Establishing a discipline-specific stats support workshop provision

What we did….Sarra Saffron Powell

Responded to a call for fundingCollaborative interdisciplinary approach:

• Professor Damian Clancy – School of Maths (sigma contact and budget holder –a “sleeper” role)

• Dr James Cruikshank – School of Psychology (engage students and colleagues with the initiative/room bookings)

• Dr Janet Strivens – Educational Developer (evaluation)• Sarra Saffron Powell – Educational Devloper/eLearning technologist

(pedagogy, sigma hub co-ordinator, now steering committee )• Two critical friends to the project (Lesley Fletcher LJMU, Colin Steel

Manchester University)

• Psychology PhD students.

• …but you don’t need all of these people!

Hey!

Funding!!!

Institutional provision

• Resource (budget) already allocated to Schools to support students stats skills development – but limited evidence of rigour (i.e. effective pedagogical practice, impact, evaluation, student engagement)

• Wanted to access that resource and reposition it to ensure sustainability and evidence impact of student learning/enhanced student experience

• We wanted students to feel supported. For maximum efficacy of provision that support should be in discipline specific contexts.

• UoL Key strategy: enhancing the student experience

Focus where students need support

We knew there were key “crisis areas” in student

understanding and application of stats

Psychology Level 2 Psychology PhD post grads (x5)

Systematic implementation of a peer learning approach = effective learning (Boud, Cohen, Samson, 2001)

•Registered students•Logged troublesome areas•Identified useful resources

PhD’s training on supporting

students learning

Identified online learning

resources

•Elicited feedback form students (evaluation )

Online diagnostic

“Drop in”workshops

PhD tutor training

• PhD tutors very good understanding of student issues (been there, wrangled with it) in discipline context

• Training to ensure they developed student skill and enhanced learning rather than “doing it for them”

• two Educational Development mentors• Two PhD students went on to also teach on CEd stats

courses• In class review of teaching (Janet Strivens)• Were offered ‘Teaching for Researchers’ CPD (Eddev)

Provision

• Drop in workshops (teaching colleagues to direct students to it)

• Consulted teaching colleagues to identify ‘troublesome areas’

• 5 x PhD students identified useful (usable) resources

• Student ‘I don’t know what my problem is’ problem – needed help in identifying difficulty

Provision

• = resource rich environment• Students benefitted from a variety of

perspectives and learning styles (other students, PhD tutors not just one lecturer)

• Online provision – just identified existing resources (lots) made available and indexed (= accessible)

Getting the students in

• Attendance endorsed and advised by lecturers (important)

• Posters, email, assignment feedback• Word of mouth (very important, comes with time)• 6 session planned – 3 delivered = 75 students

attended• Timing of session needs to be mapped against

curricula (assessment and troublesome areas)for maximum impact

Costings

• Initial sigma funding £8,000 (match funded by UoL) but this approach is very cheap!

• Costs about £6,000 a year (12 sessions) £900 for web/database designer

• If one student stays on course – pays for itself for several years

• Potential impact in Departmental NSS student satisfaction

Advice

• Block room book!• Anticipate unidentified ‘troublesome areas’• PhD tutor dynamics may need monitoring – encourage

reflective practice• Ensure evaluation processes built in from the start• Aim for best practice re quality assurance issues• Accrue student feedback (evidence)• Be prepared to identify and address curriculum problem

areas • Blended approach is valuable (students can be referred to

online resources whilst waiting)• Identify problems – delivery of themed sessions

Evaluation

• Student feedback was excellent• Valued peer learning environments – “tutors understand

the problems, they’ve been there”, “no such thing as a stupid question”, “as someone who has struggled, I now feel a lot more confident”

• Greater accessibility than personal/academic tutors/lecturers

• Many students used sessions to peer review their work • Requests for 3rd year workshops• Future – map to assessment performance (ought to

improve!)• Identify departmental NSS scoring/comments• Also good form APR, review and audits

The end

• Happy to share as evidence base for proposalssarrasaf@liv.ac.uk