BASR: Discourse Journal

Teaching and Learning > DISCOURSE

This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.

Enhancing Academic Achievement among Philosophy Students

Author: Yvonne Bremer et al

Journal Title: Discourse

ISSN: 2040-3674

ISSN-L: 1741-4164

Volume: 6

Number: 1

Start page: 13

End page: 49

Return to vol. 6 no. 1 index page

Background and rationale

The project was put together to examine, and hopefully present some solutions to, the challenges posed by the increasing number of students with special educational needs (SEN), dyslexia in particular, entering higher education.

The reasons for this increase stem mainly from a) the current government's agenda to widen participation among 18-30 year olds to 50% and b) the fact that schools have become better at supporting students with special needs, thereby enabling them to achieve the requirements for university admissions.

Although there has been a great deal of research in how best to support students with diverse learning needs in higher education, it appears that many staff in departments either are not aware of strategies for enhancing academic performance for students with SEN, or are of the opinion that it is not part of their 'remit', believing it to be the domain of specialists. This second point — that SEN is a problem for specialists — is reinforced by the way higher education institutions keep SEN units and skills study centres separate from academic departments. That is to say, specialists employed to support students with SEN rarely interface with academics. Instead they work directly with students and rely on them to be able to articulate their needs.

Our project aimed to redress this lack of communication between academics and SEN specialists so that support strategies could be embedded in the curriculum. We also felt that employing alternative methods of communicating material might mean that academics are able to enhance the achievement of all students — not merely those who have been identified as having special needs.

The need for a subject-specific approach

If academics are less than enthusiastic about sourcing and implementing alternative teaching methods provided by educationalists generally, and SEN specialists specifically, it may be in part because the work that they do tends to be regarded as 'generic', while academics understand their subject areas to be highly specialised. Approaches that are effective with engineering students, for example, may not be seen to be helpful for philosophy undergraduates grappling with subject-specific issues such as logic or the writing of highly structured, detailed arguments.

Our project aimed to facilitate a two-way conversation between SEN experts and academics — in this case academics working in philosophy — so that alternative teaching methods could be applied appropriately and with a view to addressing the particular needs of the subject community. This means that SEN specialists and philosophers were called upon to cooperate to find means of enhancing academic achievement. The focus was on developing academic achievement for students who have diverse learning needs, with an emphasis on dyslexia.

Projected outcomes

There were two main outcomes expected from this project. The first was to have academics experiment with a variety of teaching methods, some of which were new to them, and to report on the efficacy of the methods based on student achievement over a period of time, to be assessed in a qualitative way through focus groups. (It was also envisaged that this might be followed up in the future with another project which would seek to identify quantitative data on the effects of such methods on student achievement.) The second was to demonstrate a working relationship between academics and a SEN specialist and to show how philosophy departments and SEN advisors might establish a useful dialogue in order to support students with diverse learning needs. Keith Crome reports on this in the Discourse article, 'Reflecting on collaboration with SEN specialists'.

Methodology

Individual academics who were in contact with the Subject Centre, and had expressed an interest, were invited to take part in a focus group as part of a workshop day facilitated by the SEN specialist, Yvonne Bremer. The findings of this day would inform how we progressed with the project.

Conceptual framework

To give some background to the project and its methodology, from the educationalist perspective, this section seeks to clarify the rationale that was used to discuss teaching and learning in lectures, seminars and through the use of course materials, which was elaborated on and built upon in the focus group and workshop sessions.

What makes effective teaching and learning in a lecture?

Structuring

The topic emphasis for each section should be clearly stated.
Information should be critically evaluated, and links to the next piece of information should be made clear.
The cumulative, sequential nature of information should be made explicit.
Students should be able to follow the lecturer's cognitive map, which should be clearly signposted with distinct headings.
The process of delivery should also be signposted by using summarising and questioning, and application of the new knowledge to examples.
The students should be engaged emotionally by collaboratively setting expectations in terms of learning outcomes and the projected aims for the session.
The information covered should be effectively summarised.

Variation in style and pace

Methods of delivery which are not exclusively auditory should be used.
Visual associations should be created, with images, colours, different fonts, and staggered appearance of text in PowerPoint.
Repetition of key concepts should be linked to easily remembered phrases, rather like a narrative.
A reference document should be used to support delivery so that students can track the progress of the information and note their own memory joggers and associations.
Pace changes should be used that are responsive to lulls in energy levels.
The type of interaction should be varied and inclusive. Suggestions for achieving this include: widen group participation, invite comments, or split into pairs or threes for short discussions, five or even three minutes each way.

Elements of surprise and humour

The use of a video clip or a short extract from a radio recording is novel and unexpected and acknowledges that people learn in different ways. Photographs and personal details of a philosopher enable students who have working memory difficulties to establish associations for the information they are hearing.
Humour, riddles and puzzles all temporarily engage us emotionally with feelings of confusion, anticipation and enthusiasm, and facilitate academic resilience and achievement.

Interaction between lecturer and students

The lecturer should model a structured process of thinking in the delivery of the lecture.
Cognitive processes such as the lecturer's own use of questioning, comparisons, assumptions and implications of the knowledge, which have been internalised, should be made explicit.
The lecturer should remember what it was like to first start to study philosophy, assess which modes of thinking are most productive, and demonstrate how to practise them. They should be put into the context of exercises for the student.
Short invitations should be given to students to encourage them to think through, although not necessarily feed back, in the light of the information that has been given.

Seminar observation (component parts of student/tutor involvement)

Observation of students in seminars is a useful tool to evaluate how well the students are developing the selected learning aims for small group sessions.

We look for an increase or improvement in:

Understanding
Students test understanding, through examples from reading, to support their discussion and arguments and clarify concepts.
Critical thinking
Students review evidence in the light of theories, and enhance their capacity for logical reasoning and formal argument.
Personal growth
Students clarify attitudes, articulate and reappraise values, master academic discourse on the subject and evolve a sense of responsibility and commitment.
Communication skills
Students refine questioning, listening and explaining skills, present and defend their position clearly and cogently, and give and get feedback.
Group and teamwork skills
Students set, allocate and monitor, initiate and lead tasks within a group.
Self direction in learning
Students clarify their own goals as learners, manage study time and effort and set priorities, accepting responsibility for evaluating their own work and their progress as learners and increasing their motivation for independent learning.¹

Process of encouragement

Students with diverse learning needs such as dyslexia may need explicit encouragement to prepare and participate. Reduced or guided reading tasks can make the information more readily accessible. Hesitancy about participating can be addressed in a number of different ways.

Ways of encouraging students to prepare:

Provide a clear week by week course manual to outline the required reading for lecture and seminar.
Make photocopies or a course handbook of collected texts, or make them available on the internet, so that they are readily accessible for each module.
Especially in early sessions, set tasks that are limited in scope and achievable.
Setting up preparation as questions encourages reflection; for example 'read pages 10-15 and note three reasons why you think...', is better than unreflective reading with no particular purpose made explicit.
Setting sub groups of students different preparatory tasks on a common text can help to ensure a wide range of contributions.
Developing Directed Activities Related to Texts (DARTS) can make reading an essential part of learning.²

Ways of encouraging students to contribute:

Make sure that learning is seen as a co-operative process.
Use methods which foster students' contributions early on in sessions.
Make students aware of the skills they are expected to practice.
Set students realistic and achievable tasks.
Make students aware of the importance of participation.

Process of Participation

A diverse student body in terms of previous experience and knowledge may make it necessary to explain participation to students. Those students who are embarrassed by their specific learning disability need to have reassurance through clear ground rules as well as a conceptualising of behaviours that make up a repertoire of participation. This could be broken down as follows:

Listening attentively to others.
Giving information to others.
Asking others for information.
Giving examples.
Checking out what others have said.
Giving reactions to the contributions of others.
Asking for reactions to one's own contributions.
Initiating discussion by asking questions, giving ideas, making suggestions.
Bringing together and summarising.
Encouraging others to take part.

Process of establishing group safety ground rules

Students are more likely to meet ground rules that they have agreed. When formulating rules for group interaction within the group, the process immediately involves students and draws out the elements of participation described above. It shows students that their ideas are valid and valued.

Suggestions of ground rules are:³

Don't interrupt people whilst they are talking.
Turn up on time.
Do at least some preparation.
Seek consensus rather than confrontation.
Don't dominate and overpower people.
Actively encourage others to join in.
There are no 'stupid' questions.
Take a share of responsibility for making the group work.
Make an effort to contribute your ideas and opinions.
Criticise people's ideas rather than them personally.

Course requirements

Achieving academic literacy for dyslexic students requires that we think very thoroughly about reading and assessed writing tasks.

Reading

If this is inaccessible the students are at an immediate disadvantage and may become very discouraged.

Set tasks that are limited in scope with appropriate questions to encourage reflection.
Develop Directed Activities Related to Texts (DARTS).
Clarify and define specific vocabulary with examples from within the students' own frame of reference.
Conceptualise and contextually enliven the writing of particular philosophers, giving personal as well as social and cultural details.
Direct students to easier, more general information available on the web before expecting them to read the original texts, so, once again, they are able to place the information in context.

Writing

Students with dyslexia often have very time consuming approaches to organising writing and have difficulties with a range of skills. Interpretation of the essay title may result in the wrong emphasis. Structuring of information, linkages between ideas and paragraphing can be very muddled. Structuring, using an argumentative style, is a significant component of successful philosophical writing and its exposition needs to be made explicit. Grammar and sentence structure could be considered as not within a lecturer's remit, but short exemplary exercises on sentence fragments and the use of words that do not add to the meaning, embedded in learning/study skills sessions within departments, have been evaluated as useful to students.

Use exercises that will move students into recognition of different thinking modes.
Make explicit the concepts used in argumentative discourse as an example for students to use in writing.
Involve students in team-working scenarios producing summaries, critical analyses or reviews and make explicit the components that make such processes successful.

The focus group

This was held on 1st November 2005 at Manchester University. Philosophy lecturers from MMU, UCLAN and Lancaster University attended, as did two SEN specialists and two Subject Co-ordinators from the Subject Centre for PRS.

The intention of the focus group meeting was to bring educationalists and philosophers together, with the aim of participants increasing their understanding of the subject specific nature of learning and teaching in philosophy. In addition, by taking part in activities such as re-reading Descartes as a group with mixed philosophy experience, ranging from none at all to extensive, we hoped that participants would gain a more rounded appreciation of differences in learning states and styles, and cognitive styles, and that through this we would be able to suggest a range of different strategies to facilitate more effective learning which we could investigate further in the course of the project.

It was agreed that there was a need to establish a shared language of communication regarding teaching and learning, so the group began by defining certain key principles. These then informed the learning tasks that the participants performed during the course of the day, and were developed as the activities progressed.

Key principles

1. Operational Definitions of Dyslexia⁴—Historically, definitions have been descriptive, indicating a perceived deficit in the individual which is then seen as the cause of inhibited learning. Educationalists now perceive that it is more effective to give attention to the context of instruction within HE and identify the circumstances that enable individuals with different learning requirements to achieve their best potential. In this way we are using an operational definition of dyslexia, moving away from the students' causative factors to give attention to the instructional circumstances. This involves the integration of neurological factors with cognitive, behavioural and affective aspects, to tease out how these different processing difficulties will affect learning:

• neurological and biological roots of explanations have tended to be what has been focused on in the past, for example visual processing magnocellular abnormality, or levels of activity in cerebral hemispheres.
cognitive processes involved in some of the tasks we expect
students to complete should be examined, as even something as
basic as reading requires a complex array of skills. Dyslexics
have a range of difficulties with reading and information processing,
such as selection of relevant from irrelevant information,
memorising, following sequential details, excessive elaboration
and losing track of the key points. We can create an
environment that facilitates easier identification of the key points for students so that they are able to apply a structure to their own independent reading.
• acceptance of behavioural and affective aspects of learning
means that there is an acknowledgment that the social and
cultural context within which learning takes place is crucial in
mediating how effectively students learn. Students and staff can
benefit from awareness raising about the diversity in ways of
knowing, and awareness of their own behaviour and emotional
responses in certain learning contexts.

2. The importance of teaching and learning being perceived as processes — in particular the dilemma of the need to present content in a short space of time versus more interactive approaches to curriculum delivery.

3. The importance of metacognitive learning — thinking about our preferred ways to learn, to encourage self-reflection as a learner.

4. Recognising core aspects of SpLD (Specific Learning Difficulties) that are common difficulties but do not represent an identical entity.

5. Recognising a range of levels of acquisition of literacy skills by students—many students have weaknesses in this area but have not been identified as having a specific learning difficulty.

6. The recognition that there is, in any group, diversity in terms of learning style, cognitive style and abilities—such as the ability to develop schemata to structure and process information.

7. As academics and more experienced learners, in any field, we have a wealth of previously acquired information and skills. Recognising the way we use prior knowledge is an important evaluative tool in structuring teaching and also encouraging self-reflection on the part of the learner. The concept of the 'zone of proximal development',⁵ basically knowledge that we have not yet acquired, but have the ability to learn based on what we already know, can inform thinking here.

8. The principle of 'reciprocal teaching'⁶ was experienced as a possible strategy for those learners who need to bridge the gap between their current knowledge and new knowledge.

At the end of the day a consensus had been reached regarding the value of the focus day and the benefits that could be achieved from the project, and the way forward in terms of future research meetings was agreed on.

1. Watch and learn visits — It was agreed that Yvonne, lead educationalist on the project, would spend one day in the first semester with each of the prime participants (UCLAN, Lancaster and MMU), for the purpose of observing a current module in terms of lectures, seminars, suggested readings and proposed assignment titles. After this observation, discussion with staff would follow to ascertain possible small changes in teaching and learning intervention that would be practical to implement. A second semester module would then be selected and adapted to include the identified strategies to enhance a variety of learning styles. Simultaneously a cohort of students studying the new module would be invited to take part in a 1.5 hour awareness training programme on self management/ reflection as part of Personal Development Planning. This would be delivered during the second stage.

2. Monitoring the implementation of suggestions and a session for students on self coaching and self reflection skills — It was agreed that the second stage of the project would be for Yvonne to spend a second day with each of the prime participants after the adapted module had been running for three or four weeks. There would be a joint monitoring of the strategies suggested and a training session with students. Evaluation of the project could be tracked through the PDP process. The students would be asked to reflect on their experiences as they learnt within the second semester module. The outcome would be evaluated qualitatively and, perhaps, against criteria such as a broader use of active learning strategies.

3. Monitoring and reporting on success of interventions for staff and students — It was agreed that the final stage of the project would be for Yvonne to spend a third day with the prime participants at the end of the second semester. This would be in workshop format, bringing findings from the different participants together. Participants would then devise a report format that describes procedures, outlines expected outcomes and summarises actual results from this brief initiative. It was also envisaged that data from PDP would contribute to an overall assessment of the interventions, in terms to be negotiated by the participants. Although the focus was to be on the needs of learners with diverse needs, it was hoped that the interventions would be of benefit to all.

A brief report would then be written jointly by participants and Yvonne for general circulation.

UCLAN – Central Lancashire Centre for Professional Ethics

Observation of lecture and seminar within the module, 'Thinking about Bioethics', a module offered to foundation or access level students.

This initial visit was made with the objective of providing the SEN specialist with a snapshot view of the teaching and learning process within the module. Notes were made on various aspects of the course and teaching, commenting on good practice where observed, and giving suggestions of where and how improvements could be made.

The module guide

The course outline given in the guide immediately gave details of the tutor's availability during the semester and the tone sought to reassure students that if they were experiencing difficulties it would be possible to arrange a mutually convenient time to meet.
The aims and learning outcomes were concisely presented. The suggested reading materials required for the lectures and seminars were presented within four key texts, available from the library. Two were in the form of anthologies or a companion text giving a collection of writings on a series of topics. In addition, the students were encouraged to browse the newspapers and the web for material that might be relevant.
The way the course was structured was helpful in terms of developing central bioethical concepts and distinctions. The material was rooted in contemporary issues, but it was made explicit that the students' response would be increasingly logical and analytical rather than emotive or based on hype, (the acknowledged style of some sections of the media).
The expectation was set within the guide that participants need to take part in discussions because that process allows clarification of our reasons and ideas. It was made explicit that challenges are not meant personally and it was expected that some people will be more confident than others about speaking in the group. Simple guidelines to safeguard the discussion were given as examples of good practice, for example not speaking while someone else is expressing their ideas.
They were encouraged to use Web CT to give them access to module handouts, and also a discussion forum where they could discuss the material with other students.
The main potential issue arising from the module guide, for students who have a specific learning difficulty, was that they may avoid or fail to engage with reading as a means of preparing week by week unless they are confident in searching the web and the library for relevant texts. The students were not given set readings that were to accompany the question posed for each week's lecture, but rather expected to think through their own reasons and responses to the question. Most students with dyslexia take longer to read and process information so it was suggested that the booklet could be improved by providing more guided reading, questioning of texts and outlining access arrangements to sources—all principles of good practice in meeting a diversity of learning needs.

Lecture observation—could human genetic engineering ever be morally acceptable?

The session was the first one of the module and no handouts, apart from the module guide, accompanied the lecture.
Some time was spent working through the questions: 'What is Philosophy?' and 'What will the course cover?'
Ariddle was set that demonstrated the importance of asking the right questions and guidelines for good communication were made explicit.
Bioethics was explained, and the structure of the module, and the first question of the module was raised for discussion — an issue from medical ethics.
Afictional account of an argument for and against genetic engineering was presented by watching a short extract from the television programme Star Trek: Voyager.
The lecturer gave a short verbal account of the storyline and some of the details about the characters and their opinions.
During the television clip different characters opposed a mother considering intervention for her child and challenged her reasons. The mother appeared to be giving health reasons for the intervention but it was clear to all the students that she was primarily concerned with her daughter being teased and stigmatised, as, if she was not altered, she would have the appearance of a Klingon.
A core observation clarified by the lecturer was that the mother had residual feelings, that were very painful and powerful, about being teased as a young girl because she herself was easily identified as a Klingon.

Seminar

After the clip in the seminar the students were divided into four groups in which the observers participated. Two groups worked on reasons for and against genetic alteration that were pertinent to the programme, and two considered broader disability issues as a reason for or against genetic engineering.
The use of interactive groups of four or five was obviously well received by the majority of students who were well engaged with the task.
Each group discussed the material in detail and a representative
gave selected points as feedback that was written up by the lecturer.
The use of a white board with only the lecturer scribing altered the pace of the session. Energy during this time seemed to drop and some students were less engaged.
The summarising and identification of common concepts within the opposing viewpoints was excellent and once the writing had finished the majority of the students were fully engaged with the whole group discussion.
The students offered feedback on issues of control and racism, diversity and equality as part of their reasoning for both sides of the argument. The assumptions within these imagined relationships were further drawn out by the lecturer asking questions that clarified terms such as 'quality of life' and 'unnatural'.
The process of sharing their thoughts seemed to be relatively easy and enjoyable for the students and the session finished amid a buzz of interest and anticipation of the following week.

Possible strategies that may be of use

The students are currently on an Access course and may be very inexperienced in thinking critically and identifying their reasoning strategies. It may be a useful strategy to map out or name some of the concepts and distinctions that were used, as a follow-up activity after a session like the discussion in the first seminar. Flawed reasons can be identified by challenging generalisations or stereotypes, and, for students with specific learning difficulties, identifying the structural components of less sound reasoning is really helpful. Many students are not able to identify these, and therefore continue to take global solutions rather than serial ones, which are perhaps less effective in philosophy than in other disciplines. This suggestion does not mean that the reasoning given should be prescriptive, but rather that the thinking process itself should be unpicked in terms of structure and key concepts, implications and assumptions. Given that the students responded so well to a multimedia presentation using several sensory channels, perhaps PowerPoint would be an effective medium for talking through the unpicking of an argument.
Some dyslexic students have difficulties with working memory (also referred to as short term memory), and, for these students, following the discussion and taking notes are difficult tasks to complete simultaneously. The seminar leader summarised and progressed ideas and did provide a written summary on the white board when receiving feedback from each group, but none of the students took notes of the discussion. In terms of recall and later processing of the information a brief written record is often helpful to some students. A lack of triggers, whether written or verbal, or visual imaging, may mean that content and the concepts of the discussion are not remembered, and that the potential of the seminar as a learning opportunity is not fulfilled. Maybe each small group could make their notes available to provide hangers for recall between sessions that could facilitate skills building.

Follow up visit

The suggestions from the first visit were put into practice in the fourth week of the module when the question being discussed was, 'Should we allow a trade in human organs?'

Using slides in PowerPoint the lecture question was unpicked to demonstrate the distinctive ways it could be interpreted.
Students were given a copy of the presentation to add in their own notes and follow the structure of the lecture.
Explicit examples were made of how to think philosophically, such as exploring options and the rationale that guides behaviour. For example: 'Either sales of duplicate organs while seller is alive, or the seller gets money now for organs to be used after his/her death, or if seller's organs are to be used after her/his death the money goes to his/her estate'.
Students were invited to detect the reasons against organ sales from a radio interview with John Evans of the British Organ Donor Society.
Students discussed in groups the quality of the reasons that John Evans gave.
The lecture highlighted the value of identifying flawed reasons and misplaced assumptions—the philosophical skill of evaluating arguments.
Cognitive processes were made explicit through use of factual data.
Distinctions were made about thinking through problems when knowledge is not factual but more attitudinal, or experiential — the philosophical implications of this were discussed.
Conceptualising and structuring an argument against a position were discussed; using concepts such as risk, equality, a negative impact on altruism, exploitation, and commoditisation to provide foundations on which to structure arguments.

Staff and student feedback session

Alively discussion about the benefits of the project took place. Overall, both staff and students felt that the strategies suggested had improved the learning experience. Some comments made by students and staff were:

The handout that covered the PowerPoint helped me to think about it afterwards. There wasn't masses of detail but it was there to work with in terms of triggers for your memory.
I learn more if they are asking questions and there is time to think about things.
I think it works really well because the informality of it makes it a lot easier to interact with everyone. You didn't feel as if you'd be shot down if you made your opinions known.
I liked having the sheets that go with the PowerPoint with a big gap underneath. When you've been talking about what goes up on there you can write your own notes—that's really helpful.
PowerPoint made it more structured. I could go back and read it three or four times and clearly understand what we were debating about.
(About course materials) Not as formal as a lot of course booklets...You didn't feel as threatened.
Given the sort of course it is, an introductory one, not to make a sharp distinction between lectures and seminars meant people could chip in to discussion at any point.

MMU – Department of Politics and Philosophy

Observation of lecture and seminar in the module 'Existentialism, Literature and Style', offered to first year students taking BA (Hons) Philosophy or BA Combined Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences.

Again, this initial visit was made with the objective of providing the SEN specialist with a snapshot view of the teaching and learning process within the module. Notes were made on various aspects of the course and teaching, commenting on good practice where observed, and giving suggestions of where and how improvements could be made.

The module handbook

The module literature could be adapted by making small adjustments to make it more accessible and helpful:

Present the information in an A5 booklet rather than on A4 sheets. The students require a week-by-week log of requirements so this format suits the purpose and is easier to use in this way. Information should be very concise, comprising the general information at the beginning and then weekly requirements set out clearly.
In the general section make expectations clear. For example, students are not expected to read everything, but there are certain module textbooks, so set the minimum very explicitly, for example one textbook from those listed, and give an indication of whether they are held in the library.
Availability of staff could usefully be written in the general section of the module handbook. Although it is clear in the present documentation that students may email tutors, it is more difficult for those who are less confident about their written skills to use this medium. Staff workload may make it difficult for staff to be available at regular times on a weekly basis but this information may encourage students to seek help if they are struggling or just want some clarification.
Similarly the support officer's availability could be usefully included in the general introductory pages.
A calendar of course requirements and dates for submission could all be usefully accessible in the general section.
A week by week course outline is fine, but the seminar reading could be put in a box with the accompanying study questions.
Try to have a short attention grabbing title/question to the lecture that will also provide a structure to the reading.
Give web references where appropriate for supplementary reading as they are often presented interactively and enable students to select certain aspects for study that interest them. The language used on the web is easier and more familiar to the student than original texts. Reference to these sources isn't enough information in itself, but it can enable the student to form a scaffold/structure before attempting the more difficult texts.
Once they have structured some of the information in their prelecture reading this will form a scaffold for the more complex detail that is presented in the lecture.
Compile a course reader, copyright permitting, that students can buy as well as being held in the library for reference only. Access to these resources would enable students to pace their reading and anticipate as well as catch up if they fall behind week by week.
It is helpful that this level one course is entirely assessed by essays. This enables those students who are struggling with the work at the drafting stage to discuss problems with their seminar leaders.
Verbal discussion with the faculty student support officer, Vivien Lee, about structuring an essay is an additional source of support to supplement the discussions the students may have with their tutor. Both are able to encourage the student to consider implications, the logical progression of reason and the making of comparisons. These skills will enable the student with a specific difficulty to impose some structure on their written work.

Lecture observation – Sartre and Nausea

The lecture that was observed was the first of three, which did not match the information in the module information. It was held in a traditional tiered lecture theatre, and presented in a standard lecture format. Suggestions were made about ways that other teaching and support methods could be incorporated.

It was noted that the lecturer began by posing three questions that linked with previous material and provided a structure for the lecture.
Comparisons between Plato and Sartre could have been supported by visual stimuli. Without this, an opportunity to underline the dissimilarities between the two philosophers and make them memorable may have been lost.
Introduction to Sartre and his work relied on spoken information and could have been usefully accompanied by a photograph and some amusing personal details presented using PowerPoint. Some learners will appreciate this process of personalising and the image will be memorised more readily than extensive spoken details.
Phrases such as "conscious of France", "existence is prior to essence" and "engaged literature" could have been useful memory triggers with accompanying bullet points to enable the listener to map his way through the information as it was delivered. Once again a presentation using PowerPoint would have been useful, as they could have been presented in coloured text to support recall.
A handout was not available to support the lecturer's questioning process, so the three initial questions were not accessible to the listener as a way of categorising the supporting detail to the query.
It was observed that the majority of students did not take notes. The ability to take notes for some students may have been impeded by limited summarising, referring and naming of the conceptual framework that the lecturer was using. The students are currently in their ninth week of study and the content is acknowledged to be very difficult for most first year students.
The energy level dropped at around thirty minutes into the lecture. Although lecturers do have a pressure to complete a certain amount of information, it was observed that some students had clearly switched off attention. Rather than continue talking the lecturer could change the dynamics and focus attention differently. One strategy that will often inject some vitality is to invite students to talk together in pairs or a group of three. A brief discussion on "What can literature do that a philosophy text can't?" would have shifted the interaction and the students need only have five to seven minutes available to them for this kind of activity. Once again the feedback needs to be swift and need not be as detailed as in a seminar.
The quotes such as the key phrases mentioned earlier are positive memory triggers that could be presented on a handout that could accompany a projected presentation.
The level of participation and engagement could have been stronger. Most students had no queries to raise in their seminar group.
The use of a PowerPoint presentation with an accompanying handout would enable the students to follow through the structure of the three questions that were posed. In addition, specific information about the different texts can contextually help their reading of Sartre's Nausea, but it must be presented in an easily accessible format, for example using a handout, preparing specific passages or having copies of the lecturer's notes or providing web addresses for easier reading resources.
A PowerPoint presentation also needs to be segmented to encourage attention to one item at a time. Creativity and surprise in a variety of media can engage students when they find the act of listening difficult to maintain. Students with a specific learning difficulty will not distinguish text very readily on a PowerPoint slide especially if there are several lines to read through. The use of spaces, indenting and having parts in bold makes it easier for the student to navigate around the text when sitting at a distance in a large auditorium.
A summary of the differences and similarities between the discourses of philosophy and literature could have been usefully provided as a handout.

Seminar observation

The seminar leader had attended the lecture but rather than reiterate the subject matter of the lecture, he chose to use the text itself.
A group of twenty students was expected to attend but on this occasion there were ten in the first seminar and twelve in the second.
The leader chose to introduce and acknowledge the observers to the students and to allow them to take part in the seminar discussions. It was noted that the seminar leader started by asking if there were any questions arising from the lecture but none were suggested.
He then proceeded to the text but only three students had started reading the book so a handout was provided of the first page. The leader asked why we would keep a diary and specifically why Sartre's character was keeping his diary, which initiated a discussion.
The seminar leader wrote the comments on the whiteboard and with the exception of two students everyone engaged in this activity. The second seminar group did not have this initial activity and went straight to a discussion about the first page of the diary.
The leader had shared that he was keen for the students to identify certain themes in the text and he facilitated this process by summarising and paraphrasing what the students offered in terms that fitted into his more experienced understanding of the book. Much of his questioning of the students enabled them to clarify the nature of Sartre's discussion of nausea and think about the manner in which time can affect our sense of personal identity. Students shared from their own personal experiences and the leader gave anecdotal examples from his own life.
The majority of the group contributed verbally but those students who remained quiet were either writing their own notes or listening with interest to others' contributions. Frequently the leader would use an invitational tone to ascertain if anyone else in the group wanted to contribute. It is a possibility that some students were inhibited by the presence of the observers and in other circumstances would have been more forthcoming.
The leader wrote brief notes on the whiteboard as reminders and summarised the discussion of different passages taken from the novel to support the theme of lack of mastery or the destructive sense of time that may form part of the nature of nausea.

Possible strategies

All that was observed was very good practice although there are a few suggestions that may be helpful.

Some dyslexic students have difficulties with working memory (also referred to as short term memory). Following the discussion and taking notes simultaneously is difficult for these students. Perhaps a student could be designated to be a scribe for the session and a copy of their notes shared with the other participants.
A lack of triggers, whether written or verbal, or visual imaging may mean that content and the concepts of the discussion are not remembered. Repetition of key points is important, particularly supported by an easy phrase to recall e.g. "Time affects our sense of personal identity". This will maximise recollection of content discussed.

Follow up visit

Lecture observation

Suggestions from the first visit were put into practice in the lecture 'Sketch For The Theory Of Emotions'.

The lecture was delivered using PowerPoint incorporating recommendations made in the visit report.
Cognitive mapping was much more explicit. Time was taken to define the conceptual framework of the lecture, with introductory outlines given of the peripheric theory of emotions, no intrinsic significance, outcome of body's response.
A slide supported the three important conceptualisations of emotions by Sartre.
The purpose of the lecture was clearly defined in terms of three aspects of consciousness to be explored, again supported by a slide.
Examples were given visually — e.g. a photograph of pen, paper and ink with arrows, a green banana — to illustrate the idea that the world appears through the context of the inter-relationships between objects. We know their nature through using them, but are frustrated by, for example, a green banana, as it is inedible.
Links were made by comparing Sartre and Descartes to draw out distinctive understanding of existentialism, consciousness and thinking.
The pace of the lecture was measured and incorporated humour by the use of certain examples supported by the lecturer's personal experience.
A mixture of delivery was used, with some direct talking to students, and some use of PowerPoint to maintain variety.
Each development and topic heading was made explicit by use of PowerPoint, although there was no supporting handout available.
Each new idea was rooted in the student's experience whenever possible, for example for the role of the body in emotion — jump for joy, clap hands in excitement.
Questioning, such as 'why does emotion require the body?' was invitational and gave time for a brief consideration by students.
A conclusion drew together five main strands that were linked to the seminar that followed.

Seminar observation

Written notes of the discussion were made and copied for students, as suggested, as students with dyslexia struggle to participate and take notes at the same time.
A volunteer student acted as scribe so that the students might feel that they had more ownership of the small group learning environment.
The seminar leader modelled listening attentively to each contribution and encouraged responses from students to others' contributions.

Staff and student feedback

The students were shown a brief presentation that defined the learning process and identified different ways of learning and thinking. Discussion then arose to evaluate the impact of the perceived changes in lectures, seminars and, to a lesser extent, course materials, since the start of the project. The group comprised twenty students who were divided into smaller groups to feed back about one of the three areas. They recorded their comments on flipcharts, and as these were fed back to whole group, additional comments were added from entire group.

Lectures

Positive comments and improvements seen:

The lecturer gets a lot of information across in an hour.
Good use of PowerPoint with complex theories—slide sets are better structured.
Use of examples you can relate to.
Good handouts.
Lectures are broken up with activities.
Good use of visual aids.
Clear aims.

Negative comments and suggested further improvements:

Lack of structure.
Unexplained technical terms.
Needs more notice of important points, perhaps through pauses or repetition.

Seminar

Positive comments and improvements seen:

Participants stuck to the topic.
Everyone was involved in group discussions.
Groups were a good size (8–12 people).
There was an informal atmosphere, so you didn't feel stupid if you said something wrong.
It can actually be fun!
Having a laugh and a joke is good as it helps you relax and learn.
It's good to have a mix of tutors and methods of teaching.

Negative comments and suggested further improvements:

Sometimes it's easy to lose the thread when responding to questions.
Teaching aims need to be made more clear.
Sometimes it's hard to hear people's contributions.
Goals and learning objectives need to be clearly linked to the seminar and made more explicit.
Group work needs to bring back ideas to the seminar.
There should be more of a mix between BA Phil and Combined Hons.
It would be good to have handouts related to seminar, electronically available.
There should be more structure to the seminar.
More personal information needed—names not just of tutor but also students.
Not enough IT in seminars.
More variety needed in the establishment of small groups, rather than just using alphabetical order.
Need to increase topical relevance.

Staff feedback

I've been using PowerPoint in the lectures and teething problems aside I think the students find it helpful: it seems to key them into taking notes.

Lancaster University, Institute for Environment, Philosophy and Public Policy

Observation of lecture and seminar in the module 'Philosophy of Science', offered to year two or three students.

The course handbook

It was noted that students were provided with a clear course outline and the suggested reading materials required for seminars.
In addition the students could purchase a course reader, which contains all seminar readings, but photocopies were also held in the library.
The way the reading was structured was helpful in terms of developing effective reading strategies. The students were given set readings that were accompanied with questions for study that would enable them to recall and structure the texts they were reading.
The handouts for each lecture were distributed at the start of the session to accompany the power point presentation, but are also available on the module web site.
Access to information was very good for all students avoiding the frustrations of short-term loans and a lack of resources.

The implication for students who have dyslexia is that they are able to pace reading without the additional pressure of poor access to materials. Most students with dyslexia take longer to read and process information so guided reading, questioning texts and easy access are all principles of good practice in meeting a diversity of learning needs.

Lecture observation—Feyerabend

It was noted that the philosopher was introduced with some personal details that were amusing and an accompanying photograph. Some learners will have appreciated this process of personalising and the image will be stored more readily than extensive spoken details.
Secondly, very early in the lecture, the listeners were invited to frame this new knowledge within their existing knowledge by means of a comparison of philosophers who had been previously studied.
A recap was made to a linking idea from previous lecture to draw out the demarcating aspects between science and nonscience and this was detailed on the handout as points a-d.
Each one was discussed in more detail but the progression and the information available on the slides, at times, was difficult to write up in own notes, as very little time was given to reframe in students' own written language.
The use of a PowerPoint presentation with an accompanying handout enabled the students to follow through the structure of the first and second argument. However the PowerPoint could be further segmented to encourage attention to one item at a time. Variety and surprise will often engage listeners when they are finding the act of listening rather difficult to maintain. Students with a specific learning difficulty have problems reading texts that appears to them as dense (words in a block). It is a dyslexia friendly practice to use spacing well, with titles and indents, so the slide looks more appealing to read.
An interactive exercise carried out in pairs or threes was obviously well received by the majority of students who were well engaged with the task. Of necessity the feedback was quickly acknowledged but the purpose was to further explore the issue of incommensurability in the seminar groups.

Techniques to try with PowerPoint:

Indentation.
Underlining and bold.
Colour highlights of key phrases.
Staged use of bullet points flying in as the lecturer is talking about that point.
A handout of the presentation (3 slides to a page) will provide an order for lecturer and a reminder of the points to be discussed.
Background colour on slides: a pastel shade such as light blue or green is more comfortable for readers with visual processing difficulties or syntopic light sensitivity as experienced by some dyslexics.
The handout font preferred by dyslexics, again in terms of reading comfort, is Arial or Comic Sans. It is not that other fonts can't be read, but rather it is hard to maintain attention when you are struggling with the physical format of the words on the handout.
Some students may use tinted overlays with white paper to increase the sharpness of the letters' edges and prevent movement of text and blurring of lines (some departments do provide coloured handouts but some students dislike being singled out).

Seminar observation

The seminar leader had not attended the lecture as he already had a teaching commitment but he was familiar with the lecture content and used the handout to refer to the two main arguments.
There are 12 students in the group but during this snapshot observation seven students attended and three remained silent throughout. The seminar leader confirmed that this was the regular attendance pattern with perhaps two or three extra students on occasions. The quiet students were still engaged, often making notes or as the observer was informed often requesting a discussion with the leader at the end of the session.
The three students who participated verbally were very articulate but without encouragement were not always relating their comments to concepts that were covered in the lecture.
At one point the seminar leader referred to a quote on the handout that questioned the success of science. This intervention opened up the discussion further and a fourth student contributed.
All students had their own copies of the course reading booklet and were using the detail from it in their discussions.
Although the two arguments formed a backdrop for the discussion, it extended beyond material in this lecture and some students offered comparisons between the previous philosophers they had studied during the module.

Possible strategies

In this small group seminar there were four individuals who were not speaking, including the observer. Some students, even those who were verbally participating, at times seemed a little uncomfortable with this imbalance. The seminar leader encouraged students to develop the idea of individual frames of reference and this discussion could have been located in an exercise in pairs or threes. This is a useful strategy to encourage the more diffident students to participate as long as the discussion content is accessible. One student was from overseas and others were studying different combination degrees so there was diversity among the group that could be analysed within the concept of frames of reference. The seminar leader has used this strategy in the past and has found it to be very helpful.
The seminar leader summarised and progressed ideas, but only used a verbal medium for the majority of the time. Only one student took notes of the discussion, and she was participating verbally, and yet in terms of recall and later processing of the information a brief written record is always helpful. Some dyslexic students have difficulties with working memory (as discussed earlier) and following the discussion and taking notes are difficult tasks to complete for these students simultaneously. A lack of triggers, whether written or verbal, or visual imaging, may mean that content and the concepts of the discussion are not remembered. The seminar leader provided a short written summary on the white board at the end, but it was at a point when we needed to close the session quickly because of time. Perhaps a student could be designated to be a scribe for the session and a copy of their notes shared with the other participants.

Follow up visit

Suggestions from the first visit were put into practice in a philosophy of biology lecture that was the second of a series on psychoanalysis, which addressed the attack on psychoanalysis, which labels it a pseudo-science.

Lecture observation:

The lecturer used a handout to support his PowerPoint presentation, which was clearly structured for students into three distinct parts (electronically available as a reference).
The use of Popper's critique, and then possible objections, modelled methods that the students could later apply in the seminar to Medawar's critique.
The presentation was used to integrate summarising after each section, so that students could associate what they were hearing with points or images on the slide.
References to the students' newly acquired knowledge from the previous lectures were used widely to encourage critical thought and comparisons and modifications of ideas.
Photographs were used to personalise details about Popper and Medawar and the lecturer conveyed his obvious interest.

Seminar observation:

In the seminar, the leader and participants moved around, with different students scribing for the group on the white board, which conveyed a sense of group ownership of the discussion.
At times, students were divided into pairs to discuss and feedback to the larger group, which seemed to maintain the energy level and facilitate increased participation.
The seminar leader posed questions that extended the discussions at times when it had become stuck and he facilitated a joint summary at the end of the session that was written up for the group by a volunteer.

Feedback

I don't like lectures that have no additional aids when we are just talked to.
Funny examples help me take it in.
In seminars some students are scared to talk but some lecturers can encourage and others don't.
It is better to have relatively brief notes to go with PowerPoint with blanks to complete at the lecture.
It is better to have variety because the new style might cut out those who liked old method.

The way forward: participants' observations and preferred future approaches to developing academic literacy in philosophy

As the final part of the project, a dissemination day was held to bring together participants from different institutions, and share the findings of the project with staff from different philosophy departments. Among the universities that responded were Hertfordshire, Hull, Oxford and Manchester.

Academic literacy

A definition of academic literacy and its skill set was established. A skills list was established that covered generic skills required at universities that describe academic literacy.

Research
Note taking
Composition
Editing
Oral language skills
Time and information management
Revision, memory/recall

Skills specific to philosophy

It was accepted that there are disciplinary differences that affect students.
They need to be taught how to write philosophically, as it is not taught at school.
Similarly, at the reading level, an analysis of an argument, and the logic and reasoning within that process, have to be critically evaluated. Philosophy demands deeper level reading, getting at the core of meaning.
Students studying philosophy are also expected to be intellectually imaginative in the sense that they present new ways of thinking about ideas.

Sharing of key recommendations, feedback on the project and ways to further improve:

In the project all participants were encouraged to take a more flexible approach to lectures. This meant relying less on one single sensory input, facilitating more group interaction, and altering responses to the environment if the energy level dropped, for example cutting short delivery or changing the focus from lecturer to group.
Students benefited from accompanying handouts to PowerPoint and having access to these notes prior to the lecture would further enable them to be more familiar with the content and better able to participate.
In the project the need for the lecturer to make explicit their cognitive processes was emphasised. Examples and strategies that indicated their own use of questioning, comparisons, assumptions and implications of the knowledge that has been internalised became an important part of the delivery.
Staff felt that an important component of future courses would be a core element of study that prepared students for studying philosophy at university, providing explanations regarding what it means to write philosophically, to tease out the deeper meaning of philosophical text and apply reason and critical thinking skills to arguments both written and verbal. Reading and research are an important part of academic literacy.

In workshops during the dissemination day we used texts from Descartes and Hume to remember what it was like to first start to study philosophy. We explored the modes of thinking that are most productive, how to practise them, and how staff can put them in a context of exercises for the students, such as DARTs already referred to.

Another important component of the way forward was the need to encourage a variety of approaches to a student developing metalearning. Below are some approaches that are currently being used:

Students meet with their tutor and investigate the feedback sheets from all their modules. They attempt to identify certain patterns of weakness and discuss ways of developing compensatory strategies, for example exposition is good, argument is weak.
Students offer peer assessment to one other retrospectively after they complete a specific task and they relate it to the marking criteria. They develop a better understanding from one another of the requirements of the task.
Finally students take part in workshops geared at, for example, developing argumentative writing, embedded in their departments and related to a specific module task.

Further suggestions that were made:

There is a need for a guide to PowerPoint so that the time spent in preparation can be minimised and copyright issues are clear. The Subject Centre is in the process of developing this resource.
There is a need to clarify and experiment with teaching logic, effective reading and argumentative composition in philosophy.
There is a need to clarify questions regarding intellectual property for lecture notes and handouts available on the web.

Summary

We believe that this study has illustrated at least some of the benefits of this way of working. The approach involved academic staff, educationalists with experience in diverse learning needs, and students, working together to deliver effective teaching and learning within the study of philosophy. Through the project lifecycle this value was recognised to be beneficial to all students. Positive feedback was received, but in addition to this, we observed that students and staff were thinking about teaching and learning in a more involved and deeper way. Those participating have increased their range of strategies and now have the tools to develop further.

However, the project relied on qualitative data and could only depend on a small sample of students. To establish better empirical reliability, a further project based in one environment over a longer period with clear quantitative criteria for assessment was recommended.

End notes

Based on Forster F, Housell D, & Thompson S., Tutoring and Demonstrating: A Handbook. (Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh/UCoSDA, 1995).
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/read/darts.shtml has a good summary of what DARTs are and how to use them.
Examples taken from Exley, K & Dennick, R, Small Group Teaching. Tutorials, Seminars and Beyond (London: Routledge, 2004).
Reid, G., Dyslexia: A Practitioner's Handbook 3rd edition, (Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2003). For further reading purposes see particularly Part III, 'Teaching and Learning', chapters 7-9.
Vygotsky, L.S. Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1978).
Burden, Robert L., 'Trends and Developments in Educational Psychology: An International Perspective', in School Psychology International, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 293-347 (SAGE Publications 1994)

Return to vol. 6 no. 1 index page

This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.