The host university for the PAL program is a public research-intensive institution with 50,000 students enrolled in undergraduate, graduate, and professional school degrees in the United States. Despite selective admissions standards, administrators were concerned about unacceptable dropout rates. During the fall of 2006, the Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) program was created to increase student graduation rates and persistence in academically rigorous programs such as science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) [1]. Regardless of graduation rate improvement, students switching from degree programs in STEM to other, less rigorous ones undermine institutional efforts to increase the diversity and success of historically underrepresented students [2]. PAL targets historically difficult math and science courses for first- and second-year students with high rates of final course grades of D, F, I, or withdrawal [1]. These academically challenging courses are gatekeepers before students are permitted to enter highly competitive academic programs in STEM and other professional programs at the undergraduate, graduate, and professional school levels. Following is a description of the PAL program that is similar to others previously published by the authors of this article [3].

PAL incorporates the best practices of Supplemental Instruction-PASS (SI-PASS) [4], Peer-led Team Learning (PLTL) [5], and the Emerging Scholars Program (ESP) [6]. Participation in PAL was mandatory for students in the targeted gatekeeper classes. They were required to participate in weekly study review sessions, and their attendance was reported to the target course’s professors and the campus PAL administrator to track compliance. Irregular attendance often had a negative impact on the final course grade. Several studies have validated the efficacy of the PAL program in increasing student academic success [3]. PAL attendance was uniformly high and regular throughout the academic term. These sessions were led by an upper-division undergraduate student employed by the campus learning center. Due to the mandatory attendance policy, the PAL sessions ranged from 20 to 30 student participants.

The student leaders were competitively selected based on academic competency in the content area, previous success in the targeted gatekeeper courses for which they would serve as study group facilitators, and good interpersonal communication skills. Twenty percent of the facilitators were concurrently enrolled in an education major or planned to do so. The position attracted their attention due to the salary and the belief that it served as an early teaching experience. Most of the remaining 80% of PAL facilitators planned to complete doctoral degrees in graduate or professional schools, a common aspiration among many admitted students. Their self-reported interest in the PAL job included (a) reinforcing basic subject area concepts needed for later courses in their major, (b) genuine interest in helping other students to be successful in the introductory course, (c) the salary, and (d) belief that the job experience would be helpful for admission to graduate or professional schools in programs such as law, medicine, STEM, and other health and science degrees. Most thought that the PAL job experience was viewed positively when committees evaluated admission applications as evidence of their communication and small group skills. For students planning to attend graduate school, most thought the PAL experience provided training to serve as a graduate teaching assistant (GTA), which is often required to obtain financial aid for a doctoral degree. Students believed teaching as a GTA would be a short-term, part-time job during graduate school to support their long-term objective as commercial or university researchers.

To clarify the student leader’s role during PAL sessions, their formal title was “facilitator” rather than “leader”. During the academic term, an important objective for PAL sessions was for the facilitator to transfer leadership in the review sessions from themselves to study group participants. One reason for this was the intentional use of varied collaborative learning activities during PAL sessions so all students could become leaders and actively engage with the group’s work.

In addition to a review of course content during PAL sessions, the PAL facilitator modeled two types of learning strategies. Cognitive strategies included lecture note-taking, effective reading, visual organizers, and exam preparation. Due to the requirements of the math and science courses, extensive time was spent on problem-solving strategies using preplanned worksheets. These contained different types of problem sets to complete individually and collaboratively during PAL sessions with the assistance of the PAL facilitator. Metacognitive strategies included identifying error patterns in exams, selecting appropriate cognitive strategies based on the learning task, and self-testing for comprehension. Students applied these skills to course material during study sessions so they became a part of their academic repertoire when dealing with this and future courses. PAL facilitator training materials were available for review online [1,7].

Facilitators engaged in extensive training before and during the academic term. A two-day workshop preceded the academic term, where they received basic instruction in PAL session procedures, participated in mock PAL sessions assuming the roles of facilitators and students, and worked in small groups to plan PAL sessions and reflect on choices made. Multiple times throughout their initial and subsequent training, the PAL facilitators were instructed to never assume the role of a teacher or teach a lesson. The reason for this explicit order was the political negotiation between the PAL program and the instructional staff, the result of which was that the PAL facilitators were never to assume the instructor’s role. It was explained to the facilitators that on other college campuses, programs like PAL had been shut down due to complaints from the instructional staff that the student assistants were assuming the role of a classroom instructor, which was a violation of their role boundary.

The PAL training manual [7] was divided into eight principles that guided PAL facilitators during their study sessions. Principle #4 was that they were to shift PAL session authority and ownership over to the participants during the academic term as quickly as possible. During the fall term, they were required to enroll in a one-credit course (PsTL 3050) taught by a faculty member who co-developed the campus PAL program and was an advisor to the PAL program administrator. Students read assigned educational theory articles applicable to the PAL program and engaged in guided group discussion, discussed PAL participant behaviors, created solutions to improve the learning environment, and engaged in open-ended discussions of their growth due to the PAL experience.

As part of the PsTL 3050 course requirements for all new PAL facilitators, they maintained a weekly journal of their experiences and observed behaviors and perceptions of attitudes displayed by participants in their study groups. In addition, they also recorded reflections on their growth academically and personally. Facilitators noted changes in their students and themselves over the academic term and recorded examples in weekly journal entries. The PsTL 3050 course instructor read all entries and provided feedback and suggestions as warranted. Twice each academic term, they observed the PAL sessions of another facilitator, and then the two debriefed decisions made and reactions by participants. They had numerous opportunities for informal conversations with one another regarding what they had experienced and learned from their PAL experience. Twenty-five of the facilitators were interviewed regarding their PAL session experiences in the PsTL 3050 course as part of an assignment that included audio recordings to be used in a podcast. The course instructor for PsTL 3050 maintained notes on class discussions of the study group leaders concerning their attitudes and behaviors displayed during the study group sessions. A professional staff member administrated the PAL program, conducted periodic team meetings with the student staff throughout the academic term, periodically observed PAL sessions, coached and mentored the PAL student leaders, and performed program evaluations each term. PAL facilitators completed a detailed written reflection about their job experience and personal and professional growth at the end of the term [8].