Davis Report - Executive Summary

More Student Learning, Less Faculty Work? The WPI Davis Experiment in Educational Quality and Productivity

Executive Summary

In 1992, the Davis Educational Foundation gave WPI a five-year, $800,000 grant to develop and test a model to increase educational quality and educational productivity. Mini-grants were given to faculty for redevelopment of first and second year courses. The essential elements of course redesign were increased student responsibility for learning, use of cooperative learning (CL), use of project-based learning, better use of faculty time, and the use of peer learning assistants (PLAs).

Peer learning assistants are upperclass, undergraduate students, selected for course success and interpersonal skills, and trained and paid to facilitate group process and dynamics in CL courses. PLAs work with teams of 3-5 students for approximately 10 hours per week. During this time they assist CL teams with group process and dynamics, and as a result reduce faculty time spent on peer-appropriate tasks. PLAs are not group leaders, tutors, graders, or undergraduate TAs.

Peer-assisted cooperative learning (PAC) courses were comprised of classes from the Biology, Chemical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Humanities, and Mathematics Departments. The PLA model used in the Mathematics department differed somewhat from that in other departments, in that math PLAs spent a much larger proportion of their time reinforcing and tutoring course content, and very little of their effort on group process and dynamics. Also, the math department used PLAs in virtually all of its freshman and sophomore courses (Calculus I through IV, Linear Algebra, and Differential Equations) and therefore employed a much larger number of PLAs than all other departments put together.

The PAC model was assessed for its impact on student learning, student attitudes, student retention, PLAs, faculty perceptions concerning time commitment and student learning, and the cost effectiveness of the project. Multiple measures, including both qualitative and quantitative tools, were used to evaluate the project. These methods included: learning outcomes within initiatives, such as exams, presentations and final project reports; student course evaluations; faculty time logs; faculty interviews; registrar student record analysis; and surveys of students, participating faculty, the senior class, and PLAs.

The major results of the project were that taking PAC courses in the first two years had a significant positive effect on student grades in courses in the last two years, and on retention and graduation rates. Other benefits included improved learning in PAC courses and major self-reported benefits for the PLAs. PAC course taking had no significant effect on MQP and IQP grades, but approximately 75% of the projects received A's, so any effect of PAC course taking would have had to be very large to be noticeable. Taking PAC courses had limited effects on student attitudes and satisfaction. Most non-math faculty reported significant time savings in the PAC mode, whereas math faculty reported spending more time. The PAC model costs $1000 to $2000 per term more than the traditional model in non-math courses, and $5000-$7000 per term more with the math courses included. The cost increment for non-math courses reflects faculty time savings which are slightly more than offset by PLA salaries; the cost increment for math courses reflects both increased faculty time input and the cost of PLA salaries. In this analysis monetary value is assigned to faculty, TA, and PLA time but not to educational benefits. All PAC courses and departments have continued the model since the expiration of Davis Foundation funding.

The Davis project has resulted in substantial scholarship outcomes for participating faculty, including 22 papers in professional journals, 30 professional presentations, 1 book, and 4 externally funded grants, with more in preparation. In addition to the scholarship outcomes and the benefits to students, this model has been adopted elsewhere on a limited scale including MIT, The University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, and the University of New Hampshire, Durham.

Maintained by webmaster@wpi.edu
Last modified: Jun 21, 2005, 15:50 EDT