The PAL³ Project

1. The PAL³ Project ALDinHE Symposium, Nottingham 2010 Sherry Jeary, Suzy Atfield-Cutts & Heather Mayes

2. Outline • An overview of PAL • PAL in Bournemouth University • PAL on the Software Systems Framework • The PAL³ project • Classifying PAL • Future work

3. Background to PAL • Introduced in the UK in 1990 • Based on US model called Supplemental Instruction (SI) • SI is an Exemplary Education Program in US • Purpose in US is to target high risk, historically difficult courses • Goals are to decrease attrition rates in target courses, to improve student grades and increase graduation rates

4. What is PAL? • A scheme run by students for students • Active learning is encouraged • Participatory, collaborative group work is facilitated by a student leader • UK National Centre of Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) at Manchester launched 2009

5. PAL in Bournemouth • Peer Assisted Learning • University wide • Used in all schools in most frameworks in some form • 2nd year students who have been selected via interview process, are employed to run timetabled session for 1st year students.

6. PAL in Bournemouth (2) Requirement of employment that PAL Leaders undergo initial training Centrally provided for PAL Leaders from all over BU Initial and Follow-Up training Facilitates independent/peer learning NO TEACHING In period 2001-2007 - 700 PAL Leaders trained and 8000 students benefitted.

7. PAL on Software Systems Framework • Used informally in 1996 on BSc Business Information Technology (BIT) degree for two years • More formal trial run on BSc Computing in 2001which was suspended after problems • Started 3 weeks into term • Did not include PAL on the timetable • Sessions were arranged, advertised and promoted by PAL Leaders. • Was not taken seriously by all staff

8. Teething Troubles Resolved • When PAL resumed 4 PAL Leaders were trained centrally. • PAL was introduced from the first week. • PAL was timetabled and embedded into the course. • Registers of attendance taken. • Staff were encouraged to participate by providing notes, work etc to PAL Leaders for inclusion into PAL sessions.

9. PAL on Software Systems Framework • Used on the BSc BIT degree in 2002 and resumed on BSc Computing in 2004. • The courses have since evolved • Courses are now part of Software Systems Framework with 220+ students. • Advertised to prospective students • Employer buy-in • PAL is fully integrated into the Framework

10. More detail • PAL Leaders work in pairs • Each pair assigned to 2 seminar groups for the year • Regular meetings between PAL Leaders and PAL Contacts • 2 PAL Contacts are course based and are also 1st Year Tutors • In 2009/2010 200+ 1st Year Students and 12 PAL Leaders

11. PAL Structure in SSF

12. The PAL³ Project

13. Aims Provide useful support for PAL Leaders Provide a central repository to link all 3 aspects of PAL Give PAL Leaders autonomy over their own area

14. Requirements A repository and communication systems for 3 levels of users. Students PAL Leaders PAL Contacts 3 areas for these distinct sets of people which can be identified as: Signposting Repository of knowledge Administration

15. Students’ Requirements Students’ Requirements were to include: All student access is read only. Options available to include Info page Links Document Repository Social

16. Student View

17. Student View 2

18. PAL Leaders’ Requirements PAL Leaders’ Requirements were to include: Admin Area PAL Session Links Social

19. PAL Leader View

20. PAL Leader View 2

21. PAL Contacts’ Requirements PAL Contacts full access administration externally facing repository, of PAL/Peer Mentoring/Supplemental Support info and documents etc. This will be a separate stage of development.

22. PAL Contact View

23. Implementation PAL Leaders – 1st week of Autumn Term PAL Leaders then introduced the system to their students PAL Leaders then used BUPAL to plan for sessions Competition for facebook logo Poster – “Lessons Learned”

24. Evaluation Interim questionnaire for PAL Leaders 55% response rate Overall PAL Leaders were positive about the project despite some teething issues Focus groups held at end of term with each seminar group Focus group with PAL Leaders

25. Conclusions Initial findings, corroborated later by the Forums, indicated: A central storage point key An external system seen as an unwelcome, additional burden & a barrier to use Additional features were not used E-mail remained key tool

26. Continuing Work on PAL Contact View Audience input Go through form Which institution Do they have PAL Is that person involved in PAL Which categories apply Have “other” option for them to fill in themselves Collect Forms What problems did they have filling in the form? Ask for missing categories

27. Continuing Work on PAL Contact View • What problems did they have filling in the form? • Ask for missing categories

28. Factors & Catagories

29. Why create Factors & Categories? • To make PAL programs comparable. • Do relationships exist between implementation factors and successful PAL programs? • Several factors are identified, each has its own set of categories. • Using the categories in a matrix makes programs comparable • Measuring the level of program success makes it possible to identify the factors that make a program successful. • We hope to contribute to the improvement and quality of learning NB:- Measuring success is not part of our work currently.

30. Web Page of PAL Programs

31. 7 Factors for Comparison PAL Leader Status Course Scope Rewards(for PAL Leaders) Staff Involvement Session Integration Timetabling Subject

32. Factor: PAL Leader Status • Natural Selection Peer Leader • Elected Peer Leader • Promoted Peer Leader • Next Level Peer Leader • Previous Level Peer Leader

33. Factor: Course Scope • Often defined by the problem it is implemented to solve. • In turn, often defined by the duration of topic or module as it is studied often in parallel in normal teaching sessions. • Single topic • Single Module • Course Wide

34. Factor: Rewards (for PAL Leaders) • Employment • Course Credit • Prestige only

35. Factor: Staff Involvement • Staff Directed Sessions • Staff Topic Suggestion • Staff Resource Provision

36. Factor: Session Integration • Highly related to scope. • Taught sessions are often for short term use of PAL and the session integration factor refers to the level of integration of PAL into taught sessions. • Taught Sessions • Additional Sessions

37. Factor: Timetabling • Highly influential factor on attendance • Eg: early days at BU - including PAL on students’ timetables from the beginning of the year, improved PAL attendance dramatically. • Timetabled • Additional

38. Factor : Subject • It may be that, for instance, PAL lends itself best to • Eg: science subjects rather than arts • Eg: practical subjects rather than theoretical. • Currently, there is no information available • Identifying the areas in which PAL operates most successfully will depend on the current and previous use and perceived success.

39. Using Factors & Categories • Multiple programmes within a matrix enables easy comparison • Other criteria under consideration for inclusion as factors include • student to leader ratio • group size • whether attendance is optional • training in terms of type and duration

40. Using Factors & Categories

41. Factors & CategoriesFuture Work • E.g.: current criteria would not differentiate between two implementations with the same attribute values across the board where • class sizes of 18 led by a pair of PAL Leaders jointly ( BU ) • classes are split into groups of 5 students per PAL Leader (University of Central Lancashire) (Tariq,2005). • We know of many examples informally which pose questions for formal study • Categorising PAL programmes may create some building blocks for future work • Need a means of identifying ‘successful’ PAL programs

42. Thanks • Learn Higher • BU

43. Questions?