TUTORIAL REPRESENTATIVES MEETING
THURSDAY 12 FEBRUARY 2009, 12.00 – 13.00 PM
ROOM 2.12 APPLETON TOWER
MINUTES
Present: Dr. Elizabeth Bomberg (Course Organizer), Meryl Kenny (Senior
Tutor), Stephanie Sproson, Rosie Jenner, Matthew McBryan, Eleonora
Paganini, Charles Jamieson, Claire Huston, Sofia Dumont, Euan Chalmers,
Tahra Yien, Kelly Stroh, Milena Lasheras Maas, Camille Soulier, Sam Barber,
Richard Martin, Tere Burns, Andrew McGuire, Juliet McCutcheon, Nikita
Khandelwal, Kate Kobylka
Apologies (feedback sent via email): Svenja Timmins, Marika Andersen,
Pierre Pecheux, Hunter Claire Rogers, Juliette Marie Hall
AGENDA
1. LECTURES
[Note: at the time of the meeting, students had only had lectures on the United
Kingdom]
In terms of the substance of lectures, one student suggested that the course
should be taught thematically, rather than separated into three separate
country sections. Other students suggested that the UK should be the last
country covered in the course, rather than the first. Some students felt that the
lectures on the UK were repetitive from IPIR last semester, while others
reported that international students and students who hadn’t taken IPIR found
the lectures difficult to follow at times. Several students thought that the
lectures were too technical and that there needed to be more balance
between general concepts and specific examples (particularly the lectures on
ideology and elections/voting). Others, however, reported that the balance
was about right. Students were positive about the organization of the lectures
1
on the UK, especially the fact that details of specific readings and page
numbers were provided.
In terms of style, some students felt that lectures on the UK were not
sufficiently engaging. Others highlighted issues of time-keeping. But several
others praised the delivery of lectures, especially their clarity and
presentation. While some felt the lecturer was reading off the slides, others
felt the lectures on the UK spoke to the slides, but helpfully also gave
additional examples and explanation. Several students also asked that
powerpoint slides be available before the lectures.
Dr. Elizabeth Bomberg (Course Organizer) thanked the students for the
comments. As noted in the tutorial representatives meeting last semester,
lecture slides will not be provided beforehand as the teaching team wants to
encourage first-year students to develop a crucial study skill: the ability to
listen and take notes at the same time. Dr. Bomberg stated that lecture slides
would continue to be posted on webCT immediately after the lectures.
Suggestions to structure the course in different ways were acknowledged,
although it was noted that there would be potential overlap with later courses
– in particular the compulsory Honours course ‘Comparative Politics’, which is
structured thematically. Dr. Bomberg also noted that there are multiple ways
in which the course could be structured, and that there are benefits and
drawbacks to each format. Meryl Kenny (Senior Tutor) noted that the course
begins with the UK in part because students are more familiar with the UK
context, which can then serve as a base for comparison. She also noted that
while some students are familiar with the UK, others are not, and both
tutorials and lectures, then, need to balance between these different levels of
knowledge.
2. TUTORIALS
Students were generally positive about tutorials. Some felt that there was not
enough time to cover all of the points/questions listed in the tutorial plans and
suggested that there should be two tutorial hours a week instead of one.
Others felt that tutorials were well-organized and well-timed and that all of the
questions were covered adequately. Overall, students generally enjoyed the
format of tutorials, in particularly the variety of exercises – small group
activities, debates, large group discussions, and weekly tutorial tasks. While
one student did not feel that small group discussions were helpful, others
were generally positive about small group activities. Some students had
specific comments about particular tutorial exercises – for example, in which
tutors had done more general activities such as ‘how to read an article’ –
which they felt were not particularly helpful.
Students had mixed opinions as to the mock essay plan exercise (assigned
for week 5). Some students pointed out that it was difficult to write the essay
plan, as it required additional reading and work, and did not involve the actual
essay questions assigned for the course. One student suggested that the
exercise should involve bringing in essay plans on one of the actual essay
2
questions. Others suggested that the exercise should be an actual mock
essay (rather than just a plan), which the students could submit to tutors for
feedback before writing their main essay for assessment. Students felt that
the question assigned for the exercise was difficult to answer. Others
commented that the essay plan exercise was very useful, particularly when it
combined small group peer critiques with a wider group discussion. Students
were positive about the accessibility of their tutors, and noted that they felt
comfortable going to their tutors with specific questions about essays or essay
plans.
Meryl Kenny (Senior Tutor) thanked the students for their comments, and
stated that she would pass this feedback on to DCP tutors. With regards to
the mock essay exercise, Meryl Kenny noted that tutorials have to cover a
broad range of material in a short amount of time, and as such will not always
get through all of the points/questions in the tutorial plan. The essay plan
exercise, then, is intended to combine essay preparation with the topic of the
week in order to ensure that both areas are covered. The standardized essay
prep question provides a common ground for students to work through (with
the help of tutors) how to write a ‘good’ essay. In terms of the particular
question assigned for the exercise, addressing a ‘tough’ question as a group
can also help students work through potential pitfalls and mistakes.
In response to the suggestion that students should bring in plans on one of
the actual essay questions, Meryl Kenny noted that this would essentially
require tutors to assess student work before it had actually been submitted for
assessment. Students can still continue to ask their tutors for help on their
specific essay question. However, while tutors can briefly comment on essay
plans or give suggestions for reading, they cannot comment on a complete
draft of an essay.
Dr. Bomberg noted that the same tutorial formats don’t necessarily work in all
tutorial groups, and suggested that students (particularly tutorial
representatives) should feel comfortable giving direct feedback to their tutors
about both the substance and format of their tutorials.
4. READINGS
Students were generally positive about course readings, in particular the main
course textbook (Kesselman et al, 2009). Some were critical of the American
slant of the textbook, while others enjoyed the ‘outsider perspective’ of the
textbook. Several students felt that there was too much reading assigned for
the course – particularly the tutorials. Others thought the amount of readings
was adequate. Some students felt that there was often too much overlap
between the readings and that some of the readings were overly long
(particularly the Coxall et al, 2003 and Dunleavy et al, 2006 readings assigned
for week 4). One student suggested (via email feedback) that a printed out
and bound booklet of e-reserve readings should be available for a set price.
Students had generally mixed opinions on whether essay-specific reading lists
should be provided
3
Dr. Bomberg noted that comments on specific readings are particularly
helpful. She also reminded the students that subjects such as Politics and IR
required significant amounts of reading and that learning how to manage that
requirement is a key skill of university life. An intense quick reading of some
material might be required. Meryl Kenny noted that students are provided with
a tutorial plan which highlights the tutorial questions for the week. If students
are feeling overwhelmed by reading, then they should think about reading
enough to answer the tutorial questions.
5. webCT
Students were overwhelmingly positive about webCT, particularly in
comparison to other subjects. They felt that it was better to include all of the
webCT readings under one tab, rather than separate them by lecture (as had
been done in IPIR). Students had mixed opinions as to the usefulness of
discussion boards – while some had posted on the discussion boards, others
had not. Some students were reluctant to the ‘first to post’ on the board and
asked if tutors could start the discussion. One student asked if a confirmation
or notification could be sent once students had signed up for tutorials.
Dr. Bomberg and Meryl Kenny asked if the tutorial representatives could be
the first to post on the discussion boards. For example, tutorial
representatives can post the feedback from the representatives meeting for
their tutorial group. Students who are currently posting on the discussion
boards have addressed issues relating to class discussions, posted
newspaper articles relating to the course, and so on.
6. OTHER MATTERS
Students raised the issue of exam feedback. Dr. Bomberg asked that students
consult the general exam feedback posted on the IPIR webCT page. While
each student exam is unique, there are general patterns among student
exams which are addressed in the feedback. Students should consult this
feedback before viewing their actual exam papers, as it will help them to
understand their mark.
Students noted that the deadline for signing up for exam viewing is Friday 13
February and asked if an announcement to this effect could be posted on
webCT. [Note: an announcement to this effect was posted immediately
following the meeting].
Students also asked that announcements of lecture cancellations (as in the
case of the Monday 9 February lecture) should be posted earlier. Dr.
Bomberg noted that this announcement had been posted as soon as the
notification of illness occurred.
A student requested that the occasional Friday slot (for viewing videos, etc)
be included on Wisard timetable. Dr. Bomberg will make this change.
4
One student (via email feedback) asked that standardized essay marking
guidelines be provided, particular in terms of penalties for word count. It
should be noted that standardized essay marking guidelines are provided in
both the Course Guide and the School Handbook. In addition, the penalties
for word count are explicitly clear in the course guide. Students who are
unhappy with any penalties enforced on their essays should contact their
tutors in the first instance to clarify the penalty.
Dr. Bomberg and Meryl Kenny thanked the students again for their comments,
and asked that if students had any additional feedback that they were unable
to raise at the meeting, they should send it via email.
5