Gill Spencer and Jenni Wallace

Conceptualising SI

Gill Spencer and Jenni Wallace
From Helping Students to Learn from Each Other, Supplemental Instruction. SEDA Paper 86, 1995. Reproduced with permission.

"Cooperative learning is appropriate for an instructional task. The more conceptual the tasks, the more problem-solving and decision-making are required, and the more creative the answers need to be, the greater the superiority of cooperative over competitive and individualistic learning. "(Johnson et al 1986)

The benefits of cooperative small group learning strategies have long been recognised (Argyle:1967; Johnson et al: 1982; Light: 1990). However, there has been little formalisation of any processes that utilise such strategies. A tendency has been to encourage students to form their own study groups in an informal manner. Supplemental Instruction provides the opportunity for all students in historically difficult courses to benefit from voluntary involvement in cooperative small group learning in a structured or formalised way. Thus providing the much needed support.

Students when entering University typically perceive their needs as being content centred. However, experience shows that marginal students tend to show a common need for learning and thinking skills which are basic to content mastery. (Martin et al: 1992).

Academics are continually dissatisfied with learners' apparent inability to 'think'. Academic skills development seems lacking across the range of student preparedness in Universities. The lack of these skills inhibits the development autonomous or empowered students. It is proposed that the academic skills referred to include higher order skills such as comprehension, synthesis and cognitive monitoring, and not merely the traditional learning skills such as reading, writing and notetaking. In effect, academic skills relate to the process of learning that is required for content mastery.

Knowles (1980) suggests that education should be defined as "a lifelong process of continuing enquiry... the most important learning of all is learning how to learn, the skills of self-directed enquiry.". The educator's role could thus be perceived as teaching the learner how to learn. The changing nature of the predominant 'knowledge or truth' within any given discipline makes the development of the independent learner seem far more appropriate than the development of the learner as a vessel to be filled with a body of static knowledge. In order to equip the learner with the skills necessary for continued self-directed enquiry it is argued that more emphasis needs to be given to the process of learning than is currently the case.

Current understanding of the learning process are that the past knowledge, experience, values for and beliefs etc. of the learner are an integral part of the process. In order for learning to take place, the learners must 'construct' their own knowledge, which is informed by these experiences.

It is, however, increasingly difficult for academics to offer situations where learners can develop the skills necessary to construct their own knowledge, especially when information is transmitted through large lecture-style methodologies. Such methodologies are often synonymous with student passivity.

It seems obvious that some other approaches are necessary to provide the opportunity for the student to develop the academic skills necessary to become an autonomous learner.

Keimig (1983) developed a "Hierarchy of Learning Improvement Programmes" (in Martin et al: 1992). Remedial course teaching skills in isolation from course content ranked lowest on the hierarchy. Learning assistance for individual students ranked second from bottom, since such tutoring was generally provided after the academic failure or difficulty had been experienced. Such findings have influence the movement from traditional approaches of academic support to the current model of integrating skills development with course content (Frame: 1992).

Those strategies at the top of the hierarchy adopted methodologies whereby "students' learning needs are presented as being necessary because of the nature of the objectives and content of the course rather than because of students' deficiencies. Therefore, au students have access to supplementary ... instructional experiences, which benefit non-remedial students as well" (Keimig: 1983, in Martin et al: 1992).

One of the strategies at the top of this hierarchy is Supplemental Instruction.

Why is Sl different from Tutorials?

SI is different from an existing tutorial system in universities.

• attendance at SI is voluntary. It provides opportunity for learning to all students in a course. As only those students who wish to make use of this opportunity attend, the potentially destructive influence of non-participative students is avoided.
• SI sessions are learner-controlled, as opposed to teacher-controlled. The matrix below compares active and passive versus learner-controlled and teacher-controlled methodologies. (Von Hirschfeld: 1992).

Tutorials are located in the bottom left quadrant, i.e. active trainer-controlled methodologies. SI is located in the bottom right quadrant, i.e. active learner-controlled methodologies. Methodologies such as open questions, group discussions, self evaluation and role plays are commonly used in SI sessions. This impacts on the learning process in a number of important ways.

Teaching Methodologies Matrix

 

(Source: Adapted from Von Hirschfeld: 1992)

Through SI, the students are provided with an opportunity to discuss any difficulties they are experiencing in a pro-active manner. The students ask and answer their own questions. In order to master the content, techniques such as the informal quiz are used to ensure that students are provided with opportunities to determine what areas in the content are potentially difficult. Thus, whilst the students determine the agenda, the SI facilitator plans the session in such a way as to enable the students to pinpoint areas that warrant attention. It is thus, not simply a matter of asking the students what their problems are, but rather guiding them through a process that will make these problem areas transparent. It is suggested that the degree to which the SI sessions need to be planned and structured will depend largely on the academic and personal maturity of students at the SI sessions. The SI facilitator is trained to enable students to master the content of the discipline by guiding them through the learning process. The focus is on mastering the content by encouraging the use of appropriate leaming strategies that enable deeper understanding. In tutorials the agenda is typically determined by the lecturer or course coordinator. The tutor usually both asks and answers questions. The focus in tutorials is on content as opposed to process mastery.

Secondly, as SI is learner-controlled the power relations in SI are different from tutorials. The SI facilitator is in no way involved in assessment and is presented as a model student as opposed to a discipline authority. Thus, students are provided with an opportunity to construct their knowledge in a non-threatening environment. The risk attached to expressing one 's views is reduced by this non-threatening environment.

The third major difference between SI and tutorials is that the SI facilitator meets regularly with the course coordinator or lecturers to discuss the course content and to provide feedback from the students regarding the course. This enables the SI facilitator to identify those areas where students are likely to find difficulties. The SI facilitator is also in a position to make links between lectures, tutorials, texts and assignments. The process of course evaluation and planning is facilitated by the feedback from the SI facilitator to the course coordinator or lecturer/s. It is thus imperative that the course coordinators or lecturer/s involved in the course view SI as an integral part of the course and are willing to engage in a critical reflection of the course with the SI facilitator.

Fourthly SI leaders receive intensive training about the learning process. Tutors are normally given guidance only in content specific areas.

Finally, the SI programme lends itself to stringent evaluation in both a quantitative and qualitative manner.

Conclusion

Whilst the concept of cooperative small group learning is by no means new, the SI programme offers a practical cost-effective means of providing students with the opportunity to develop into autonomous learners.

This is achieved through the use of SI facilitators who are senior students. They are trained to develop the academic skills of learners by guiding them through the learning process necessary to achieve content mastery.

It is also apparent that SI offers all round support, not only to the learner, but to the academic staff, and the institution. The table below highlights those supportive points:

The support for the institution is that:

SI

• acknowledges there are difficult courses
• identifies their potential for high risk (student failure or drop-out) and combats the attrition rate aiding retention
• provides a cost effective way of supporting larger student numbers
• breaks down barriers between year groups
• may assist in breaking down cultural barriers
• creates an effective learning community.

The support for the academic is that:

SI

• supports the increased work load
• cuts down the amount of "minor requests" from students (they are dealt with by 2nd year students)
• enables students to be better prepared and keep up with course material
• trains students in basic group work
• embeds study skills in course content and delivery
• creates more independent learning
• gives regular feedback on how material is being learnt.

The support for the student is that:

SI

• enables the mastery of course concepts and increases competence in study and cognitive skills
• develops transferable skills
• enables students to increase their levels of performance and achievement
• gives discreet support for those students needing help
• gives privacy to practice the subject, to make mistakes, learn from peer groups, and build up confidence
• develops understanding of the university culture
• demonstrates the value of working a collaborative way, rather than one of competing
• enables a dear view of the course expectations
• develops autonomy in learning leading to a more empowered learner.

Last, but by no means least, there are a range of skills developed by the SI leaders, they are:

The skills of

• leadership
• problem solving
• group work
• listening/communication
• organisation
• guidance and support.

References

Argyle, M (1967); The Psychology of Interpersonal Behaviour; Pelican

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson F.P. (1982); Joining Together: Group Theory & Group Skills, 2nd ed.; Prentice Hall

Light R.J. (1990); The Harvard Assessment Seminars; Harvard University

Martin D.C. & Arendale D.R. (1992); SI: Improving Student Success in High Risk Courses; University of South Carolina, National Resource Centre for the Freshment Experience

Knowles M.S. (1980); The Modern Practice of Adult Education; Gulf Publications Co.

Von Hirschfield (1992); IMSSA Training Workshop; Johannesburg S.A.