PILS Consultants Project
Final Report
Name
PILS Theme
Natasha Sigala
Psychology
Project Title
Investigating the use of Tutorial Group conferences as a teaching tool
Project Summary
Project Description
The project comprises a report of a group of SD226 (Biological Psychology) associate
lecturers and students' responses on their use of the tutorial group conference as a
teaching and learning tool, respectively. I first asked a group of SD226 (Biological
Psychology) associate lecturers (n = 14) how they used and viewed their tutor group
conferences and collected suggestions for best practice. I then experimented with
these ideas on my own tutor group conference and collected responses (n = 9) from
my students about what they found most useful and/or interesting, how they used and
viewed the tutor group conference, and how it compared with the national SD226
(Biological Psychology) student conference, or other tutor group conferences they had
experience of. The goal of the project was to make this report a useful tool for all
SD226 (Biological Psychology) associate lecturers (and potentially associate lecturers
of other courses that use tutor group conferences) with guidelines of good practice for
future course presentations, as evaluated by a group of associate lecturers as well as
a small student sample. It is therefore a rather typical example of technical action
research, undertaken by one associate lecturers "on a relatively short-term basis and
aimed at making an [existing teaching tool] more efficient and effective". (Action
Research, A Guide for Associate Lecturers, M. Coats, 2005, The Open University)
Project Outcomes
All the associate lecturers and students who took part in this piece of action research
found the tutor group conference to be a useful tool, particularly for supporting
deposition and compilation of results for the experimental part of the course, which
requires group work. The students also mentioned that it lessened the feeling of
isolation, it reassured them that more students were experiencing similar problems,
and that it provided a quick update about the course module along with welcome extra
associate lecturer guidance. However, a lot of associate lecturers highlighted that the
students did not contribute to the conference beyond submitting their experimental
counts and were discouraged to promote its use as a discussion forum. I reflect on the
connection of the way students use the tutor group conference with summative
assessment, and propose ways of encouraging and helping students by providing
opportunities for constructive feedback, self- and peer- evaluation as examples of
formative assessment. This would motivate students with different learning styles and
at a variety of development stages as learners. It would also help them address their
individual learning needs and develop a self-critical attitude to their work, encouraging
their autonomy and satisfaction from their learning experience during the course.
Full Project Report
1. Full project description
What was your initial rationale for your project?
What did you do?
How did you go about it?
What was your timeframe?
1
Initial Rationale
The initial rationale for the project, as finalised after the two day PILS conference (1st
and 2nd of July 2006), was not substantially changed. The main idea was to find out
ways to enhance support to Open University students through more effective use of
online tuition, in the form of tutor group conferences. This was a goal in line with the
PILS aim for associate lecturer to support success, and for students 1) to raise
"increased awareness of and satisfaction with learner support resources", and 2) to
lead to "increased student recognition and appreciation of contact and support leading
to greater progress and success". (Aims of the Personalised Integrated Learning
Support Centre (PILS), flyer 2006)
What I did and how I accomplished it
I constructed a questionnaire for associate lecturers, a combination of closed and open
questions, to help identify the ways in which they used their tutor group conferences. I
specifically asked them: 1) what kind of information they had posted, 2) how their
students had used the tutor groups and 3) reacted to the postings, 4) the frequency
with which they used them, and 5) any suggestions and comments they had about
using the tutorial groups more effectively. I am grateful to two SD226 (Biological
Psychology) colleagues, Dr. Michael Hornberger and Dr. Elaine Shanks, who gave me
feedback on the initial draft and helped me finalize the contents and format of the
questionnaire. A copy of the final version is appended at the end of this section. I
posted the associate lecturer questionnaire on the SD226 (Biological Psychology)
online conference for associate lecturer, and emailed it personally to my fellow SD226
(Biological Psychology) associate lecturers in Region 06: The Open University in the
East of England. I received eight replies through the national SD226 (Biological
Psychology) associate lecturer conference, and six replies from the associate lecturers
in Region 06: The Open University in the East of England.
I then started experimenting with suggestions of good practice with my tutor group
conference, and finally I sent out a questionnaire to my student group. A lot of these
were suggestions that fellow associate lecturer had made in their replies to my
associate lecturer questionnaire.
I then prepared a questionnaire for my SD226 (Biological Psychology) students. It was
again a combination of open and closed questions and aimed to find out the following
things: 1) if and how they had used our tutor group conference, 2) if they had found it
useful (or not) and why, 3) if they would like to see it used in other ways, 4) compare it
with other Open University tutor group conferences they may have used in the past,
and 5) any other suggestions and comments they had about using the tutorial groups
more effectively. A copy of the final version is appended at the end of this section. I
sent the student questionnaire to all 18 students of my group (Colchester area) and
received nine replies.
2
Timeframe
The initial timeframe of the project (dates by which to complete component tasks of the
project), which was agreed in July 2006, was the following:
Preparation and distribution of the July 15th 2006
questionnaire for associate lecturers.
Analysis of responses.
September 1st 2006
Experimentation with suggestions of July and until the end of October
good practice with own tutor group
conference as the suggestions.
Preparation and distribution of the October 15th 2006
questionnaire for students.
Analysis of students' questionnaires.
December 1st 2006
Report writing.
February 2007
Modifications to the initial timeframe
This timeframe had to be adjusted at several stages. The initial project approval took
longer than expected, and by the time I received it in late July I was unable to work on
the questionnaire until mid August. I managed to prepare, incorporate feedback and
distribute the associate lecturer questionnaire by the 22nd of August. As I had not
received any replies by the 12th of September, I sent a request and a copy of the
questionnaire to my fellow Region 06: The Open University in the East of England
SD226 (Biological Psychology) associate lecturers, most of whom responded very fast
(n = 6), and the rest of the associate lecturer replies contacted via the national
conference (n = 8) kept arriving until the end of September. I emailed the student
questionnaire to my students by the end of October, but I did not get any email replies
from them. I then sent them paper copies of the questionnaire along with self
addressed and stamped envelopes, and I eventually received nine replies. The
analysis of the students' questionnaires and the report writing was then further delayed
by approximately three months, and the report was submitted in May 2007.
Copies of the Questionnaires
Copy of the Questionnaire for Associate Lecturers:
Dear SD226 (Biological Psychology) Associate Lecturer,
please tell me a few things about the way you use your Tutor Group conference.
Thank you! Natasha Sigala, Associate Lecturer R06.
3
In the current course presentation, have you used the TG (tutor group) conference in
any of the following ways?
Yes
No
To post your:

Welcome letter
___
___

Tutorial plans
___
___

Tutorial Handouts
___
___

c-FOS results
___
___
Do the students use the TG (tutor group) conference as a study group?
___
___
Do they use it to communicate with you?
___
___
Do you post:

Other course-related information (e.g. links to useful websites)?

Please describe in a few words.
To advertise Psychology events (e.g. Psychology at the Science Museum, Psychology
Day conference)?
Please describe in a few words.
To communicate other study related issues (e.g. information on OU Career links,
change of your contact details, change of postage rates)? Please describe in a few
words.
Have your students used the TG (tutor group) conference to ask questions to you
and/or fellow students? Please describe in a few words what sort of questions they
have asked.
How often do you log on to your TG (tutor group) conference?
How many messages (approximately) have been posted on the TG (tutor group)
conference

by you?

by the students?
Do you have any suggestions about postings/ initiatives that worked well for you, e.g.
icebreakers?
Any other comments about the TG (tutor group) conference and how you view it (e.g. a
message board, a discussion forum).
4
Copy of the Questionnaire for my SD226 (Biological Psychology) students:
Dear SD226 (Biological Psychology) Student,
please tell me a few things about the way you used our Tutor Group (TG)
conference. It should only take a few minutes.
Thank you!
Natasha Sigala
In the current course presentation have you ever logged on the SD226 (Biological
Psychology) TG (tutor group) conference?
If yes:
Yes
No
To read the welcome letter?
___
___
To read information about tutorials
___
___
To post your cFOS counts
___
___
To download your group cFOS results
___
___
To read other course-related information
___
___
To post a message
___
___
To ask a question
___
___
To initiate a discussion
___
___
To communicate with your tutor
(associate lecturer)
___
___
To communicate with your fellow students
___
___
To read information posted by your tutor
(associate lecturer)
___
___
(e.g. change of contact details, postal rate changes, exhibitions, events)
Do you ever log on to the national student conferences
to read messages?
___
___
if yes, how often?
___
___
to post messages?
___
___
if yes, how often?
___
___
Could you tell me if you found our TG (tutor group) conference useful, and why or why
not?
(more space was available in the actual version to provide an answer)
In what other ways would you like to see the TG (tutor group) being used?
(more space was available in the actual version to provide an answer)
5
Have you used a TG (tutor group) conference in other Open University courses and if
so how does it compare?
(more space was available in the actual version to provide an answer)
Any other comments about the TG (tutor group) conference, or other ways you'd like to
communicate with your associate lecturer and fellow students.
(more space was available in the actual version to provide an answer)
Full description of project outcomes
What did you find out / produce?
If you created a product – were you able to pilot your project? and what refinements
did you make as a result of this piloting?
Findings from the responses to the associate lecturer questionnaire
All the associate lecturers in the sample used the tutor group conference to post the
group cFOS results. The second most frequent use was to post tutorial plans and/or
memorandum of tutorial dates (13/14 or 93%), followed by posting tutorial handouts
(11/14 or 79%) and posting the welcome letter to the group (9/14 or 65%).
According to the associate lecturers in the sample, approximately one third of the
student groups used the tutor group conference as a study group (4/14 or 29%), where
they posted questions and answers addressed to their peers rather than their
associate lecturer. The majority of the student groups used the conference to
communicate with their associate lecturer (10/14 or 71%).
Approximately half the associate lecturers in the sample posted other course related
information (8/14 or 57%). This ranged from links to useful websites (e.g. link to an
online t test calculator), materials they had created for a struggling student or in
response to tutorial questions, specific student toolkits (sets 3, 6, 9), catalogue for
brain models and pertinent literature references (such as the “caffeine reference” in
2005 that had appeared in the national SD226 (Biological Psychology) associate
lecturer conference), to general tutor marked assignment feedback after the end of a
marking round, and general advice and encouragement.
The same number of associate lecturers used the tutor group conference to
communicate to their students other study related issues. Examples of this were:
availability and holidays of the associate lecturer, change of the postal rates that would
affect the cost of posting their tutor marked assignments, Open University regulations
related to late submission of tutor marked assignments, change of details, things that
have come up on the tutor marked assignments, changes to tutor marked assignment
questions, effects of bank holidays on tutor marked assignment submission.
A slightly smaller number of associate lecturers advertised Psychology events to their
students (6/14 or 43%), such as relevant lectures/events in and around the area on
brain and mind, the OUPS and summer schools, the Science museum-Open University
event, programmes on the BBC radio about memory.
The pattern for the above uses was variable. A fifth of the associate lecturers (3/14 or
20%) had not used the tutor group conference to post any additional information, 4/14
or 29% had used it for all additional types of information that the questionnaire
mentioned, while the remaining sample (7/14 or 50%) had posted at least one type of
additional information. It is interesting to note here that three of the associate lecturers
in the sample mentioned that they would use the conference more if the students
checked the responses and/or responded to the postings more often. One of them
6
resorted to sending group emails to the students instead. I will return to this point, and
suggestions that other associate lecturers made, later in this report.
The next part of the questionnaire was designed to assess the kind of messages that
the students had posted. The majority of the replies (7/14 or 50%) indicated that
messages related to the cFOS exercise (posting the counts and asking clarifications
about it). Other popular queries were about the course material, the tutor marked
assignments and the end of course module assessment (statistics, feedback on plans
for experiment), a few questions about tutorials and requests for tutorial materials, and
more unusual examples were messages of students trying to decide whether to
continue with the course, and of one dissatisfied student who wanted to solicit support
against the associate lecturer.
I then tried to measure if the frequency with which the associate lecturer posted
messages and/or checked the tutor group conference affected the frequency of its use
by the students. All associate lecturers checked the conference at least once a week,
and most of them more often (several times a week or every day). I then asked the
associate lecturers for an estimate of how many messages had been posted by them,
and how many by their students, to see if there was a correlation between the two. The
numbers of messages for every tutor group (first digit: number of messages by
associate lecturers, second digit: number of messages by students) were: [15, 15], [10,
15], [40, 30], [25, 30], [70, 16], [40, 190], [13, 37], [27, 38], [20, 25], [16, 45], [50, 150],
[28, 86], [20, 45], [22, 78]. These pairs of values gave a high correlation coefficient (r =
0.46), however it was not a significant one (P = 0.1), so the conclusion is that a high
number of postings by the associate lecturer do not necessarily generate a high
number of messages by the student group.
A relevant comment from my personal experience of running a tutor group conference
during the academic year 2005-6 and approximately half the academic year 2006-7, is
that a more popular tutor group conference does not necessarily mean that it is more
successful, or that it involves a wider section of the student group. During the previous
academic year (nine months) I contributed 34 messages to the conference, while the
students (a group of 18 active students, based in/around Colchester, with 1 student
unable to access First Class) posted 29 messages, mainly about the cFOS
experiment. If I extrapolate the numbers from the first four months in the current
academic year, by the end of it I will have contributed 52 messages, while the students
(a group of 19 active students, based in/around Colchester, with 2 students unable to
access First Class) will have posted 92. Although at first glance the second year group
seems to be more active and involved with the tutor group conference, most of the
difference can be attributed to one individual student, who has so far contributed more
than half of the student messages.
At the end of the associate lecturer questionnaire I asked the associate lecturers to
give me their comments and suggestions about improving the use of the tutor group
conference as a correspondence teaching tool. The most common comment by the
associate lecturer was that it worked mostly as a message board, especially on behalf
of the associate lecturer, rather than a discussion forum for the whole group, although
it clearly had the potential for that. They emphasized that icebreaker efforts from their
part had made little difference, and that even identical messages sent to individual
mailboxes were more likely to be responded to. They also said that most students
preferred to send personal emails to the associate lecturer, rather than ask something
via the tutor group conference. Possible explanations they offered were that: 1) the
students simply did not check it regularly, in comparison for example with students
from a brick and mortar university; 2) along similar lines, that the critical mass was not
there, because even for active tutor group conferences, there is always a silent subset
of the tutor group, who prefer to lurk rather than contribute anything further than their
cFOS counts; 3) two tutor groups also observed that the national student conference
7
was so popular and well-moderated, with regular contributions from the course team
and other associate lecturers, that there was very little room for the tutor group
conferences to develop much further than supplementing the cFOS exercise. One
associate lecturer with two student groups mentioned that their students find there are
simply too many conferences to keep up with.
There was also an interesting contribution from the associate lecturer who ran the most
popular tutor group conference in my sample (approximately 190 messages posted by
the students). They said that they actually felt it was so popular, it was creating a lot of
work for them and did not like it at all; it made them feel that they were "at everyone's
beck and call". It seems that a very popular tutor group conference, without clear
boundaries of the associate lecturer's responsibility to respond and moderate it, can
create problems for the associate lecturer and create feelings of frustration. A possible
suggestion to overcome this potential problem is to create a measure of the workload
that tutor group conferences impose on the associate lecturers and adjust a one–off
payment at the end of the year for it, as it can create duties over and above the usual
levels of student support/contact time. A related comment from a different associate
lecturer in the sample was that because they owned a really old computer and had a
dial-up connection, it was very time consuming for them to use this method of
communication and teaching extensively. Ways to help associate lecturers to obtain
and/or maintain the necessary hardware and internet connection required to fulfil their
electronic tuition duties would also facilitate a more frequent use the tutor group
conference.
On a more practical level, I will now summarize the suggestions that the associate
lecturers in my sample made for encouraging the students to use the tutor group
conference. A popular suggestion that seems to work well at the beginning of the
academic year is to post a welcome message, and/or a copy of the paper welcome
letter (which describes the existence and importance of the tutor group conference and
how to access it), that urges the students to post a message to show they have found
the site and briefly introduce themselves. It also helps to make it clear in the welcome
letter that the tutor group conference will be the main/only way through which the
associate lecturers will communicate with the group regarding the cFOS exercise
(group/slide allocation, posting of individual results, circulation of group data/counts).
Another suggestion is to send a group email every time there is something important to
look up at the conference, to alert all students to check as soon as they can. The
disadvantage of this is that it feels like a replication of the work to some extent, as one
could in principle also include the information posted on the conference in the group
email, but the advantage is that it notifies everyone at the same time and does not rely
on the frequency with which individuals check the conference (or not, as the case may
be). It does of course depend on the frequency with which individuals check their
email. Another associate lecturer mentioned how she tried to regularly post useful
information and advice to reward the students for visiting the conference. I will mention
further examples of such postings later in this report. A further suggestion was to
encourage communication of all course and study related issues via the conference
(possibly through the welcome letter), and only allow issues of a personal nature to be
communicated via email/telephone. Along similar lines, an associate lecturer
suggested that the use of the conference could be encouraged through additional
channels apart from the associate lecturer, like for example the course material, letters
in material dispatches, and the Regional Centre. A particularly interesting suggestion
came from an associate lecturer who had successfully ran a 2-week long e-tutorial
using the tutor group conference. The tutorial was devoted to the experimental section
of the course and involved discussing the feedback that she had given the students on
their experimental plans and the content that was expected in the second part of the
end of course assessment. Reflecting on the reasonable success of the tutorial (about
three students joined the discussion), she proposed using the tutor group conference
for e-tutorials at specific points during the course. This would involve advertising the etutorial on a specific topic in advance by email; specific suggestions for topics and time
8
points during the course were: 1) at the beginning of the course, when a lot of students
find the anatomy and the terminology difficult; 2) later, in the third month of the course,
when the students need support for the cFOS experiment; 3) just before the third tutor
marked assignment, when they need support with the experimental design that will be
part of their end of course assessment. This is an appealing suggestion that I did not
have time to implement with my own tutorial group, but would certainly merit further
investigation as a teaching and support tool.
Examples of good practice that I had the opportunity to implement with my own TG
conference
Because of my long standing interest in the tutor group conference as a teaching tool, I
had been thinking and discussing of ways to improve its use with colleagues since the
first presentation year of SD226 (Biological Psychology) (2003-2004). That gave me
the opportunity to experiment with a number of approaches from the beginning of the
year that was relevant for this project (2005-2006), and not only after I had collected
the responses to the associate lecturer questionnaires (August 2006), which would
have given me a very limited time window. A lot of the things I had tried were actually
along the lines of some of the most popular suggestions I received, however there are
still suggestions that I did not have the time to try at all, like the e-tutorial. The
examples of good practice that I included in my running the relevant year's tutor group
are the following:
1. Highlight the tutor group conference and its relevance for the cFOS experiment
in my welcome letter.
2. Post a welcome message on the tutor group conference encouraging them to
post a message and watch that space for regular updates. It could be very similar
to the welcome hard copy letter.
3. Promote the formation of a self-help study group by posting Open University
guidelines on how to run such groups (appended at the end of this section).
4. Post regular updates with tutorial plans and handouts (e.g. on plagiarism),
relevant internet links (e.g. society for neuroscience, career links, library
resources), information about relevant programmes and events, errata in course
material, tutor marked assignments or student notes (as identified on the national
SD226 (Biological Psychology) associate lecturer conference).
5. Inform them of changes that would affect their studies, e.g. my holidays,
change of postal rates.
Having this information in mind, helps better interpret and evaluate the findings from
the student questionnaire that follow in the next section.
Findings from the responses to the student questionnaire
The first part of the student questionnaire comprised of yes/no type questions that tried
to characterize the reasons that the students logged on to the tutor group conference.
The most popular reasons that seemed to attract the students to the conference (9/9
students, or 100%) were: to post their cFOS counts and download the group results,
and to read information posted by the associate lecturer (e.g. change of contact
details, postal rates, exhibitions, events). This measure seems to fit well with the
function of the tutor group conference as a message board with no or little need for
interactive use by the majority of the students/users. The second most popular reasons
(8/9, or 89%) were to read the welcome message (prompted by the welcome letter),
and to read other course-related information (e.g. errata).
The next most popular reasons (7/9, or 78%) were to read information about tutorials
(plans and handouts), and to post a message (mainly their cFOS counts, as they had
been encouraged from the start of the course). Only one third of the respondents (3/9,
or 33%) used the tutor group conference to ask a question, or as a means to
communicate with their associate lecturer or their fellow students; even fewer (2/9, or
22%) used it to initiate a discussion.
9
The next part of the questionnaire was designed to compare the respondents' use of
the tutor group conference with that of the national student SD226 (Biological
Psychology) conference. Out of the 9 respondents, all of whom had used the TG
conference, 6 (67%) had logged on to the national conference to read messages, and
a third of them (3/9, 33%) to post messages. Some of them checked the national
conference on a daily basis (4/6 or 67%), one (1/6) every week, and another one (1/6)
every month. One of the 3 students who logged on to post messages to the national
conference did so once or twice a week, while the other two posted messages once a
month or occasionally, respectively. This pattern of responses indicates that the TG
conference can and does serve a different and complementary role to the national
SD226 (Biological Psychology) conference, since a third of the students who had used
the tutor group conference had not used the national one, while the rest of the
respondents used both conferences to some extent.
The students were then asked whether they had found the tutor group conference
useful or not, and to justify their opinion. All 9 respondents found the tutor group
conference useful; broadly for the following reasons: 1) it helped communication of the
experimental data (cFOS exercise); 2) it lessened the feeling if isolation and it
reassured them that other students in the group were experiencing similar problems; 3)
it provided a quick update about what was happening on the course and welcome
extra associate lecturer guidance. One student said they found it useful sometimes,
depending on the information, indicating that different types of messages appeal to
different learning styles. The same student found that they did not like delays when
looking for a response, so they preferred to call their associate lecturer to obtain an
answer.
When asked in what other ways they would like to see the tutor group being used and
compare with other tutor group conferences they had experience of, they offered the
following suggestions: 1) the associate lecturer could initiate some questions for the
students in the group to answer and then compare notes, in order to initiate
communication “between all”; of course there is no guarantee that all students will join
in such a discussion, but it is likely to engage people who prefer to respond to
messages, rather than initiate discussions; 2) a search engine within the conference
that could give faster access to relevant messages and information; 3) an exercise
organised by the associate lecturer, along the lines of the cFOS experiment, where the
students would have to discuss the outcome; one student had experience of such an
activity in another course, but still felt that the associate lecturer had to help the
students a lot to overcome “their ‘natural’ reluctance”. This account seems to be in
agreement with the one offered by the associate lecturer who organised the e-tutorial,
where only a small subset of the student group joined in the discussion; 4) an
interesting final suggestion was to incorporate a form of real time chat facilities.
The final part of the questionnaire invited students to offer their comments about the
tutor group conference, and the other ways they like to communicate with the
associate lecturer and fellow students. One student said that they liked to work on their
own, and although they liked to see what was going on at the national conference, they
preferred contacting the associate lecturer by direct email whenever necessary.
Another student thought that it may be a good idea to have everyone introduce
themselves to each other on the conference at a more personal level, although they
thought that people were nervous to expose themselves when they did not know each
other and that it could be intimidating. Practically, beyond encouraging students to post
messages, it is difficult to coerce people to introduce themselves. More than half the
students in the sample (5/9, or 56%) were generally happy with the tutor group
conference as an additional learning resource, irrespective of personal style
preferences (e.g. study on their own, or face to face contact).
As a summary of the views the students had about the tutor group conference, as well
10
as the national SD226 (Biological Psychology) conference, there was evidence that it
is a useful and versatile tool that has something to offer for everyone, independently of
their learning style (e.g. active, reflective). There was also evidence that it helps speed
up the process of collating the cFOS group counts, and provide useful information for a
variety of course, study and/or subject related issues. Just like associate lecturers
choose if and when they will check and contribute to the SD226 (Biological
Psychology) associate lecturer conference, the learners have the choice of how to use
the tutor group conference; they can only be prompted by their associate lecturer and
then take the initiative as to how they wish to use that tool. People who are comfortable
with informal, chat-like interactions may use it to organise car pools to attend tutorials,
others may be happy to see that they are not alone facing difficulties with the course
material and the assignment deadlines. At the end of the day, it is the learners that
have the responsibility to prioritise how they will use their study time, which more often
than not in the case of the Open University students is time they have to make in a
schedule that includes full-time work or caring responsibilities. In this sense it is useful
to encourage them to engage with it at the beginning of the course and highlight its
advantages and possible uses, but it would not make sense to coerce them to check it
frequently or contribute to it by presenting it as a course requirement; this would be
likely to help some students, but also put off a greater number of them, and possibly a
number of associate lecturers as well. I return to this point in the Reflection section of
the report.
Guidelines on how to run self-help study groups
Getting Together
A Guide to Organising Study Groups
Why A Study Group?
Do you feel that you are studying in isolation? Are you having problems with a unit?
Would you like to try out your ideas for tackling a TMA [tutor marked assignment]
before you put pen to paper?
Is it difficult for you to attend a tutorial held half way across the region?
If the answer to any of these questions is 'yes', then a study group may help you.
Informal groups of students following the same course can provide valuable support.
And groups needn't be used just for study - you could also use your group for
arranging lifts to tutorials and summer schools, organising trips of special interest
and so on.
1. Contacting other students
There are several ways you can find other students in your area on the same course.
a) The Regional Directory. Some regions send a form to students in order to link
students on the same course. Complete this form and return it following instructions.
You will then receive, in due course, the Regional Directory, a list of other students
on your course who have completed the form.
The more people who do this the better the chance of finding someone near
you. So do return the form even if you are not actively contemplating becoming a
member of a group - at least you will then have a list of people who you can turn to in
an emergency - e.g. your course material failing to turn up.
b) Your Course Tutor [Associate Lecturer] can help you organise a self-help
group by asking his or her students if they are willing to join.
c) Group Registration. A good method of ensuring a viable group is group
registration for a course [module]. If you have been involved in a successful tutorial
group one year you could consider the possibility of moving onto the same course
[module] together the next.
Remember
- Telephone networks. You don't necessarily have to meet face-to-face. You can just
arrange to keep in touch by telephone with other students on your course [module]
11
If you keep a list of students on a computer you should be aware of the requirements
of the Data Protection Act.
2. Organising the first meeting?
To actually get the group home, but be aware of insurance and safety issues. You
are welcome to use the Study Centre (you should book via your Regional Centre) or
any public meeting area. At the first meeting it's a good idea to decide on
arrangements for the first two or three meetings - when, where, etc. and whether to
appoint a convenor (or take it in turns).
3. Running the meeting
There are a number of things you shouldn't do. It's not fair for instance to expect the
convenor of the meeting to have the responsibility of running it - the responsibility
should be shared.
Equally the meeting shouldn't really be run like a tutorial with one person trying to
teach the others - unless of course you going, someone (perhaps you?) will need to
take the initiative to contact some others and suggest a time and place. It may be
that when you've contacted one or two fellow students they'll agree to contact others
themselves.
The number of people you'll want in your group will depend on how many there are
in your area but successful groups have been run with numbers from two to twenty.
Where to meet? Obviously you can meet at someone's have someone in the group
who happens to be an expert on a particular topic.
Nor should the session be like a business meeting with a chair trying to reach the
most efficient decision.
The aim is that group members should share their understanding and problems in
the course. By talking things over in a group you can extend your working knowledge
and increase your awareness of the range of opinions, values, experiences and
techniques. Here are some ideas for getting the discussion going.
a) Breaking the ice. The first meeting can be awkward because members don't
know where to begin. Try going round the room with members introducing
themselves, saying why they're doing the course [module] and what they hope to get
out of the study group. For a larger group (more than 8 or so) use a 'snowballing
session' (see below) to share experiences and expectations.
When the group has warmed up the discussion may follow naturally. Or you may
want to structure it in some way in which case try the following.
b) Discussing the next assignment.
Remember it's not cheating to discuss assignments as long as the assignment you
finally submit is your own work. You could discuss: the meaning of the question, the
approach to answering it, the background.
You may be quite happy about the way the discussion is going. However, if a group
does want to adjust its level of talk here are two practical suggestions:
if the discussion is dominated by a few people and others are having difficulty getting
a word in, then agree to give everyone (say) two minutes of the group's time to say
what they like about the topic;
if discussion is slow and people are reluctant to contribute then split into pair and
share ideas on the discussion topic with one other person for 2-3 minutes (it's
normally easier to talk to one person than several). Then report back to the full
group.
c) Just chatting. Sometimes people complain that their study groups spend their
time 'just chatting'. In fact 'chatting' can be very useful - sharing experiences and
getting reinforcement - more valuable perhaps than an intellectual discussion that
doesn't touch anyone personally,
However, 'chatting' can mean that the group doesn't know where to start, is bored, or
doesn't feel at ease,
Doesn't know where to start? it's important to discuss and agree on what the group
12
is going to do in any session,
Bored? Perhaps everyone has said all they have to say on the topic or are simply not
interested. Don't be afraid to suggest moving onto something else.
d) Snowballing is a very useful way of getting the discussion going particularly at
the first few meetings of a group or if the group is quite large. Decide on a topic (e.g.
the main theme of the current Unit, the next assignment and so on, then
everyone: makes notes individually on that topic for 2 or 3 minutes; compares notes
with one other member for 3 to 5 minutes, identifying areas of agreement and
discussion; reports back to the rest of the group or, if the group is large, repeats the
exercise in groups of four and then reports back to the group.
e) Videotapes. If your course uses video tapes and you have access to a video then
agree to watch a programme together and discuss it.
f) Leading on a particular topic. It may be that there is an individual in the group
who has special knowledge of a particular topic who would be willing to lead the
group on that topic.
g) Soap boxing. Choose some specific statement from the Unit and go round the
group giving everyone two minutes to say why they agree or disagree with the
statement.
4. Snares and pitfalls
(Ignore this section if your group is running well)
a) Talking too much or too little. People vary in the amount they contribute in
discussion. That doesn't matter as long as everyone feels happy.
b) Uneasy? Sometimes groups develop a critical, judging atmosphere, which
makes people anxious about talking openly. Try and ensure that the group can
accept all the opinions offered without putting people down or insisting on simple
answers.
c) Conflicting goals. An underlying reason for difficulties in a group can be that not
all members are agreed on their goals. They may have different values and
expectations.
Different values? Conflict can arise when members interpret issues solely in terms of
their own outlook on life and don't accept that other people may have different
values.
Different expectations? Group members must feel free to say what they would like
the group to be doing. Tolerance and frankness are the most important qualities in
running groups.
5. Computer Conferencing via the FirstClass system
a) Choosing your conferences
If you have FirstClass then there are many conferences to choose from
Tutor Group conferences. If your course uses FirstClass, then there will certainly be
a tutor group conference - probably set up by your tutor [associate lecturer] and on
your desk-top. This will probably be your most useful conference. But there are
plenty of others......
 OUSA conferences - there's a wide range of conferences set up by the Open
13





University Students' Association [desktop - OU shield-Campus Map]
Common Room - general conferences on general study topics - tips,
interests, etc
OUSA Study Rooms - there'll probably be a conference for your course in
here whether it uses FC or not.
Regional Conferences [Campus Map - Regions] - these contain general
OUSA conferences and a Notice Board for your Region. Some Regions
have a Student Enquiry area where you can pose queries to Regional Staff.
Faculty conferences [Campus Map - individual Faculties] - with a range of
conferences
Special conferences - for example the Course Choice Conference where
students share opinions and information about courses [Campus Map - Info'
Centre - there is also a range of other information and advice in the Info
Centre on a range of topics].
If you’d just like to find one or two others to talk to with out joining a
conference then try the ‘find a Study Friend’ conference in the Course
Choice Fair.
b) Computer Conferencing in practice
Your main problem is finding which conferences might be of most interest and use
to you. But one of the great advantages of computer conferencing is that you can
'lurk' in a conference and see whether it's one you might contribute to or whether it's
too 'chatty' or inactive to be of interest.
The 'protocols' of conferencing are still being developed. Meanwhile just remember
that: you should introduce yourself when you join, you shouldn't 'say' anything that
you wouldn't say face-to-face
6. This leaflet
We hope you've found this leaflet useful. Do follow it up and organise yourself a
group if you can - even if it's only two of you. Time and again we find students
saying how helpful they had found their groups and how they wished they'd tried it
earlier. Give it a go!
This leaflet was written by Ormond Simpson.
What obstacles or difficulties were there – if any?
The main difficulties involved the collection of an adequate sample of questionnaires
from associate lecturers and students. I had initially thought that the national SD226
(Biological Psychology) associate lecturer conference site would be a very good way to
reach a large number of colleagues and ensure a good sample, but it turned out that
emailing associate lecturers I knew personally was more effective. Similarly, I had
expected that more students from my group would complete and reply to the
questionnaire I sent them, but I only received replies from half of them after sending
them hard copies of the questionnaire with self-addressed stamped envelopes.
However, that was probably a sample representative of the people who had most often
used the tutor group conference.
Reflection on practice
What do you think you have learnt?
What did you, or will you change, in your own practice, as a result of your project?
14
Reflection
The last point in Section 2 highlighted the differences among students in their
approaches to learning. This is an important fact, since there is a lot of evidence in the
educational literature, which shows that students' approaches to learning, especially at
the level of higher education, are related to the quality of what they learn (1). Assuming
that every teacher's aim is to ensure that their students achieve the best possible
learning outcomes, we must consider these different approaches to learning and take
them into account when we reflect on our teaching practices. As summarized in the
associate lecturer toolkit on correspondence tuition (2), the approach taken by an
individual student will depend on the learning context (which we assume to be the
same for a group of students assigned to an associate lecturer), but also on a number
of factors that are individual for every student. Those are: 1) the development stage
they have achieved as a learner; 2) their background knowledge of the subject; 3) their
interest and the priority they can give to the studied subject, given their available time
and other responsibilities; and, crucially 4) their previous experiences as a learner.
Being aware of these inherent variability factors in the learning approach, trying to find
out about them and address them as part of our teaching is a good starting point.
In practical terms, finding out about our students' access to and familiarity with online
conferences could help identify students that will need more encouragement and
support early on, so they will not panic near the time they will have to post their cFOS
results. Offering the alternative option of sending an email to the associate lecturer,
who will then post the counts on the tutor group conference, can also provide some
much needed reassurance to students who feel particularly uncertain about their
computing skills.
The students' motivation is also an issue that we need to keep in mind. Different
learning styles are best motivated by different rewards. For example, some students
may decide that if contributions to the tutor group conference are not part of their
summative assessment (an overall mark), they would rather not participate in it at all
(except, crucially, for the elements that are indirectly assessed, like the contribution of
the cFOS counts, which has the highest degree of student participation, as confirmed
both by the associate lecturer and the student samples). In Paul Ramsden's words
"From our students' point of view, assessment always defines the actual curriculum" (3,
p.182). However, assessment can take many forms, and passing grades is only one of
them. Providing detailed and constructive feedback, as an integral part of tutor marked
assignment marking, is a form of formative assessment that Open University associate
lecturers and students are very familiar with. I propose that extending this form of
feedback, and encouraging self- and peer-evaluation through the tutor group
conference, would make this online facility a more helpful tool for addressing the
individual learning needs of different students. An example of such use would be to
post the feedback form "What to do when your tutor marked assignment comes back"
(4), and post the following questions for them to respond to:
1. "What suggestion are you going to take from this feedback to act on next time?"
2. "What is still puzzling you that you need to clarify/explore further?"
3. "What advice do you have for yourself about what to do next time your tutor
marked assignment comes back?" (5)
Another example would be a summary and/or a self-evaluation form on the
communication skills the students have practiced by participating in the tutor group
conference. If an associate lecturer decides to provide an exercise that requires
collaboration to complete a common task, for example as part of an e-tutorial, then the
specific skills required would include: "team working, negotiation, group decision
making and task management" (6).
It was a privilege to learn in more detail how my colleagues have used this teaching
tool with their own student groups. I found that a lot of us had simply converged to
15
similar strategies for encouraging participation from the students, but also that
everyone had a rather unique way of using it, which reflected both the resources
available to them (PC, internet connection, time) and the style with which they
supported their student groups (e.g. emphasis on encouragement and support, fast
and efficient dissemination of course related information, or on unsupervised
exchanges between the students.) Inevitably the individual associate lecturer's style
and approach to the tutor group conference is an important component of the learning
context within which a particular group of students has to function and develop. From
that point of view it is an important duty for each associate lecturer to consider how
they could modify their teaching approaches/uses of the tutor group conference to help
a variety of learning approaches that may be present in their group of students. With
respect to the tutor group conference, it is important to consider how they can
encourage less confident students to participate and work towards their individual
learning goals.
Changes in teaching practice
The things that I changed in my own practice in the current course presentation (20062007) as a result of this project have been the following:
1. I post a message with the tutorial dates and venues two to three weeks before
they come up as a reminder about the material that they might be focusing on
and/or preparing questions for
2. I post the student toolkit on essay and report writing skills a few weeks before
first tutor marked assignment, to help students who have not written an essay
before with the relevant question of that tutor marked assignment.
3. I post a group email to all individual email addresses (both Open University and
personal ones, if provided) to alert them to the most important conference
messages; these so far have been: the tutorial handouts (including the cFOS
allocation), the collated cFOS data, and errata in the course material or the tutor
marked assignment questions or student notes
The changes that I plan to implement in the near future are:
1. Post a summary message that reviews a tutor marked assignment marking
round to give the students a feeling about what the group found particularly difficult.
2. Post the handouts described in the Reflection Section ("What to do when your
[tutor marked assignment] comes back" (4)), along with the questions that will
provoke self-evaluation and identification of specific learning goals, different for
each student, according to their own level of development and understanding.
3. Run an e-tutorial that will focus on experimental design.
References
(1) Understanding Learning and Teaching, The Experience in Higher Education, M.
Prosser & K. Trigwell, Buckingham: Open University Press (2002).
(2) Tutor toolkit on correspondence tuition, Section One, p.3, The Open University
http://www.open.ac.uk/tutorpages/documents/correspondence_tuition_sec1_scr
.pdf
(3) Learning to teach in Higher Education, P. Ramsden, London: RoutledgeFalmer,
2nd edition (2003).
(4) Correspondence Handouts, The Open University
http://www.open.ac.uk/tutorpages/documents/correspondence_handouts_scr.p
df
(5) Tutor toolkit on correspondence tuition, Section Four, p.28, The Open
University
16
http://www.open.ac.uk/tutorpages/documents/correspondence_tuition_sec4_scr
.pdf
(6) Tutor toolkit on correspondence tuition, Section Six, p.37, The Open University
http://www.open.ac.uk/tutorpages/documents/correspondence_tuition_sec6_scr
.pdf
Implementation suggestions or ideas
Which outcomes would you recommend being implemented?
What changes in practice might be needed?
What resources might be needed?
Recommended Outcomes
1. Highlight the tutor group conference and its relevance for the cFOS experiment in
the welcome letter.
2. Post a welcome message on the tutor group conference encouraging them to post
a message and watch that space for regular updates. It could be very similar to the
welcome hard copy letter. Encourage students with limited experience of online
conferences to experiment with it as early as possible.
3. Promote the formation of a self-help study group by posting guidelines on how to
run such groups (see end of Section Two).
4. Post regular updates with tutorial plans and handouts (e.g. on plagiarism), relevant
Internet links (e.g. society for neuroscience, career links, library resources), information
about relevant programmes and events, errata in course material, tutor marked
assignments or student notes (as identified on the national SD226 (Biological
Psychology) associate lecturer conference).
5. Inform the students of changes that could affect their studies, e.g. holidays, change
of postal rates.
6. Post a message with the tutorial dates and venues two to three weeks in advance
as a reminder about the material that they might be focusing on and/or preparing
questions for.
7. Post relevant student toolkits (e.g. on essay and report writing skills a few weeks
before the first tutor marked assignment, to help students who have not written an
essay before with the relevant question of that tutor marked assignment).
8. Post a group email to all individual email addresses (both Open University and
personal ones, if provided) to alert them to the most important conference messages,
like the tutorial handouts (including the cFOS allocation), the collated cFOS data, and
errata in the course material or the tutor marked assignment questions or student
notes
9. Post a summary message that reviews a tutor marked assignment marking round
to give the students a feeling about what the group found particularly difficult.
10. Post the handouts described in the Reflection Section ("What to do when your tutor
marked assignment comes back" (4)), along with the questions that will provoke selfevaluation and identification of specific learning goals, different for each student,
according to their own level of development and understanding.
11. Clarify expectations about how often you will be checking and responding to tutor
group messages, if the group is particularly demanding.
Possible changes in practice
The above recommendations require that the associate lecturer remains optimistic and
perseveres even when the students are very reluctant to join in any discussion at the
initial stages of the course. On the other hand, a very popular tutor group conference,
without clear boundaries of the associate lecturer's responsibility to respond to
messages and moderate it, can create a large workload and feelings of frustration for
17
the associate lecturer. A possible suggestion to overcome this potential problem is to
create a measure of the workload that tutor group conferences impose on the
associate lecturers and adjust a one-off payment at the end of the year, as it can
create duties over and above the usual levels of student support/contact time.
Resources that would be helpful
As a lot of the recommended postings would repeat every academic year at roughly
similar time points throughout the course, it would make sense to have some of these
messages sent automatically, or as reminders, to associate lecturers via several routes
(e.g. the Regional Centres for local events, the course manager for errata). An optional
automated email system that alerts individual students, who have subscribed to it, to
new messages posted, would spare the associate lecturers from this mundane task.
Re-iterating the point mentioned in the previous paragraph, possible adjustments to
salary and support for upgrading and/or maintaining the necessary hardware and
internet connection required would also make a positive difference in a number of
cases.
Do you have any ideas for further enquiries/ projects?
It is entirely possible that the findings of this project are misleading, as they are based
on a small sample of associate lecturers and students. It would be worthwhile to
conduct a nationwide survey and identify strengths and weaknesses of the current
implementation in different geographical areas.
Have you had any opportunities to disseminate or share your ideas?
I am lucky to have had three fellow SD226 (Biological Psychology) associate lecturers
at my main place of work over the last two years, with whom I have discussed findings
of this project at different stages of its progress, but not at its final form. I have also
been a mentor for three associate lecturers with whom I have shared examples of
good practice over the last two years.
Did you enjoy being a PILS consultant?
Is the principle of providing this type of opportunity a good one i.e. for Associate
Lecturers to look at their practice or undertake a development activity?
Is the consultant idea a good one?
It has been a worthwhile and rewarding experience and has given me the opportunity
to discuss with colleagues of different courses and disciplines. It certainly helps to
discover things through one’s own activities, versus passively receiving information
about them, and in this sense I would encourage associate lecturers to undertake a
consultancy or simply experiment a little with their own teaching practices and observe
the results of those changes.
18