Chalk and Talk Method vs. Peer Learning: Its Effectiveness in Teaching Statistics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21380767Keywords:
Chalk and Talk Method, Peer Learning, Pre-test, Post-test, Quasi-Experiment, Teaching EffectivenessAbstract
This study compared the effectiveness of the Chalk and Talk Method and Peer Learning in teaching Statistics among first-year Bachelor of Science in Tourism Management students at Zamboanga State College of Marine Sciences and Technology. Statistics is often regarded as a difficult subject because it requires students to apply mathematical concepts, interpret data, and develop analytical thinking skills. As a result, many students experience challenges in understanding statistical concepts and solving related problems. In response to these difficulties, the study aimed to determine which instructional method was more effective in improving students' academic performance and understanding of Statistics. The study utilized a quasi-experimental research design involving two intact classes. One group received instruction through the traditional Chalk-and-Talk Method, where the teacher delivered lessons primarily through lectures, explanations, and board work. The other group was taught using Peer Learning, an instructional approach that encourages students to work collaboratively, share ideas, and assist one another in understanding lessons and solving problems. Researcher-made pre-tests and post-tests consisting of multiple-choice questions on Measures of Central Tendency were administered to assess students' knowledge before and after the implementation of the teaching interventions. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and t-test through IBM SPSS Statistics. The findings revealed that both instructional methods contributed to improvements in students' academic performance in Statistics. However, students who participated in Peer Learning demonstrated greater improvement in understanding statistical concepts and applying their knowledge compared to those who experienced the traditional Chalk-and-Talk Method. The study concludes that Peer Learning is a more effective strategy for teaching Statistics and may be adopted by educators to promote active participation, collaboration, critical thinking, and meaningful learning experiences in the classroom.
References
Alé-Ruiz, R., Martínez-Abad, F., & del Moral-Marcos, M. T. (2024). Academic engagement and management of personalised active learning in higher education digital ecosystems. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 12289–12304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12358-4
Beimel, D., Tsoury, A., & Barnett-Itzhaki, Z. (2024). The impact of extent and variety in active learning methods across online and face-to-face education on students' course evaluations. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1432054. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1432054
Burgess, A., Roberts, C., Lane, A. S., Haq, I., Clark, T., Kalman, E., Pappalardo, N., & Bleasel, J. (2021). Peer review in team-based learning: Influencing feedback literacy. BMC Medical Education, 21, 426. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02821-6
Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(39), 19251–19257. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936116
Douglas, D. (2024). Teaching Statistics for the Social Sciences Using Active Learning: A Case Study. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1163. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111163
Ishtiaq, M. (2019)., Book Review Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (4th ed.). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.5539/ELT.V12N5P40
John Hattie Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. https://inspirasifoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/John-Hattie-Visible-Learning_-A-synthesis-of-over-800-meta-analyses-relating-to-achievement-2008.pdf
Keerthirathne, W. K. D. (2020). Peer learning: An overview. International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Science, 4(11), 1–6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355209445_Peer_Learning_an_Overview
Lev Vygotsky Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Moon, J., McNeill, L., Edmonds, C. T., Banihashem, S. K., & Noroozi, O. (2024). Using learning analytics to explore peer learning patterns in asynchronous gamified environments. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, 45. DOI:10.1186/s41239-024-00476-z
Pretorius, L. (2025, September 15). Chalk and talk vs. active learning: What’s holding South African teachers back from using proven methods? The Conversation. https://doi.org/10.64628/AAJ.f7c4ym7sk
Sankdia, R. K., Gupta, P., Marko, S., & Dubey, L. (2022).An observational cross-sectional study to evaluate the preference and perspectives of undergraduate MBBS students regarding chalk and board versus PowerPoint presentation. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 12(7), 1104–1107. https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2022.12.062661202210062022
Secomb, J. (2008). A systematic review of peer teaching and learning in clinical education. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(6), 703–716. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.01954.x
Tan, A. J. Y., Davies, J., Nicolson, R. I., & Karaminis, T. (2023). A technology-enhanced learning intervention for statistics in higher education using bite-sized video-based learning and precision teaching. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 18. https://doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2023.18001
Topping, K. J. (2023). Advantages and Disadvantages of Online and Face-to-Face Peer Learning in Higher Education: A Review. Education Sciences, 13(4), 326. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040326
Vacalares, A. B., Elbanbuena, C. O., & Comon, J. D. (2024). Differentiated instructional practices and academic performance in mathematics. European Modern Studies Journal, 8(4), 199–233. https://doi.org/10.59573/emsj.8(4).2024.11
Volante, L., Klinger, D. A., & Barrett, J. (2025, January 3). In 2025 and beyond, schools need to teach more than just “the basics”. The Conversation. https://doi.org/10.64628/AAM.dvjsg33ah
Vozzo, R., Johnson, S., & Tuke, J. (2024). An assessment of peer instruction in large first-year mathematics courses. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.14151
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Research on Multidisciplinary Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
