Description --
This model takes its cue from the tutorial system used in Oxford and Cambridge, in which a single student or a small group of 2-3 students meet weekly with a faculty member. The tutorial session itself is used to discuss the reading for the week, as well as a paper the student/s has written and turned in before the tutorial itself. This is the flipped-classroom coupled with individualized attention and accountability.
To put this into practice, a class would be divided into groups of 2-4 students each. Faculty can either have each student in the group write a paper for the week, or the group could discuss one or two papers each session, rotating through students as the semester progresses. The conversations (~45 mins each) would focus on the ideas each student brings to the “table,” and talk through the implications of their ideas. Papers (and conversations) could either be open-ended, or they could be in response to a prompt or a series of possible prompts.
The small-group discussions can happen either face to face or via video-conferencing, as needed, and can be paired with a full-group synchronous session as well, either weekly or several times over the course of a term.
Advantages --
This structure allows for close-knit, personal interaction that builds a sense of community and collaboration between students, and between students and faculty members. Because the groups are small, social distancing measures can be more easily put into place during face-to-face meetings, and students have the opportunity to develop intellectual relationships with their group members that are sustained over the entire term.
Assessment --
The weekly papers can be assessed in the same way as any writing assignment would be, and participation in the tutorials themselves can either be assessed by the faculty member once or several times throughout the term, or by the students themselves. They can reflect on their own participation and grade themselves, and/or they could give their tutorial group as a whole a collaborative participation grade, reflecting on how well they worked together.
Challenges/Dealbreakers --
This model would work best for a small class, no more than 10-15 students. Larger classes would require more and more faculty time, and would perhaps prove to be too labor-intensive for individual faculty to commit to. Team-taught courses could perhaps handle a larger number of small groups.
Interpersonal challenges can also emerge, as with any dedicated small-group work. Faculty would need to focus on fostering a sense of community and collaboration with each group, keeping an eye out for students who have the tendency to be either less engaged or quieter. Tutorial sessions might open with a chance for everyone to speak individually about an aspect of one of the pre-circulated paper/s, before moving to a larger, more organic conversation.