Transcript What is the effect of SI on:

Annah Bengesai
Suri Moodley
Vino Paideya
Veena Singaram
Overview
 The presentation will seek to answer the following
questions
 What is SI?
 Does it work?
 Why does it work?
 Way forward
Is there a need for academic
development?
Summary of national graduation rates: DoE, 2009
30
26
25
24
25
Graduation rates
20
20
22
21
18
20
19
17
17
22
17
18
20
20
17
14
15
10
8
5
0
Institution
15
15
14
13
National Imperatives for Higher
Education
 Increase graduation rates to more than 25% by 2030.
 How can we contribute towards this imperative?
History of SI
1963 (University of Kansas City)
- Small Private University
- Law, Music, Dentistry, Pharmacy
- Reached to Urban Centres = UMKC
University of Missouri-Kansas City
- Public Institution
- No longer top 20% of High School graduates
- Culturally & Academically diverse
- Attrition rate from 20% - 45%
1972
- Survey of Academic Assistance Programmes
History of SI
 Faculty wanted
- Programme that did not lower standard
- No Extra work
- Not Remedial
- Promoted independent learning
What is SI?
A peer-assisted learning
programme
What is SI?
 Targets ‘high-risk’ courses and not ‘high-risk’ students
 Two-tiered – course content and ‘how to learn’
 SO the focus in SI is on learning rather than teaching.
Theoretical foundations
Vygotsky
 Learning as collaboration, a product of social
interaction
 Zone of proximal development
 Scaffolding
Zone of Proximal Development
Lave and Wenger’s situated
learning learning is a negotiated outcome resulting from
interactions between students and or the more
experienced academics.
 Learning takes place through participation in a
community of practice
Social interactions
Biggs’ Meta-learning
awareness of [own] learning and control over the
strategy selection and deployment (Biggs, 1985)
Principles of SI Derived
 Develops reciprocity and cooperation among students
 Encourages active learning
 Provides a space where students can freely engage in
their learning
 Combines the what (content) and the how to learn
(study methods)
Other principles
 Voluntary
 Non remedial
 Pro-active- starts as soon as lectures start
Implementation of SI at UKZN
 Formal learning space
 Faculty approved and supported
 Learning spaces encourage communal arrangements
and collaborative learning
 SI leaders- senior or postgraduate students
 Recruited by the SI supervisor and or Faculty members
based on course competency and interpersonal skills
Implementation
 Re-attend lectures and consult with the lecturer
 Two day training for SI leaders on SI principles and
facilitation techniques
 Goals of the SI program
 Improve student performance
 Improve learning skills

- Thinking and reasoning

- Responsibility

- Reflection
 Create independent learners
What SI is not
 Spoon feeding
 Re-lecturing
 Criticising the lecturer
 The facilitator dominating the session
 The facilitator providing all the answers
Overview
 Background to the study at UKZN

Arendale(2002); Zerger (2006)
 Aims
 Literature
 Methodology
 Results
Background
• Parallels (UKZN and UMKC)
•
Arendale (2002); Martin (); Zerger et al. (2006)
• SA context
• Hence SI implemented
What is the effect of SI on:
 Pass rates
•
quality of passes
– Retention
– Projected time to graduation
•
•
Progression
Throughput
– Students’ academic standing
Literature
 Pass rates:
 Arendale (2001);
 Malm, Bryngfors and Mörner (2011); )
 McCarthy, Smuts and Cosser (1997);
 Pascarella and Terenzini (2005).
 Retention:
 Blanc, deBuhr & Martin (1983);
 Bowles, McCoy and Bates (2008);
 Doty (2003);
 Pascarella & Terenzini (2005);
 Tinto (2005).
Methodology
 Sought to determine effect of SI on:





pass rates
Retention
Progression
Throughput
Academic standing
 Civil engineering
 2009 cohort (first entry) was traced over 3 semesters
 Students categorised:



Regular SI participants (SI > 5)
Inconsistent SI participants (SI < 5)
Students who did not participate (No SI)
Pass rates
2009 data for civil engineering modules: Fluids 1 and
Structural design 1(SD1)
Module
SI Attendance
Pass %
Fail %
Supp %
Fluids 1
SI >=5
100
0
0
SI < 5
72
14
14
No SI
87
4
9
SI >=5
82
4
14
SI < 5
44
12
44
No SI
33
50
17
SD1
Quality of pass
Charts for Mean. Median, mode for
SD1 and Fluids 1 respectively
90
80
80
70
70
80
70
60
60
60
50
50
mean
mean
med
med
mode
mode
40
40
3030
50
40
mean
med
30
mode
2020
20
1010
10
0 0
0
NoNo
SISI
SD1
SD10<x<5
0<x<5 5<=x<=15
5<=x<=15
No SI
FL1 0<x<5
5<=x<=15
90%
2009
SD1
2010
80%
70%
Pass rate
Pass rate
60%
50%
2009
FL1
57%
61%
40%
2010
30%
20%
52%
81%
10%
0%
SD1
FL1
2009 Civil engineering progression
90
2009

SD1
SI (>=5)
(36)
Current year of study
nd
Exclud 2
ed/ year
droppe
d
3%
rd
rd
th
3
3 and 4
th
year
4
year
year
70
60
SI (>=5) (36)
SI (1 <= n<5) (9)
50
3%
16 %
0%
78 %
Non-SI (11)
40
SI (1 <= 11 %
n<5)
(9)
Non-SI
(11)
0%
nd
2 &
rd
3
year
80
0%
18 % 18 %
0%
22 % 11 % 56 %
30
20
9%
18 %
0%
37 %
10
0
Excluded/
dropped
2nd year
2nd & 3rd
year
3rd year 3rd and 4th 4th year
year
Robot system
Academic standing – Fluids 1
100%
Status
No SI
SI (0< x < 5) SI (>=5)
90%
80%
Good
74 %
66 %
92 %
70%
60%
Risk
4%
16 %
8%
No SI
50%
Under
17 %
9%
0%
SI (0< x < 5)
SI (>=5)
40%
30%
Excl
4%
9%
0%
20%
10%
0%
Good
Risk
Under
Excl
80
Mark
distribution No SI
0<x<5
x >=5
70
60
0<x<20
3
0
0
20<x<29
2
0
0
30<x<39
2
1
2
50
mean
40
40<x<49
2
3
med
6
mode
30
50<x<59
1
2
12
60<x<69
1
0
13
20
70<x<79
0
2
2
10
80<x<100
0
0
0
0
No SI
SD1 0<x<5
5<=x<=15
Fluids 2
mean
med
mode
No SI
FL1 0<x<5
5<=x<=15
60
59
55
66
71
76
80
80
78
0
0
1
2
10
4
4
2
0
0
0
2
3
3
9
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
6
Mark distribution
0<x<20
20<x<29
30<x<39
40<x<49
50<x<59
60<x<69
70<x<79
80<x<100
Conclusion
Purpose of the study : to determine the effect of SI on
pass rates, retention, progression, throughput and
academic standing.
In this study student with regular SI attendance show
improved:
 Pass rates
 Retention
 Progression
 Throughput and academic standing