Atlas Academic Teaching And Learning Assistants Study: The Use Of Peers As ‘Quality Managers’ In Engineering Class Instruction

In recent years, teacher/student ratios (TSR) have been progressively declining in many higher educational environments. While the reduced TSR is not necessarily a drawback to the educational experience, it is generally believed –or perceived– that fewer students per qualified instructor can have a more positive effect on educational outcomes in terms of attention, learning efficiency, communication patterns, and overall student satisfaction. To simultaneously address issues of class size and course quality, the Academic Teaching and Learning Assistants Study (ATLAS) was developed at Northeastern University. ATLAS explores the effects of enlisting and training student peers from within an ongoing class to serve as “Quality Managers” for select lessons and labs in engineering courses. These Quality Managers (QM’s) act as instructional and supportive extensions of the professor in more complex course environments. Following preparations with the instructor and some independent work on the labs or activities, QM’s serve as assistants and/or reference resources to their peers in the class to help guide selected lessons. More details are set out in the body of the paper in terms of QM selection, responsibilities, roles, and outcomes. Participating students (Quality Managers and their course peers, referred to in this work as general students) completed an extensive questionnaire inquiring about the use of QM’s in the classroom and, if applicable, their personal experience as a QM. The QM program was implemented across multiple academic levels: freshman (1 st year), middler (3 rd -year) and seniors (5 th -year), and all levels participated in the feedback process. Empirical data gathered in the ATLAS initiative strongly supports the efficacy of the QM program and provides evidence that the use of Quality Managers has appreciably improved activities in classroom and lab settings and has enhanced the academic experience of the QM’s themselves. Introduction and Background In their work on engineering education, Upadhyay et al., state, “Quality consciousness has become a central theme for any human endeavor in today’s competitive world. The system of higher education is not devoid of this concept.” 9 Baldwin another educational advocate, refers to meeting the challenges in our current STEM classrooms and considers possible innovative solutions to such demands: “Today many of the efforts to strengthen undergraduate education in Science, Technology Engineering, and Math (STEM) fields continue to rely on individual faculty and small faculty groups who are committed to the cause of improving science or technology education in their department or institution.” 2 Baldwin and Upadhyay provide an apt lens for this focus on raising educational quality and inspiration to seek out ways to accomplish this . In this paper, the Academic Teaching and Learning Assistants Study (ATLAS) describes one initiative that has effectively attempted to address some of the challenges that persist in STEM classroom and lab cultures through the use of strategic and guided peer-assisted instruction. P ge 15219.2 Use of student teaching and learning assistants, while not a novel concept in American colleges, has had a resurgence of interest and involvement in STEM settings. Coupled with social networking and peer collaboration in the framework of quality assurance, the ATLAS approach is intended to be both timely and significant. As noted, concern about ensuring quality education is prevalent. Expectations from students and administration alike include the following factors: educational excellence, demonstrated competence, student-educator access, achievable and measurable learning goals and objectives, accountability, productivity, learning strategies that connect with real world experiences and students’ individual learning preferences, and applied theory into action. Further challenges are presented in terms of class size, facilitation of lab design, managing increasing diversity in terms of the number and variety of students and learning styles. Give these challenges, we have a recipe that requires, when done well, innovation, creativity, and an understanding that the learning culture we create must serve each and every student and not just the majority “type”. Exploring educational and learning trends, class size implications, and characteristics of the current student generation will help inform us as we seek and plan for effectiveness and excellence in teaching. That in turn, will allow us insight into the functionality of using the ATLAS approach of utilizing classmates as QM’s (Quality Managers) in class and laboratory settings. Current Learning Trends and Motivation Conclusions reached over the past two decades by multiple national reports indicate that undergraduate education in STEM fields needs improvement. 12 We are reminded, that despite the burgeoning technology that has provided additional access and capacity for learning, that the concept of the classroom is still the center of the learning interaction and engagement. While calls for online assessment tools that link students, faculty and administration continue, educational and sociological research still subscribe to the prevailing quality of student-faculty interaction. ATLAS provides a peer intermediary in the form of a Quality Manager that enhances the quality of the educational connection between instructor and general student. QM’s bridge the gap in the learning culture by providing feedback on assignments, course difficulty, instructor and lesson effectiveness, and by enhancing the attainment of learning objectives and tracking these objectives within the context of the course curriculum. It is a systematic approach to address the calls for improvement. The following trends highlight current general educational adaptations. These trends lend support for QM application, providing necessary ingredients for relevance, retention, and engagement. Departure from Traditional Lecture. Another commonly accepted notion developed in recent years has devoted attention to the merits of learning methods that go well beyond traditional lecture. Many professional organizations and educational societies are imploring their members and stakeholders to adopt more flexible, active, collaborative, and welcoming pedagogical practices that will reach out more effectively to diverse learners. Baldwin continues the dialogue on STEM learning, agreeing with Wieman who notes, “The traditional lecture is not an effective way to help students master basic scientific concepts essential to advanced study and work in STEM fields.” 2,12 Despite its idealistic intent, it is not without challenges. Lack of resources to support instructional development, absence of incentives to research teaching and learning, growing class sizes, and limited rewards for course and instructional improvements have P ge 15219.3 discouraged some engineering professors from investing time and energy to upgrade their approaches to instruction. As daunting as these challenges are, the tenacious desire to improve STEM education has continued to surface, despite the economic barriers. This is illustrated not only in this project but in countless other ASEE initiatives that strive to improve and strengthen the climate of our educational system. Teacher-Student Ratio. Given the reality of teaching large numbers of students with diverse backgrounds and interests and we try to prepare them for a rapidly changing world while being cognizant of the ever-growing demand for science and technology, Seymour and Hewitt remind us that “many undergraduate classes occur in large lecture halls where instructional practices are constrained... such constraints include: student-teacher dialogue limitations, heavily lecturebased formats that encourage passive learners, and memorization of facts and formulas that pass tests [yet] fail to achieve genuine understanding of STEM subject matter.” 7 The declining teacher-student ratio is the result of several factors, such as (1) diminishing resources for faculty and/or graduate teaching assistants, (2) an inclination toward enlisting only university faculty with the highest possible degree, (3) a trend toward learning methods that depend less on instructor-based pedagogy and foster either individual/solitary responsibility for learning or group-based education, and/or (4) improved and enhanced technology, materials, and activities in response to student-centered learning described in (3) above. While it would seem preferable to keep class sizes as small as reasonably possible, research has yielded differing opinions on the topic of class size. Social Elements of Learning Given the trend toward experiential learning, along with the interactive nature of many laboratory settings and the prevalence of teamwork in engineering, it is incumbent on educators to examine some of the social elements that interact in this context. Student-Centered Curricula. In a move away from teacher-centered instruction styles, the focus is now on the learner coupled with a growing interest in the use of self and peer assessment methods. 5 In an article entitled “Assessment for Learning and Skill Development: The Case of Large Classes”, Wanous et al illustrate a new goal of involving students as far as possible in teaching, learning, and assessment activities in their Professional Studies. 10 They include a quote from Ronald Dearing that states, “students will increasingly need to develop new capabilities and to manage their own development and learning throughout life ... it is important that students are provided with opportunities for independent self reflective learning to prepare them for the workplace upon graduation...this is why giving students more responsibility for their learning and development is so vital.” 10 ATLAS provides that opportunity to the QM’s and the general students alike. Collaborative and Team-Based Learnin