Collaborative workshops and student academic performance in introductory college mathematics courses: A study of a Treisman model math excel program

School Science and Mathematics, Nov 2000 by Duncan, Hollis, Dick, Thomas

It could be argued that motivated students are more likely to simply study more, in any case, and that this motivation alone might account for generally better performance by the Math Excel students. In other words, this argument would suggest that the students who volunteer for Math Excel would have studied more and subsequently performed better in their mathematics courses, whether or not they actually participated in Math Excel workshop sessions.

This competing hypothesis is suspect ontwo grounds. First, research suggests that the relationship between time spent studying and achievement appears to be one that cannot be measured in hours alone. Treisman's own original research indicated that studying in isolation was not nearly as effective as studying in peer groups. In a review of the literature on homework and its effect on achievement, Cooper (1989) found that the total amount of time spent on homework did not affect achievement unless it was more than 4 hours per week. This finding is consistent with the Oregon State University Math Learning Center's study (Duncan, 1999) mentioned earlier, in which hours studied per week did not emerge as a significant predictor of course grades.

Second, Treisman's own early research (Fullilove & Treisman, 1990) should also be considered. The Emerging Scholars workshop model was developed to provide a structure for facilitating student discourse in an effort to emulate what appeared to be a key difference in how groups of successful and unsuccessful students approached studying mathematics. The value of student discourse was corroborated by students' selfreports evaluating their Math Excel experiences. Based on evaluation surveys, over 90% of the students in all the Math Excel sections indicated they perceived that (a) they would not have earned as high a grade in their mathematics class without the Excel experience and (b) they viewed cooperative groups as a highly effective means of learning mathematics. Interestingly, almost half of the students reported spending less time studying mathematics out of class than they would have without Math Excel. The opportunity for structured discourse with peers was considered extremely valuable, and the time spent in Math Excel workshops was viewed as a highly effective replacement for time normally spent studying alone. This finding is also consistent with the results of Berliner (1992), who maintained that the quality of time spent studying is more important than the quantity of time.

Implications and Conclusions

If the Emerging Scholars model of collaborative problem solving students is good for some students, then does it make sense to adopt the model as a more general instructional strategy? Anecdotal evidence suggests that the model may lose its effectiveness when self-selection is eliminated as a factor. While the participants in Math Excel overwhelmingly thought that learning in small groups was beneficial to them, it would be unreasonable to suggest that all students would like the approach. How important is student voluntary self-selection on the efficacy of this particular approach? What characteristics (learning styles) of students might suggest that the model is a good match for them?