RAPPORT
Issue 5 (August 2020)
The relationships and interactions that
students have with their teachers can
serve to either inhibit or promote
developmental change that causes them
to engage. It is in this manner that
interactions and relationships between the
learners and the teacher are important in
understanding student engagement. This
relationship fosters the building of
partnerships between students and tutors.
It is worth noting that the classroom is an
intricate social system and, therefore, the
relationships and interactions between
teachers and students are equally complex
systems; an observation by T2 highlights
this:
The students come from a school
environment where teachers are
spoon feeding them. They come to
this environment, adult education,
and they expect the same. Through
our tutorial meetings, we explained
that this is adult learning
environment where they need to take
responsibility of their learning and
seek advice. Some were shy at the
beginning and not seeking help but
gradually were able to drop the
shield and take responsibility for their
own future. [T2]
Findings related to the effect of
tutorial meetings on the ILP
process
Before the first tutorial meeting, I asked
the teachers about their experience in the
past with completing the ILP. My purpose
was to draw a comparison between the
ILP being completed as previously, to fulfill
audit requirements, and as part of the
tutorial meeting with the purpose of
student engagement. T1 noted that
completing ILP in previous semesters was
clinical:
I found it very clinical. There was no
personal interaction between the
student and teacher. I found that the
main point of completing the training
plan was to complete the task. I did
not get any extra information from
any student. [T1]
T2 had completed the ILP with students
later in the semester, as teachers have 12
weeks to sign off the ILP:
I completed them individually with
each student. They were done later
in the semester, which didn't give me
the opportunity to put what I learned
into as good effect as I would have
hoped. For example, there was a
student who had little to none
computer experience and was from
non-English speaking background,
but I was aware of his struggle. I
related his struggle to the language
barrier. I gave him a lot of attention
but only after completing the training
plan, which is when I found out he
has limited computer experience. If I
knew this before the class, I could
have given him homework tasks to
assist him. I didn't get a chance to revisit
the Plan and see how they are
coping in their learning and going in
their study. [T2]
The first interview with the teachers
explored their views on challenges faced
by teaching staff while completing the ILP
in the existing model:
The challenges were I felt that I was
just trying to get the information out
of the student just to complete the
form in a very short time space.
There was no allocated time for a
proper conversation. It was
completed in the middle of the
semester, not at the beginning. We
should interview them one to one. It
79