Australian Association for Research in Education Judith Couchman
'Researching Education in New Times' Office of Preparatory & November 30
- December 4 1997 Continuing Studies
Brisbane USQ Toowoomba Q 4350
COUCJ97.521
SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION: PEER MENTORING AND STUDENT PRODUCTIVITY
Abstract:
During Semester 1, 1997, the Supplemental Instruction
program was implemented in a first year accounting subject in the
Faculty of Commerce at the University of Southern Queensland. The
results, in both quantitative and qualitative terms have endorsed early
Supplemental Instruction intervention success. This paper will review
the method and outcomes and will consider pertinent educational,
financial and other benefits. Another similarly useful strategy, viz.
the Student Productivity Initiative will also be reviewed as a
complementary strategy that has demonstrated substantial benefits -
particularly in gaining employment upon graduation.
A study of the implementation of the Supplemental Instruction program
was undertaken in Semester 1, 1997 in the Faculty of Commerce with the
first year unit, 51002: Introduction to Accounting. An action research
model was adopted as the most appropriate. The three conditions for
action research to be pertinent were present. There was a strategic
social practice that could be improved; the teaching and learning in
the identified unit. The study proceeded through a spiral of cycles of
planning, acting, observing and reflecting; the Supplemental
Instruction program itself incorporated these cycles weekly as well as
on a semester basis as outlined below. In addition all those
responsible for the social practice were considered; lecturers, tutors,
students, student mentors and Supplemental Instruction supervisors
collaborated regularly (Brown et. al., 1982; Grundy & Kemmis, 1981).
The rationale for the focus of the study being the Introduction to
Accounting unit was that the Faculty of Commerce academic staff had
identified it as problematic. This unit had experienced high failure
rates in recent semesters. The intervention deemed appropriate to
improve student failure rates was the Supplemental Instruction program.
Supplemental Instruction is a unique peer-mentoring system for units at
'academic risk', that is, units with historically high failure rates.
Supplemental Instruction is effective because it:
identifies 'high risk' units rather than 'high risk' students;
is not a remedial program, so there is no stigma attached to
participants;
is only implemented by invitation and support of Faculty;
is applicable to all enrolled students irrespective of their prior
academic performance;
is conducted from the first week of semester before students encounter
academic difficulties;
requires student leaders to re-attend lectures in the unit;
uses Supplemental Instruction leaders who encourage students to engage
with the material rather than act as authority figures who lecture or
teach;
is supervised by a trained academic staff member;
helps students learn how to learn as they identify what to learn and
provides training for the Supplemental Instruction leaders in
collaborative learning methods (Martin et. al., 1993).
Literature on the program reports that it has enjoyed consistent
success in reducing student failure and withdrawal rates in the United
States and other overseas universities (Martin et. al., 1993) and at
the Queensland University of Technology (Loh, 1994).
Other literature supports this view of its success. Supplemental
Instruction satisfies the characteristics of Kemig's (1983, p. 31)
Level IV most effective learning improvement programmes and Tinto's
(1995; 1993, pp. 193-212) criteria of first year student experiences
which lead to increased student retention and success rates.
Supplemental Instruction should be available to all students. It
should be presented as an integral part of the unit offering along with
lectures and tutorials. It should be presented in the institutional
timetable as 'practical' or 'workshop' sessions and described as such
in orientation presentations and first day lectures. Supplemental
Instruction is non-judgmental of students. It has an expectation of
student success as all students are encouraged to attend. Pass rates
from previous offerings of the program are presented as evidence of the
program's effectiveness. It recognizes the whole range of student
needs (the students we DO have) and allows them to be active
participants in their learning by using collaborative learning methods.
Pair and small group activities are planned and undertaken, and the
student mentors/leaders act as facilitators who offer suggestions from
their experience in learning in the unit rather than as tutors or
teachers of the content. This is congruent with the needs and
practices of Confucian Heritage Culture (CHC) international students,
many of whom form collaborative learning groups outside of the
classroom (Tang, 1996; Tang & Biggs, 1996). Through the weekly
Supplemental Instruction sessions the university is broken down into
smaller 'more knowable' communities, thus helping students to construct
their own social network (Tinto, 1993, p. 199).
The Supplemental Instruction program also facilitates reflective
practice as defined by Adler (1991). The weekly planning and
debriefing meetings are the venue for this. In the presence of the
unit lecturer, the supervisor and student leaders analyze the previous
week's Supplemental Instruction sessions and ways in which they were
successful or may be improved. Student feedback on the unit is also
reported and discussed. This equips all of the participants in the
planning and debriefing sessions to improve their performances in their
various roles.
Supplemental Instruction is mentioned as effective in promoting
lifelong learning by Candy, Crebert and O'Leary (1994, p. 133) in
their NBEET commissioned report. The Good Universities Guide (1997, p.
157) also identified the programme as '... an imaginative new program
which offers extra tuition to anyone taking a "high risk" unit.'
Hypotheses
On the basis of reported successes gained at USQ and QUT, in the United
States and other overseas universities, it was anticipated that
students who elected to attend the Supplemental Instruction sessions
would achieve a demonstrably better grade profile than the students who
chose not to attend. In particular, it was anticipated that the
failure rates of attendees would be half that of non-attendees.
As changes were made in 1997 to the assessment items and the student
composition of the whole unit, the external student cohorts in 1996 and
1997 were used as a control group. The external students were subject
to the same changes as the day mode students except for the
introduction of the Supplemental Instruction program.
Comparisons could then be drawn between the 1996 and 1997 internal
student cohorts to gauge the impact of Supplemental Instruction. It
was anticipated that the pass rate of the 1997 internal student cohort
would be substantially greater than those of the 1996 internal student
cohort.
Implementation of the Supplemental Instruction Program
The four phases of action research were adopted. Planning began with
meetings with Mark Vallely and Michaela Rankin, Unit Team Leaders, and
Debby Dunne, Course Administrator to choose likely student candidates
for Supplemental Instruction Leader training. These students
participated in the two-day training program prior to semester 1. The
Unit Team Leaders and tutors were also invited to attend and
participate.
Initially ten 50 minute Supplemental Instruction sessions were
scheduled for each of thirteen teaching weeks. This was reduced to
nine in the fourth week due to low attendance at one of the sessions.
Students attending this session were able to attend one of the other
sessions.
In keeping with action research principles, a further cycle of
planning, acting, observing and reflecting was implemented. This was
done within the Supplemental Instruction program itself. The student
leaders, supervisors, and one of the unit team leaders met weekly to
consider progress and to plan future sessions.
Results
Quantitative Data
The Control Group: Comparison of 1996 and 1997 External Student
Cohorts
Table 1 and Figure 1 below indicate that there was no change in the
fail rate of the control group of external students. The changes to
the assessment items and the student composition of the Unit did not
impact on this. There was however a trebling of the HD rate and a 50%
increase in the IDS/M rate.
Table 1: Comparison of 1996 and 1997 External Mode Cohorts
Figure 1: Comparison of 1996 & 1997 External Mode Student Cohorts
The Experimental Group: Comparison of 1996 and 1997 Internal Student Cohorts
Table 2 and Figure 2 below advise that the 1997 internal student cohort
preformed better at all grade levels, except at the C level, than the
1996 cohort. The 1997 cohort achieved 800% more HDs, just over twice
as many As, slightly more Bs, the same percentage of Cs resulting in an
increase of 16% in the pass rate. The incomplete deferred
supplementary and make-up (IDS/M) grades are similar. The efficacy of
the Supplemental Instruction program implemented in this unit during
semester 2, 1996 is clear.
Table 2: Comparison of 1996 and 1997 Day Mode Cohorts
Figure 2: Comparison of 1996 & 1997 Day Mode Student Cohorts
Supplemental Instruction Attendance
Attendance at Supplemental Instruction is voluntary. Table 3 below
advises that, of all of the enrolled internal students, 24% attended
more than four Supplemental Instruction sessions. It should be noted
that students across the entire range of grade point averages were
attracted to the program, although those in the lower GPA levels were
less likely to attend regularly. The rate of attendance of the
International students was greater than the average attendance.
This average rate of attendance did not allow the Supplemental
Instruction program to enjoy the full success it does if the majority
of students from all levels attend. A more substantial impact can be
made on the unit failure rate if there is a higher level of attendance.
There needs to be strategies put in place by the Faculty academic
staff to encourage higher levels of attendance in the early stages of
the program. The full benefits of the Supplemental Instruction program
will then be gained.
Table 3 below advises the rates of attendance of the various GPA level
ranges. Attendance was calculated at the 30% attendance rate, i.e.
four or more sessions. It has been established that attendance at less
than four of the thirteen available sessions does not make a
substantial difference to student performance (UM-KC, 1997, p. 3).
Table 3: Summary of Supplemental Instruction Attendance and OP Level
All Enrolled Internal Students
An appreciation of the impact of Supplemental Instruction can be gained
by comparing the grades of students who attended at least four
Supplemental Instruction sessions with those who elected to attend less
often or not at all. Figure 3 below advises that SI attendees were
nearly four times more likely to gain a HD, nearly equally likely to
gain an A, just over twice as likely to gain a B, less likely to gain a
C and only 40% as likely to fail as non-attendees.
Figure 3: Grade Comparison of Supplemental Instruction Attendees & Non-attendees
Table 4 below provides more detail on this.
Table 4: Summary of Supplemental Instruction Attendance and Grade (N = 289)
Further appreciation of the impact of Supplemental Instruction can be
gained by comparing the results of students who attended various
percentages of the programme. These data are shown in Appendix A, which
shows there is a positive correlation between attendance at
Supplemental Instructions sessions and the final grade achieved.
Excluding students who received an Incomplete or No Result, the grade
point average for the unit (51002: Introduction to Accounting) of the
attendance group was 4.65 compared with 3.50 for the non-attendance
group.
It is clear that those students who had a greater commitment to
Supplemental Instruction achieved better than those who did not.
The OP 1 to 12 Student Group
Figure 4 and Table 5 below demonstrate the positive impact of
Supplemental Instruction attendance on the students with an OP between
one and twelve. This group could be categorised as the high achievers.
Of this group, those who attended SI sessions regularly achieved more
than twice as many HDs, fewer As, twice as many Bs, less than half as
many Cs and half the number of fail grades. Those who chose not to
attend realised a twenty-six percent failure rate. Attendance at SI
sessions enabled the high achieving students to gain better marks than
their peers who did not attend.
Figure 4: Grade Comparison of OP Levels 1-12 Supplemental Instruction
Attendees & Non-attendees (N=101)
Table 5: Grade Comparison of OP Levels 1-12 Supplemental Instruction
Attendees and Non-attendees (N=101)
The 'At Risk' Student Groups
An understanding of the composition of the 1997 cohort can be obtained
by grouping the students according to OP levels and the students' first
language background. Table 6 below identifies that approximately one
third of the enrolled internal students had OP levels in the upper
range. Students with lower OP levels constituted thirty-nine percent
of the total enrolment. International students were twenty-four
percent of the unit's internal enrolment. A further four percent did
not have an assigned OP level. The students with OPs in the range
13-20 and the ESL or International students were considered as possible
"at risk" students and deserve special attention when considering the
outcomes of the Supplemental Instruction program.
Table 6: Student Profile (N = 289)
Student Group No. of Students % of Students (rounded)
OP 1-12 101 35
OP 13-20 107 39
International 68 24
Other 13 4
The OP 13 to 20 Student Cohort
The performance of students with an OP of thirteen to twenty is
presented in Figure 5 and Table 7 below.
Figure 5: Grade Comparison of OP 13-20 Supplemental Instruction
Attendees & Non-attendees (N=107)
Table 7: Summary of OP 13-20 Supplemental Instruction Attendance and
Grade (N = 107)
SI Attendance Number of Students HD% A% B% C% F% IDS%
Attendees 17 6 0 18
35 29 12
Non-attendees 90 0 2 9
21 59 9
Supplemental Instruction attendees in this group scored the only HDs,
no As, twice as many Bs, over 50% more Cs and approximately half as
many fail grades. In this regard, the efficacy and cost-effectiveness
of the Supplemental Instruction program are evident.
The International Student Cohort
The performance of international students is presented in Figure 6 and
Table 8 below. Attendees performed substantially better than
non-attendees (except in the C grades). This is particularly evident
in the demonstrably reduced failure and IDS/M rates. Supplemental
Instruction seems to be of particular benefit to this group of students
when they choose to attend regularly.
Figure 6: Grade Comparison of International Student Supplemental
Instruction Attendees and Non-attendees (N=68)
Table 8: Summary of International Student Supplemental Instruction
Attendance and Grade (N = 68)
SI Attendance No. of Students HD% A% B% C% F% IDS%
Attendees 22 18 14 32 14 9
14
Non-attendees 46 7 4 20 17 28
24
In socio-economic terms, this result endorses the effectiveness of the
Supplemental Instruction program for all who volunteered to attend -
including these International students.
Qualitative Data
Student Attendees
Qualitative data indicate further benefits of Supplemental
Instruction. In week 14, all enrolled students' perceptions of the
program were sought. They completed a Supplemental Instruction
evaluation questionnaire prepared by the Supervisors. The instrument
was distributed and completed during the lecture that week.
There was a 91% response rate from regular attendees of the program.
Their comments were generally positive and strongly supportive of the
program. Students indicated that they attended to gain assistance with
the content of the Unit, help with revision and to improve their
grades. Attendees particularly appreciated the relaxed atmosphere of
the Supplemental Instruction sessions, the time spent on talking
through their problem content areas and the empathy of their student
leaders Their main criticism of the program was that the sessions were
too brief and that they should be extended. Over half of the attendees
considered they improved their ability to reference and organise their
time. Over 60% of the respondents rated the leaders highly in the
following areas:
organisation of the SI sessions;
content knowledge of the unit;
interpersonal skills/empathy with students;
involvement of the students in the SI sessions;
use of appropriate examples;
being liked by students.
Student participants considered the Supplemental Instruction program a
success.
Of those that who chose not to attend sessions regularly, 19% responded
to the survey. Of these, 80% were in the 18-25 age group and were
attempting the Unit for the first time; 61% were high school-leavers.
Reasons cited for not attending sessions were time-table clashes,
insufficient time, the opinion that they did not need to attend or they
were presently employed in the accounting sector which gave them
practical experience in the content area.
Supplemental Instruction Leaders
The leaders were also surveyed on their satisfaction with the program
(Appendix C). They enjoyed the role of helping in the learning process
of other students and were unanimous in considering that the program
had helped them to improve their leadership and communication skills as
well as their content knowledge. In their opinion, student attendees
benefited from the program because it provided a relaxed and friendly
collaborative environment in which students were able to ask all types
of questions without fear or embarrassment.
They recommended that the program be outlined briefly and strongly
recommended by lecturers in the Unit Introductory Book and that
students log on to sessions by computer. Suggestions were made that
all sessions might be better held after tutorials and a greater variety
of learning activities be undertaken next time.
Financial Benefits
Another measure of the productivity of the Supplemental Instruction
program is a comparison of the cost of loss of funding to the
institution through student failure and withdrawal with the cost to
faculty for the implementation of the program. In the context of this
implementation of the Supplemental Instruction program the costs are as
follows:
Cost of the Supplemental Instruction program to faculty:
student leader remuneration
(cost/hr X 3hrs/wk* X 9 student leaders X 13 weeks) $7371
* 3 hrs/wk are for 2 X Supplemental Instruction sessions and 1 X
planning & debriefing session, student leaders work in pairs
Assumed loss of funding for the institution through student failure and
withdrawal:
% increase in pass rate 16
no. of students (N for unit=302) 48
funding/unit/student $1200
assumed previous loss of funding for this unit
(48 X $1200) $57 600
assumed previous loss of funding/semester
(4 units/semester) $230 400
Conclusions and Future Directions
The data presented indicate that Supplemental Instruction has made a
positive impact on the pass rate of the Unit (raising it from 39% in
1996 to 55% in 1997) and on the performance of participants. The
results obtained are similar to those recorded in other universities in
Australia and overseas. Supplemental Instruction participants averaged
1.15 of a letter grade higher than non-participants. The results
identified that Supplemental Instruction participants were only
one-third as likely to fail; nearly four times more likely to gain a
HD, approximately equally likely to gain an A grade; over twice as
likely to gain a B grade; and three-quarters as likely to gain a C
grade than non-participants. These Supplemental Instruction
participants were broken down into constituent groups, two of which
could be considered 'at risk'; students with an OP of between 13 and 20
and International students. A positive impact was made on the
performance of attendees in both these groups. The International
students who chose to attend regularly had a pass rate of 78% compared
with 48% for those who chose not to attend regularly. The qualitative
data reinforce the impression that Supplemental Instruction has been
instrumental in bringing about the improved success rates.
The Supplemental Instruction initiative at the University of Southern
Queensland has demonstrated the financial efficacy that seems more
attractive to university administrators to-day. The educational
attainment aspect is commonly ignored as it is more a qualitative
consideration. The preceding 'balance sheet' positively indicates for
university administrators that the future sum paid for the enrolments
saved is in excess of the sum paid for the peer based instruction. The
fact that fellow students are gaining valuable experience by tutoring
their colleagues and their employment prospects are being enhanced
requires consideration by university administrators.
While the Supplemental Instruction initiative has been conducted a
little known research effort has proceeded at the University of
Southern Queensland. This unofficial research effort has been a
contribution by a sole academic who was genuinely concerned about the
lack of ability of higher education students at USQ to cope with the
modest academic demands of a Diploma of Teaching programme. The
subsequent work has produced outstanding results. Students from
throughout the various faculties at USQ have been advised to contact
this staff member to gain his insights regarding how one might
successfully engage in the demands of a higher education programme. It
is known that not one student who has sought this form of assistance
has subsequently failed in an essay assignment or an examination that
involves essay or short answer forms of assessment.
The insight that has been provided focused initially on the essay type
assignment. The evidence available, such as the date that students were
disengaging from their chosen degree programmes, indicated that a
considerable number, some years as high as thirty percent (30%) of
those enrolled, left a programme (about the time that the first essay
assignment was due) without transferring to another degree programme.
Where possible, the lecturer contacted these former students and spoke
with them. He encourage many to return with a promise to assist them
with their academic demands. Rather than merely tell his "student
colleagues" how to go about the many and varied processes necessary to
complete essay type assignments successfully, he accompanied them to
the university, the municipal or the University of Queensland extension
library in Toowoomba. There he sat beside the students observed their
efforts and guided them in how they might proceed more "productively".
The outcomes of this direct observation of many students who were
experiencing dire difficulties in coping with their academic
commitments have been precised, to a certain extent, in three simple
booklets that sell from the USQ Campus Bookshop in their thousands, via
personal referral. Students tell students to go and buy their own
copies of the booklets. This continuing referral phenomenon is cited as
an indication of the value (as far as students are concerned) of the
information contained in these booklets.
It was hoped that the lecturer would represent what he had discerned
over more than twenty years of researching, however, the demands of
honest assessment, professionalism and concern for others has prevented
this academic from undertaking what would have been an insightful
finale. To address this circumstance, this paper will introduce the
concept of the higher education student productivity indices , their
motivational value and their potential to assist potential graduands in
their efforts to gain appropriate employment in this age of "Economic
Rationalism" or "Neo-liberalism", as it should be known.
As a former Senior Productivity Groups Officer (i.e., senior management
consultant) the lecturer came back to education with clear notions as
to why and how higher education students needed to be able to calculate
and to chart their own productivity and progress. The 'measurements'
had to be simple and to ensure integrity, the 'measurements' had to be
supervised in some way. Realising that the mere supervision would be
beyond his own capacity to cope for too long, the lecturer instituted a
system that allowed him time to assist the new students who were 'at
risk' students (i.e., students who had failed one or more units and who
would be required to "show cause" why their enrolment should not be
cancelled if they should fail one of the units that were to be
repeated.) Those who had been "inducted" were required to work with a
peer and all records of the time spent in completing an essay
assignment were to be recorded, witnessed and counter signed. This
strategy ensured that the times recorded were correct as others acted
as monitors (as happens in the game of golf).
Another similarity to the game of golf was the fact that the students
were advised that they were now competing against their own "previous
best time taken and their own results". The lecturer explained that, as
in golf, one had to contend with various courses. What counted would be
how well the student fared in terms of the time taken per hundred words
of completed essay assignment and the consequent essay assignment
results and the end-of-semester results (measured in Grade Point
Average (GPA) terms). The motivation effect was evident. Students were
encouraged to "chart their own progress and to set their own realistic
goals for their improvement." The visual record of their own progress
was cited by all of the students as "a spur". The end of semester
plenary meeting to discuss how each student had fared also gave the
students a reason to commit themselves to working efficiently and
effectively. One of the many positive outcomes was that the students
were able to complete their essay assignments in advance of the
submission dates. Consequently the students had extra time available to
prepare for examinations. The "can do" attitude that become a noted
characteristic of these students was in contrast to their previous
attitude that fostered procrastination and/or cheating. The simple
strategies outlined by the lecturer were readily adopted by the
students as they related directly to what they had to do and they
definitely saved time.
The characteristic shape of the graph of the time taken per hundred
words of submitted essay assignment demonstrated a very sharp drop in
the number of hours taken . The units of measurement for the graphing
of the times taken allowed the gradient of the line that represented an
observed previous essay assignment time taken vis-a-vis an essay
assignment completed using the simple strategy devised from observing
students undertaking their uninformed approach to essay assignment
writing to represent the time taken productivity index. This index is
called the Elms Higher Education Student Time Factor Productivity
Index.
During this considerable longitude research effort it was realised that
the typical students merely needed to see the sharp decline of the
plotted "times taken per hundred words of submitted essay" to become
highly motivated. Typically the research subjects were highly receptive
to the view represented to them by the researcher, viz., "In this
competition you are competing with your own previous best result in
terms of time taken and the grade or mark awarded. You only have to
improve on your own previous best effort. Maturity and experience
should make this a manageable competition." Year level and plenary
meetings were convened to discuss how the students had fared
individually. These meetings were also used to introduce other types of
essay assignments. (After several years of these meetings the
researcher identified that regardless of the discipline or who assessed
an essay assignment, the argumentative style of presentation
consistently gained higher grading that other forms of essay style.)
Towards ensuring maximum opportunity to better one's previous best
index and grade composite, the researcher undertook to ensure that all
of the research subjects were introduced to a simple strategy for
composing an argumentative style essay presentation as soon as was
appropriate within the circumstances.
Having achieved a simple strategy that allowed 'at risk' and typical
students to cope efficiently and effectively with essay assignments the
researcher then observed students in their efforts to cope with other
cognitive demands of their courses. The relatively strategy
specifically devised for typical students have demonstrably aided
students in overcoming their loathing of 'deadlines' and their fear of
examinations. Students reported openly that the observations and the
consequent simple strategies had greatly assisted them in "becoming a
professional individual".
The student productivity graphs that charted each student's progress
were then proffered by potential graduands in their applications to
gain appropriate employment. In a climate dominated by economic
rationalism or neo-liberalism, each applicant was able to introduce his
or her productivity indices as a "talking point". The associated
individual representations have been cited by the applicants as highly
influential in their gaining appropriate employment. Members of
selection panels readily appreciated that here was an applicant who was
already making the best use of available time while being aware of the
need to continue to improve in one's application to assigned duties.
The research that has been conducted over a period of more than twenty
years is really a grounded theory approach to a perennial problem.
Rather than replicate what has been proposed and researched many times
before, this calm, thorough, 'scientific' approach has produced an
entirely new strategy that is based on an insightful induction of new
higher education students. Instead of presuming that the new students
have necessary skills, this research observed the skills, processes and
strategies that were used by actual students. Suggestions were made by
the researcher to guide the students in terms of actual assignments or
examinations that they needed to complete. The before and after
comparisons of how well each student fared in terms of time taken or
results were instrumental in convincing students that they would
benefit directly from continuing in the research project over the
remainder of their degree programme. Students were not forced to remain
in the project: they did so because they readily realised the benefits
of gaining insights and strategies that were immediately applicable to
their current assessment responsibilities.
It is proposed to continue with this form of higher education student
induction. The Supplemental Instruction will be continued as it is also
a most successful and needed initiative. If research funds are
available, then it is intended to conduct the two forms of student
assistance so that comparisons can be drawn. Present indications
support the view that both strategies, viz., the Supplemental
Instruction and the Productivity Indices Approach , will have
significant benefits for novice higher education students. Though the
educational efficacy of both strategies is evident, it is seriously
declared that it is more likely to be the economic argument that
persuades university administrators to support either or both of these
successful approaches to stem student departure.
Bibliography
Adler S. 1991 'The reflective practitioner and the curriculum of
teacher education', Journal of Education for Teaching, vol. 17, no. 2,
pp. 139-150.
Ashenden D. & Millgan S. 1997 The Good Universities Guide to
Australian Universities, Ashenden & Millgan, Subiaco, WA.
Brown L., Henry C., Henry J. & McTaggart R. 1982 'Action Research:
Notes on the national seminar', Classroom Action Research Network
Bulletin, no. 5, pp. 1-16.
Candy P., Crebert, G. & O'Leary J. 1994 Developing Lifelong Learners
through Undergraduate Education, NBEET Commissioned Report No. 28,
AGPS, Canberra.
Grundy S. & Kemmis S. 1981 Educational action research in Australia:
The State of the art (an overview), Paper presented at the Annual
Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education,
Adelaide, November.
Kemig R. T. 1983 Raising Academic Standards: A guide to learning
improvement, ASHE-ERIC Higher Eduction Report No. 4, Association for
the Study of Higher Education, Washington DC. ED 233 669.
Loh H. 1994 'Strategies to overcome the first year high failure rate in
anatomy for nursing students', Paper presented at the 7th International
Conference for First Year Experience, Dublin, July.
Martin D., Arendale D.R. & Associates 1993 Supplemental Instruction:
Improving first-year student success in high-risk courses, National
Resource Centre for the Freshman Year Experience, University of South
Carolina.
Tang C. 1996 'How Hong Kong students cope with assessment' eds
Watkins & Biggs, The Chinese Learner: Cultural, psychological and
contextual influences, CERC Hong Kong & ACER Melbourne.
Tang C. & Biggs J. 1996 'How Hong Kong students cope with assessment'
eds Watkins & Biggs, The Chinese Learner: Cultural, psychological and
contextual influences, CERC Hong Kong & ACER Melbourne.
Tinto V. 1993 Leaving College, The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
Tinto V. 1995 'Learning Communities and the reconstruction of the
First Year Experience', Keynote Address at the Inaugural Pacific Rim
First Year Experience Conference, Brisbane July 12.
University of Missouri-Kansas City 1997 Supplemental Instruction
Update, Summer, UM-KC, The Centre for Academic Development, Kansas
City, MO.