LTC13-P32
6 June 2013
report for Learning and Teaching Committee
28 May 2013
Peer Support at Loughborough
submitted by
Dr Maurice FitzGerald, Quality Enhancement Officer, Teaching Centre
executive summary
This report provides Learning and Teaching Committee with a contemporary snapshot of peer
support activities and initiatives that are taking place at Loughborough and beyond. In doing so,
it makes the case for the immediate institutional investment into, and implementation of, this
student-centred support system across campus through the appointment of a full-time
University Peer Support Co-ordinator.
the case for central provision
One of the five main sets of recommendations from the Enhancing Student Engagement project
centres on peer support. Initially concerned with two strands – firstly, the dissemination of
information regarding existing and/or planned efforts at peer support and, secondly, the
initiation of a coordinated peer support pilot project in a specific location on campus – this
project subsequently advocated for the institutional implementation of peer support.1
So, what is peer support? It typically takes a number of forms – including buddying, coaching,
mentoring, Peer Assisted Learning (PAL), Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS), etc. – but its very
essence is that it sees students helping other students to fulfill their academic and/or nonacademic potential, all the while aiding them in their educational attainment and/or personal
development. In fact, for some time it has been argued that peer support can help students and
their places of study in any number of ways, including:







addressing changing patterns of engagement with the university;
providing a form of ongoing induction;
supporting student networks, friendships and relationships;
improving student retention and achievement;
targeting action to support widening participation;
enabling the personal development of students; and
creating opportunities for informal student feedback.
Indeed, it has been found within such peer support frameworks and settings that “students’
interactions with their peers positively influence inter alia academic and social self-concepts,
self-confidence, knowledge acquisition, cognitive development, moral reasoning, and
leadership skills”. In addition, it has also been argued that: “All activities that involve students
supporting students need to emphasise the development of a culture of trust, integrity and
confidentiality, ensuring that peer learning can provide a safe environment for student
1. For more information, see PQ10-P19 Enhancing Student Engagement tabled at Programme Quality Team on 8 March 2010,
and ASPSC12-P04 Enhancing Student Engagement: an update tabled at Academic Standards and Procedures SubCommittee on 21 May 2012.
reflection and decision-making. Students … have credibility in the eyes of their peers … a
credibility different from that provided through contact with supportive academic staff. As a
result, students can be effective mentors to their peers”.2
While other Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) such as the University of Bath and Newcastle
University, underpinned by significant financial backing, have added their names to the list of
more established peer support programmes – e.g. typified by the PAL scheme at Bournemouth
University and the PASS scheme operated at the University of Manchester – this level of buy-in
has not yet happened here. It might be remembered that the University’s Learning and
Teaching Strategy sets out to “support student ‘buddying’ schemes in academic departments”
as one of its main objectives; furthermore, the Loughborough Student Charter advocates that
students undertake to “foster a supportive student learning community by, for example,
participating fully in group learning activities and acting
as learning facilitators for fellow students”. Yet, peer
support appears to be a rather underutilised means of
supporting student learning at this institution, this is
despite its championing by individual staff and groups of
students in various pockets across campus.
While it can be argued that resources such as the Peer
Support Directory (see across) and developments such
as the Peer Support Community of Practice (which met
for the first time on 28 February 2012) have helped to
share information regarding peer support, and that the
Second Year Mathematics BeyOnd Lectures (SYMBoL)
project in the Department of Mathematical Sciences has
shown how PAL can be established in a specific location
on campus, there is no substantial central University
resource which could be said to constitute anything
approaching institutional implementation. At best, it can
be argued that Loughborough promotes peer support
(e.g. by funding start-up projects through the Teaching
Innovation Awards (TIAs)), yet the reality is that the
status quo ante applies, and that we are not necessarily
any further forward than we were three years ago when
this issue was last broached in substantive terms.3
In sum, peer support is in evidence across campus, and
includes various Schools/Departments and Professional
Services, as well as Loughborough Students’ Union (LSU),
among its number. It typically involves students who
have been here longer supporting newer students; in addition, it sees the involvement of
alumni, mature, as well as potential future students, and it can be academic and/or pastoral in
2. Daphne Hampton & Jacqueline Potter, “The rise and development of peer learning within UK universities”, pp.5-8, &
Jacqueline Potter & Daphne Hampton, “Summary and moving forward”, p.37, in Jacqueline Potter & Daphne Hampton
(eds.), Students Supporting Students, SEDA Special 26 (London: SEDA, 2009).
3. See PQ10-P45 Peer Assisted Learning at Loughborough tabled at Programme Quality Team on 18 October 2010.
2
nature, operating within and/or outside of the curriculum. The truth however is that it exists
despite a lack of coordinated and/or central resourcing, not because of it.
the lessons from SYMBoL
Beyond the dissemination of information regarding existing/planned efforts at peer support,
the Teaching Centre’s more direct involvement in a coordinated peer support pilot project in
the Department of Mathematical Sciences helped to meet the second initial recommendation
of the Enhancing Student Engagement work. Across the last two academic years, the Teaching
Centre has offered initial training to, and on-going support for, the PAL Student Leaders who
work directly with students taking the MAB142 Vector Spaces and/or the MAB241 Complex
Variables modules. This input was initially offered as the Teaching Centre’s contribution to the
SYMBoL project led by Prof Tony Croft of the Mathematics Education Centre (MEC), but has
since led to on-going – though not necessarily indefinite – collaboration.
Building on a National HE Stem Programme funded
project in 2011-12, the main outputs of this year’s
Loughborough University Development Trust (LUDT)
sponsored-project – entitled Peer Support: academic
community and student partnership in action – have
centred on resources developed by the students
themselves, and in particular the PAL Ambassadors
who are being funded through the LUDT grant. The
PAL Ambassadors have had three main purposes:
1. peer support @ Lboro – to define what is meant
by peer support, to gather information regarding
how the various schemes across campus operate,
and to gather the views of student representatives;
2. empowering Student Leaders – to ascertain what
the Student Leaders themselves had gained and
what advice they in turn could offer regarding the
running of peer support schemes; and
3. sustaining PAL in Maths – to produce materials
that would help to sustain the PAL programme
beyond 2012-13, certainly for at least one more
academic year, particularly those which support
the recruitment of Student Leaders.
These resources were presented in draft form at the
recent Peer Support at Lboro: Enhancing the Student
Experience event held on 24 April 2013, a practice
sharing event which also constituted the second
meeting of the Peer Support Community of Practice.
In detailing some of the highlights here (see across),
it should be noted that a more comprehensive
report is due to be provided to the LUDT funders
with the conclusion of this project later this year.
1. peer support @ Lboro
defined differently depending upon how a
peer support role is shaped, the scheme’s
aims and intentions, etc., there are three
broad sets of peer support initiative
currently taking place at Loughborough:
 Peer Mentoring;
 Peer Assisted Learning; and
 Peer Learning and Assessment.
2. empowering Student Leaders
it comes down to a number of essentials:
 understand the role peer support can
play (e.g. PAL sessions vs. tutorials);
 identify when and where it can help
students most (i.e. on the journey
from A-level through University);
 establish what the Student Leaders
themselves require (e.g. appropriate
training and staff support); and
 consider how the PAL sessions can
best be facilitated (e.g. timetabling)
and housed (i.e. room allocation)
3. sustaining PAL in Maths
It is worth adding that, on 15 May 2013, the MEC’s
Seminar Series hosted a SYMBoL event where the
project’s initial findings were presented. Reflecting
3
upon the role played by student interns in the summer of 2011, and the subsequent work of
the PAL Student Leaders who have facilitated the learning by their fellow students across the
last two academic years, this project has already provided evidence regarding: how staffstudent collaboration can support curriculum development through module redesign and
delivery; how it can help to offer additional teaching support and to manage change in the
nature of learning provision; and, how this can all enhance student academic performance,
attainment and satisfaction.
In a presentation entitled “Are peer-assisted learning sessions worthwhile?”, it was argued by
Dr Matthew Inglis (MEC) that PAL leads to a ‘radical renegotiation of the didactic contract’, and
that it has impacted positively upon the academic performance of those students who take
advantage of this offering. Indeed, in what he termed a ‘very encouraging finding’, he
established that there was, on average, a 1.2% improvement in a student’s performance for
every PAL session that they attended – for many students, this equates to a whole classification
on a module; he also found that the impact of PAL attendance upon academic performance
appeared to be twice as effective as attending a lecture.
This work is set to carry on across 2013-14, with the initial training for next year’s PAL Student
Leaders to take place on 19 June 2013. Efforts will continue on a number of fronts, including
MEC and Teaching Centre support for students leading and attending PAL sessions, which it
should be recalled take place in addition to lectures and tutorials. The findings from this project
work consistently point to PAL being a process that supports the on-going transitioning of
students to University life. A positive impact upon Part B academic performance in 2011-12 has
already been recorded, but it is also expected that the testing of attendance and performance
data will again take place. One area where the PAL Student Leaders will need efforts to be
redoubled is in the realm of support by staff champions, including that offered by the module
leaders and identified staff in the Department of Mathematics; another is the energy required
to sustain this programme by recruiting for future years. Finally, the timetabling efforts to
enable PAL Student Leaders to support Part B students should not be underestimated, and
continue to demand considerable organisational skills and flexibility from the Student Leaders.
The 2011-12 PAL Student Leaders with staff
from the MEC and the Teaching Centre.
4
other peer support initiatives at Loughborough …
As noted previously, there are a number of peer support initiatives at Loughborough, some of
which have established themselves over time, while many others have perished, with yet more
being set up and planned. Two of the more well-known schemes are those in the School of
Electronic, Electrical and Systems Engineering (essentially a buddying scheme which sees
existing students supporting the initial transition of new undergraduates from school to
university life) and in the School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (where finalists
and second years support each other in terms of curriculum appreciation and development). In
addition, there has been a concerted effort to ensure that students involved in peer support
are encouraged to apply for the Loughborough Employability Award, as well as to take the
opportunity to reflect upon the skills they have developed when supporting other students.
Notwithstanding these success stories, there have been numerous other examples of peer
support initiatives that have been launched in order to help meet a need but which have not
been sustained; this is for a variety of reasons ranging from a lack of prioritisation to an overdependence upon individuals dotted across campus. This does not necessarily stop people from
trying to start up new schemes. Yet, while both of those schemes noted above are eminently
transferable, neither has explicit or on-going institutional support; for example, there is no
central training provision for staff champions or student leaders, funds to cover start-up costs
are difficult and time-consuming to secure, resources are more likely to be built from scratch
because effective practice is not being shared, and so on.
One location amongst many that has sought to drive this agenda forward is the Department of
Politics, History and International Relations (PHIR); indeed, three schemes currently operate
there, with each pioneering approaches that are readily adaptable and eminently transferable:
 internationalisation – the Peer Advisor Scheme (which includes supporting resources such as a
promotional YouTube video created by the students themselves, a draft paper entitled ‘Learning
from Peers’ submitted to the European Political Science journal by the staff member coordinating
the scheme, etc.) sees PHIR finalists who have personalised their degree (either by spending a
semester/year studying abroad and/or working in a professional environment in the United
Kingdom/abroad) returning to offer advice to new undergraduates;
 peer mentoring – the PHIR peer-mentoring scheme aims to facilitate the provision of help to, and
support for, PHIR students by their more experienced peers, with supporting resources (such as a
set of FAQs) built by the students themselves under the supervision of the PHIR Director of
Student Welfare – 2012-13 was the first year of this TIA-backed programme; and
 student-led curriculum – the latest example of PHIR peer support takes the form of a project
informing curriculum development, with one of the first steps being a presentation for staff and
students entitled ‘Partnership: Further Student Engagement’ delivered on 20 May 2013 by Grace
Barker (University Mentoring Co-ordinator, Newcastle University), who is one of the main movers
behind the RAISE (Researching, Advancing & Inspiring Student Engagement) network.
Yet, outside of PHIR, who knows about these initiatives? Indeed, within PHIR, how are these
efforts to involve students seen by staff and students alike? Who evaluates them? Laudable in
themselves, they should be informing University priorities and building on links to programmes
such as the Loughborough Employability Awards. Yet, beyond the staff and students directly
involved in these projects, there is an understandable lack of appreciation regarding their
inherent potential and impact. Without an institutional driving-force, such efforts will remain
peripheral to mainstream thinking, addressing locally identified issues without contributing
significantly to centrally advocated solutions to problems such as student engagement.
5
… and at other institutions, as well as national perceptions
In an increasingly competitive sector, and in the light of debates regarding whether students
should be seen as consumers or partners, it is interesting to see how comparator HEIs view
peer support, and indeed what essential additional value peer support brings to the student
academic experience. It is also worth noting that peer support is increasingly attracting rather a
lot of attention in the associated literature.
In writing about ‘students as partners’, for example, last year’s report from the 1994 Group
entitled A multi-dimensional student experience suggests that:4
Another way of thinking about student participation was to see them as partners to the institution
and approach ... which recognises that learning is [an] active process in which students must engage,
and so teaching and learning becomes akin to a partnership. The presence of teaching and learning
awards, peer mentoring, peer-assisted study schemes and similar activities were seen as testament
to this type of relationship.
Indeed, another recent report, this time from the Higher Education Academy (HEA) entitled
Implications of ‘Dimensions of quality’ in a market environment, argues that:5
Students are a much underutilised resource in that pedagogic processes that give students an active
role, such as collaborative learning, peer tutoring and self- and peer assessment (for feedback, not
marks) all increase performance at little or no cost.
The evidence is growing, and our competitors are taking action.
Beyond this supporting literature, it is important to see what is happening in practice. Indeed,
as noted already, the University of Bath is one of the latest HEIs to introduce peer support, and
interestingly it has done so in conjunction with their Students’ Union. Run by a full-time Peer
Support Co-ordinator who has term-time and part-time support from a Peer Support
Administrator, their scheme has two main dimensions: firstly, it promotes peer mentoring and,
secondly, it advocates PAL. With regard to the former, the supporting online statement reads:
Peer Mentoring is about students supporting other students throughout their time at the University
of Bath. Peer Mentors can offer practical help and advice to new students, sign posting to support
serivices [sic], and sharing their experience of being a student at the Univeristy [sic] of Bath. Peer
Mentees can be assured that the mentoring environment is safe, informal and confidential.
With regard to the latter, the University of Bath Students’ Union supporting materials state:
Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) is academic based and is about students working together to get a
deeper understanding of their course material and to develop the study skills necessary to succeed
on their course. PAL Leaders are older students from a particular course who are responsible for
facilitating the study session. PAL Leaders can help students to make the most out of their learning.
PAL Participants can be assured that the study sessions are colaborative [sic], informal and open to
anyone regardless of academic ability.
The University of Bath has clearly made a strategic decision to drive the implementation of peer
support across their student body and in conjunction with their Students’ Union.6 It is certainly
worth remembering that LSU has already undertaken peer support work within the realm of
4. Zoë Molyneux, A multidimensional student experience (London: 1994 Group, 2012), p.14, available at
http://www.1994group.co.uk/publications/a_multidimensional_student_experience.pdf [16 May 2013].
5. Graham Gibbs, A multidimensional student experience (York: HEA, 2012), available at
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/evidence_informed_practice/HEA_Dimensions_of_Quality_2.pdf [16 May
2013].
6. “Peer Support”, University of Bath Students’ Union, http://www.bathstudent.com/peer-support/ [16 May 2013].
6
mental health (see HeadsUp!), and it is also noteworthy that a new coaching and mentoring
programme will begin later this summer through Loughborough Sport.
As a prime example of student engagement, peer support increasingly fits the needs and
demands of today’s students, while also helping to embody the views of the Quality Assurance
Agency (QAA) regarding student engagement as being “all about involving and empowering
students in the process of shaping the student learning experience … to help them [HEIs and
Students’ Unions] develop the tools to actively involve students in the organisation of their own
learning and student experience”.7 Indeed, the QAA has gone on to argue that peer support has
a role to play in a whole host of ways to enable student development and achievement:8
defining and coordinating roles and responsibilities
 “Higher education providers take steps to make students aware of their responsibilities to engage
with the opportunities offered to enable their development and achievement. They recognise the
role student representative bodies may have in making available opportunities for students to
develop networks and peer support groups.”
initial and on-going transitions
 “Induction processes continue at points of transition, including between defined periods, such as
semesters or terms, or years of a programme, when academic demands are likely to change.
Existing students may be able to support the transition of new students through peer mentoring
schemes or other networks.”
academic progression and retention
 “Higher education providers pay particular attention to how these systems operate when
students move into another learning environment, such as an employment-based placement or
period of study abroad. They also recognise the value of peer networks of support among
students and encourage and facilitate this development.”
The role that peer support can play is not just limited to student transitioning however, as PAL
also demonstrates that there are also ways in which it can move beyond informal networks and
operate in addition to existing provision in the classroom.
In considering the role that PAL might play in terms of facilitating learning in small groups and
in viewing our students as active participants in their own education, it would be perverse not
to note that Loughborough University may now have some ground to make up in this area, that
is at least according to successive Times Higher Education Student Experience Surveys. In the
past two years, this institution may only have fallen from 2nd to 5th overall, yet no other
institution in the Top 40 had a lower score under the heading ‘Tuition in small groups’ in 2012,
while no university in the Top 25 had a lower score under that same heading in 2013.9
7. QAA, “Student engagement at QAA”, http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Partners/students/student-engagementQAA/Pages/default.aspx [16 May 2013]. In addition, it might be noted that RAISE defines student engagement as follows:
“Student engagement is about what a student brings to Higher Education in terms of goals, aspirations, values and beliefs
and how these are shaped and mediated by their experience whilst a student. SE is constructed and reconstructed through
the lenses of the perceptions and identities held by students and the meaning and sense a student makes of their
experiences and interactions. As players in and shapers of the educational context, educators need to foster educationally
purposeful SE to support and enable students to learn in constructive and powerful ways and realise their potential in
education and society.” RAISE, http://raise-network.ning.com/ [16 May 2013].
8. QAA, “Quality Code – Chapter B4: Enabling student development and achievement”,
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/Quality-Code-Chapter-B4.pdf, 23 March 2013.
9. Zoë Corbyn, “Dundee tops THE Student Experience Survey as fees put focus on ‘value for money’”, Times Higher Education,
26 April 2012, available at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/dundee-tops-the-student-experience-survey-asfees-put-focus-on-value-for-money/419771.article; & Elizabeth Gibney, “THE Student Experience Survey 2013”, Times
7
Clearly, this category is impacting upon Loughborough’s standing in this particular set of league
tables. That being said, there is no reason to believe why students themselves – who number
some 16,000 across campus – should not be at the forefront of addressing this perceived need
for small group learning, that is operating in addition to the more traditional forms of teaching
which include lectures, tutorials, seminars, laboratories, and so on.
Thus, with the literature, our peers, and student perceptions all pointing in the same direction,
there is much food for thought regarding the future of peer support at this institution.
conclusions and recommendations
In its favour, it can be argued that peer support at Loughborough is becoming increasingly
organic, championed, and effective; however, in its current form, it can also be said that peer
support is localised, uncoordinated, and unsustainable. Meanwhile, the evidence supporting
the potential inherent in peer support is growing, not diminishing, not least because it
empowers students to facilitate and support the learning of others, typically in small group
settings, but also beyond the curriculum. That is why the main recommendation of this paper is
for the University to appoint a dedicated person, as well as to determine an appropriate
location, to manage an institution-wide set of peer support programmes, particularly those
centred around peer mentoring and PAL.
If the decision is ultimately taken to consider this possibility seriously, this institution could do
worse than employing a checklist such as the following:10
peer support checklist
1. consider embedding peer support as part of an institutional learning and teaching strategy;
2. decide upon the form of peer support programme(s) to be introduced;
3. design a robust, well-structured, and properly funded central programme/set of programmes;
4. appoint a dedicated person/persons and location to manage the programme(s);
5. ensure effective marketing of the programme(s) across campus;
6. introduce a rigorous Student Leader selection and training process;
7. take care in pairing Student Leaders and their students to ensure a good local match;
8. make on-going support available through trained and committed staff champions;
9. evaluate the programme at an appropriate point or points each year; and
10. consider academic credit, recognition and/or reward for Student Leaders.
Without institutional implementation – which in order to match our competitors would require
the designation of at least one dedicated member of staff for three years so that peer support
can be piloted ever more extensively and evaluated fully – it remains evident from past and
more recent experience that peer support will not, and frankly cannot, realise its true potential
across campus. Loughborough is in real danger of falling behind.
Higher Education, 25 April 2013, available at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/the-student-experiencesurvey-2013/2003450.article [both 16 May 2013].
10. This checklist has been adapted from a retention project funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England that
was delivered in conjunction with institutional partners including Aston University and the University of Sheffield; further
information is available in the final project report: Jane Andrews & Robin Clark, “Peer Mentoring Works! How Peer
Mentoring Enhances Student Success in Higher Education”, http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/what-worksstudent-retention/Aston_What_Works_Final_Report.pdf [17 May 2013].
8