Learning and teaching

• Staff home
• IT and online services
• Learning and teaching
  • Community Engaged Learning (CEL)
  • Technology
  • Programme Learning and Design
  • Quality assurance
  • Academic Practice
    • Lecturing staff
    • Graduate teaching assistants
    • Research staff who teach
    • Teaching leaders
    • Supervising Dissertations and Projects workshop
  • Inclusive-Learning@York
  • Student learning support
  • Contacts and committees
• Administrative hub
• Research
• Staff supporting students
• Health and safety
• Project and change management
• Working at York
• Finance
• Legal Services
• Leisure and culture
• Support, health and wellbeing
• Policies and strategies
• External relations
• Community without Limits

Streamlined peer support: Mathematics

How much administration and reporting is really necessary for Peer Support for Teaching (PST)? What other PST approaches and systems might foster and sustain a positive, supportive, culture around teaching and learning that gets things done when needed?

The PST process in Mathematics

Background

The introduction of the PST Policy in 2011 prompted Mathematics to review activities within their department to identify those that could be described as such in order to formalise a system for coordinating and reporting on them. Prior to 2011, the department had a robust and valued Peer Observation of Teaching (PoT) system in place, with PST initially seen as a means of expanding on this. The benefit of the review was that it revealed a rich array of PST activities already occurring across the department, examples of which are outlined below. These activities tended to emerge organically in response to teaching and learning enhancement interests among staff, to institutional and national sector demands, and/or to student evaluations on modules and feedback from students on the Staff/Student Liaison Committee (SSLC). However, the ad-hoc nature of these activities, often involving teaching teams working together, proved to be something of a problem in terms of devising a formal PST system for coordinating and reporting on them.

After a preliminary trial, the general consensus within the department was that it too administratively burdensome for a delegated staff member to coordinate a formal PST process to cover all of these activities. It also risked undermining the very ethos of collegiality that the new policy was intended to support, all without adding any palpable benefit to teaching and student learning in the department. Staff reported feeling constrained in pursuing their enhancement interests by the imposition of formally coordinated PST groups; and the detailed reporting process, feeding through from PST groups to the Departmental Teaching Committee (DTC) and into the Annual Programme Review (APR), was felt to have an air of performance monitoring that many were uncomfortable with.

Taking stock of the implementation of PST, the department ultimately decided no longer to coordinate and report on group activities but instead to allow them to emerge organically and be reported through existing mechanisms when necessary as before. As it was felt that PoT was one PST activity that would be less likely to occur spontaneously, the system to coordinate and report on it was reinstated.

Example Group Project Assessment Review

The nature of Mathematics as a discipline requires students to be challenged and risk failure in order to learn effectively. However, beyond the first year, the organisation of most modules on the BSc Mathematics means that failing any assessment carries high stakes for students as there is a strong possibility that it would impact negatively on their final degree grade, particularly as University rules require students to pass all modules to progress. This can be an issue even for exceptionally strong students predominantly achieving high first class grades, which the department believes risks a disproportionate penalty for otherwise highly engaged and able students.

In 2015/16, prompted by a discussion emerging from DTC, a PST group of staff volunteered to look at curriculum design options that might address this issue. The group consisted of members of BoS, DTC and the Assessment Committee, with wider input from interested staff members. The group’s recommendation was to merge existing 10-credit modules into 40 credit modules, one of which would be core. The 40 credit modules would be assessed through three exams. This way students could cover each of the four 10 credit units without being required to pass each unit successively.

The group proposed the idea to DTC, where it was met with enthusiasm. It was then reported to BoS, who noted wider consequences, especially with regards to Combined Programmes and compliance with University regulations on assessment. The PST group is currently investigating these issues further with a view to taking the idea forward. The project has been recorded in minutes for the DTC and BoS but has not been coordinated or reported through PST. The project is ongoing.

Peer observation of teaching

PST approach: paired support

At the start of the academic year, a member of DTC pairs all academic staff who teach for observations. Lecturers are observed once on every module they teach across the year, with most staff teaching two or three modules in this time. In selecting who to pair, the staff member considers extent of professional experience, how long someone has been working in the department, whether these colleagues have observed each other before and how recently, the average standard of evaluation they receive from students on their own modules, and their level of familiarity with their partner’s area of specialism in mathematics. Every effort is made, for example, to pair staff who are new to the department, very new to HE teaching, and/or to the UK HE context with experienced colleagues who have a record of receiving positive evaluations from students on their modules. This pairing supplements other systems in place to support staff orientation: such as being assigned a mentor from within the department and undertaking the University’s PGCAP programme. 

Once colleagues are paired, they are left to organise the observation as they see fit. A basic form is available to record the process, which requires the teacher to complete basic information, the observer to then record their observations, before returning it to the teacher for a written response. However, most find it more beneficial to have a face-to-face discussion soon after the session, using the form to note any concerns or examples of good practice that were discussed. These forms are then passed on to the delegated DTC member for review to report back to the main DTC. Most concerns raised are minor in nature and resolved through the paired discussion, so the DTC report on the Peer Observation process tends to be general. Significant concerns are, however, noted and discussed at the DTC meeting, which includes student reps who can also contribute to this discussion.

Examples of good practice are also noted by DTC, although the main vehicles for capturing these are module evaluations and staff reports on particular initiatives (a current example of the latter is trialling lecture capture). This information is collated and disseminated to the whole department at an annual Programme Review meeting held at the end of the summer.

Postgraduates Who Teach (PGWTs)

PST approach: nominated supporters

Academic staff in Mathematics who are assigned PGWTs for their modules have a responsibility for supporting their professional development as teachers, which should (as a minimum) involve undertaking at least one observation of their teaching. This dispersed PST Nominated Supporter model can mean some staff have more PGWTs to observe than others, depending on the cohort size and organisation of the module. However, academic staff recognise a mutual benefit to supporting PGWTs given that the latter are assisting them in the delivery of the module. The same Peer Observation form described above is used for PGWTs, although their completed forms are added to their file and discussed at their next TAP meeting.  PGWTs are also expected to attend at least one of the module convenor’s teaching sessions. 

Module monitoring and support

PST approach: paired support

Mathematics also has a process in place to support colleagues who may be experiencing specific problems with their modules. Staff can request support through this process, or it can be triggered if a module evaluation scores below a minimum threshold standard set by the department.

Identified modules are assigned to a more experienced staff member – usually a member of the Department Management Team.  The process is tailored through discussion with the module leader, and may involve all or any of the following: 

• Meeting to review all teaching materials and documentation (syllabus, module descriptor, etc) to determine if the module would benefit from design changes.
• Observation by the experienced staff member of one or more teaching sessions, especially if they involve different modes of delivery.
• Support with setting, marking and moderating summative and formative assessment.

The paired colleagues have a final meeting to evaluate the experience and ensure that the module leader feels confident and supported moving forward.  Module leaders who have been supported through the process report finding it very helpful, not least as it has consistently resulted in improved evaluation scores.

Peer support for teaching and learning enhancement

As mentioned above, there are a range of activities occurring regularly in the department that classify as PST, but which the department has opted not to formally coordinate and report on through a PST process.

In terms of sharing practice on an individual level on specific issues such as module design, assessment and teaching delivery, the department values a “corridor conversation” culture, and has in the past enjoyed the benefit of a departmental coffee lounge to facilitate this informally. Timetabling constraints throughout the University means that this space may have to be used for teaching if it is under-used. However, the department has sought to maintain it as a versatile “lounge-classroom” rather than transform it into a more typical seminar room so that it can still be used by staff when available. It may be, if timetabling constraints increase, that use of this space for informal conversations on teaching and learning might need to be organised more carefully. A model for how this might work is already been trailed by the department’s research facilitator, who has been organising scheduled “coffee mornings” for colleagues to meet informally to discuss their current work.

PST approach: group projects (ad-hoc)

Attending to enhancement initiatives often involve the formation of working groups to address specific issues, which the department does recognise as PST, but finds is more appropriately managed through existing administrative mechanisms. These groups can be formed both reactively to specific problems and with the aspirational aim of enhancing some aspect of teaching in the department. The groups are trusted to coordinate themselves and either address the issue autonomously, or consult with and report decisions to DTC and Board of Studies (BoS) as appropriate. Projects lengths can vary, with many spanning more than one year. Membership of the groups can also change as needed depending on the stage and knowledge input requirements for  the project. Recent projects include the redesign of year-one of the BSc Mathematics for implementation in 2016/17 and a proposed redesign of year-two of the same programme currently under way.