1. Learning by teaching: Facilitating
peer-to-peer tuition in Content and
Language Integrated Learning
John Blake
University of Aizu
2. Overview
02
1. Teaching context
2. Content and language integrated learning (CLIL)
3. Learning by teaching
4. Theoretical basis
5. Practical implementation
6. Evaluation
7. Lessons learned
3. 1. Teaching context
03
Context
• Small niche university in rural northern
(and snowy) Japan
Courses
• Content courses delivered in English
e.g. natural language processing,
computer science, logic
• Class size: 50 students
Learners
• Computer science majors
• Over 90% Japanese and around 90% male
• 100% smartphone ownership and free
access to wifi
4. 2. Content and language integrated
learning (CLIL)
04
Learn content
• Students learn the subject content, e.g. natural language
processing
Learn language
• Students learn the language of delivery, e.g. English
5. 3. Learning by teaching
05
Situation
• One teacher, many students.
Problem
• One teacher develops materials for many students
• Teacher creates text-based materials
• Students prefer multimodal materials
• Difficulty to teach in real-time, e.g. wifi dropping
Solution
• Switch from one-to-many to many-to-many model
• Adopt completely learner-centred approach
• Students create multimodal materials themselves
• Student developers learn through the process
• Student users learn from the materials developed
6. 4. Theoretical basis
06
Motivation
• Students learn not to help themselves but to help others.
• Students need to understand the content to teach the
content.
Active learning
• Students read, listen to or watch content.
• Students create audio or video explanation.
• Students need to simplify the content, and/or make the
content relevant to peers.
Time on task
• Students draft notes and/or script before recording.
• Students make multiple recordings to get quality version.
• More time on task, more progress.
7. 5. Practical implementation
07
Align assessments with activities
• What gets assessed, gets done.
Audio materials
• “Sound is king.”
Slideshow materials
• Provide examples but allow creativity
• Copyright issues
• Scaffolding through peer support
Video materials
• Pre-production: script, storyboard and shot list
• Production: area, actors and ambience (esp. lighting)
• Post-production: editing and subtitling
Password-protected or open-access
• Students were comfortable sharing their explanations with course
participants.
• A few were happy for materials to be released online.
8. 6. Evaluation
08
Student feedback (students)
• Triangulated: observation,
focus group and
questionnaire
Professor’s feedback
• Four professors in same
university
Tutor reflection
• Time intensive to create
initial system
• Current quality control
system is bottleneck
• Recommend animated
rather than live action
video
“enjoyed watching video explanations”
“preferred to watch animated slideshows”
“win-win scenario”
“approval of teach-to-learn approach”
“will consider adopting same approach”
9. 7. Lessons learned
09
1. Ensure students know intended audience.
2. Explain rationale for learn-to-teach approach.
3. Provide clear rubrics.
4. Provide clear assessment criteria.
5. Provide examples and/or templates.
6. Show how lighting and sound affect video quality.
7. Monitor video production progress
• e.g. students submit storyboards and scripts.
8. Be aware that live action is the most difficult, most
time-consuming type of video format.