Evaluating the ‘Teach Smarter’ Initiative in Law

Mr Warren Barr

&

Dr Robert Stokes

Overview Background: The ‘Teach Smarter’ Initiative Module Design

Two Examples: Equity& Trusts, Commercial Law

Evaluating the Initiative Internal Processes, CLL Project

Potential and Pitfalls

Background:

The ‘Teach Smarter’ Initiative

Traditional ‘Law’ Delivery Professional Subject

Required Modules – 7 subjects (225 credits) 250+ students per required module 100+ for optional modules

Traditional Delivery & Assessment 24 Lectures + 5 Small Group Teaching Tutorials/Seminars (12

per group) Traditional Assessment Methods

Issues High volume of repeat teaching Lack of student engagement (preparation, participation) Feedback Issue

No Single Model Adopted

‘Teach Smarter’ is a change in ethos not a single blue-print for

module design or delivery

‘Teach Smarter’ Initiative

Rethinking Delivery Structured and more engaging learning:

• E-support and e-tasks• Emphasis on collaborative work (e.g. group work)• Emphasis on student engagement• Structured learning – pre- and post- delivery

engagement• Improved feedback

Staff Workload Benefits:• More research time through less repeat teaching• More engaging delivery

Module Design:

Two Examples

Example 1: Equity (Required)

30 credit module (‘long, fat’) 48 lectures + 10 tutorials for 250+ students

• Repeat Teaching Groups of 12 students = 21 tutorial groups Delivery Hours: 105 per Semester = 210 hours

Directed reading and lecture slides available on VITAL Tutorial Preparation:

• Students Conduct Individual Preparation and Participate In Interaction With The Tutor

Feedback: Informal, and Formal on Assessments Assessment: 25% coursework (Sem 1); 75% unseen

examination

Example 1: Equity (Required)

48 lectures + 6 seminars for 250 + students• Repeat Teaching

Groups of 30 students = 9 Seminar Groups Delivery Hours: 54 per Semester (2 hr Seminars) – 108 hours

Directed reading, pre- and post- group work (in, podcasts and other e-learning support materials on VITAL

• Students Prepare Directed Reading• Split Into Sub-Groups of no more than 6 students• Prepare unseen questions in group• Write up a question as a group after completion of Seminar

Additional Feedback: • Group Essay Feedback + Guideline Answer per Question• MCQ Self Test Feedback

Assessment: 25% coursework (Sem 1); 75% unseen examination

Change in Learning Ethos

TTutorT

Example 2: Commercial Law (Optional)

Different Approach:• Comparative Delivery Savings over of 1/3rd

Module Delivery:• No lectures• 10 Hours Seminars replace 5 hours Tutorials

Retains emphasis on group work

• Extensive support materials, including Seminar Podcasts and MCQs per topic and follow-up exercises

• Feedback: Podcasts (on seminar performance); Group Work Feedback, Marked Formative Essay, Assessed Plans

Evaluating The Initiative:

Internal Processes & CLL Project

Internal Processes

Student Surveys 2009-10 Equity & Trusts

• Positive reception to new model• Improved engagement• Too much content• Group work problems

Commercial Law• Positive reception to new model• Seminar materials praised• Positive response to feedback• Group work problems• Lectures popular

Evidence – Equity & Trusts Over 93% of respondents felt that VITAL was well used,

particularly in providing sources for seminar study and in supplementing lecture provision

“Very useful and found them a lot more helpful than tutorials that occurred for other modules. Learnt a lot more in seminars from discussions with others in the seminar and also in sub group work”

“the seminars do work very well - I have found them rewarding, and they have helped to clarify areas I was still hazy on following lectures and reading”

“the level of feedback given far surpasses that in any other module, and is helpful”

Evidence – Equity & Trusts

Some criticism:

“There are too much to cover in one seminar with a high speed train rushing through the session. Why cover 3 chapters when one is more than enough”

“If group work is preferred, punishments should be given to those who were not involved. Penalty seems too lenient, many got away by saying they are down with swine flu but I saw my group mate attended the lecture!”

Evidence – Commercial Law

90% felt seminars made a contribution to their learning beyond that of private study

93% felt that the seminar materials were either good or very good

86% were either very or fairly satisfied with the feedback they received.

Evidence – Commercial Law

Some criticism:“However, the seminars were pretty good. If possible, I would just add lectures to the current seminars, then it would be simply great module to study”

“The feed back to the only formative assessment essay was extremely poor and I was highly disappointed after putting work into it not getting a detailed personal feedback”

“I strongly believe having lectures will help students connect with the module much better”

“If there were no lectures, my tuition fee's should have been reduced.”

CLL Review

Methodology

Student Focus Groups: Nominal Group Technique

Online Survey (student) Online Survey (staff) Staff Interviews

Preliminary Observations

First Year Feedback Enablers

• Importance of directed reading• Opportunity for engagement• Structured learning

Disablers • Tutorial atmosphere• The free-loader problem• Unrealistic reading lists

Preliminary Observations

Second Year Feedback

More fractious than Year One Concerns over feedback and communication Problems with collaborative work Support for structured learning and new forms

of feedback, e.g. podcasts

Concluding Remarks

Potential and Pitfalls

Potential

Real Savings In Delivery Gains not in the first year but in subsequent years Should definitely be a pay-off in freeing up research time,

important for early academics

Better Student engagement More directed and effective Increased transferable skills

Staff benefits from learning ethos Better learning atmosphere – collaborative learning Better knowledge of students and student performance

Pitfalls

Entrenched attitudes

Front loading Too easy to underestimate workload involved in preparing

materials and rethinking delivery

Role of individual tutor Feedback, Quality, Approachability

Group Work and Communication Know What They Have To Do Better Guidance

Conclusions

Too early to be sure Potentials seems to outweigh pitfalls Students not harmed

Final assessment results are on a par or better than in previous year

Student Experience Will Improve As Progresses

Provisional View: Qualified Success