There are two aspects to this case study - one, the responses which are common to all students using PARs and two, those details specific to Joint Honours students.
Under this first heading there was a general satisfaction with the record-keeping and structuring of one-to-one meetings with the tutor but a less-than-positive response to the career development, skills development and CV building. It is worth adding that four of the areas which had positive suggestions for change from the students have already been acted on, and the Careers Officer has redesigned the material and its timing.
Under the second heading the case study revealed that it would not be easy to economise on staff time by having only one tutor for a Joint Honours student. Students most value the one-to-one contact with a tutor in both departments. Students value highly personal contact, time spent on them and staff availability (all areas of expense in terms of staff time).
Questionnaire responses indicated a large difference in positive response between the general student body and those whose tutor was enthusiastic about PADSHE. This indicates the vital importance of staff training.
The comparison that Joint Honours students were able to make between English (using PADSHE) and other departments (not using a PADSHE system) did not always come out in favour of PADSHE and the explanation was almost invariably that the "non-English" department was small enough for the student to be personally familiar to the staff. A system like PADSHE is efficient and guarantees evenness in treatment of students, but needs efforts from tutors to give it a human face. Otherwise the papers and agendas make it seem bureaucratic.
Within English, the Joint Honours evaluation has led to discussion of possible modifications both in the documentation, which is to be reviewed, and in some of the processes. Likely modifications, at this stage, are:
· greater continuity of tuition
· greater attention to tutoring at the induction meetings
· consideration of whether some tutoring work can be group based
It does not look as though initial hopes for rationalisation of work load will be realised at this point, since the personal tutoring system is not currently robust enough across all disciplines to provide a sound basis for such rationalisation, but that can still be a longer term goal.
Some other disciplines have more personal contact but less emphasis on recording. The process of harmonisation is stimulating useful departmental discussion about the appropriate balance between the more "mechanical" aspects of PADSHE, and the underlying purposes of personal tutoring.
The project within the Humanities provides a case study of considerable numbers of Joint Honours students, and of combinations of subjects, yet within subject disciplines that are very diverse in their:
· traditions
· pedagogies
· research/training orientation
· staff-student ratios
This provides a good test area for the robustness of PADSHE, and also its adaptability to differing needs and traditions. The model that emerges from this should be capable of wider dissemination, both in terms of:
a) processes of change and collaboration across groups of disciplines (now no longer governed by Faculty structure within this University)
b) PAR processes with wide acceptability