There is a group of science communicators that is often overlooked: peer tutors. Peer tutoring is an educational strategy in which students teach other students as equals. Reflecting on this strategy leads to valuable insights for science communication.

Peer tutoring gives students a chance to learn one-on-one and ask questions they are uncomfortable asking professors. Some professors struggle with science communication; they have been teaching their classes for decades and know their material inside out. This expertise makes them forget what it feels like to be a beginner – commonly known as the ‘expert’s curse’. During peer tutoring, a student is talking to another student, and the equality in the conversation puts students at ease. We started the Biology, Chemistry, and Environmental Sciences Learning Centre (BCE-LC) at the American University of Sharjah with the idea that my peers and I learned best in groups, explaining concepts to one another in a comfortable environment.

My path to becoming a peer tutor

When we first established the Learning Centre, my co-founder and I were ecstatic. We had a space to share our knowledge and enthusiasm for STEM subjects with other students. By then, I was in my third year. I believed in my own skills, both in understanding and teaching biology, chemistry and environmental sciences. I was both unconsciously incompetent about my teaching skills and overconfident in my own knowledge.

Within the first semester of running the Learning Centre, I was quickly humbled. Most students I tutored came in asking basic questions about chemistry and biology, which did not make sense to me. How could they not understand? It was simple to me, intuitive. Ironically, I had developed the same mindset as the professors I had complained about myself. No matter how well I thought I knew these concepts, I could not explain them to a beginner. I made things too technical, explained too fast, and left them feeling more confused than before.

Change came slowly. Instead of jumping right in, I began asking students what they knew and what they had trouble with, evaluating their baseline. I simplified my language, explained more slowly, checking in with students as a topic grew more complex to assess how well I was communicating. With every session, I reflected not on how much material I got through, but on how well I communicated it. Did my students understand how concepts fit together? Could they apply them to questions asked in class? Given what they knew, could they make reasonable assumptions? Then came the big question: could I?

Developing communication skills

I realized that just because information in class is neatly packaged and presented doesn’t mean that’s all there is to a topic. I started attending my professors‘ office hours and asking questions about topics beyond the curriculum. I discussed research with my classmates, noting that it often led to more ideas. These discussions helped me see different points of view, things I had not considered before. They helped me avoid being entrenched in my own thoughts.

This change in my approach to teaching had an impact on many of the other communication formats I used. I wrote better papers. My first publication came about when I noticed connections between seemingly insignificant details in review papers – something I would not have done if I had not learned to reflect on what I knew. I made better posters and was frequently recommended for research seminars and presentations in my university as a result. By tutoring my peers, I had become more flexible; I did not see questions as a challenge, but as an opportunity to think differently.

After three semesters of tutoring students, my teaching skills grew. I could explain the same concept in many different ways, adapting to whether a student had a scientific background or none. I could find analogies that made sense to everyone. For example, I could explain electron arrangement by describing a neighbourhood, its houses, and its inhabitants. My improvement in communication skills was reflected in my students’ feedback. They left the tutoring sessions happier and more confident in their understanding of the material. Through the learning process of becoming peer-tutors, my colleagues and I had managed to find our way out of the ‘expert’s course’ trap.

Repeating Patterns

The Learning Centre is now in its fourth year. Interviewing subsequent managers led me to conclude that the pattern I experienced was repeated. We started out as students, became tutors and, without realising it, trained ourselves to become effective science communicators.

One manager said she learned to always start a session by breaking the ice, getting to know the student to make them more comfortable. She said this led to better results; a student was more likely to listen and learn if they felt relaxed. Another said that she honed her teaching skills and communication skills, finding a love for breaking down complex ideas into bite-sized pieces, making the scientific concepts more accessible. The consensus was: “Science communication is not one-way. You can’t communicate science effectively unless you first understand the learner’s starting point, goals, and emotional state.”

My experience as a peer tutor taught me an important lesson about communicating science: we need to listen first and then communicate. We should be as curious as those we are communicating with. Although peer tutoring is often misunderstood as a simple university job, it can produce excellent science communicators who are curious, humble and reflective.

Guest contributions do not necessarily reflect the views of our editorial team. The editor responsible for this piece was Anna Henschel.