Peer-led Team Learning in Early General Engineering Curriculum

James E. Lewis; Gerold Willing; Thomas D. Rockaway

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Seattle, Washington
Publication Date: June 14, 2015
Start Date: June 14, 2015
End Date: June 17, 2015
ISBN: 978-0-692-50180-1
ISSN: 2153-5965
Conference Session: First-Year Programs Division Technical Session 1: It's All About Teams and Teamwork
Tagged Division: First-Year Programs
Page Count: 10
Page Numbers: 26.1221.1 - 26.1221.10
DOI: 10.18260/p.24558
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/24558
Download Count: 416

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

James E. Lewis University of Louisville

visit author page

James E. Lewis, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Fundamentals in the J. B. Speed School of Engineering at the University of Louisville. His research interests include parallel and distributed computer systems, cryptography, engineering education, undergraduate retention and
technology (Tablet PCs) used in the classroom.

visit author page

author page

Gerold Willing University of Louisville

author page

Thomas D. Rockaway University of Louisville

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Peer-Led-Team-Learning in Early General Engineering CurriculumAbstractThe Partnership for Retention Improvement in Mathematics, Engineering, and Science(PRIMES) is an NSF STEP program being implemented across nine different departments inthree different schools (Engineering, Education, and Arts and Sciences) at the University of XX.The cornerstone of this program is the development of Peer-Led-Team-Learning (PLTL)communities in several of the foundation courses for each of the participating departments. Theunderlying concept of this approach is students will feel more comfortable and are more likely toengage when mentors are closer to their same age or experience.The exact implementation of PLTL model varies between courses, but every implementationuses an undergraduate student to present material and to provide help with homework problems.Within the courses assessed, implementation of the PLTL model has varied between usingexternal volunteer attendance sessions versus mandatory in-class sessions. Each of theseimplementation styles has advantages and disadvantages. External volunteer attendance sessionsallow for a better relationship between the peer leader and the attendees. The disadvantage ofmaking it a volunteer session is reduced participation unless it is heavily incentivized. Themandatory in-class peer led groups have the advantage of greater attendance, and instantfeedback on lecture materials. However, this reduces instructor led class time and can be chaoticin the classroom with multiple peer leaders simultaneously meeting in groups. It can also fostera false impression of understanding the topics, since students worked the problems correctly in agroup.Based on the XXX Engineering School’s implementation of PRIMES, the observed outcomeshave been an improved attitude of students participating the program and improved studentperformance. Academically, students at different performance levels receive different benefitsfrom participating in this program. Students already preforming at high levels deepen theirknowledge by the experience of explaining concepts to their classmates. Midlevel studentsbenefit by having complex material explained in a variety of different formats. Ultimately, thiskeeps both groups engaged throughout the class. In addition to the academic gains, participatingstudents appear to gain a greater attachment to their engineering identity and will discuss theirfuture goals with their peer mentors.Initial evaluation of the PRIMES program in three undergraduate departments indicates thatincluding peer mentors in the educational process is beneficial to the student, but may be moreappropriately quantified by a subtle shift in academic performance, an enlarged sense ofcommunity, and an increased commitment to their degree programs. Ultimately, these are verybeneficial results, but are very difficult to quantify.

Citation
Format

Lewis, J. E., & Willing, G., & Rockaway, T. D. (2015, June), Peer-led Team Learning in Early General Engineering Curriculum Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.24558

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -              Peer-Led-Team-Learning in Early General Engineering                                CurriculumAbstractThe Partnership for Retention Improvement in Mathematics, Engineering, and Science(PRIMES) is an NSF STEP program being implemented across nine different departments inthree different schools (Engineering, Education, and Arts and Sciences) at the University of XX.The cornerstone of this program is the development of Peer-Led-Team-Learning (PLTL)communities in several of the foundation courses for each of the participating departments. Theunderlying concept of this approach is students will feel more comfortable and are more likely toengage when mentors are closer to their same age or experience.The exact implementation of PLTL model varies between courses, but every implementationuses an undergraduate student to present material and to provide help with homework problems.Within the courses assessed, implementation of the PLTL model has varied between usingexternal volunteer attendance sessions versus mandatory in-class sessions. Each of theseimplementation styles has advantages and disadvantages. External volunteer attendance sessionsallow for a better relationship between the peer leader and the attendees. The disadvantage ofmaking it a volunteer session is reduced participation unless it is heavily incentivized. Themandatory in-class peer led groups have the advantage of greater attendance, and instantfeedback on lecture materials. However, this reduces instructor led class time and can be chaoticin the classroom with multiple peer leaders simultaneously meeting in groups. It can also fostera false impression of understanding the topics, since students worked the problems correctly in agroup.Based on the XXX Engineering School’s implementation of PRIMES, the observed outcomeshave been an improved attitude of students participating the program and improved studentperformance. Academically, students at different performance levels receive different benefitsfrom participating in this program. Students already preforming at high levels deepen theirknowledge by the experience of explaining concepts to their classmates. Midlevel studentsbenefit by having complex material explained in a variety of different formats. Ultimately, thiskeeps both groups engaged throughout the class. In addition to the academic gains, participatingstudents appear to gain a greater attachment to their engineering identity and will discuss theirfuture goals with their peer mentors.Initial evaluation of the PRIMES program in three undergraduate departments indicates thatincluding peer mentors in the educational process is beneficial to the student, but may be moreappropriately quantified by a subtle shift in academic performance, an enlarged sense ofcommunity, and an increased commitment to their degree programs. Ultimately, these are verybeneficial results, but are very difficult to quantify.
AU  - James E. Lewis
AU  - Gerold Willing
AU  - Thomas D. Rockaway
CY  - Seattle, Washington
DA  - 2015/06/14
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Peer-led Team Learning in Early General Engineering Curriculum
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/24558
DO  - 10.18260/p.24558
ER  -