Innovative Higher Education

, 30:269 | Cite as

Undergraduates Leading Undergraduates: Peer Facilitation in a Science Workshop Program

  • Marina Micari
  • Bernhard Streitwieser
  • Gregory Light


This article presents the results of a study investigating the experiences of undergraduatesacting as peer leaders in an extensive peer-led team learning program in introductory undergraduate sciences and engineering courses. In an effort to understand the facilitator experience in the program better and to report initial findings on the benefits derived through a peer-facilitation experience, the study identified multiple areas in which peer facilitators reported experiences ofgrowth and the ways in which they understood and responded to this growth.


higher education small group learning peer-led team learning science education minority achievement in higher education 


  1. Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty: Graduate school as socialization to the academic career. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 94–122.Google Scholar
  2. Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefit of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 593–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blumer, H. (1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19, 3–10.Google Scholar
  4. Bonsangue M. V., & Drew D. E. (1995). Increasing minority students' success in calculus. In Gainen, J., & Willemsen, E. (Eds.), Fostering student success in quantitative gateway courses. New directions for teaching and learning (61) (pp. 23–33). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Bos, S. (1998). Perceived benefits of peer leadership as described by junior baccalaureate nursing students . Journal of Nursing Education, 37, 189–191.Google Scholar
  6. Boud, D. (2001). Introduction: Making the move to peer learning. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.), Peer learning in higher education (pp. 1–17). Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, W. (1997). Bioexcel at the University of Kentucky. Unpublished Project Description.Google Scholar
  9. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K. R., & Whalen, S. (1997). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dewey, J. (1964). The need for a philosophy of education. In R. D. Archambault (Ed.), John Dewey on education: Selected writings (pp. 3–14). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dreyfus, A. E. (2002). How are we doing? Steady growth in implementing peer-led team learning. Progressions: Peer-Led Team Learning, 3(3–4), 1–5.Google Scholar
  12. Drott, P. M. (2001). Utilizing undergraduate nursing students to provide health education in elementary schools. Journal of School Health, 71, 201–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Etkina, E. (2000). Helping graduate assistants teach physics: Problems and solutions. The Journal of Graduate Teaching Assistant Development, 7, 123–137.Google Scholar
  14. Freeman, M. (1995). Mathexcel: A special opportunity in calculus. Unpublished Report, Department of Mathematics, University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
  15. Freeman, M. (1997). Collaborative math and science workshops in Kentucky and Appalachia. Mathematics and Education Research Forum, 9(1), 5–8.Google Scholar
  16. French, D., & Russell, C. (2002). Do graduate teaching assistants benefit from teaching inquiry-based laboratories? Bioscience, 52, 1036–1042.Google Scholar
  17. Fullilove M., Fullilove R. E., Terris, M., & Lacayo, N. (1988). Is “Black achievement” an oxymoron? Thought and Action, 4(2), 5–20.Google Scholar
  18. Gafney, L. (2001). Workshop chemistry evaluation. In D. K. Gosser, M. S. Cracolice, J. A. Kampmeier, V. Roth, V. S. Strozak, & P. Varma-Nelson (Eds.), Peer-led team learning: A guidebook (pp. 75–93). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Good, J., Halpin G., & Halpin G. (2000). A promising prospect for minority retention: Students becoming peer mentors. Journal of Negro Education, 69, 375–383.Google Scholar
  20. Gosser, D. K., Cracolice, M. S., Kampmeier, J. A., Roth, V., Strozak, V. S., & Varma-Nelson, P. (2001). Peer-led team learning: A guidebook. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Haith-Cooper, M. (2003). An exploration of tutors' experiences of facilitating problem-based learning. Part II: Implications for the facilitation of problem-based learning. Nurse Education Today, 23(1), 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. McCaffrey, J., & Meyers, M. (1994). The emerging scholars program. Unpublished Program Description, The University of Texas.Google Scholar
  24. Moore, M. J., & Holmes, W. R. (2003). Biology experience impacts career development. American Biology Teacher, 65, 355.Google Scholar
  25. Newcomb, A. F., & Bagwell, C. L. (1997). Collaborative learning in an introduction to psychological science laboratory: Undergraduate teaching fellows teach to learn. Teaching of Psychology, 24(2), 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nyquist, J. D., & Sprague, J. (1998). Thinking developmentally about TAs. In M. Marincovich, J. Prostko, & F. Stout (Eds.), The professional development of graduate teaching assistants (pp. 61–87). Bolton, MA: Anker.Google Scholar
  27. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Robinson, J. B. (2000). New teaching assistants facilitate active learning in chemistry laboratories: Promoting teaching assistant learning through formative assessment and peer review. The Journal of Graduate Teaching Assistant Development, 7, 123–137.Google Scholar
  30. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.Google Scholar
  31. Solomon, P., & Crowe, J. (1999). Evaluation of a model of student peer tutoring. In J. Conway& A. Williams (Eds.), Themes and variations in PBL (pp. 196–205). Callaghan, Australia: University of New Castle.Google Scholar
  32. Solomon, P., & Crowe, P. (2001). Perceptions of student peer tutors in a problem-based learning programme. Medical Teacher, 23, 181–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Swartz, O. (1996). The value of the undergraduate teaching/tutoring experience For graduate school success: A personal narrative. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  34. Treisman, U. (1992). Studying students studying calculus: A look at the lives of minority mathematics students in college. The College Mathematics Journal, 23, 362–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. van den Hoonaard, W. C. (1997). Working with sensitizing concepts: Analytic field research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Vygotsky, L. S. (1934–1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1. Problems of general psychology. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
  37. Webb, N. M., Farivar, S. H., & Mastergeorge, A. M. (2002). Productive helping in cooperative groups. Theory Into Practice, 41(1), 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marina Micari
    • 1
  • Bernhard Streitwieser
    • 2
  • Gregory Light
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Minnesota, Gateway Science Workshop Program, Northwestern UniversityEvanston
  2. 2.German DepartmentColumbia University, Searle Center for Teaching Excellence, Northwestern UniversityEvanston
  3. 3.University of London, is Director, Searle Center for Teaching Excellence, Northwestern UniversityEvanston

Personalised recommendations