Print

Print


Georgine,

Right again. Once an instructor has agreed to SI, what you are
describing should be seen as valuble feed back to her. In one true
situation the SI leader and the instructor had agreed on what was
going to be asked on the mid-term exam, but almost none of the agreed
material was on the exam. Of course, the students didn't know about
this arrangement, but were lead by the SI leader--by her explaining
how to use the course syllabus, their class notes, etc. to generate
and answer study questions, etc.

The SI leader talked to the instructor about this*--it was a long-
standing complaint of students--and the instructor mended her ways.

*The above instructor was the perfect example of the comment found
on many an exam: This course was very complete; what was not covered
during the term was covered on the this exam.

Perry


> Date sent:      Wed, 11 Dec 1996 16:22:48 -0500
> From:           Georgine Materniak <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject:        Re: Peer Tutorial Programs
> To:             [log in to unmask]
> Send reply to:  Open Forum for Learning Assistance Professionals
>                 <[log in to unmask]>

> This is one option that we have proposed and I believe has the greatest
> potential for bridging support services with instruction. We are having
> wonderful success with SI so there is an established track record of the
> potential of the model.   Whether or not it is acceptable to the
> department remains to be seen. Although SI works closely with the faculty
> and the course, there is a certain amount of autonomy in the decision as
> to what actually happens in the sessions. If SI is not accepted by the
> dept. as a viable option, it will be because of the autonomy issue.
>
> My understanding of SI is that it is the students who actually determine
> the goals of an SI session and what they want to accomplish.  The SI
> leader is a facilitator.  So, the source of what happens in SI is
> generated by the students, not by the faculty. We would need to reach this
> understanding with the department to seriously consider SI as the
> solution.
>
>
>  Georgine
>
> On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, [Linnae Clinton] wrote:
>
> > Georgine,
> > Why not move to a supplemental instruction model rather than peer tutoring?
> >
>