SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yükseköğretim Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3

The Impact of Peer Learning on Student Outcomes in Higher Education: Meta-Analytic Evidence from Türkiye

Yükseköğretimde Akran Öğreniminin Öğrenci Çıktıları Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye’den Meta-Analitik Kanıtlar

Metin Kaya(İstanbul Medipol University Faculty of Education)0000-0002-8287-4929
A. Taylan Aydın(GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, GAZİ EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ)0009-0008-9681-0791
İlker Altunbaşak(İstanbul Medipol University Faculty of Education)0000-0002-0383-7362
Pages
609–621
Publication Date
2025-12-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was found that the overall impact of peer learning on student outcomes in higher education in Turkey is at a low level with ES = .33 [CI = .19-.48].

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to examine the impact of peer learning in higher education on student outcomes in the context of Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Based on these criteria, 12 primary studies were included in the analysis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that the overall impact of peer learning on student outcomes in higher education in Turkey is at a low level with ES = .33 [CI = .19-.48].
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Başarı · Tutum · Yükseköğretim

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the impact of peer learning in higher education on student outcomes in the context of Turkey. For this purpose, databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOHOST, and TR Index were used to access research focused on peer learning in the Turkish context. Additionally, to access grey literature, searches were conducted in the YÖK Thesis database, DergiPark, and Google Scholar databases in both English and Turkish. Various inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed for this study. Based on these criteria, 12 primary studies were included in the analysis. A meta-analysis was conducted to combine the statistical findings of the primary studies. This meta-analysis was conducted under the random effects model. It was found that the overall impact of peer learning on student outcomes in higher education in Turkey is at a low level with ES = .33 [CI = .19-.48]. Furthermore, it was observed that the average effect sizes statistically differed according to the types of peer learning.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, yükseköğretimde akran öğrenmesinin öğrenci çıktıları üzerindeki etkisini Türkiye bağlamında incelemektir. Bu amaçla, Türkiye’de akran öğrenmesine odaklanan araştırmalara erişmek için Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOHOST ve TR Dizin gibi veri tabanları kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca, gri literatüre erişmek için YÖK Tez veri tabanı, DergiPark ve Google Scholar veri tabanlarında hem İngilizce hem de Türkçe aramalar yapılmıştır. Bu çalışma için çeşitli dahil etme ve hariç tutma kriterleri geliştirilmiştir. Bu kriterlere dayanarak, 12 birincil çalışma analize dahil edilmiştir. Birincil çalışmaların istatistiksel bulgularını birleştirmek için bir meta-analiz yapılmıştır. Bu meta-analiz rastgele etkiler modeli altında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Türkiye’de yükseköğretimde akran öğrenmesinin öğrenci çıktıları üzerindeki genel etkisinin ES = .33 [CI = .19-.48] ile düşük düzeyde olduğu bulunmuştur. Ayrıca, ortalama etki büyüklüklerinin akran öğrenmesi türlerine göre istatistiksel olarak farklılaştığı görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kaya, M., Aydın, A. T., Altunbaşak, İ. (2025). The Impact of Peer Learning on Student Outcomes in Higher Education: Meta-Analytic Evidence from Türkiye. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3, 609–621. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1582341

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (81)

  1. Alegre Ansuátegui, F. J., Moliner Miravet, L., Lorenzo, G., & Maroto, A. (2018). Peer tutoring and academic achievement in mathematics: A meta-analysis. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 337-354. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/79805
  2. Alpaslan, M. M. (2017). Examining the disciplinary differences of ninth graders’ resource management strategies in biology and physics. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 11(2), 197-211. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.373342
  3. Altintas, T., Gunes, A., & Sayan, H. (2016). A peer-assisted learning experience in computer programming language learning and developing computer programming skills. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(3), 329-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.993418
  4. Altundağ, Ş., & Kolsuz, S. (2023). Elimination of the strength of reading in primary school through peer teaching. Journal of Social, Humanities and Administrative Sciences, 9(60), 2214-2227. https://doi.org/10.29228/JOSHAS.67026
  5. Atlı, K., Mirzeoğlu, A. D., & Erkut, O. (2018). Akran öğretim modeli ve fiziksel etkinlik kartları uygulamalarına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri. Türkiye Klinikleri Journal of Sports Sciences, 10(3), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.5336/sportsci.2018-60112
  6. Bacanlı, H. (2006). Duyuşsal davranış eğitimi (3rd edition). Nobel Yayın.
  7. Balcı, T. (2023). Akran öğretim modelinin öğretim stilleri bilgi düzeyi, pedagojik inanç ve mikro öğretim uygulamalarına etkisi: Beden eğitimi öğretmen adaylarına yönelik çalışma [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Balıkesir University.
  8. Balta, N., Michinovb N., Balyimez, S., & Ayaz, M. F. (2017). A meta-analysis of the effect of peer instruction on learning gain: Identification of informational and cultural moderators. International Journal of Educational Research, 86, 66-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.08.009
  9. Bengesai, A. V., Amusa, L. B., & Dhunpath, R. (2023). A meta-analysis on the effect of formal peer learning approaches on on-course performance in higher education. Cogent Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2203990
  10. Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and social learning. McGraw Hill.
  11. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
  12. Boud, D. (2001). Introduction: Making the move to peer learning. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.), Peer learning in higher education: learning from & with each other (pp. 1-20). Kogan Page.
  13. Bouffard, M., & Reid, G. (2012). The good, the bad, and the ugly of evidence-based practice. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 29(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.29.1.1
  14. Bulut, B. (2019). The impact of peer instruction on academic achievements and creative thinking skills of college students. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(3), 503-512. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.3.50
  15. Çavuşoğlu, F., & Çelik Eren, D. Ç. (2024). Investigation of the effectiveness of hygiene education provided by a peer education model to a group of girls in the adolescent period. Etkili Hemşirelik Dergisi, 17(2), 176-188. https://doi.org/10.46483/jnef.1468496
  16. Cemalcılar, Z. (2010). Schools as socialisation contexts: understanding the impact of school climate factors on students’ sense of school belonging. Applied Psychology, 59(2), 243-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2009.00389.x
  17. Choi, J. A., Kim, O., Park, S., Lim, H., & Kim, J.H. (2021). The effectiveness of peer learning in undergraduate nursing students: A meta-analysis. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 50(C), 92-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2020.09.002
  18. Cohen, L. G. (1992). Children with exceptional needs in regular classrooms. National Education Association.
  19. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: a meta- analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312019002237
  20. Colaco, S. M., Chou, C. L., & Hauer, K. E. (2006). Near-peer teaching in a formative clinical skills examination. Medical Education, 40(11), 1129-1130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02593.x
  21. Collings, R. M., Swanson, V., & Watkins, R. V. (2014). The impact of peer mentoring on levels of student wellbeing, integration and retention: a controlled comparative evaluation of residential students in UK higher education. Higher Education, 68(6), 927-942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9752-y
  22. Colvin, J. W., & Ashman M. (2010). Roles, risks, and benefits of peer mentoring relationships in higher education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(2), 121–134. http://doi.org/10.1080/13611261003678879
  23. Cook, S., Scruggs, T., Mastropieri, M., & Casto, G. (1986). Handicapped students as tutors. Journal of Special Education, 19(4), 483-492. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669850190041
  24. Crouch, C. H., Watkins, J., Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2007). Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Research-Based Reform of University Physics, 1(1), 40-95.
  25. Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249
  26. Demirci, N., & Şekercioğlu, A. (2009). Akran öğretimi yönteminin üniversite öğrencilerinin Elektrostatik konusundaki başarılarına etkisi ve yönteme yönelik tutumları. e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 4(1), 240-256.
  27. Eberlein, T., Kampmeier, J., Minderhout, V., Moog, R. S., Platt, T., Varma-Nelson, P., … White, H. B. (2008). Pedagogies of engagement in science: A comparison of PBL, POGIL, and PLTL. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 36(4), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20204
  28. Ender, S. C., & Kay, K. (2001). Peer leadership programs: A rationale and review of the literature. In S. L. Hamid (Ed.), Peer leadership: a primer on program essentials (pp. 1–11). National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, University of South Carolina.
  29. Ercan, H., & Yıldırım Orhan, Ş. (2016). Bireysel çalgı ve öğretimi dersinde akran öğretimine dayalı öğrenme öğretme yaklaşımı. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16 (İpekyolu Özel Sayısı), 2269-2281.
  30. Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. A. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
  31. Gaustad, J. (1993, March). Peer and cross-age tutoring (ERIC Digest No. 79). ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED354608
  32. Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Rohrbeck, C. A., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2006). A meta-analytic review of social, self-concept, and behavioral outcomes of peer-assisted learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 732. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.732
  33. Gok, T. (2012). The effects of peer instruction on students’ conceptual learning and motivation. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 1-17.
  34. Gok, T. (2014). Peer instruction in the physics classroom: Effects on gender difference performance, conceptual learning, and problem solving. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 776-788.
  35. Gok, T. (2018). The evaluation of conceptual learning and problem-solving achievement of students by peer instruction. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1), 18-32. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.403361
  36. Gülçek, N. (2015). The effects of peer education on the candidate teachers’ success of science in the subject of ideal gases [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. İnönü University.
  37. Guraya, S. Y., & Abdalla, M. E. (2020). Determining the effectiveness of peer-assisted learning in medical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 15(3), 177-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2020.05.002
  38. Harden, R. M., & Laidlaw, J. M. (2013). Be FAIR to students: four principles that lead to more effective learning. Medical Teacher, 35(1), 27-31. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.732717
  39. Heirdsfield, A. M., Walker, S., Walsh, K., & Wilss, L. (2008). Peer mentoring for first-year teacher education students: the mentors’ experience. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(2), 109-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611260801916135
  40. Jenkins, J. R., & Jenkins, L. M. (1987). Making peer tutoring work. Educational Leadership, 44(6), 64-68.
  41. Kara, M., Şahin, S., & Kapat, S. (2020). Yabancı uyruklu öğrencilerin Türkçe öğrenme sürecinde akran öğretiminin etkisi: deneysel bir çalışma. OPUS International Journal of Society ResearchesResearch, 16(Eğitim ve Toplum Özel sayısı), 5974-5994. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.730411
  42. Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborate studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775. https:// doi.org/10.1126/science.1199327.
  43. Kepes, S., Wang, W., & Cortina, J. M. (2023). Assessing publication bias: A 7-step user’s guide with best-practice recommendations. Journal of Business and Psychology, 38(5), 957-982. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09840-0
  44. Koç, A. (2020). The effect of cloud-based peer tutoring on teacher candidates’ academic success, communication skills and course attitudes [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. İnönü University.
  45. Kolaski, K., Logan, L. R., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2024). Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews. British Journal of Pharmacology, 181(1), 180–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/bph.16100
  46. Kömürcü, N., Değirmenci Öz, S., Uysal, N., & Yedek, S. (2023). HPV ve güvenli cinsel yaşam konusunda üniversite gençlerini bilgilendirme ve risklerini belirlemede akran eğitiminin etkisi. BANÜ Sağlık Bilimleri ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 55-64. https://doi.org/10.46413/boneyusbad.1171532
  47. Lakdizaji, S., Abdollahzadeh, F., Hassankhanih, H., & Kalantari, M. (2013). Impact of guided reciprocal peer questioning on nursing students’ self-esteem and learning. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 18(4), 285-289.
  48. Lane, S. R. (2018). Addressing the stressful first year in college: could peer mentoring be a critical strategy?. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 22(3), 481-496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025118773319
  49. Leung, K. C. (2015). Preliminary empirical model of crucial determinants of best practice for peer tutoring on academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 558-579. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037698
  50. Lin, L., & Aloe, A. M. (2021). Evaluation of various estimators for standardized mean difference in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 40(2), 403-426. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8781
  51. Loda, T., Erschens, R., Loenneker, H., Keifenheim, K. E., Nikendei, C., Junne, F., … Zipfel, T. (2019). Cognitive and social congruence in peer-assisted learning–A scoping review. PloS One, 14(9), e0222224. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222224
  52. Mathes, P., & Fuchs, L. (1994). The efficacy of peer tutoring in reading strategies for students with mild disabilities: a best-evidence synthesis. School Psychology Review, 23(1), 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1994.12085695
  53. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user’s manual. Prentice Hall.
  54. McLachlan, J. C. (2002). Testing learning theories: the NUL hypothesis. Medical Education, 36(12), 1196-1200. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01382.x
  55. Melnyk, B. M. (2010). Evidence-based practice in nursing and health care: A guide to best practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  56. Mirzeoğlu, A. D. (2014). The effects of peer teaching on the university students’ achievements in cognitive, affective, psychomotor domains and game performances in volleyball courses. Educational Research and Reviews, 9(9), 262-271.
  57. Oflas, B., Özboyacı, C., Musal, B., Özkütük, A. A., & Çavdar, C. (2023). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesinde akran destekli öğrenme deneyimi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 37(1), 17-23. https://doi.org/10.18614/deutip.1187833
  58. Olpak, Y. Z., Baltaci, S., & Arican, M. (2018). Investigating the effects of peer instruction on preservice mathematics teachers’ achievements in statistics and probability. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 2323-2340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9717-3
  59. Oral, G. (2022). Attıtudes of primary school and pre-school teaching about peer education Journal of Academic Social Science, 10(127), 206-227. https://doi.org/10.29228/ASOS.55070
  60. Öz, E. (2024). Effects of peer instruction on academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 19(4), 505-522. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2023.2246447
  61. Özcan, O. (2017). An action research towards teaching acids and bases to grade 12 students through peer instruction [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Atatürk University.
  62. Özden, Y. (2005). Öğrenme ve öğretme. Pegem Akademi.
  63. Palmer, R. J., Hunt, A. N., Neal, M., & Wuetherick, B. (2015). Mentoring, undergraduate research, and identity development: A conceptual review and research agenda. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 23(5), 411–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2015.1126165
  64. Pascarella, E. T. & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. Jossey-Bass.
  65. Pring, R. & Thomas, G. (Eds). (2004). Evidence-based practice in education. McGraw-Hill International.
  66. Rohrbeck, C. A., Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Fantuzzo, J. W. & Miller, T. R. (2003). Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 240–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.240
  67. Ruthkosky, P. & Castano, S. (2007). First-year peer mentoring helps ease student transition to college. E-Source for College Transitions, 5(1), 6-9.
  68. Sackett, D. L. (1997). Evidence-based medicine. Seminars in Perinatology, 21(1), 3-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-0005(97)80013-4
  69. Stigmar, M. (2016). Peer-to-peer teaching in higher education: A critical literature review mentor. Tutor: Partnership Learn, 24(2), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13611267.2016.1178963.
  70. Subaşı Çağlar, S. (2021). A meta-analysis study skills the effect of the peer education in nursing students on the clinical practice [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. Karabük University.
  71. Tai, J., Molloy, E., Haines, T., & Canny, B. (2016). Same-level peer-assisted learning in medical clinical placements: A narrative systematic review. Medical Education, 50(4), 469-484. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12898
  72. Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172
  73. Tufanaru, C., Munn, Z., Aromataris, E., Campbell, J., & Hopp L. (2020). Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In E. Aromataris, C. Lockwood, K. Porritt, B. Pilla, & Z. Jordan (Eds.), JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI3. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-24-03
  74. Türkmenoğlu, M., & Baştuğ, M. (2017). The overcoming reading difficulty through peer tutoring in primary school. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 5(3), 36-66.
  75. Uzuner Yurt, S., & Aktas, E. (2016). The effects of peer tutoring on university students’ success, speaking skills and speech self-efficacy in the effective and good speech course. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(11), 1035-1042. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2016.2718.
  76. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
  77. Wenghofer, E. F., Way, D., Moxam, R. S., Wu, H., Faulkner, D., & Klass, D. J. (2006). Effectiveness of an enhanced peer assessment program: introducing education into regulatory assessment. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(3), 199-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/chp.70
  78. Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Rowntree, J., & Parker, M. (2017). ‘It’d be useful, but I wouldn’t use it’: barriers to university students’ feedback seeking and recipience. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2026-2041. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130032
  79. Yurdakul, B. (2015). Yapılandırmacılık. In Ö. Demirel (Ed.), Eğitimde yeni yönelimler (pp. 39-61). Pegem Akademi.
  80. Zha, S., Estes, M. D., & Xu, L. (2019). A meta-analysis on the effect of duration, task, and training in peer-led learning. Journal of Peer Learning, 12(2), 5-28.
  81. Zhang, H., Liao, A. W. X., Goh, S. H., Wu, X. V., & Yoong, S. Q. (2022). Effectiveness of peer teaching in health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Education Today, 118, 105499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105499