"The Peer-Led Team Learning Model: Engaging Students in Mathematics and Science" by Janet Liou-Mark, AE Dreyfuss, Laura Yuen Lau, Mursheda Ahmed, Amelise Bonhomme, Juan Meija, Beili Wang, Karmen Yu, and Yi Ming Yu, New York City College of Technology

1. The Peer-Led Team Learning Model:
Engaging Students in
Mathematics and Science
PRESENTERS:
Janet Liou-Mark, AE Dreyfuss, Laura Yuen-Lau
PEER LEADERS:
Mursheda Ahmed, Amelise Bonhomme, Juan Meija, Beili Wang, Karmen Yu, and Yi Ming Yu
NEW YORK CITY COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY
CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
Supplemental Instruction Mini Conference
Lehman College
October 7, 2011

2. What is peer-led team learning?
The PLTL Workshop model engages teams of six to eight
students in learning sciences, mathematics and other
undergraduate disciplines guided by a peer leader.
Funded by NSF DUE from 1991 – 2005.
Honored with the 2008 James Flack Norris Award for
Outstanding Achievement in the Teaching of Chemistry (by
NESACS) to David Gosser, Jack Kampmeier, and Pratibha
Varma-Nelson.
Currently a core leadership team and a loose affiliation of
faculty from 80+ institutions who have adopted (and
adapted) the model, spanning all the STEM disciplines and
beyond in courses from the freshman to senior level.

3. Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL)
Peer : A more experienced undergraduate student
who has recently completed the course with a good
grade.
Led: Refers to leadership. A leader is a guide to
Led:
others. Goes through extensive training to assume this
role.
Team:
Team: A group of 6-8 people who work together to
6-
achieve a common goal.
Learning:
Learning: The goal of the team is to learn subject
material.

4. PLTL Workshop Model
provides an active learning experience for
students
creates a leadership role for undergraduates
engages faculty in a creative new dimension of
instruction

5. The Critical Components of Successful
PLTL Workshops
The "critical components" are a set of
benchmarks that have been arrived at through
the project evaluation (NSF, 1995-2000).
1995-

6. 1. Workshops are an integral part of the course
The workshop is a regular course component which
all students are expected to attend.
Each group meets on a weekly basis under the
guidance of an assigned leader.
Problems presented are tied to the course schedule
so that the necessary background has been discussed
in lecture.
This component is one place where PLTL and SI models diverge:
- SI focuses on courses where there is a high risk of failure (high
withdrawal and failure rates), and SI sessions are not
mandatory for students taking such a course

7. 2. The faculty are closely involved
The Faculty are responsible for ensuring that the
workshop modules are closely coordinated with
course goals.
Faculty meet with peer leaders and model ways
to manage interpersonal dynamics within a team.
This component is also where PLTL and SI diverge:
- SI leaders may meet with faculty to discuss class test
results and learning strategies
- SI leaders have support from learning specialists
connected with the campus tutoring program or SI
program.

8. 3. The peer leaders are trained
The faculty and learning specialists need to be
closely involved in training the peer leaders.
Peer leaders learn to be guides or facilitators, and
not lecturers.
Peer Leaders are instructed in some learning
theory and teaching strategies that engage
students in group discussion.
This component is where PLTL and SI converge:
- SI leaders are trained in effective learning strategies for the
course content, collaborative learning techniques and
group dynamics

9. 4. The Workshop modules are challenging
Each workshop session is built around a set of
problems and activities.
- The modules are designed and structured by the faculty
member.
- They focus on a central idea and help students attain their
course goal.
The peer leader must work to actively engage the
students with the materials and with each other.
This component is where PLTL and SI diverge:
- SI sessions focus on the course content and the faculty’s
teaching methodology. Pedagogy is central to the SI model.

10. 5. Organizational arrangements are optimized
Time and space are major issues
- Workshop sessions require a space conducive to small
group discussion.
Workshops must be scheduled in advance.
The Workshop model recommends:
- a two-hour workshop, held once a week with 6 - 8 students.
two-
- attendance be required.
This component is where PLTL and SI converge:
- SI sessions are scheduled for specific times and locations.
Group size is intended to accommodate all students in a
section of a course.
- Attendance is open to all students enrolled but is voluntary.

11. 6. There is institutional support
The PLTL Workshop approach can be successfully
institutionalized when:
- the administrators understand that its goals coincide with
the larger goals of the college and the department,
- the administration recognizes and rewards innovative and
effective teaching, and
- logistical and financial support are provided as well.
This component is where PLTL and SI diverge:
- SI as an organized, internationally-recognized program with its
own training and certification process is usually part of the
academic support system on campus.

12. Sample Workshop
Kinetics
Discussion

13. What is a Peer Leader?
A student (peer) who recently took the course and did well (A
or B grade)
Selected for academic skills: An expert student
Selected for personal skills (Interviewed):
Interactive, communicative, supportive, positive,
responsive
Respects and understands others
NOT an answer-giver --- NOT an authority
answer-
Is compensated in dollars or credit or other means

14. Why is Leader Training a Critical Component?
The Workshop Project’s summative
evaluation identified leader training as one
of the critical components.
Without leader training, workshop leaders
tend to default to what they have been
trained to observe - recitation and lecture.

15. What? No Answer Key?
Working without a net is like the real world and like
the exam too!
Believing in oneself as a real problem solver
Learning how to construct answers
How to evaluate different answers
How to test for ambiguity
How to test for completeness

16. Peer-
Peer-Assisted Learning (PAL) Workshops
at City Tech
Workshops in Mathematics
MAT 1180: Mathematical Concepts and Applications
MAT 1175: Fundamentals of Mathematics
MAT 1275: College Algebra & Trigonometry
MAT 1375: Precalculus
MAT 1475: Calculus I
MAT 1575: Calculus II
MAT 2675: Calculus III
Workshops in Science
CHEM 1110: General Chemistry I
CHEM 1210: General Chemistry II
CHEM 2223: Organic Chemistry I
CHEM 2323: Organic Chemistry II
PHYS 1433: Physics 1.2
BIO 1101: Biology I
BIO 2311: Human Anatomy and Physiology

17. Academic Inventory Module (AIM) for
Success in Mathematics
Participants
First-year students enrolled in a first credit-bearing mathematics course,
Fundamentals of Mathematics (MAT 1175) during the 2009 -2010 academic year.
Cohort 1 consisted of 22 (from a total of 27) self-selected students who enrolled
in the AIM for Success in Mathematics program
Cohort 2 was a MAT 1175 class with a PLTL workshop component integrated in
the course where 23 of the 33 students were freshmen taking the course for the
first time.
Of the total 45 participants, 40% (18) were the first in their families to attend
college and 73.3% (33) were from underrepresented minority groups.
The comparison group consisted of 20 first-year undergraduate students enrolled
in a learning community with 75% (15) of the students from underrepresented
minority groups.

18. Grades of PAL Workshop Attendees, PAL Workshop
Embedded in Course and Comparison Group
2009-2010
2009-
Cohort 1 Cohort 2
Comparison
(PAL Workshop (PAL Workshop
Grade Group
Attendees) Integrated in Course)
(n=20)
(n=22) (n=23)
ABC 77.3% (17) 91.3% (21) 45.0% (9)
ABCD 86.4% (19) 95.7% (22) 65.0% (13)
F 9.1% (2) 0.0% (0) 20.0% (4)
Withdraws 4.5% (1) 4.3% (1) 15.0% (3)

19. Departmental Final Exam Grades
The mean grade on the departmental final exam for Cohort2 (M=75.0,
SD=16.7) was higher than the comparison group (M=49.9, SD=19.8). The
results from an independent sample’s t-test showed that there was a
t-
statistically significant difference [t(35)=4.158, p =.000] between the two
[t =.000]
groups, indicating that the treatment of having PAL workshops helped
students improve their departmental final exam score.
To investigate if PAL workshops, given as a separate component of class or
as an integral part of class, impact students’ final grades, an independent
sample’s t-test was conducted. The average final grade was lower for
t-
Cohort 1 (M=2.38, SD=1.3) compared with Cohort 2 (M=2.77, SD=1.0). The
difference in average final grade was not statistically significant [t(43)=1.125,
[t
p =.267] for the two groups, showing that workshops, whether embedded in
=.267]
a class or not, in this case did not make a distinction on the final grade for
the course.

20. Mathematics Self-Efficacy, Task Value, and Goal
Orientation Pre- and Post-Survey Results
A paired sample’s t-test showed statistically significant differences
after the intervention in the following areas:
I am certain I can understand the ideas taught in the
mathematics course [t(43)=2.764, p =.008]
I expect to do very well in the mathematics class
[t(43)=1.829, p =.074]
I am sure I can do an excellent job on the problems and tasks
assigned in the mathematics class [t(43)=1.902, p =.064]
I enjoy it when others are aware of how well I am doing
[t(41)=1.853, p =.071]
I would not avoid taking on a new task if there was a chance that
I would appear rather incompetent to others [t(40)=2.284, p
=.028]

21. Means and Standard Deviations for Responses
on the MAT 1175 PAL Workshops
Mean (Standard
Statements (n=43) Deviation)
1 (strongly disagree) – 5 (strongly agree)
The workshops are closely related to the material taught in the lectures. 4.46 (.59)
Workshops help me do better on tests. 4.47 (.67)
Interacting with the workshop leader increases my understanding. 4.33 (.75)
The workshop materials are helpful in preparing for exams. 4.33 (.65)
I believe that the workshops are improving my grade. 4.44 (.59)
Interacting with the other group members increases my 4.26 (.76)
understanding.
I would recommend workshop courses to other students. 4.49 (.63)
In the workshops I am comfortable asking questions when I do not 4.51 (.60)
understand something.
In the workshops I enjoyed interacting with the other students. 4.67 (.48)
The workshop experience led me to join formal or informal study 3.67 (.99)
groups related to other courses.

22. Note:
The PLTL Workshop Project, and its publications were
supported from 1991-2005 by grants from the National
1991-
Science Foundation's Division of Undergraduate Education
This presentation was made possible through the NSF STEP
Grant #0622493, MAA Tensor Foundation Women and
Mathematics Grant, CUNY’s Improving Undergraduate
Learning Outcomes in Mathematics Grant, Black Male
Initiative, and Perkins Grant.

23. For more information
AE Dreyfuss adreyfuss@citytech.cuny.edu
Janet Liou-Mark jliou-mark@citytech.cuny.edu