The young people talk and explain in one understandable language for them, and the teachers are basically always much older than them and unich slightly different worldview. Accordingly, students are much easier and more pleasant to communicate with the same as they and develop together. Teachers with students have different goals and views on life, so they can not always fully explain something to each other.
Your opinion is very right. We can easily learn from friends, but the ones who make us more knowledgeable are the ones who are ahead of us - the teacher. 
Topic: Peers, more than teachers, inspire us to learn (Read 879 times)
University students are not forced to study, it was their own choice and their own (or their parents') money that allowed them to do it. They should know why they're doing it and shouldn't need persuasion or confirmation from their peers. I understand that might be the case with teenagers, because they feel like they're wasting time learning boring stuff, but not students.
I know from experience that you're learning the fastest if you're using something in practice and need the knowledge to make projects.
I know from experience that you're learning the fastest if you're using something in practice and need the knowledge to make projects.
Classmates can only compete among themselves. Sometimes they can help, but it's very rare. It is this rivalry that stimulates them to improve their knowledge. But teachers have more knowledge and they can more effectively teach.
Perhaps if you're in physical classroom. But if you look for example courses on edx or coursera, you can see that peers motivate each other (especially if there's facebook group or some kind of forum) and I didn't see a competition per se but pure encouragement and students helping each other.
I think its a broad assumption and it depends upon the situation. peers really inspire us to learn and even to learn some naughtiness. Some peers are bad influence too. That is why it is good to be surrounded by good people, good peers or groups.
Classmates can only compete among themselves. Sometimes they can help, but it's very rare. It is this rivalry that stimulates them to improve their knowledge. But teachers have more knowledge and they can more effectively teach.
Perhaps if you're in physical classroom. But if you look for example courses on edx or coursera, you can see that peers motivate each other (especially if there's facebook group or some kind of forum) and I didn't see a competition per se but pure encouragement and students helping each other.
I very much doubt that you will be able to learn something from their peers. They know almost as much as you do. You have nothing to learn from them. The teacher gives knowledge to those which neither you nor the peers no. Have peers you can learn just manner of conduct and it is not always good.
OP is not stating from whom we can learn more from but rather which of them inspires us to learn and i will go for Peers competition among classmates always makes student to do better.
Classmates can only compete among themselves. Sometimes they can help, but it's very rare. It is this rivalry that stimulates them to improve their knowledge. But teachers have more knowledge and they can more effectively teach.
I very much doubt that you will be able to learn something from their peers. They know almost as much as you do. You have nothing to learn from them. The teacher gives knowledge to those which neither you nor the peers no. Have peers you can learn just manner of conduct and it is not always good.
I think its the competition between fellow students that brings the best in them. Teachers really don't really inspire us to learn very hard. The desire to have bragging rights over fellow peers helps us to learn and achieve better grades.
Young people can communicate and develop together with their peers, but they can not give each other new knowledge. Teachers are much more experienced and educated, therefore they can give a lot of necessary information. Only they can not so clearly understand the language to bring it to the children.
Very few are given the gift to communicate knowledge to children. This is really hard, because children do not want to study, and a competent teacher who knows how to do this, always finds an approach to every child. Pedagogy is art.
Young people can communicate and develop together with their peers, but they can not give each other new knowledge. Teachers are much more experienced and educated, therefore they can give a lot of necessary information. Only they can not so clearly understand the language to bring it to the children.
Because peers share a similar discourse, allowing for greater understanding. And their peers are the people to whom they associate through daily interaction of the course of their years together and the acceptable social norms are taught and fostered. So it really has a significant contribution specially in learning or education. I think we can all relate to this during our educational years. We band ourselves with our peers and friends and together we learn not just in education but other facets in our life as we grow along.
I think that peers will not give you the knowledge offered by the teacher. To their peers, you get only that information which you want for yourself. The teacher also imposes on you the knowledge that you don't want to. It is absolutely not comparable knowledge.
Well i think that it's because of the fact that we share experiences with our friends and we spend more time with them and we're a lot more at ease with them as well. Things you learn from your teachers still are very important when it comes to academics but the experiences you have with your friends are i think more vital in real life
Why do I have to learn this?' It's a common question among youth, but new research suggests students perform much better academically when the answer is provided by their peers rather than their teachers.
University students who were given a rationale for why learning is important from people similar to them -- in this case actors posing as young professionals -- wrote more effective essays and got a significantly better final grade than students who were given the same rationale from the course instructor.
"These findings suggest that what instructors were good at was getting across cold facts, while the peers seemed to be tapping into an identification process," said study co-author Cary Roseth, associate professor of educational psychology. "In other words, as a student, I can identify with my peers and imagine myself using the course material in the same way they do. This gives the material meaning and a sense of purpose that goes beyond memorization. When I hear a peer's story, it connects to the story I am telling myself about who I want to be in the future."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170321110341.htm
University students who were given a rationale for why learning is important from people similar to them -- in this case actors posing as young professionals -- wrote more effective essays and got a significantly better final grade than students who were given the same rationale from the course instructor.
"These findings suggest that what instructors were good at was getting across cold facts, while the peers seemed to be tapping into an identification process," said study co-author Cary Roseth, associate professor of educational psychology. "In other words, as a student, I can identify with my peers and imagine myself using the course material in the same way they do. This gives the material meaning and a sense of purpose that goes beyond memorization. When I hear a peer's story, it connects to the story I am telling myself about who I want to be in the future."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170321110341.htm
Listening to the teacher is boring and learning is not that really effective sometimes since the words of the teacher doesnt really get to us. But if there is an interaction among students then they are no longer passive learners but become active learners. When the youth are active their brain cells are working lively and they will learn and understand easily.
Because being alike increases likability, at least that's what I remembered from Robert Cialdini. 
People of the same age group usually relate to each other in a way they can't with people of authority like parents and teachers. This is most observable during adolescence where it seems teens do all their best to distance themselves from their families as they "build" their identity.
Educators seem to be learning how to adopt their programs to this. Most of the time they can be left on their own to do exercises and learn from each other. The role of the teachers can then be more on guiding and facilitating discussions as well as correcting mistakes they might make.
People of the same age group usually relate to each other in a way they can't with people of authority like parents and teachers. This is most observable during adolescence where it seems teens do all their best to distance themselves from their families as they "build" their identity.Educators seem to be learning how to adopt their programs to this. Most of the time they can be left on their own to do exercises and learn from each other. The role of the teachers can then be more on guiding and facilitating discussions as well as correcting mistakes they might make.
Teachers sometimes try to assert themselves at the expense of students, because those are inexperienced and have too little knowledge. Students have better relations with each other and they are on the same stage of development, they are easier to communicate with each other and to explain new information.
This is the reason why in some schools, teachers are now relegated to the job as facilitators as peer are given more space and venues because we are now assuming that students can be learning from each other. Of course, this can never be applicable in all settings though it is a force we have to reckon with. Will this be a new movement on learning and will it mean that we can have a better education when done like this? Years from now, the answers to those questions can be known.
Because they trust people that they're not forced to learn from. I think it's the fact that learning from peers is voluntary that makes them pay attention more. Beyond that it's also the fact that they can relate to someone closer to them, and that they're not just pressuring themselves to do well in some exam - instead they're gaining information based on what they want to hear.
The young people talk and explain in one understandable language for them, and the teachers are basically always much older than them and unich slightly different worldview. Accordingly, students are much easier and more pleasant to communicate with the same as they and develop together. Teachers with students have different goals and views on life, so they can not always fully explain something to each other.
Why do I have to learn this?' It's a common question among youth, but new research suggests students perform much better academically when the answer is provided by their peers rather than their teachers.
University students who were given a rationale for why learning is important from people similar to them -- in this case actors posing as young professionals -- wrote more effective essays and got a significantly better final grade than students who were given the same rationale from the course instructor.
"These findings suggest that what instructors were good at was getting across cold facts, while the peers seemed to be tapping into an identification process," said study co-author Cary Roseth, associate professor of educational psychology. "In other words, as a student, I can identify with my peers and imagine myself using the course material in the same way they do. This gives the material meaning and a sense of purpose that goes beyond memorization. When I hear a peer's story, it connects to the story I am telling myself about who I want to be in the future."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170321110341.htm
University students who were given a rationale for why learning is important from people similar to them -- in this case actors posing as young professionals -- wrote more effective essays and got a significantly better final grade than students who were given the same rationale from the course instructor.
"These findings suggest that what instructors were good at was getting across cold facts, while the peers seemed to be tapping into an identification process," said study co-author Cary Roseth, associate professor of educational psychology. "In other words, as a student, I can identify with my peers and imagine myself using the course material in the same way they do. This gives the material meaning and a sense of purpose that goes beyond memorization. When I hear a peer's story, it connects to the story I am telling myself about who I want to be in the future."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170321110341.htm
Jump to: