expectations are essential to enhance cultural awareness and cross-cultural communication, especially for eLearning that involves an ‘anyone, anytime, from anywhere mentality.
2.4 Conclusions about the integrative narrative of peer learning
Peer-to-peer Learning is the process of teaching one another, sharing questions and examples, solving a problem, working to develop a collective understanding or even co-create a project-based assignment. The roles in the groups could be equal participation or different contributions, including mentoring (Bould et al.,2014). The literature narrative showed that P2P learning enhances motivation, engagement, and understanding of the course outcomes and provides students with an equitable and inclusive experience. It boosted students’ confidence and promoted insightful teaching as part of different role-playing, multi-channelled communication and explorative inquiries. The positive side-effect is empathy – to know the learning challenges of fellow students and try to assist them and social peer pressure that makes changes less uncomfortable. This learning approach has become increasingly popular in education and work training because it offers cost-effective, efficient and enjoyable options for acquiring skills, retaining knowledge and creative thinking. It improves engagement, autonomy and empowerment, critical competencies for learning for a living. The power of P2P is social pressure that creates standard etiquette and values, micro-scaffolding and P2P support that helps students overcome challenges if used with an inclusive perspective.
Overall, it is a cost-effective way to learn and teach, making the process more enjoyable and effective for students and less tiring for educators while offering professional salience. It is important to note that working with others and co-creating and designing the learning process is the social capital students need to invest as a form of competence, which is evident in how social media works.
Some factors, such as students’ commitment, teachers’ reluctance to employ the new methods or educators’ sense of control of the learning process, hinder the implementation of the peer-to-peer approach. Significant challenges, including differences in peer leaders’ approaches and organisational difficulties, are also evident. Moreover, people working in peer-to-peer learning need interpersonal skills and intercultural awareness to provide feedback in a non-judgmental way and be aware of the different learning obstacles students face.
Donald and Ford (2023) believe that peer learning can foster social mobility and employability in new ways to ensure universities remain relevant in preparing young people for entry into the labour market. There is a need for empirical studies to explore and examine the relationship between peer learning, social mobility, and employability outcomes in university settings following the COVID-19 pandemic. There is also a need for supervisors and the students providing peer learning to consider new ways to discuss and share best practices beyond their localised networks. More training and research findings dissemination are needed as peer support communities for educators and their students to bridge the gap between what research shows and what educators use in praxis.