Loading…

Aligning seminars with Bologna requirements: reciprocal peer tutoring, the solo taxonomy and deep learning

Changes in public policy, such as the Bologna Process, require students to be equipped with multifunctional competencies to master relevant tasks in unfamiliar situations. Achieving this goal might imply a change in many curricula toward deeper learning. As a didactical means to achieve deep learnin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames) 2016-09, Vol.41 (9), p.1674-1691
Main Authors: Lueg, Rainer, Lueg, Klarissa, Lauridsen, Ole
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3
container_end_page 1691
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1674
container_title Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames)
container_volume 41
creator Lueg, Rainer
Lueg, Klarissa
Lauridsen, Ole
description Changes in public policy, such as the Bologna Process, require students to be equipped with multifunctional competencies to master relevant tasks in unfamiliar situations. Achieving this goal might imply a change in many curricula toward deeper learning. As a didactical means to achieve deep learning results, the authors suggest reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT); as a conceptual framework the authors suggest the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy and constructive alignment as suggested by Biggs and Tang. Our study presents results from the introduction of RPT in a large course. The authors find that RPT produces satisfying learning outcomes, active students, and ideal constructive alignments of the seminar content with the exam, the intended learning outcomes, and the requirements of the Bologna Process. Our data, which comprise surveys and evaluations from both faculty and students, suggest that RPT fosters deeper learning than does teacher-led instruction. Based on these findings, the authors also offer guidelines regarding how to implement RPT and how to overcome barriers.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/03075079.2014.1002832
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_03075079_2014_1002832</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1105841</ericid><sourcerecordid>4141577631</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFu1DAQhi0EEkvhESpZ4krasR2vE06UqlBQJS4gcbO8zmTrVWJvx161-_Y42sKRk2XP9_sffYydC7gQ0MElKDAaTH8hQbT1CWSn5Au2Eq2BRpj290u2WphmgV6zNznvAGBtunbFdldT2MYQtzzjHKKjzB9Dueef05S20XHCh0MgnDGW_LHefNhT8m7ie0Ti5VAS1fAHXu6R55rhxT2lmOYjd3HgA-KeT-hoaXjLXo1uyvju-Txjv77c_Ly-be5-fP12fXXXeLWG0qge-k3fK9hIjaMyUkuvhR60702neu3letPi0I1d27fSaDRuBFxvBqcq5Jw6Y-9P_9ZNHw6Yi92lA8VaaUVX7RiptKmUPlGeUs6Eo91TmB0drQC7aLV_tdpFq33WWnPnpxxS8P8yN9-FAN21os4_neYhjolm95hoGmxxxynRSC76kK36f8Ufy62I8Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1810072357</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Aligning seminars with Bologna requirements: reciprocal peer tutoring, the solo taxonomy and deep learning</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>ERIC</source><source>Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection</source><creator>Lueg, Rainer ; Lueg, Klarissa ; Lauridsen, Ole</creator><creatorcontrib>Lueg, Rainer ; Lueg, Klarissa ; Lauridsen, Ole</creatorcontrib><description>Changes in public policy, such as the Bologna Process, require students to be equipped with multifunctional competencies to master relevant tasks in unfamiliar situations. Achieving this goal might imply a change in many curricula toward deeper learning. As a didactical means to achieve deep learning results, the authors suggest reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT); as a conceptual framework the authors suggest the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy and constructive alignment as suggested by Biggs and Tang. Our study presents results from the introduction of RPT in a large course. The authors find that RPT produces satisfying learning outcomes, active students, and ideal constructive alignments of the seminar content with the exam, the intended learning outcomes, and the requirements of the Bologna Process. Our data, which comprise surveys and evaluations from both faculty and students, suggest that RPT fosters deeper learning than does teacher-led instruction. Based on these findings, the authors also offer guidelines regarding how to implement RPT and how to overcome barriers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0307-5079</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1470-174X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2014.1002832</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Routledge</publisher><subject>Academic Degrees ; Alignment (Education) ; Bologna Process ; Case Studies ; Comparative Analysis ; Constructivism (Learning) ; Correlation ; Curricula ; deep learning ; Denmark ; educational expansion ; Europe ; Focus Groups ; Foreign Countries ; Higher Education ; Independent Study ; International Cooperation ; Learning ; Likert Scales ; Mixed Methods Research ; National Standards ; Outcomes of Education ; Peer Teaching ; Peer tutoring ; Public policy ; Questionnaires ; reciprocal peer tutoring ; Seminars ; student activation ; Student Surveys ; Taxonomy ; Teaching Methods ; Tutoring</subject><ispartof>Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames), 2016-09, Vol.41 (9), p.1674-1691</ispartof><rights>2015 Society for Research into Higher Education 2015</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd. 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27898,27899,33197</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1105841$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lueg, Rainer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lueg, Klarissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lauridsen, Ole</creatorcontrib><title>Aligning seminars with Bologna requirements: reciprocal peer tutoring, the solo taxonomy and deep learning</title><title>Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames)</title><description>Changes in public policy, such as the Bologna Process, require students to be equipped with multifunctional competencies to master relevant tasks in unfamiliar situations. Achieving this goal might imply a change in many curricula toward deeper learning. As a didactical means to achieve deep learning results, the authors suggest reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT); as a conceptual framework the authors suggest the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy and constructive alignment as suggested by Biggs and Tang. Our study presents results from the introduction of RPT in a large course. The authors find that RPT produces satisfying learning outcomes, active students, and ideal constructive alignments of the seminar content with the exam, the intended learning outcomes, and the requirements of the Bologna Process. Our data, which comprise surveys and evaluations from both faculty and students, suggest that RPT fosters deeper learning than does teacher-led instruction. Based on these findings, the authors also offer guidelines regarding how to implement RPT and how to overcome barriers.</description><subject>Academic Degrees</subject><subject>Alignment (Education)</subject><subject>Bologna Process</subject><subject>Case Studies</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Constructivism (Learning)</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>deep learning</subject><subject>Denmark</subject><subject>educational expansion</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Focus Groups</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Higher Education</subject><subject>Independent Study</subject><subject>International Cooperation</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Likert Scales</subject><subject>Mixed Methods Research</subject><subject>National Standards</subject><subject>Outcomes of Education</subject><subject>Peer Teaching</subject><subject>Peer tutoring</subject><subject>Public policy</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>reciprocal peer tutoring</subject><subject>Seminars</subject><subject>student activation</subject><subject>Student Surveys</subject><subject>Taxonomy</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>Tutoring</subject><issn>0307-5079</issn><issn>1470-174X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFu1DAQhi0EEkvhESpZ4krasR2vE06UqlBQJS4gcbO8zmTrVWJvx161-_Y42sKRk2XP9_sffYydC7gQ0MElKDAaTH8hQbT1CWSn5Au2Eq2BRpj290u2WphmgV6zNznvAGBtunbFdldT2MYQtzzjHKKjzB9Dueef05S20XHCh0MgnDGW_LHefNhT8m7ie0Ti5VAS1fAHXu6R55rhxT2lmOYjd3HgA-KeT-hoaXjLXo1uyvju-Txjv77c_Ly-be5-fP12fXXXeLWG0qge-k3fK9hIjaMyUkuvhR60702neu3letPi0I1d27fSaDRuBFxvBqcq5Jw6Y-9P_9ZNHw6Yi92lA8VaaUVX7RiptKmUPlGeUs6Eo91TmB0drQC7aLV_tdpFq33WWnPnpxxS8P8yN9-FAN21os4_neYhjolm95hoGmxxxynRSC76kK36f8Ufy62I8Q</recordid><startdate>20160901</startdate><enddate>20160901</enddate><creator>Lueg, Rainer</creator><creator>Lueg, Klarissa</creator><creator>Lauridsen, Ole</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160901</creationdate><title>Aligning seminars with Bologna requirements: reciprocal peer tutoring, the solo taxonomy and deep learning</title><author>Lueg, Rainer ; Lueg, Klarissa ; Lauridsen, Ole</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Academic Degrees</topic><topic>Alignment (Education)</topic><topic>Bologna Process</topic><topic>Case Studies</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Constructivism (Learning)</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>deep learning</topic><topic>Denmark</topic><topic>educational expansion</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Focus Groups</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Higher Education</topic><topic>Independent Study</topic><topic>International Cooperation</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Likert Scales</topic><topic>Mixed Methods Research</topic><topic>National Standards</topic><topic>Outcomes of Education</topic><topic>Peer Teaching</topic><topic>Peer tutoring</topic><topic>Public policy</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>reciprocal peer tutoring</topic><topic>Seminars</topic><topic>student activation</topic><topic>Student Surveys</topic><topic>Taxonomy</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>Tutoring</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lueg, Rainer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lueg, Klarissa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lauridsen, Ole</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lueg, Rainer</au><au>Lueg, Klarissa</au><au>Lauridsen, Ole</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1105841</ericid><atitle>Aligning seminars with Bologna requirements: reciprocal peer tutoring, the solo taxonomy and deep learning</atitle><jtitle>Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames)</jtitle><date>2016-09-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1674</spage><epage>1691</epage><pages>1674-1691</pages><issn>0307-5079</issn><eissn>1470-174X</eissn><abstract>Changes in public policy, such as the Bologna Process, require students to be equipped with multifunctional competencies to master relevant tasks in unfamiliar situations. Achieving this goal might imply a change in many curricula toward deeper learning. As a didactical means to achieve deep learning results, the authors suggest reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT); as a conceptual framework the authors suggest the SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy and constructive alignment as suggested by Biggs and Tang. Our study presents results from the introduction of RPT in a large course. The authors find that RPT produces satisfying learning outcomes, active students, and ideal constructive alignments of the seminar content with the exam, the intended learning outcomes, and the requirements of the Bologna Process. Our data, which comprise surveys and evaluations from both faculty and students, suggest that RPT fosters deeper learning than does teacher-led instruction. Based on these findings, the authors also offer guidelines regarding how to implement RPT and how to overcome barriers.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/03075079.2014.1002832</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0307-5079
ispartof Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames), 2016-09, Vol.41 (9), p.1674-1691
issn 0307-5079
1470-174X
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_03075079_2014_1002832
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ERIC; Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection
subjects Academic Degrees
Alignment (Education)
Bologna Process
Case Studies
Comparative Analysis
Constructivism (Learning)
Correlation
Curricula
deep learning
Denmark
educational expansion
Europe
Focus Groups
Foreign Countries
Higher Education
Independent Study
International Cooperation
Learning
Likert Scales
Mixed Methods Research
National Standards
Outcomes of Education
Peer Teaching
Peer tutoring
Public policy
Questionnaires
reciprocal peer tutoring
Seminars
student activation
Student Surveys
Taxonomy
Teaching Methods
Tutoring
title Aligning seminars with Bologna requirements: reciprocal peer tutoring, the solo taxonomy and deep learning
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-25T23%3A31%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Aligning%20seminars%20with%20Bologna%20requirements:%20reciprocal%20peer%20tutoring,%20the%20solo%20taxonomy%20and%20deep%20learning&rft.jtitle=Studies%20in%20higher%20education%20(Dorchester-on-Thames)&rft.au=Lueg,%20Rainer&rft.date=2016-09-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1674&rft.epage=1691&rft.pages=1674-1691&rft.issn=0307-5079&rft.eissn=1470-174X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/03075079.2014.1002832&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4141577631%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-3909b9930b25ef37252c515d5c978395c26b4ed8f8494275e7af0e6bda35d5aa3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1810072357&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1105841&rfr_iscdi=true