Structuring Peer Interaction to Promote High-Level Cognitive Processing

By A. King. 2002

361 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ee38bb9fd8c33d3198c7400fff44bce94cb7a0e8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Turkish high school students' biology achievement in relation to academic self-regulation (2007, background): “However, as King (2002) claimed, some peer learning tasks, such as working together to solve ill-structured problems and analyzing and integrating ideas to build knowledge, demand a higher, more complex level of cognitive processing, which may lead to a better academic achievement.”
Promoting academically productive student dialogue during collaborative learning (2017, background): “This is a concern because King (2002) found that the cognitive and metacognitive levels of group discussions are positively correlated with students’ cognitive and metacognitive outcomes.”
Effects of Problem-Based Learning and Traditional Instruction on Self-Regulated Learning (2006, background): “King (2002) claimed that some peer-learning tasks, such as (a) working together to solve ill-structured problems, (b) working on problems with several possible solutions, (c) analyzing and integrating ideas that reach beyond presented material to build new knowledge, (d) making decisions within…”
The effect of peer feedback for blogging on college students' reflective learning processes (2008, methodology): “In addition, structured peer learning improved academic achievement and boosted student attitudes (King, 2002).”
Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis (2006, background): “Collaboration Scripts 12 learners ( King, 1997, 1998, 2002 ).”
Promoting reasoned argumentation, problem‐solving and learning during small‐group work (2009, background): “Students do not elaborate on information, do not ask thought-provoking questions, and do not spontaneously draw upon prior knowledge without some relevant external guidance (King, 1999, 2002).”
Striking a balance: Socio-emotional processes during argumentation in collaborative learning interaction (2017, background): “However, the emergence of high-level cognitive processes, such as elaborating, justifying, negotiating, and reasoning (Baker, 1999; King, 2002; Volet, Summers, & Thurman, 2009) depend on the sociosustain cohesive, mutually respectful social interaction (Barron, 2003; Rogat & Adams-Wiggings, 2015).”
The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Junior High School Students' Behaviours, Discourse and Learning During a Science-Based Learning Activity (2008, background): “The science probe that was administered to the students at the completion of their work unit was specifically designed to determine how they were building these understandings and constructing these links; in effect, generating new understandings and knowledge to enable them to find new ways of thin”
Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills (2018, background): “skills such as explaining, identifying mistakes and gaps, and providing suggestions for improvement (King, 2002).”
Productive group engagement in cognitive activity and metacognitive regulation during collaborative learning: can it explain differences in students’ conceptual understanding? (2014, background): “Given high-level knowledge co-construction is considered highly desirable in peer learning (King 2002; Volet et al. 2009a), identifying the individual and contextual aspects that might contribute to group engagement in high-level conceptual understanding and knowledge construction is warranted.”
Cooperative Learning: Review of Research and Practice. (2016, background): “King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 235-255). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30, 359-377. Roseth, C.,”
Dialogic interactions in the cooperative classroom (2016, background): “Challenging students to provide explanations and reasons are important if they are connect what they have learned previously to what they are currently learning and engage in more reasoned argumentation, problem-solving and learning (Gillies & Khan, 2009; King, 2002).”
Students' questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science (2008, background): “For example, in Guided Reciprocal Peer Questioning (King, 1992, 2002), students are provided with question-starters to generate content-specific questions in a focused discussion setting.”
Peer‐mediated learning beyond the curriculum (2008, background): “However, in the literature peer learning is nearly always presented as a didactic model initiated and administered by teachers (O’Donnell and King 1999; Boud, Cohen, and Sampson 2001 ; Cooper 2002 ; King 2002 ).”