|
|
SPACER SPACER SPACER |
SCOPE Project Lecturer's Report:
|
I. Introduction
As a further phase of the evaluation of course pack provision for the 4711 Social Differentiation course at the University of Stirling in autumn 1996, a more formal interview was arranged with the course coordinator (and principal lecturer) of the course.
4711 had 252 students registered on the course at the end of November 1996. Nearly all participants on the programme were full-time students at the University, and a huge majority were first-year students. About 30% of the class were 'mature' students, according to the end-of-semester questionnaire, although AB suspected that that might be a slightly high estimate (as mature students tend to turn up to lectures). There was one blind student on the course.
II. Methodology
This interview was conducted on Thursday 12th December 1996. The discussion was recorded to aid recall and ensure the accuracy of quotations.
At the start of the discussion, AB quickly read over the draft report on the focus groups and the raw data from the end-of-semester questionnaire (which had been delivered to the 4711 students the previous week).
III. Findings
Please note that material in quotation marks is attributed to AB.
a) Organisation of the course
The course, taught by the Department of Applied Social Sciences (DASS), comprised three one-hour lectures per week, on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays, although the Monday lecture later becomes an optional essay 'surgery'. In addition, there were four compulsory two-hour workshop sessions for which preparation was necessary.
Assessment was based on 40% coursework (30% on one essay and 5% on each of two workshop reports) and 60% on a 1.5 hour examination (on Saturday 14th December), which comprised two questions.
b) Organisation of the packs.
As far as selection of material for the readers was concerned, AB had sought one piece that was more theoretical and one piece that was more empirical for each topic of the course, for each reader. Which two pieces were selected was decided on the basis of something interesting, up-to-date, and useful for the next few years. Across the three packs there were to be, therefore, six items for each topic.
Subsequently, there were changes when copyright clearance was sought, particularly as clearance could not be obtained for the introductory materials. Each pack had been designed to give the student a range of reading across the course: they were never intended to be used for specific essays or workshops, with the proviso that if students formed consortiums of three, they would have a pretty good start for any essay or workshop topic between them. The approach was carefully thought out, and these points were made to the students, both verbally (in the first lecture) and in the information from SCOPE that went out with the course handout. AB said that was about the limit of what could be done for the students: she didn't have the time to go over administrative material at every lecture.
RG mentioned the strong call from the focus groups and questionnaires for more focussed packs i.e. gathering together all the papers on a particular topic. AB commented: "We might be able to generate more work from students or better attendance from students by introducing spoon-feeding, but I think that we would regard that as too high a price to pay, because the students who are going to do well in sociology and social policy are the ones who cope well with an introductory course where they are not spoon-fed, and right from the start we wish to encourage that. If they don't like it, they need to go and do a subject which is more directive. We do not want students who require everything given to them: that's not the nature of the study that we're attempting to promote. They need to get at the end to the point where they can do a dissertation, with some independent research, very independently. Spoon-feeding in the first year is not a good start. We have particular aims and objectives which we work towards from the start, I think." How much material is given to students and how to encourage them to read more widely is an area of great debate in the Department. In general, AB would agree with Steve Barron's assessment (in spring semester 1995/96) that first year students are not good at reading widely, but that they get better in later years. "This year's fourth year are terrific [at independent study]."
RG mentioned the comments from the focus groups about better indexing of the material in the SCOPE packs, and that students would like this related back to the course handout. AB commented that that wasn't feasible for last summer because of the copyright clearance difficulties. Even when the lists of pack contents were drawn up ten days before the course commenced, there were late deletions to the packs, and several students complained. AB wasn't convinced that further indexing beyond providing a list of the pack contents was necessary. For example, she specifically does not put call numbers on her reading lists to encourage students to start using the library.
AB was very disappointed by the copyright clearance problems this time around. "The problems weren't predictable: had they been so, we might have been able to produce more alternatives. We had to try and produce alternatives at very short notice. It makes it very difficult when you're trying to do something that is carefully thought out. It was OK; we survived, but I wouldn't like to try and do that every summer. Perhaps we should look at it sooner."
c) Students
There was some discussion about the number of people who turn up at lectures. RG expressed surprise that there were not more people at the final lecture. AB commented that many students on the course had not really chosen to do it. Her own evaluation form was seeking data on this issue. The current third year course had 90 students on it, implying fairly good retention of students. The University does not follow individual students through their time at the University: the University takes the view that students are admitted to the University, not to particular degree courses. This is not necessarily how students and academics see it.
When asked about the number of second year students on the course, AB commented that many students pick up sociology in the second semester of first year (4712) and then go on to take 4711 in the first semester of second year. 4712 is a 'recruiting' course for sociology as much as is 4711.
When told that about 30% of the class appeared to be mature students, AB agreed that that seemed about right among those that turn up to lectures, but that it might be skewed because the mature students are the ones who do attend lectures. It was her very strong impression that those who do not turn up to lectures are the younger students.
There was a general discussion about those students who do not turn up at lectures. AB has little time for them. Workshops on the course are compulsory and University attendance requirements are operated. Some students are ejected from the course every year for non-attendance: twelve last year, probably about ten this year. Usually these students are doing the same thing on other courses i.e. not attending, etc.
A discussion about student reading habits prompted the useful comment that with the changed assessment system, students were of necessity now much more focussed upon essays and so on, in comparison with the old finals system. "Part of [academics'] complaint is asking students to do things that they really can't do. There is an element of unreasonableness in it, but at the same time we're trying to encourage reading."
d) Electronic delivery
AB had definite concerns about the level of computer provision at the University. While she thought that Stirling was in a better position than the 'new' universities, it lagged well behind the 'old' universities like Glasgow and Edinburgh. She did not think that the University had sufficient capacity, nor that the students had sufficient computer-literacy, nor that the students had adequate means for becoming computer-literate. She has heard mixed feedback on the centrally-provided course (which she had recommended to all her students: the Psychology Department had arranged a special course for its own students). Many students, even those who enter the University straight from school, do not have a history of good access to, or familiarity with, computers.
When RG pointed out that there was already a change in the level of concern about computer provision between last year's students and this year's, and that it should continue to diminish over time, she expressed doubt that it would change very quickly. In her own course evaluation, she had included a question about level of computer use and familiarity to establish a baseline of where the students were in terms of computer literacy. (These results would be fed back to SCOPE after analysis in January.) DASS was looking at computer provision in the University as a whole following feedback from the last TQA assessment. DASS is quite clear that central provision must be improved.
AB was pleased to hear that it was intended that the resources were intended to be made available, on a read-only basis, to all suitably equipped (i.e. Acrobat readers) machines on campus.
She also commented that using the online resource bank would entail a series of decisions for the students, with repeat visits, compared with the single decision that was required on the purchase of a reader. This was considered to be a good thing in many respects, involving a more active use of reading resources.
When asked about continuing with paper packs or switching to electronic provision, AB commented that students will still need to go to the library to select particular items for particular essays. She did not think that online provision would increase the spoon-feeding element: "I don't know how far it will decrease the wider reading element. That's one of the things that we were trying to promote in producing the readers in the way that we did, because we felt that there was a problem with students' wider reading; we felt maybe we could turn it around and use it to promote wider reading whereas everybody thinks that you use it to promote spoon-feeding. My major worry [with online provision] is the University facilities, and I feel that we may have to go on having both [paper and online provision]."
AB envisages a reduced print run of paper packs, but in the same format i.e. three packs. Providing one large pack would be too expensive. When originally conceived in 1995, a single pack was going to be about £60 (on the basis of CLA charges). "If students can use the SCOPE thing as an online library, then maybe that's a good thing ... It would take the pressure off [the RBR]. But they must be able to get at it: they must be able to get at the terminals, both in terms of having enough and in terms of their own ability -- that, to me, is still a major worry."
In response to concern expressed by RG that the 4711 students might have had enough of SCOPE ('SCOPEd out'!) with two questionnaires as well as focus groups, AB commented that she hadn't had any worries expressed from students about the Project. "Looking for feedback is very important, so that they feel they are being involved and they are being properly consulted."
e) Other
There was concern about the level of provision of material in RBR. Material in the SCOPE reader was cut back to one copy (but this was not different from last year): other material was cut from one copy per 15 students to one copy per 30 students.
AB asked whether providing material online would allow extra copies to be put in RBR.
IV. Summary
1) AB is planning to continue with the production of paper course packs as a complement to online provision for the next teaching session in 1997/98, subject to discussion with the SCOPE team.
2) Organisation of the paper course packs will need to be started earlier to try and avoid the difficulties that resulted with this autumn's provision.
3) The format of the printed packs will not be changed. AB will resist the call for paper packs that are more focussed on particular subject areas or essay/workshop topics.
4) AB has real concerns about students' access to computers and their level of computer literacy. DASS is attempting to address this by urging improvement to central provision.