The following is an example of a possible implementation of Peer Instruction and Pingo:
Input Phase 1: The contents of a given key topic are imparted to the students. This information is important for the subsequent Pingo question.
Pingo Question: This question should evaluate the extent to which the students have understood the lesson content. It is reasonable to allow students about two minutes for reflection prior to posing the question.[LM1] This ensures that each student will be able to adequately address the question.
Feedback 1: Within a minute of having been asked the question, students enter their answers anonymously via their mobile device or laptop. The results of the first feedback round should only be visible to the instructor, in order to avoid influencing the subsequent peer discussion.
Peer Discussion: At this point the actual peer discussion begins. After every student has responded to the question, the next task is for them to convince their fellow students of the correctness of their own answer. During this phase, explanation attempts are verbalized, reasoning errors are exposed, and the students own ideas are encouraged. Depending on the specific nature of the question, 5-7 minutes should be planned for this step.
Feedback 2: After the peer discussion round, the same question is asked once more and the new results are then presented in a bar graph format for all to see. A comparison with the results of the first feedback round is usually very instructive and worthwhile.
Group discussion: Ideally, the majority of the students will have chosen the correct answer during the second feedback round, that which follows the peer discussion activity. However, this does not necessarily mean that they have done so for the right reasons. Accordingly, it is important that the question and its possible answers are once more briefly discussed in a group setting, this time including feedback from the instructor. Following this, the second input phase can begin.
If following the group discussion no clear – and above all correct – result has been provided by the students, it is advantageous to repeat the Input Phase 1. At this point, lecturers can help to shift the students’ focus, as the issues responsible for their lack of comprehension should have become clear during the peer and group discussions. In addition, the students can now compare their own experiences with the expert knowledge of the instructors and their understanding of the content can be linked.
[LM1]I assume you mean before the question is asked, they should receive a few minutes (2) contemplation time – this seems clear based on the fact that in the following point, you write „