Background of the Study
Education is the key to life, and the process of facilitating learning, acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Moreover, a broad range of learning approaches also exists, which contributed to education both in positive and negative way; for example, e-learning, blended learning and distance learning which utilizes information and communication technology (Maier, 2007). The potential of e-learning seems very assuring, but because of gaps between developed and developing countries, knowledge transfer is not only difficult but also costly. Every year, more of the world’s people become connected to the network, its bandwidth increases and its users becomes more integrated to all that happens in the globe. Connectivity to this network has becomes key to opportunity, success and fulfillment for individuals. Just like the technology has changed the world, it is now changing the learning and teaching environment.
E-learning denotes the use of ICT by teachers and learners. Schmidt (2005) holds that e-learning consists of conventional training, such as courses, ad-hoc training, selected learning objects, formalization through document collections and community formation which can be achieved via social software. The growth of e-learning programs according to Lockwood and Gooley (2002) is driven by the need for and potential of providing education in less expensive ways, increased access to information, effective learning and greater flexibility.
Level of education are; preschool or kindergarten, primary, secondary and tertiary institutions. Education can take place in formal or informal settings and any experience that has a formative effect on the way one thinks, feels, or acts may be considered educational. The informal setting takes place at home while the formal setting takes place within the school environment under the guidance of the teachers. Teachers are trained specifically in the subject area and pedagogy. Educational methods include storytelling, discussion, teaching, training, and directed research (Hawkins, 2002). Teachers use various method to inculcate but the common one is the teacher dominating the classroom while learner are passive. Student learning among themselves is called peer learning. Peer learning takes place within colleagues in friendly atmosphere where tips are received among peers to meet the yearning needs in a timely and convenient situation. Learners are allowed to express themselves freely without fear.
Peer learning is the acquisition of knowledge and skills through active helping and supporting among equal status. It involves people from similar social groupings who are not professional teachers helping each other to learn and in so doing are learning themselves. Many of the key elements for effective peer learning are often incorporated in the design of small collaborative learning groups, and research shows that students who engage in collaborative learning and group study perform better academically, persist longer, feel better about the educational experience, and have enhanced self-esteem (Landis, 2000). The outcomes of peer learning ultimately depend on the design strategy, outcome objectives of the course, facilitating skills of the teacher, and the commitment of students and teachers. The emphasis is on the learning process, including the emotional support learners offer each other, as much as the learning task itself, in peer learning the role of teacher and learner are fixed. Student have similar challenges they carefully ask questions what may appear in other situations to be silly questions. Learning from each other is not only a feature of informal learning, it occurs in all courses at all levels. Students have conversations about what they are learning inside and outside classrooms whether teachers are aware of it or not. The first approach, when stuck on a problem, is normally to ask another student, not the teacher. Not only can they provide each other with useful information, but sharing the experience of learning also makes it less burdensome and more enjoyable.
Peer learning in a college setting is, in a sentence, students helping one another learn. However, this method of expanding and deepening one’s knowledge is distinct from tutoring, teaching, learning or teaching assistant facilitated review. The key aspect of peer learning that distinguishes it from other forms of instruction is that there is only a small gap between the knowledge of one person and the others Jessica Hovingh and Swetha Rajagopal (The importance of peer learning in the context of college level forensic science education) pdf. For example, researchers from the University of Ulster identified ten different models of peer learning (Griffiths, Houston &Lazenbatt 2000). These ranged from the traditional proctor model, in which senior students tutor junior students, to the more innovative learning cells, in which students in the same year form partnerships to assist each other with both course content and personal concerns. Other models involved discussion seminars, private study groups, parrainage (a buddy system) or counseling, peer assessment schemes, collaborative project or laboratory work, projects in different sized (cascading) groups, workplace mentoring and community activities.
Peer learning can be modified and adapted to match a broad range of social skill materials. Teachers can develop and implement their own peer learning procedures in their classrooms and adapt it to incorporate a wide variety of materials. Good peer learning is reciprocal. In other words, both students have turns playing the role of a teacher and learner during the same tutoring session. The advantage is that it prevents negative feelings of always having to be the learner and feelings of superiority of always being the teacher. Excess time for teacher due to peer learning should be used to float around the classroom and monitor the students while they tutor one another. Teachers can use this opportunity to reward pairs that are working cooperatively and following procedures. For peer learning to be successful, there should be 4?8 sessions that should not last more than 15 minutes Eskay M., Onu V. C., Obiyo N, Obidoa M(Use of peer tutoring, cooperative learning, and collaborative learning).
Training can start with teaching of feedback/error correction procedure. The teacher should demonstrate what peer learning is like with another teacher or with a student, using simple clear materials, such as prepared worksheets, or a deck of flashcards, and developing system to request help, such as raising of hands, or raising “help” cards. There are behavior management and reward systems. The teacher should specify clear rules and expectations before peer tutoring. He/she should reward positive cooperative and appropriate behaviors during tutoring. Materials for tutoring should not aggravate problem behaviors, but demonstrate rewarding the “models” for appropriate behavior during demonstrations and set a timer which should not last more than 20 minutes. When the time goes off, let the students switch roles, they should use game formats for they are highly motivational. Once, the students are paired, they should divide the entire class into two teams and let the students total their scores at the end. The team with the most points will win a reward. Partner selection must match. They should not immediately break them up if they are not matching and use it during one class period. Learning to get along and work cooperatively is very important. If not working, they should place the students on a time out from rewards for five minutes. This is not time out on activity but a suspension of the rewards given for appropriate behavior and good performance. The teacher should avoid putting best friends together or pair worst enemies. Teachers should interact closely with students and state specific goals to measure and examine progress. The tutors should adapt instruction to learner’s pace, learning style, and understanding. Comments and corrections should be immediate Eskay M. et al (2012) Use of Peer Tutoring, Cooperative Learning, and Collaborative Learning.
The teacher may need to pair according to how the students behave, and change the students every 2–3 weeks. This will prevent students from developing patterns of behavior or response. It will also help students to be better acquainted with some other people in the classroom. When mastered, incorporate the strategy into other class periods.
For peer tutoring to be highly effective, it requires a high level of cooperation as noted earlier . Earlier, Slavin (2000) stressed that peer tutoring has a reward structure where cooperation is at its core. Educators, researchers, administrators, and even parents are rediscovering the fact that two or more students working together learn more than individual students working alone. It involves cooperative learning. Cooperative learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize.
According to Scott et al. (2016), peer learning also known as peer-to-peer learning, is learning from and with the learner’s peers. Peer learning has been used in education to address critical thinking, psychomotor skills, cognitive development, clinical skills, and academic gains. One type of peer learning is problem-based learning (PBL) which is characterized by students learning from each other and from independently sourced information. It is student centered, utilizing group work with the analysis of case studies as a means of learning. Alternatively “peer tutoring” involves individuals from similar settings helping others to learn, which may occur one-on-one or as small group sessions . Bound (2010) posited that the advantage in learning from people you know is that they are or have been in a similar position to oneself. Student have faced the same challenges as ourselves in the same context, student talk to us in same language. Student have conversation about what they are learning inside and outside classrooms whether teachers are aware of it or not. The first approach, when stuck on a problem, is normally to ask another student, not the teacher. Not only can they provide each other with useful information, but sharing the experience of learning also makes it less burdensome and more enjoyable.
Awareness is an integral component of CSCW research. Dourish de?ned it as understanding of the activities of others, which provides a context activity. In 2002, the in?uential CSCW researcher Kjeld Schmidt criticized the term for its fuzziness by pointing out that the term is found both “ambiguous and unsatisfactory” and that the notion of awareness would be “hardly a concise concept by any standard. He outlines the different awareness research strands by reviewing most of the existing literature and stresses the need for strong ties between awareness support and support for cooperative processes. Peer learning awareness encourages pupils to recognize the importance of peer learning. Awareness contribute to the Wellbeing curriculum outcomes. This does not mean identifying any individual pupil but rather advocates an ethos where pupils are treated equally but individually. They will need to know how to respond to behaviors that appear unfriendly and how to encourage abilities that facilitate learning. Without guidance and support from the teacher, the reaction can be rejection and ridicule rather than acceptance and inclusion in their activities Tony Attwood (2007).
Undergraduate are not aware of peer learning and but really understands the usefulness and besides most know peer learning as tutorials so once the word peer learning is mentioned some get confuse and show negative attitude towards it, while the little that utilize peer learning are been distracted based on gender differences(male and female). Once they gather together to learn they are shy due to difference in sex and they feel segregated, in that face learning cannot be achieved
Statement of Problem
In Nigeria, there are many challenges that the educational sector encounters among which includes inadequate educational services, and lack of quality instructions available for students to develop on (Jiboku, 2017). Some students have problem in there academics and have been sent out of the university . Had it been that they are aware of peer learning some would have been helped, where they come together to learn and discussed difficult concept. Could it be that they are aware of peer learning or student are aware just that they fails to utilize it to pursue their academic goal instead use it to pursue social and political around the campus. It is in view of these concern that this study was carried out to investigate the awareness and utilization of peer learning among undergraduate student.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is investigate awareness on the utilization of peer learning on academic performance in University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
Specifically, this study’
Find out the awareness of undergraduate for peer learning.
Assess the utilization of peer learning among undergraduate students
Examine the impact of peer learning on students’ academic performance
Determine gender ascertain attitude of undergraduate on peer learning
The study specifically sought to provide answers to the following questions.
Are undergraduate student aware of peer learning?
Do undergraduate students utilize peer learning for educational purpose?
Does peer learning have impact on the academic performance of undergraduate students based on gender?
Does gender influence undergraduate attitude toward use of peer learning?
The following null hypotheses were tested:
H01: There is no significant difference in the awareness of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender.
H02: There is no significant difference in the utilization of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender
Scope of the Study
The study focused on the awareness and utilization of peer learning for improvement of student academic performance in University of Ilorin. A descriptive research method of the survey type was employed to collect process and analyze data with the use of a researcher designed questionnaire. The location of this study was University of Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. The target population are undergraduate students in University of Ilorin, in which fifty(50) students were randomly selected from five(5) faculty to make a total sum of Two Hundred and fifty (250) Students.
Clarification of Major Terms and VariablesEducation: The process of receiving or giving systematic instructions, especially at a school or university.
Awareness: How student are informed about a particular thing based on experienced.
Utilization: The action of making practical and effective use of something.
Peer-Learning: It is an educational practice in which students interact with other students to attain educational goals it can also be called cooperative learning.
Significance of the Study
It is anticipated that this study will provide an idea about the awareness and utilization of peer learning among undergraduates which will ensure better performance. In the same way, the study will provide knowledge and guidelines for the stakeholder(student, parents, lecturers, Ngo)e.t.c. The research is therefore of importance for planners, and other social scientists. Also, this study will provide an input to the students, teachers and researchers in the areas of peer learning. The result will also guide counselors to find the best ways of handling peer groups learning problems. The students will also benefit from the study by acquiring knowledge on peers that can hinder their progress in academic. The result will enable the teacher/ lecturer to make use of peer learning process to solve problems on student individual differences because of each student level of understanding is different from another. The study might help the teacher and the students to be aware of the importance of peer learning. The study will assist in identifying the major challenges facing the utilization of peer learning in tertiary institutions.
This study might serve as useful resources to planners and policymakers on how to ensure the greater involvement of decision and policy makers in the society and how to organize a learning process when systems, cultures and problem-solving concepts are different. The peer review in the field of social inclusion and social protection policies of the society serves to stimulate and support mutual learning and the exchange of good practices between the Member States, with the final objective of contributing to the further development and improvement of national and social inclusion policies.
This study will aid undergraduate develop skills in organizing and planning learning activities, working collaboratively with others, giving and receiving feedback and evaluating their own learning. Peer learning is becoming an increasingly important part of many courses, and it is being used in a variety of contexts and disciplines in many countries.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATUREBased on the main purpose of this study, the review of related literature was addressed under the following sub-headings:
Concept of Information Communication Technology(ICT)
Meaning and Nature of Peer learning
Relevance of Peer Learning in Higher Education
Awareness of Peer Learning by undergraduate in Teaching and Learning.
Attitude of undergraduate Towards Utilization Of Peer Learning
Influence of gender towards utilization of peer learning
Appraisal of reviewed literature.
Concept of ICT
ICT is technology that supports activities involving information. Such activities include gathering, processing, storing and presenting data. Increasingly these activities also involve collaboration and communication. ICT implies the technology which consists of electronic devices and associated human interactive materials that enable the user to employ them for a wide range of teaching – learning processes in addition to personal use (Gibbons, 2007)53. Hence IT has become ICT information and communication technology. Information and communication technology (ICT) has become, one of the basic building blocks of modern society. Many countries now regard understanding ICT and mastering the basic skills and concepts of ICT as part of the core of education, alongside reading, writing and numeracy. UNESCO aims to ensure that all countries, both developed and developing, have access to the best educational facilities necessary to prepare young people to play full roles in modern society and to contribute to a knowledge nation. Because of the fundamental importance of ICT in the task of schools today(concept of ICT). On one hand, it is noted that e-learning is at least as effective as traditional instructional strategies (Rosenberg, Grad and Matear, 2003), and that there are no major differences in academic performance between the more traditional and more technology-oriented modes of instruction (Cavanaugh, 2001). Many reviews go further, reflecting a principally positive attitude towards the impact of e-learning (Mayer, 2003). The current piece sought to demystify e-learning by concentrating on how specific e-learning factors (socio-demographic characteristics, hours spent on-line and prior computer skills) influence individual academic performance.
There is a considerable body of evidence to suggest that different teaching delivery styles can have different degrees of success; as measured in terms of academic results (Emerson & Taylor, 2004). In relation to online teaching, some studies indicate that this medium of delivery has a positive impact on performance, for example, Smith and Hardaker (2000). Other studies however, find that greater online teaching has a negative impact on performance (Johnson, 2005).
Benefits include offering a variety of new possibilities to learners (Breuleux, Laferrière, &Lamon, 2002), in addition to having a positive effect on students’ achievement in different subject matter areas (Chambers, 2003). Other benefits of electronic education include increases in enrollment or time in school as education programs reach underserved regions, broader educational opportunity for students who are unable to attend traditional schools, access to resources and instructors not locally available, and increases in student-teacher communication. According to Barker ;Wendel (2001) students in virtual schools showed greater improvement that their conventional school counterparts in critical thinking, researching, using computers, learning independently, problem-solving, creative thinking, decision-making, and time management.
Hoque, Shah and Shafiul (2010)54 posited that ICTs are used as productivity tools or enrichment resources; this generally means that they support the traditional teacher-led mode of instruction in subject areas such as math, language, social studies, or science. ICTs are enablers that optimize student-centered pedagogical methods. They are used to develop broad, generic skills such as problem solving, independent and collaborative learning, and communication. ICT provides opportunities for schools to communicate with one another through email, mailing lists, chat rooms, and so on. It also provides quicker and easier access to more extensive and current information, and it can be used to do complex mathematical and statistical calculations. Furthermore, it provides researchers with a steady avenue for the dissemination of research reports and findings (Yusuf and Onasanya, 2004)59.
Meaning and Nature of peer learning
Peer learning essentially refers to students learning with and from each other as fellow learners without any implied authority to any individual, based on the tenet. Students learn a great deal by explaining their ideas to others and by participating in activities in which they can learn from their peers (Boud, 2001).Peer learning refers to students learning from and with each other in both formal and informal ways. The emphasis is on the learning process, including the emotional support learners offer each other, as much as the learning task itself. In peer teaching the roles of teacher and learner are fixed, whereas in peer learning they are either undefined or may shift during the course of the learning experience. Staff may be actively involved as group facilitators or they may simply initiate student-directed activities such as workshops or learning partnerships. In peer learning, students construct and negotiate their own meaning and understanding of content and concepts. Essentially, students will be involved in searching, for collecting, analyzing, evaluating, integrating and applying information to complete an assignment or solve a problem. Students engage in intellectually, emotionally and socially (Gwee, 2003) “constructive conversation” and learn by talking and questioning each other’s views and reaching consensus or dissent.
Peer learning is also important for the tutor; that is, learning is encouraged through teaching. Hartman (2010) conducted an evaluation study and reported that peer tutoring increased students’ motivation to learn. This result is supported by Whitman (2012) and Annis (2013) that peer learning can be the most intellectually rewarding experience of a student’s career. They found peer learning helped students perform better on higher order conceptual understanding scales than students who read the material simply for study purposes. Topping (2010) also asserts that peer tutoring serves as an effective way to improve self-esteem in students. Peer tutoring aids interaction among peers not only academically but also socially.
In addition to these ‘mainstream’ motives, it is also argued that collective forms of peer learning suit some students better than the individualistic teaching and learning practices of traditional courses (Slavin, 1995; Chalmers &Volet, 1997). This has been particularly true for women and students from some cultural backgrounds, as peer learning activities value co-operation within groups above competition and encourages greater respect for the varied experiences and backgrounds of the participants. Peer learning promotes certain types of learning outcomes. Some of these are not so easily achieved through other teaching and learning strategies. While different varieties of peer learning emphasis’ different outcomes, some of the common learning outcomes include:
The skills involved in working with others include teamwork and being a member of a learning community. Peer learning can prompt a sense of responsibility for one’s own and others’ learning and development of increased confidence and self-esteem through engaging in a community of learning and learners. Much learning takes place from sharing others’ experiences, existing knowledge and skills. Students learn to acknowledge the backgrounds and contributions of the people they are working with. Peer learning necessarily involves students working together to develop collaborative skills. Working together gives them practice in planning and teamwork and makes them part of a learning community in which they have a stake.
Challenges to existing ways of thinking arise from more detailed interchanges between students in which points of view are argued and positions justified. It provides opportunities for formulating questions rather than simply responding to those posed by others. There is evidence to suggest that fostering critical reflection and reassessment of views more readily comes from interchange between peers (Smith and Hatton 1993) than even from well planned discussion sessions with teachers. Depending on the particular activities chosen, peer learning can provide opportunities for deep engagement in the learning process, as students are learning through their relationships with peers, not just trying to ‘beat the system’. Students are often better able to reflect on and explore ideas when the presence and authority of a staff member (Boud and Walker 1998) do not influence them. In peer learning contexts students generally communicate more about the subject area than they do when staff are present. They are able to articulate what they understand and be more open to be critiqued by peers, as well as learning from listening to and critiquing others.
Concept development often occurs through the testing of ideas on others and the rehearsing of positions that enable learners to express their understanding of ideas and concepts. It is often only when they are expressed and challenged, that students appreciate whether they have a good grasp of what they are studying. There are often limited opportunities for this without peer learning activities. Invaluable additional practice in practicing skills is often available in peer settings especially when direct supervision is not required for safety or ethical reasons.
Peer learning activities require students to develop self-management skills and managing with others. They are not being continually prompted by deadlines from staff (though there may be some ultimate deadlines), but through the exigencies of cooperating with others. This demands different kinds of self-responsibility as it involves obligations to others and maintaining ones position in a peer group. Many peer learning activities require students to cooperate on quite substantial tasks which students have to work out how to tackle for themselves with minimum specific direction. Such tasks require students to construct an environment in which they can identify their learning needs and find ways of pursuing them within time constraints. Peer learning involves a group of students taking collective responsibility for identifying their own learning needs and planning how these might be addressed. This is a vital skill in learning how to learn. It also allows students to practice the kinds of interaction needed in employment. Learning to co-operate with others to reach mutual goals is a prerequisite for operating in a complex society. Bowden and Marton (1998) Peer learning prompts the acquisition of knowledge about ways of working with others in groups and one-to-one, and the implications of one’s own learning choices on others. Seeing the different approaches that others use can broaden the base of understanding about variation in learning.
There are seldom enough opportunities for formative assessment and getting feedback from staff in order to significantly develop skills and concepts. Peer learning settings provide opportunities for additional self and peer assessment of a formative kind. It provides opportunities for giving and receiving feedback on one’s work and a context for comparing oneself to others. This mirrors the kinds of informal assessment activities which take place daily in the world of work: self-assessment and peer judgements are more common and can often have a more powerful influence in professional work than formal appraisals. Practice in identifying criteria to assess ones own learning and applying this in a variety of circumstances is a key element of sustainable assessment needed for lifelong learning (Boud 2000).
This initially assigns some of the main sub-processes into five categories . The first of these includes organizational or structural features of the learning interaction, such as the need and press inherent in Peer Learning toward increased time on task (t .o .t .) and time engaged with task (t. e .t .), the need for both helper and helped to elaborate goals and plans, the individualization of learning and immediacy of feedback possible within the small group or one-on-one situation, and the sheer excitement and variety of a novel kind of learning interaction . Cognitively, PL involves conflict and challenge (reflecting Piagetian schools of thought, and necessary to loosen blockages formed from old myths and false beliefs) . It also involves support and scaffolding from a more competent other, necessitating management of activities to be within the zone of proximal development of both parties (reflecting Vygotskian schools of thought, and necessary to balance any damaging excess of challenge; Vygotsky, 1978) . The helper seeks to manage and modulate the information processing demands upon the learner to maximize the rate of progress – neither too much nor too little . The helper also provides a cognitive model of competent performance .
However, the cognitive demands upon the helper in terms of monitoring learner performance and detecting, diagnosing, correcting, and otherwise managing misconceptions and errors are even greater – and herein lies much of the cognitive exercise and benefit for the helper. PL also makes heavy demands upon the communication skills of both helper and helped, and in so doing develops those skills . A participant might never have truly grasped a concept until having to explain it to another, embodying and crystallizing thought into language – another Vygotskian idea, of course .
Furthermore, listening, explaining, questioning, summarizing, speculating, and hypothesizing are all valuable skills which should be transferable . The affective component of PL might also prove very powerful. A trusting relationship with a peer who holds no position of authority might facilitate self disclosure of ignorance and misconception, enabling subsequent diagnosis and correction. The helper’s modeling of enthusiasm, competence, and the possibility of success can influence the self-confidence of the helped, while a sense of loyalty and accountability to each other might help to keep the pair motivated and on-task (Heidi Andrade, ?Gregory J. Cizek 2010) .
These five categories or sub-processes feed into a larger onward process of the helper and helped extending each other’s declarative knowledge, procedural skill, and conditional and selective application of knowledge and skills by adding to and extending current capabilities (accretion), modifying current capabilities (re-tuning), and (in areas of completely new learning or cases of gross misconception or error) rebuilding new understanding (restructuring) . These are somewhat similar to the Piagetian concepts of assimilation and accommodation . This leads to the joint construction of a shared understanding between helper and helped – which is firmly situated within the current authentic context of application, and adapted to the idiosyncrasies in their perceptions (i .e ., is inter-subjective), so might not represent absolute truth, but forms a foundation for further progress (Kevin Wheldall 2013 ) .
Subsequently, PL enables and facilitates a greater volume of engaged and successful practice, leading to consolidation, fluency, and automaticity of core skills . Much of this might occur implicitly – without the helper or helped being fully aware of what is happening . Simultaneously or subsequently, PL can lead to generalization from the specific situated example through which a concept is learned, extending the ability to apply that concept and its developmental variants to an ever-widening range of alternative and varied contexts in multiple communities of practice . As this occurs, both helper and helped give feedback to each other, implicitly and/ or explicitly . Indeed, implicit feedback is likely to have already occurred spontaneously in the earlier stages (B Brereton ?2016) .
PL increases the quantity and immediacy of feedback to the learner very substantially . Explicit reinforcement might stem from within the partnership or beyond it, by way of verbal and/or non-verbal praise, social acknowledgement and status, official accreditation, or even more tangible reward. However, reinforcement which is indiscriminate or predominantly for effort risks over-weighting the significance of the reinforced concept in the network of understandings of the learner . As the learning relationship develops, both helper and helped should become more consciously aware of what is happening in their learning interaction, and more able to monitor and regulate the effectiveness of their own learning strategies in different contexts . This development into fully conscious explicit and strategic meta cognition not only promotes more effective onward learning, it should make helper and helped more confident that they can achieve even more, and that their success is the result of their own efforts (Kevin Wheldall 2013) Development in Educational psychology.
These affective and cognitive outcomes feed back into the originating five sub-processes – a continuous iterative process and a virtuous circle (A Thurston – ?2010) . As the PL relationship develops, the model should continue to apply as the learning moves from the surface level to the strategic and on to the deep level, and from the declarative into the procedural and conditional . Simplistic forms of peer tutoring, focusing on drill and practice, seem likely to utilize only a few of the possible channels or sub-processes (typically only organization, perhaps some communication, scaffolding and error management, practice, and reinforcement – fewer than half of the total possibilities) . More elaborate and cognitively demanding forms of peer tutoring, such as peer tutoring in thinking skills (e .g, Topping, 2001b), aim to utilize all the channels, with both tutor and tutee operating and benefiting in every channel . This might be enhanced and assured by role reciprocation .
The greater the differential in ability or experience between helper and helped, the less cognitive conflict and the more scaffolding might be expected (Heidi Andrade, ?Gregory J. Cizek, 2010). Too great a differential might result in minimal cognitive engagement (let alone conflict) for the helper, and unthinking but encapsulated acceptance (with no re-tuning or co-construction) by the helped of course, if the helper is older, more experienced, and therefore more credible, but actually has no greater correct knowledge or ability than the helped, then a mismatch and faulty learning might occur in a different way . Teachers are likely to need to be particularly attentive to the channels in the lower and later parts of the chart : the development of generalization, self-regulation, meta cognition, and enhanced self-esteem and motivation the progression from implicit to explicit, and from dependency on support to increasing independence ; the shift from simple thinking to higher order and more abstract thinking, moving from the surface level to the strategic and on to the deep level, and from declarative knowledge into the procedural and conditional ; and the completion of the loop, the joining of the circle, the acceleration of the dynamic spiral, for both helper and helped (Developmental in educational psychology) by K.j. Topping.
Relevance of Peer Learning in Higher Education
Peer learning can be described as an instructional system in which students teach other students (Harris, 2002). It is the process by which a competent pupil with minimal training and with a teacher’s guidance helps one or more students at the same grade level to learn a skill or concept (Thomas, 2000). Peer learning has to do with instructional strategy where students are taught by their peers, who had been trained and supervised by other peers. It involves having students work in pairs with another student of the same age or grade. It can be used to aid in the instruction of a few specific students or on a class wide basis. The strategy is used as supplement to teacher-directed instruction in the classroom. It is not meant to replace it. It has been extremely powerful as a way of improving student academic, social, and behavioral functioning that goes beyond typical teacher-directed instruction. Goodlad and Hurst (1989) and Topping (1998) note that academic peer learning at the college level takes many different forms. Surrogate teaching, common at larger universities, involves giving older students, often graduates or advanced undergraduates, some or all of the teaching responsibility for undergraduate courses. Proctoring programs involve one-on-one tutoring by students who are slightly ahead of other students, or who have successfully demonstrated proficiency with the material in the recent past. Cooperative learning divides classmates into small groups, with each person in the group responsible for teaching others, and each contributing a unique piece to the group performance on a task. Reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT), a more specific version of cooperative learning, groups classmates into pairs to tutor each other.( www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/peer-teaching/).The main relevance of peer learning in higher education, but not limited to these is that; Students receive more time for individualized learning. Direct interaction between students promotes active learning. Peer teachers reinforce their own learning by instructing others. Students feel more comfortable and open when interacting with a peer. Peers and students share a similar discourse, allowing for greater understanding. Peer learning is a financially efficient alternative to hiring more staff members. Teachers receive more time to focus on the next lesson. Research also indicates that peer learning activities typically yield the following results for both tutor and tutee: team-building spirit and more supportive relationships; greater psychological well-being, social competence, communication skills and self-esteem; and higher achievement and greater productivity in terms of enhanced learning outcomes (E magazine for CIMA students, 2014).
Awareness of Peer Learning by undergraduate in Teaching and Learning.
The concept of “peer learning and teaching” and its connection with the terms peer group and group learning appear to be frequently referred to in educational literature. A peer is generally described as an equal and, in higher education Goldschmid and Goldschmid (2005) define it in terms of students of similar age and educational level.
Peer learning is defined as students, generally of the same class or cohort, learning with and from each other. Interaction with one another is regarded as one of the means of increasing knowledge and understanding (Falchikov, 2001). Rudduck (2005) explains that the learning that occurs is based on expression, exploration and modification of the ideas of the individual group members.
Peer teaching has been described as “a variety of peer tutoring in which students take turns in the role of teacher” (Falchikov, 2001, p.5). Peer tutoring in turn has been defined as “people from similar social groupings who are not professional teachers helping each other to learn and learning themselves by teaching ( Forman 2001). Cazden (1985) clarify that the peer tutor needs to be more knowledgeable than the tutee, otherwise the experience becomes more of a collaborative learning situation. It is generally recognized that the uniqueness of peers teaching peers lies in the removal of inhibition between members of a peer teaching group so that they are free to admit their learning difficulties to each other (Donaldson, 2001). Falchikov (2001) agrees that peers appear to have less inhibition in asking each other questions than with their teacher. Thus, Johnson et al., (1991) claim that the most effective teaching method is students teaching students.
Whilst it is recognized that learning is, ultimately, a highly personal act, with the individual requiring “to make sense” of new knowledge within her/himself, the process of achieving learning can, perhaps, be more varied. The process of abstracting meaning from information, providing new information not encountered before, and assisting in the modification of understanding can be carried out by the individual learner. However, the value of peers in being the catalyst and impetus for individual learning is increasingly recognised in higher education. Thus ideas, explanations, elaborations, and even questions from peers could be triggers that propel the learner to search for and construct new knowledge, or modify existing ones.
In peer learning and teaching, two or more people learn and teach each other in a group situation. One view is that peer learning occurs when the peer tutor, who is more knowledgeable, teaches, and the other(s) listen and learn (Lincoln and McAllister, 1993). Another view, which has gained increasing acceptance in higher education, is one which recognizes that within a peer learning and teaching situation, the group can transcend mastery of content to generate new knowledge together. The generation of this new group knowledge occurs as the group shares information, discusses, challenges, clarifies and confirms their learning with one another.
Peer learning is most effective when learning objectives are clear, and peer engagements are structured to maximize these objectives. When individual peers are matched appropriately and authorized and empowered to engage effectively, peer learning is also optimized. Learning is best facilitated when peers do things together, and reflect regularly on what they are learning(the_eip_p_to_p_learning_guide) pdf. Bruffee (2001) argues along similar lines, attributing the failure of some collaborative learning experiences to the instructional use of “mere group work”, defined by him as “uninformed, ineffectively organised group work” (p.1). He believes that in such situations, students tend not to abstract and extrapolate knowledge, but rather, remain within the zone of their current knowledge. Thus learning situations need to be carefully planned, structured and managed so that the value of learning in groups can be realized by the students.
Several authors believe that the benefits of learning in a group context outweigh those of learning in isolation, and that working with others often increases involvement in learning (Chickering&Gamson, 1991; Piaget, 1950; Vygotsky, 1978; Johnson et al., 1990). Chickering and Gamson (1991) take the view that cooperation with others through sharing of ideas and responding to each other “sharpens thinking and deepens understanding” (p.65). Along similar lines, Piaget (1950) regards the social relationship of cooperation with others, in the form of discussion, collaboration in work, exchange of ideas and mutual control, to be the basis for the development of logic. He believes that discussion with others gives rise to internalised discussion or deliberation, and reflection. Falchikov (2001) agrees with Piaget and posits that the development of a critical attitude of mind, objectivity and discursive reflection is enhanced through cooperative interaction with peers. Slavin explains this further with the claim that interaction among students on learning tasks will lead in itself to improved student achievement. Students will learn from one another because in their discussion of the content, cognitive conflicts will arise, inadequate reasoning will be exposed, and higher-quality understanding will emerge.
From Falchikov?s and Slavin?s explanations, it appears that cognitive conflict can also occur when students learn on their own and actively engage with the materials by themselves, and is perhaps more easily stimulated and made more rigorous through interactive engagement with peers. Cognitive elaboration theory offers an interpretation of learning from the perspective of the peer teacher. In order for information to be retained in the memory and related to information already in memory, the learner must engage in some type of cognitive restructuring or elaboration of the material (Wittrock, 1978). A cognitive activity that requires the learner to actively engage in identifying and reorganizing the materials is more effective than one that encourages cognitive passivity. Several authors therefore agree that the active learning strategy of preparing, teaching and explaining the material to someone else is one of the most effective ways of learning for the peer teacher (Wittrock, 1978, Whitman, 2001). Bridges and Hallinger claim that information is better understood, processed and recalled, if students have an opportunity to elaborate on that information through discussing the subject matter with other students, teaching peers what they have learned themselves, exchanging views about how the information applies to the problem they are seeking to solve (Bridges and Hallinger, 1998).
This was apparent in the experiment by Benware and Deci (cited in Whitman, 2001) where students were asked to study an article, the control group being told that there would be a test while the experimental group was told that they would be teaching the materials to others. Whilst the teaching never took place, both groups were tested. It was reported that whilst there was no difference between either group in rote memory work, the group that learnt with the understanding that they would teach others scored significantly higher on conceptual understanding.
Attitude of Undergraduate towards utilization of Peer Learning.
Researchers and pundits have long suggested that online learning will transform education delivery .With increased access to computing and the Internet, and a growing number of freely available educational resources and platforms, these predictions are gradually coming about. As Brown and Adler note, the widespread availability of the Internet, education resources, and social media creates a perfect storm of opportunity for new models of education delivery. Many strategies populate the ecosystem of online learning. Open education resources (OER) are increasing. Venues such as MIT’s Open Course Ware Initiative share class syllabi.
Video lectures are freely available on platforms such as the highly publicized Khan Academy. Higher education institutions are creating massively open online courses (MOOCs) in partnership with Coursers, Udacity, and EdX. These MOOCs have attracted participation from hundreds of thousands of learners. Finally, use of social media encourages individuals to mobilize, collaborate, and create their own peer-to-peer education opportunities. In this study, we examine such a learning platform, the Peer 2 Peer University (P2PU). P2PU allows individuals to create and lead their own open courses. beginning by describing how P2PU differs from other online learning environments such as MOOCs and learning management systems (LMSs) used in traditional college courses.
The importance of participation in collective learning environments was highlighted. Drawing from the broader research literature on online communities and e-learning to hypothesize factors that may influence levels of active participation in a peer-to-peer learning platform. Using longitudinal fixed-effects models, we empirically examine two interrelated aspects of active participation in P2PU courses: the number of participants who contribute each week and the average level of comment contribution (i.e. average comments per participant).
Influence Of Gender Towards Utilization Of Peer Learning Among Ungraduate
The area that has received most attention is the study of peer group effects in education. A general definition of peer effects in the education field was provided by Ding & Lehrer (2004), who defined them as “each student influencing his/her classmates not only through knowledge spillovers and how teachers respond to him/her, but also in how he/she affects classroom standards. Peer influence can affect student toward the utilization of peer learning, so the definition of peer influence has been one of the main difficulties in the empirical and theoretical studies in education. The main assumption is that students do not only learn from teachers but also from class- and school-mates too. Peer influence may include a direct and an indirect channel (Schneeweis and Winter-Ebmer, 2007).
The direct channel consists in student teaching one another and students learning in groups and discussions about what they are learning in class. Furthermore, students affect each other indirectly, through knowledge spillovers, casual discussions, or when a student’s ability or socioeconomic background influence classroom standards (Wilkinson, Parr, Fung, Hattie & Townsend, 2003). Moreover, peers may influences classroom atmosphere, classroom disruption and level of violence (Lavy& Schlosser, 2007), and consequently affect indirectly student learning process. Also, psychologists highlight the importance of role models, which may be a powerful means of transmitting attitudes, values and patterns of behavior (Bandura, 1986). Peer influence may even work through a change in the attitude and expectations of teachers towards the class (Cunningham & Andrews, 1988; Hattie, 2002), and a change of the pace of teaching or their instructional methods (Wilkinson et al., 2003).
Researchers have studied a wide range of topics relating to educational peer influence. Males and females learn differently from each other (Grebb, 1999; Ebel, 1999; Cavanaugh, 2002). Males tend to be more kinaesthetic, tactual, and visual, and they need more mobility in a more informal environment than females. Males are more nonconforming and peer motivated than female. Males tend to learn less by listening. Females, more than males, tend to be auditory, authority oriented, need significantly more quiet while learning, they are more self and authorities motivated, and are more conforming than males (Marcus, 1999; Pizzo, 2000). It is believed that a male learning focuses on competition, status and independence. On the contrary, a female’s world focuses on intimacy, consensus, sometimes and independence as well. Social preferences of males and females are also different during the process of learning. Male students prefer learning tasks connected with competitions in hierarchical groups, while female students learn by collaboration in small groups in which mutual liking is important (Dorval, 2000). Studies conducted by Aries (1996), Leet-Pellegrini (2000) and Fox (1999) suggest that males feel more comfortable in a lecturing role, which is a demonstration of expertise and status, but females feel more comfortable in a listening role, which show a desire to collaborate, bond and to be liked by products of a world of connections, not status. Females prefer to share their expertise with others, rather than rivaling with them. One of the most important parts of peer learning is the ability to learn from one another. Ong (1999) suggests that males’ world is based on adversativeness, On the contrary, females prefer to keep peace. Female students see the orders that males give them as unnecessarily provocative, challenging and aggressive, while male students see the suggestions that females make as infuriating and bossy (Cavanaugh, 2002). Differences in social interaction styles happen in the classroom as well. Boys, on average, are more likely to speak up during a class discussion sometimes even if not called on, or even if they do not know as much about the topic as others in the class (Sadker, 2002). When working on a project in a small co-ed group, furthermore they have a tendency to ignore girls’ comments and contributions to the group. In this respect co-ed student groups parallel interaction patterns in many parts of society, where men also have a tendency to ignore women’s comments and contributions (Tannen, 2001).
Appraisal of the Reviewed LiteratureAccording to Boud (2010), peer learning is not a single, undifferentiated educational strategy. It encompasses a broad sweep of activities. For example, researchers from the University of Ulster identified ten different models of peer learning (Griffiths, Houston &Lazenbatt 2000). These ranged from the traditional proctor model, in which senior students tutor junior students, to the more innovative learning cells, in which students in the same year form partnerships to assist each other with both course content and personal concerns. Other models involved discussion seminars, private study groups, parrainage (a buddy system) or counseling, peer assessment schemes, collaborative project or laboratory work, projects in different sized (cascading) groups, workplace mentoring and community activities.
Zahn (2010) defined peer tutoring as “one on one help in technical program courses, when teaching alone does not meet your academic needs”. It is necessary to seek help from your instructor first, as peer tutoring cannot and is not expected to replace the role of the teacher, but if additional assistance is needed, a peer tutor may help. Cirasella and Smale (2011) in their paper titled peers don’t let peers perish submitted that peer mentoring provides junior library faculty member with support and advice along the road to tenure.
This assumption was not supported in our study. Instead, our study indicates that both male and female students, as well as students from different racial/ethnic backgrounds, benefit similarly from peer learning/peer tutor. Moreover, anecdotal evidence might lead some to assume that peer learning has a greater effect on students with lower academic ability. However, some of these authors are for this research, while some are against these research, in terms of well-being, our findings demonstrate that students of all academic abilities benefit from peer learning and also the awareness and utilization. These results highlight and demonstrate that the benefits of peer learning for students extend across diverse groups of students with different characteristics or attributes.
CHAPTER THREERESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter is an overview of the different methods and procedures that was employed in the process of collecting required and useful data for this research. it is presented under the following sub-headings: research type, sample and sampling technique, research instrument, validation of research instrument, procedure for data collection and data analysis techniques.
Research TypeThis study is a descriptive research of the survey type. A researcher designed questionnaire was used to gather relevant information on undergraduate’s awareness and utilization of peer learning in university of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.
Sample and Sampling TechniquesThe population for the study were the undergraduates in University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria. While the target population composed of student from five(5) faculties.
The selected faculties are:
Research InstrumentThe instrument for this study was a researcher designed questionnaire titled “Awareness and utilization of peer learning in University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria”. The questionnaire was divided into sections. Section A consist of demographic data of the respondents, Section B sought information on the awareness from the study while Section C altitude of undergraduate toward peer learning and D utilization of peer learning by undergraduate. The questionnaire will consist of sixteen (16) questions and modified like attitudinal scale with reference option of SA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SD = Strongly Disagree, D = Disagree. The questionnaire was presented in clear and simple language to enable respondents prompt answer.
Validation of the Research InstrumentThe research instrument was validated by three lecturers in the department of educational technology for face and content validity. It was perused by the supervisor, all necessary corrections, amendments, modifications and suggestions will be incorporated before the administration of the instrument.
Procedure for Data CollectionA letter of introduction will be collected from department of Educational Technology, in which the five (5) faculties was visited with the letter. A letter of introduction was collected from the Head of Department(HOD). The instrument was collected for further analysis immediately they have been adequately completed.
Data Analysis TechniquesThe data obtained through the questionnaire was subjected to. (frequency count to percentage). The descriptive analysis was used to answer the research questions while t-test was used to test hypothesis one and two. Data collected will coded and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20.0 for windows at 0.05 level of significance.
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
This chapter presents the analysis and data collected from undergraduate in University of Ilorin on the Awareness and Utilization of Peer Learning. A researcher designed questionnaire was designed to elicit responses from undergraduates in University of Ilorin on the awareness and utilization of peer learning. Two hundred and fifty (250) respondents were randomly selected from five (5) faculties in University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria. The questionnaire was collected and analyzed using SPSS 20 at 0.05 significant level.
Table 1: Presentation of Demographic Data Based on Faculty
Faculty Frequency Percentage (%)
Agriculture 50 20.0
Arts 50 20.0
Education 50 20.0
Engineering 50 20.0
Social Science 50 20.0
Total 250 100.0
Table 1 showed the percentage distribution of respondents by faculty. The table revealed that respondents were evenly distributed across five faculties which are Agriculture, Art, Education, Engineering and Social Sciences. 50 respondents representing 20% were from each faculty.
Table 2: Presentation of Demographic Data Based on Level
Level Frequency Percentage (%)
100 60 24.0
200 67 26.8
300 53 21.2
400 42 16.8
500 28 11.2
Total 250 100.0
The table 2 showed the demographic data of the respondents based on level. The table established that 24.0% of the respondents were from 100 level, 26.8% of the respondents were from 200 level, 21.2% of the respondents were from 300 level, 16.8% of the respondents were from 400 level, while 11.2% were from 500 level.
Table 3: Presentation of Demographic Data Based on Age
Age- rang Frequency Percentage (%)
16-18 70 28
19-22 118 47.2
23-26 54 21.6
27 and above 8 3.2
Total 250 100.0
Table 3 presents the demographic data of respondent based on Age-rang. This showed that out of the total respondents, 70 (28%) respondents fell within the ages 16-18 years, 118 (47.20%) fell between ages 19-22 years, 54 (21.6%) fell between the ages of 23-26 years, while the remaining respondent 8 (3.2%) were from 27 years and above.
Table 4: Presentation of Demographic Data Based on Gender
Gender Frequency Percentage (%)
Male 118 49.2
Female 124 50.8
Total 250 100.0
Table 4 showed that 118 respondents (49.2%) were Male, while females were 127 respondents (50.8%).
Research Question 1: Are undergraduate student aware of peer learning?
Table 5: Students Awareness of Peer Learning
S/N Statement SA A D SD
1 Student are aware of peer learning as tools to supplement classroom 143
2 Assignment given requires cooperative and group discussion 82
3 Students to make use of peer learning in the classroom 99
4 Students organizes tutorials among themselves to gain more knowledge on abstract concepts using peer learning approach 116
5 Students are aware of the importance of peer learning for academic improvement 125
Table 5 showed the students awareness of peer learning . The first item on the table revealed that 226 (90.4%) respondents agreed that student are aware of peer learning as tools to supplement classroom, while 24 (9.65%) disagreed with this opinion. item 2 on the table revealed that 227 (90.8%) respondents agreed that assignment given requires cooperative and group discussion, while 23 (9.2%) disagreed with the statement. Item 3 revealed that 217 (86.8%) respondents agreed that students make use of peer learning in the classroom, while 33 (13.2%) disagreed with the opinion. Also, the table showed that 221 (88.4%) respondents agreed that students organizes tutorials among themselves to gain more knowledge on abstract concepts using peer learning approach while 29 (11.6%) respondents disagreed with the statement. Furthermore, item 5 on the table established that 217 (86.8%) respondents agreed that students are aware of the importance of peer learning for academic improvement, while 13.2% disagreed with this opinion.
Research Question 2: Do undergraduate students utilize peer learning to achieve educational goals?
Table 6: Undergraduates’ utilization of peer learning to achieve educational goal
S/N Statement SA A D SD 1 Utilization of peer learning approach encourages freedom 106
(9.6%) 2 Peer learning utilization improves students’ skills in terms of interaction 121
(3.2%) 3 Peer learning utilization encourages students collaborations and increases their learning pace 113
(4.8%) 4 Utilization of peer learning creates easy communication within the students and lecturers 100
(5.6%) 5 Peer learning utilization motivates and increases students’ assimilation of abstract concept 97
(5.6%) Table 6 revealed the undergraduates’ utilization of peer learning to achieve educational goal. Item 1 revealed that 210 (84%) respondents agreed that utilization of peer learning approach encourages freedom, while 40 (16%) respondents disagreed with the statement. Item 2 showed that 230 (92%) out of the total respondents agreed that peer learning utilization improves students’ skills in terms of interaction, while 20 (8%) respondents disagreed with the opinion. Item 3 showed that 36 (14.4%) respondents disagreed that peer learning utilization encourages students collaborations and increases their learning pace while 85.6% (214 respondents) agreed to the statement. Item 4 revealed that 214 (85.6%) respondents agreed that utilization of peer learning creates easy communication within the students and lecturers, while 36 (14.4%) respondents disagreed with the opinion. Item 5 revealed that 80.4% (201 respondents) agreed that peer learning utilization motivates and increases students’ assimilation of abstract concept while 49 (19.6%) respondents disagreed with the statement.
The above table showed that that utilization of peer learning approach encourages freedom (See item 1). It was also revealed that peer learning utilization improves students’ skills in terms of interaction (see item 2). The table showed that peer learning utilization improves students’ skills in terms of interaction (see item 3). Also utilization of peer learning creates easy communication within the students and lecturers (see item 4). Lastly peer learning utilization motivates and increases students’ assimilation of abstract concept (see item 5).
Research Question 3: What is the Influence of peer learning on academic performance of students?
Table 7: Influence of peer learning on academic performance of students
S/N Statement SA A D SD 1 Students use peer learning as a medium for gossip instead of learning 97
(9.6%) 2 Students see their peer groups as a platform for socialization alone. 60
(12.4%) 3 Students use peer learning for achieving academic goals 112
(9.2%) 4 There is increase in the student’s performance since the use of peer learning 80
(9.6%) 5 Peer learning caters for students’ individual differences 100
(5.6%) Table 7 showed the influence of peer learning on academic performance of students. Item 1 showed that 84% (182 respondents) agreed that students use peer learning as a medium for gossip instead of learning while 16% (68 respondents) disagreed with the statement. Item 2 revealed that 75.2% (188 respondents) agreed that Students see their peer groups as a platform for socialization alone, while 24.8% (62 respondents) disagreed with the opinion. Item 3 the on the table revealed that 83.2% (208 respondents) agreed that the students use peer learning for achieving academic goals, while 16.8% (42 respondents) disagreed with the statement. Item 4 showed that 81.6% of the total respondents agreed that there is increase in the student’s performance since the use of peer learning, while 18.4% (48 respondents) disagreed with the statement. Item 5 revealed that 86.4% (216 respondents) agreed that peer learning caters for students’ individual differences while 13.6% (34 respondents) disagreed with the statement.
It is evident from the above student see their peer groups as a platform for socialization and gossip, instead of learning. Also, there is increase in the student’s performance since the use of peer learning. Peer learning caters for students’ individual differences (see item 5).
Research Question 4: Does gender influence students’ utilization of peer learning?
H01: There is no significant difference in the awareness of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender.
Table 8: T- test on awareness of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender
Variable N X SD Df t Sig Remarks
Male 118 10.5136 2.56854 240 .077 .688 Accepted
Female 124 10.9823 3.61919 Table 8 showed that df (240), t = .077, p = 0.688. This means that the hypothesis is accepted. This was as a result of t-value of .077, resulting in significant p value of 0.688 which is greater than 0.05 alpha level. By implication, the stated hypothesis established that there is no significant difference in the awareness of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender
It was discovered from the above table that gender has no significant influence in the awareness of peer learning among undergraduates of University of Ilorin. The table also established that the mean score of the female students is a little bit higher than that of the male. Even though, there is no significant difference, the females are more aware of peer learning than the male (X = 10.5136 & 10.9823).
H02: There is no significant difference in the utilization of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender
Table 10: T- test analysis on the significant difference in the utilization of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender
Variable N X SD df t Sig Remarks
Table 10, revealed that df =240, t = -.911, p = .168 This means that the hypothesis was accepted. This was as a result of t-value of -.911, resulting in .168 p value greater than 0.05 significant alpha level. By implication, the stated hypothesis established that there is no significant difference in the utilization of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender.
Summary of FindingsThe findings of this study based on the research questions and hypotheses formulated were summarized as follows:
Students are aware of peer learning as a tool to supplement classroom teaching, and improve academic achievement
Students organizes tutorials among themselves to gain more knowledge on abstract concepts using peer learning approach in University of Ilorin.
Students use peer learning as a medium for gossip and socialization instead of learning.
Utilization of peer learning creates easy communication within the students and lecturers.
There is no significant difference in the awareness of peer learning among undergraduates based on gender.
There is no significant difference in the utilization of peer learning among undergraduates bas on gender.