Work in Progress: PEERSIST—An Observational Study of Student Questions to Identify Levels of Cognitive Processing

Sarah Johnston; Cody D. Jenkins; Thien Ngoc Y. Ta; Ryan James Milcarek; Gary Lichtenstein; Samantha Ruth Brunhaver; Karl A. Smith

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Portland, Oregon
Publication Date: June 23, 2024
Start Date: June 23, 2024
End Date: July 12, 2024
Conference Session: Educational Research and Methods Division (ERM) Technical Session 5
Tagged Division: Educational Research and Methods Division (ERM)
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/48506

Request a correction

Thien Ta is a doctoral student of Engineering Education Systems and Design at Arizona State University. She obtained her B.S., and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering. She has taught for Cao Thang technical college for seven years in Vietnam. She is currently

visit author page

biography

Ryan James Milcarek Arizona State University

visit author page

Ryan Milcarek obtained his B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. in the Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Department at Syracuse University. He also obtained a M.S. in Energy Systems Engineering, Certificate of Advanced Study in Sustainable Enterprise and Certificate in

visit author page

biography

Gary Lichtenstein Arizona State University

visit author page

Gary Lichtenstein, Ed.D., is founder and principal of Quality Evaluation Designs, a firm specializing in education research and program evaluation.

visit author page

biography

Samantha Ruth Brunhaver Arizona State University, Polytechnic Campus orcid.org/0000-0001-8607-5959

visit author page

Samantha Brunhaver is an Assistant Professor of Engineering in the Fulton Schools of Engineering Polytechnic School. Dr. Brunhaver recently joined Arizona State after completing her M.S. and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. She also

visit author page

biography

Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

visit author page

Emeritus Professor of Civil, Environmental, and Geo- Engineering, Morse-Alumni Distinguished University Teaching Professor, Faculty Member, Technological Leadership Institute at the University of Minnesota; and Emeritus Cooperative Learning Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University..

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

At [the institution], the PEERSIST (Peer-led, Student Instructed STudy group) model has been researched and recently fully implemented across all Thermodynamics recitation sections [1]. In the PEERSIST model students work together in small groups (4 to 5 peers) to solve challenging course related problems during weekly 50-minute recitation sections. While a facilitator observes and offers assistance to keep the group on track, the PEERSIST model relies upon student-student discussion and interactions as the primary method of learning, as opposed to direct instruction from an instructor or TA. Implementation of the PEERSIST model has improved course grades and pass rates compared to the typical TA-led Recitation (TAR) method, which involves approximately 30 students watching a TA solve problems on a board. Following up on a previous observation study of students working in the PEERSIST model, the research team noted differences in the questions students asked and the resulting discussion that occurred with their peers during the sessions [2]. These differences are hypothesized to be linked to students' cognitive processing and course achievement and lead to the following questions: 1) What level of discipline-based cognition are students reaching based on question and discussion occurring during the PEERSIST model?; and 2) To what extent do GPA and student demographics influence the questions asked and resulting discussion? To answer these questions, the research team developed an observation protocol to explore student cognition during the study group sessions. Using the protocol, the researcher records questions asked by students working in 6 different study groups over a 20-minute period. Of these groups, 4 of them consisted of students with an average GPA of at least 3.74. These groups consisted of 1) 4 White men, 2) 3 White women and 1 woman of unknown minority status, 3) 3 international students and 2 students of unknown minority status, and 4) 2 Hispanic/Latino students and 2 white students. The remaining 2 groups included 3 out of 5 Hispanic/Latino students and 3 out 4 Hispanic/Latino students with 3.0+ and 2.0+ GPAs, respectively. The researchers noted that the questions could be categorized using Bloom’s revised taxonomy, which is a method for classifying learning objectives [3, 4]. Using the taxonomy the recorded questions were classified based on whether the students were trying to recall basic course information (remember), interpret information (understand), execute a process (apply), or organize and relate material (analyze) [3]. In comparison, observations during a TAR indicate that most questions asked, if any, are more focused on whether or not the answer is correct, while some questions explore course definitions. Preliminary results from the students participating in the PEERSIST model show they primarily ask questions that demonstrate different levels of Bloom's taxonomy such as remember, understand, and analysis of the course content. These results imply a higher level of course understanding and mastery of subject material provided and will be investigated for connections to the groups incoming GPA and final course achievement during the Fall 2023 semester.

[1] R. Milcarek, S. Brunhaver, T. Ta, C. Jenkins, G. Lichtenstein, and K. Smith, “The Impact of Peer-led Study Groups on Student Performance in a Mid-level Discipline-specific Engineering Gateway Course,” unpublished. [2] C. D. Jenkins, T. N. Y. Ta, R. J. Milcarek, G. Lichtenstein, S. R. Brunhaver, K. A. Smith, “Work in Progress: PEERSIST – A Formation of Engineers Framework for Understanding Self-Efficacy and Persistence among Transfer Students,” presented at 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Baltimore, Maryland. https://peer.asee.org/44325 [3] P. Armstrong. “Bloom’s Taxonomy.” https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/ (accessed Oct. 10, 2023) [4] L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, eds. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, United States: Longman, 2001

Citation
Format

Johnston, S., & Jenkins, C. D., & Ta, T. N. Y., & Milcarek, R. J., & Lichtenstein, G., & Brunhaver, S. R., & Smith, K. A. (2024, June), Work in Progress: PEERSIST—An Observational Study of Student Questions to Identify Levels of Cognitive Processing Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. https://peer.asee.org/48506

TY - CPAPER
AB - At [the institution], the PEERSIST (Peer-led, Student Instructed STudy group) model has been researched and recently fully implemented across all Thermodynamics recitation sections [1]. In the PEERSIST model students work together in small groups (4 to 5 peers) to solve challenging course related problems during weekly 50-minute recitation sections. While a facilitator observes and offers assistance to keep the group on track, the PEERSIST model relies upon student-student discussion and interactions as the primary method of learning, as opposed to direct instruction from an instructor or TA. Implementation of the PEERSIST model has improved course grades and pass rates compared to the typical TA-led Recitation (TAR) method, which involves approximately 30 students watching a TA solve problems on a board.
Following up on a previous observation study of students working in the PEERSIST model, the research team noted differences in the questions students asked and the resulting discussion that occurred with their peers during the sessions [2]. These differences are hypothesized to be linked to students&#39; cognitive processing and course achievement and lead to the following questions: 1) What level of discipline-based cognition are students reaching based on question and discussion occurring during the PEERSIST model?; and 2) To what extent do GPA and student demographics influence the questions asked and resulting discussion? To answer these questions, the research team developed an observation protocol to explore student cognition during the study group sessions. Using the protocol, the researcher records questions asked by students working in 6 different study groups over a 20-minute period. Of these groups, 4 of them consisted of students with an average GPA of at least 3.74. These groups consisted of 1) 4 White men, 2) 3 White women and 1 woman of unknown minority status, 3) 3 international students and 2 students of unknown minority status, and 4) 2 Hispanic/Latino students and 2 white students. The remaining 2 groups included 3 out of 5 Hispanic/Latino students and 3 out 4 Hispanic/Latino students with 3.0+ and 2.0+ GPAs, respectively. The researchers noted that the questions could be categorized using Bloom’s revised taxonomy, which is a method for classifying learning objectives [3, 4]. Using the taxonomy the recorded questions were classified based on whether the students were trying to recall basic course information (remember), interpret information (understand), execute a process (apply), or organize and relate material (analyze) [3]. In comparison, observations during a TAR indicate that most questions asked, if any, are more focused on whether or not the answer is correct, while some questions explore course definitions. Preliminary results from the students participating in the PEERSIST model show they primarily ask questions that demonstrate different levels of Bloom&#39;s taxonomy such as remember, understand, and analysis of the course content. These results imply a higher level of course understanding and mastery of subject material provided and will be investigated for connections to the groups incoming GPA and final course achievement during the Fall 2023 semester.

[1] R. Milcarek, S. Brunhaver, T. Ta, C. Jenkins, G. Lichtenstein, and K. Smith, “The Impact of Peer-led Study Groups on Student Performance in a Mid-level Discipline-specific Engineering Gateway Course,” unpublished.
[2] C. D. Jenkins, T. N. Y. Ta, R. J. Milcarek, G. Lichtenstein, S. R. Brunhaver, K. A. Smith, “Work in Progress: PEERSIST – A Formation of Engineers Framework for Understanding Self-Efficacy and Persistence among Transfer Students,” presented at 2023 ASEE Annual Conference &amp;amp; Exposition, Baltimore, Maryland. https://peer.asee.org/44325
[3] P. Armstrong. “Bloom’s Taxonomy.” https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/ (accessed Oct. 10, 2023)
[4] L. W. Anderson and D. R. Krathwohl, eds. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, United States: Longman, 2001
AU - Sarah Johnston
AU - Cody D. Jenkins
AU - Thien Ngoc Y. Ta
AU - Ryan James Milcarek
AU - Gary Lichtenstein
AU - Samantha Ruth Brunhaver
AU - Karl A. Smith
CY - Portland, Oregon
DA - 2024/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Work in Progress: PEERSIST—An Observational Study of Student Questions to Identify Levels of Cognitive Processing
UR - https://peer.asee.org/48506
ER -