This article was downloaded by: [University of Ulster Library]

On: 18 February 2015, At: 10:23

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Innovations in Education and Teaching

International
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/riie20

Peer learning for change in higher

education
a
John Hilsdon
a
Department of Learning Support and Wellbeing, Plymouth
University, Plymouth, UK.
Published online: 17 May 2013.

Click for updates

To cite this article: John Hilsdon (2014) Peer learning for change in higher education, Innovations
in Education and Teaching International, 51:3, 244-254, DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2013.796709

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796709

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015
 Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2014
Vol. 51, No. 3, 244–254, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.796709

Peer learning for change in higher education

John Hilsdon*

Department of Learning Support and Wellbeing, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK

This paper draws upon small scale, qualitative research at a UK university to

present a Learning Development (LD) perspective on peer learning. This
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

approach is offered as a lens for exploring social aspects of learning, cultural

change in higher education and implications for pedagogy and policy. Views of
a small group of peer learning leaders are considered in relation to notions of
learning and identity, within disciplinary or broader student communities.
Keywords: peer-assisted learning; learning development; academic literacies;
social practices; communities of practice; third space

Introduction
Learning Development (LD) is a field of practice in Higher Education in the UK
typically associated with work described as ‘learning support’, ‘study skills’ and
‘academic advice’ (Hilsdon, 2004). LD emerged following the rapid growth of the
HE sector from 1992, amid concerns about the achievement levels and retention of
the diverse new student populations (NCIHE, 1997; Ramsden, 1992, p. 13). In this
context, learning support units and LD-type posts can be seen as a response to
‘human capital’ inspired policies to promote a ‘skills curriculum’ for universities
(Archer, Hutchings, Leathwood, & Ross, 2003; Gosling, 2001) and increase the
skills of the UK workforce (Fallows & Steven, 2000). LD practitioners themselves,
however, have often sought to emphasise aspects of their work focussing on demys-
tifying academic discourse (Lea & Street, 1998) and the legitimate participation by
students in knowledge creation, critique and research (D’Andrea & Gosling, 2001;
Hilsdon, 2011; Simpson, 1996; Wolfendale, 1996).
‘Peer learning’ has been described as a ‘… two-way reciprocal learning activity’
(Boud, Cohen, & Sampson, 2001), involving ‘... networks of learning relationships,
among students and significant others’ (Boud & Lee, 2005). Although such recipro-
cal learning has, arguably, always formed part of higher education, the focus of this
paper is on more structured arrangements for peer learning. Such schemes in
schools or HE have usually aimed to improve student performance and are often
motivated by concerns over ‘underachievement’ and targeted at those considered to
be ‘at risk’ (Topping, 2001, p. 8). In recent decades, there have been initiatives in
Europe, America and Australasia, and considerable research and literature has been
published reporting benefits, especially for those in the role of mentor or peer
learning leader (e.g. Galbraith & Winterbottom, 2011; Parkinson, 2009; Stout &
McDaniel, 2006).

*Email: john.hilsdon@plymouth.ac.uk

Ó 2013 Taylor & Francis

 Innovations in Education and Teaching International 245

This paper proposes a LD approach to peer learning in HE, utilising ideas from
literature on communities of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998); aca-
demic literacies (Lea & Street, 1998); and notions of ‘third space’ (Bhaba, 1994;
Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje, McIntosh Ciechanowski, & Kramer, 2004). Views expressed
in interviews by a small sample of student peer learning leaders at Plymouth
University are presented to inform further discussion of the potential, value and
purposes of peer learning. The study sought to raise issues relevant to identity,
learning and the nature of knowledge, and more general issues of student participa-
tion and pedagogy.

The context for peer learning in HE

Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

Various forms of peer learning, mentoring and other approaches involving students
working with students in structured ways to promote learning have been in exis-
tence in educational institutions for many years. In schools, there is also a long his-
tory of such initiatives. Topping refers to ideas about peer learning dating from
Roman times (2001, p. 7).
There has been a resurgence of interest in these approaches since the 1970s,
especially in colleges and universities in the USA, coinciding with growth in the
sector and concerns about achievement levels of certain social and ethnic groups
(Congos & Schoeps, 1993). Many of the peer learning schemes set-up in universi-
ties acknowledge their derivation from an approach known as ‘Supplemental
Instruction’ (SI), developed by Deanna Martin in the 1970s at the University of
Missouri, Kansas City in the USA (Arendale, 1994).
The discourse of SI can be located in the ‘developmental education’ movement
in the USA (Lundell & Higbee, 2002); it concentrates on issues of achievement
related to the lack of ‘preparedness’ of students for learning in HE and seeks to
counter this by promoting ‘effective and essential learning strategies’ (Hurley,
Jacobs, & Gilbert, 2006, p. 14) deriving from behavioural and cognitive psychol-
ogy; constructivist ideas along with those of Vygotsky (1978), Bakhtin (1986) and
Lillis (2003). Rather than targeting ‘at risk’ students, SI concentrates on
programmes with high drop-out rates. Arendale comments that SI ‘… avoids the
remedial stigma often attached to traditional academic assistance programmes since
it does not identify high-risk students, but identifies high-risk classes. SI is open to
all students in the targeted course’ (1994, p. 11). The first adaptation of SI for the
UK context was undertaken by Jenni Wallace. Moving to Manchester in 1995, she
adopted the name peer-assisted study sessions (PASS) to replace Supplemental
Instruction.
Peer learning schemes in universities in the UK in the last decade have similarly
promoted a learning strategies approach and have been funded in response to drives
to improve student retention, engagement and success, following recent government
policy on higher education. They have taken various names, including peer-assisted
learning (PAL); peer-assisted study sessions (PASS); and supported learning groups
(SLG). A more ‘pastoral’ approach is taken by schemes referred to as peer mentor-
ing; student ambassadors; and student buddy projects (Hampton & Potter, 2009, p.
5). Universities with prominent peer learning schemes in the UK include Bourne-
mouth, the West of England and Manchester, all of which have been significantly
influenced by the SI model. At the time of writing, Manchester University had 18
disciplines operating PASS schemes with over 400 students acting as PASS Lead-
 246 J. Hilsdon

ers, supporting some of 3,000, primarily first-year students, and 29 HE institutions

in the UK and Ireland are listed as having received training via the centre.
Taking the SI model as the most influential approach to peer learning in HE, a
review of the literature suggests considerable breadth and some variation in the the-
oretical underpinnings and purposes of this approach. The language in its title ‘sup-
plemental instruction’ invites critical attention. ‘Supplemental’ suggests an
additional learning opportunity to strengthen what exists and was certainly intended
positively, though it could be read as making up for a deficiency; and ‘instruction’
implies a behaviourist approach to education, involving transmission of knowledge
as fixed or objective phenomenon via knowledgeable instructors to others who are
lacking in knowledge.
Despite stated efforts to avoid stigmatising students in the SI approach, the term
itself may appear to locate the ‘problem’ in students rather than in the institutional
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

and pedagogic practices of higher education. One aim of a LD approach to peer

learning is to avoid a deficit model by specifically engaging students in questions
about practice in disciplinary contexts. Framing this in terms of academic literacies,
Haggis argues:

... this overall approach shifts the framing of the ‘problem’ from a static, condition-
based view of the individual learner towards a more dynamic, process-based view
which tries to identify problematic aspects of higher education discourse and practice.
The question in relation to learning then changes from being ‘what is wrong with this
student’ to ‘what are the features of the curriculum, or of processes of interaction
around the curriculum, which are preventing some students from being able to access
this subject? (Haggis, 2006, p. 527)

The PALS@Plymouth scheme

The PAL scheme was introduced at Plymouth University in 2011 (PALS@Plym-
outh) with the specific intention to promote a LD perspective. It was influenced by
Bournemouth University’s model for PALS, and the PASS model promoted by
Manchester University. Two of the Plymouth LD team received PASS supervisor
training at the National Centre in Manchester and found this highly beneficial. The
Plymouth scheme was piloted in four programmes: Psychology, Chemistry, Law
and Computing, involving around 40 students working as PALS leaders and poten-
tially some 400 student participants. The PALS leaders are students on the same
programme as those with whom they work, but are typically in the year above. The
scheme is coordinated by the LD team working alongside academics in the partici-
pating programme.
PALS sessions are held weekly; leaders work in pairs with approximately 15
students per group. A key principle of the PALS@Plymouth scheme shared with
the PASS model is that it is, as far as possible, student-led. PALS leaders also meet
with their academic coordinator and a member of the LD team in regular ‘debriefs’
to discuss issues arising in the PALS meetings and ideas for future sessions. The
debriefs with academics are advisory meetings where the leaders can share their
ideas and experiences; although academics may make suggestions, they do not
determine the content of PALS sessions. The coordination of the scheme by LD,
their involvement in the debriefs, and in strategic planning meetings with academic
staff, gives the Plymouth peer learning scheme a specifically LD character and can
 Innovations in Education and Teaching International 247

be seen as offering ‘third-space’ type learning contexts and opportunities (Bhaba,

1994).

A learning development perspective for this study

A LD approach (as described in Hilsdon, 2011) seeks the widest possible access to
HE, seeing university as encouraging social participation by critically aware citi-
zens, as well as the achievement of higher level qualifications and the development
of skills for employment and social life (Barnett, 1997). Learning developers have
frequently talked about their profession as working alongside students in making
sense of their experiences of study (Hilsdon, 2011, p. 16). This socially focussed
approach to learning is informed by the notion of legitimate participation (Lave &
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

Wenger, 1991) in communities of practice; and by ‘academic literacies’ (Lea &

Street, 1998; Lillis, 2001, 2003) and critical awareness of language conventions for
successful participation in HE programmes (Ivanic, 1998).
As Lillis points out, for many students, especially those from ‘non-traditional’
backgrounds, the language practices of university disciplines can seem mysterious
and alienating. Theoretical ideas on the socially constitutive role of discourse, based
on the work of Foucault (1972) and Bourdieu (1992), emphasise the intrinsic rela-
tionship between knowledge, language, action, identity and power (Fairclough,
2001). As students are encouraged to explore their subject position by exposing,
following, flouting and critiquing the conventions of subject discourse, their agen-
tive potential – and hence their learning through participation – may be strength-
ened (Hagyard & Watling, 2011; Neary & Winn, 2009). Utilising this perspective, I
conducted a small, preliminary study based on informal, semi-structured interviews
seeking the views of PALS leaders about how their involvement in the scheme
might serve to focus attention not just on individual student needs but on to prob-
lems arising from academic practices more broadly.

Talking to PALS leaders about learning and identity at university

Interviews with five PALS leaders were held in January 2012, each lasting approxi-
mately 90 min, seeking their general impressions of the scheme, their participation
in it and their suggestions for improving PALS and the student experience overall.
The students were studying on undergraduate programmes in Law, Psychology and
Computing. Three were female and two male. Four were between 18 and 20 years
old and one was 29-years-old. In the quotations below, participants are identified as
F1, F2, F3, M1 and M2.
In methodological terms, I was interested to examine students’ discourse for
indications of their awareness of their own subject position (Fairclough, 2001,
p. 38), for example the extent to which they see themselves within the ‘learning
spaces’ of university activities as participative or agentive, as active learners, as able
to influence their programme, the university, or effect change more generally. The
questions were primarily concerned with issues of learning and identity. On learn-
ing, students were asked how PALS had influenced their own learning and those
with whom they worked; on identity I asked how participants saw themselves and
whether PALS had made a difference to this.
 248 J. Hilsdon

This was also an opportunity to see if PALS might operate as a potential ‘third
space’ (Gutiérrez, 2008; Moje et al., 2004) for learning, where students’ own home
culture and social histories (the ‘first space’) can be validated and drawn upon in an
environment stressing informality and relatively equal power relations; and where
there is encouragement to explore, question and critique collectively the specific
practices of the subject and of the academy more generally (‘the second space’).

Learning
Participants expressed strong views about the value of PALS in promoting their
own learning and that of members of their PALS group. Several commented that
working in an informal environment with opportunities to ‘talk normally … in a
way you can’t in class’ was beneficial. It meant that participants were ‘not shy
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

about making mistakes or seeming ignorant’ (F1):

Working together (in the PALS groups) helps too. You can see the guard come down.
They ... don’t feel like we’re (the PALS leaders) snooping on them ... we’re one of
them and it’s about helping each other. (F1)

The power dimension (as exemplified in the comment above implying a surveil-
lance function for education) is relevant to several of the students’ observations in
relation to learning:

…it’s a different way of learning, PALS, actually I think it’s more effective – you’re
not being talked at. Facilitating learning is good, it’s relaxed; there’s no worries about
being embarrassed in front of other people because you are all equal. (M2)

You can go over stuff, like the main points in the last lecture, and ask what everyone
thinks. Sometimes no one will say anything, but it’s ok – it’s not like the lecturer ask-
ing them for an answer. People just say what they want to get help with. Then I find
if I can just, like hold back, then one or two will say what ... their understanding is.
(F1)

Such comments suggest that genuinely cooperative and collaborative work, with
relatively symmetrical power relationships, is underway in PALS sessions to interpret
course-related concepts and language. The implications of this for the development of
student views on the nature of knowledge, and ways to improve pedagogy, indicate
that further exploration in a more in-depth study would be fruitful.

... they are not used having a say in what they are taught. It’s a real culture shift, even
for us leaders’ and ‘it’s hard to get students to say what they want to do, they’re not
used to having choice. (F3)

There were several comments about PALS really improving the experience of
learning without it being exactly clear how: ‘You know you are doing a good job
when the same students come back again. They do find it helpful. It’s hard to say
exactly how sometimes but you know it’s working and that feels great’ (F2).
The following ideas recur in several respondents: ‘sharing experience’ (e.g. of
being on placement) ‘reassuring’; ‘friendly group atmosphere’; ‘good relations’;
‘the time just to talk’ (F1); ‘it is really helpful to make a course community’ (M2).
 Innovations in Education and Teaching International 249

The unique position of the PALS leader in promoting learning as in a commu-

nity of practice is evoked in comments such as: ‘ ... because we’re so close to them
... we did all that stuff the year before ... we can understand, we know what they
going through and we can be supportive’ (M1).

... when you prompt them with something you experienced ... they compare
approaches and I really see change, they talk and figure it out themselves. (M2)

I think people’s stories and anecdotes about any problems they’ve had, or how they
solved problems, is useful to help you measure how you are doing. It improves the
relationships between students and, of course, they get to know each other better
because they see each other frequently. The session is informal and they make friends
– in lectures there may be up to 300 people there. It’s very impersonal. I do think
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

PALS is good for motivation and it’s empowering. (M1)

Such comments fit well with the notion of a potential ‘third space’ for learning,
albeit one directed by students rather than a teacher, where the discourses of infor-
mal contexts and peer-networks can be used to reflect on, and to find ways to make
sense of, and then take ownership of academic discourse and practice.
In terms of their own learning, PALS leaders made a number of comments indi-
cating positive results:

For me, it’s really helped consolidate my learning; (PALS) ... reinforces your learning.
(F2)

Learning in the PALS groups is very helpful. It’s a safe and friendly feeling. I’m
really glad I’ve done it and I certainly didn’t do it just for the money. (F3)

My confidence has improved a lot and my ability to talk about learning statistics – it’s
really helped me understand it – and that was a difficult area for me; it’s certainly
helped my organisational skills too. (F1)

I can hold conversations now that I couldn’t have before. (M2)

There were also comments relating to the physical environment and the creation of
a ‘learning space’ that invite further investigation:

The environment and seating and expectations ...and furniture are all different by com-
parison to a lecture – these things ... the way we can move stuff around and keep it
informal – that all helps put people at their ease. (M1)

In the lecture there are usually over 200 people; it’s not ideal for learning. (F2)

PALS creates opportunities that wouldn’t have been there otherwise. (M1)

Identity
In questions about identity, I was keen to find out how the students classified
themselves in terms of social class, gender, ethnicity or other social categories.
I was also interested to examine students’ discourse for indications of their
awareness of their own subject position (Fairclough, 2001) in relation to the extent
 250 J. Hilsdon

they see themselves as participative and able to effect change in the university. Of
the five, two identified themselves as working class and one of those felt that to be
an important aspect of his identity, which he related particularly to his birthplace:

I am .. well my parents are working class. I’m the first one in my family to go to uni
and so I guess that makes me aspiring middle class. (M2)

Plymouth University is up-and-coming. It is a West Country University and I am from

here. People do mix at university and it helps break down barriers. (F1)

(PALS) ... is giving me more confidence, I know that I can achieve, I am from a working-
class background ... getting the language for speaking and writing at university is what
makes a real difference for how you are going to do in the future – if you can express
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

yourself and be confident and know the right vocabulary it is what gets you respect. (F1)

The specific comments in the above about language use and its relation to life
and employment chances reveal some awareness of the existence social and cultural
capital as determinants of positioning, particularly the explicit link made to literacy
practices and HE. Of the five interviewees, one female felt gender to be an impor-
tant category:

... you are aware in like the job market there are still some ways men are more domi-
nant, so yeh, but no – it is fading out, I think .. we are more equal. (F3)

In terms of ethnicity, all the students classified themselves as white British or Eng-
lish but none felt this an important aspect of their identity, although two felt that
their regional identity as ‘West Country born’ was important.
The aspects of identity that participants stated were important to them were
mostly to do with being a student, and soon-to-be a job-seeker – and the role of
PALS leader figured strongly in responses:

I tell people I’m a student. I think about it as a big part of my identity. (M2)

I do feel that Plymouth is my uni and I think of myself as a student ... I’d say I think
of myself as a student first and then a Plymouth student. (M2)

I do think of myself differently as a PALS leader, well that’s good for my CV and I
feel I have achieved more by that. (M1)

… it’s really helpful for, like professional development. I want to go into teaching so
I’m really glad I found out about PALS. (F3)

... and also the helping role, I do feel like I’m a teacher though I know you are not
supposed to teach ... but it’s hard not to slip into that .. leadership is a woolly word
but it’s a tricky role. (F1)

... the important thing is that a PALS leader is not a lecturer you’re still a student but
it does make you think about being a student in different ways you’re working with
students to see how they think about how you really supported working with others is
enjoyable. (M2)
 Innovations in Education and Teaching International 251

An initial analysis of the discourse in the foregoing extracts provides some

evidence of a developing perception amongst some of the PALS leaders of how
identity is constructed, and how this can relate to learning, especially for profes-
sional life. In the comments about negotiating teacher-like and leader-like roles, the
importance of discourse practices and their relation to power is highlighted. If
pursued explicitly with these students, these experiences could be used to explore
ideas such as Bourdieu’s notions of the forms of social and cultural capital and their
role in the reproduction of social structure and life in general; and in discussion of
the extent to we can be agentive in response to the construction of our identities.

Conclusions: PALS, pedagogy and power relations

This small study offers preliminary contributions to theory and practice associated
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

with peer learning and indicates that further studies of this kind would be worth-
while. The attempted articulation of a LD approach to peer learning, and its use in
shaping the study has afforded insights from participants in relation to learning and
identity that add to those arising from previous studies about SI or PALS. In addi-
tion to the evidence presented above about the value of learning from peers, in the
course of their interviews, participants also offered a range of practical suggestions.
All commented on two issues in particular:

(a) the need for all lecturers to be aware of PALS and to meet leaders in their
subject areas,
(b) where PALS sessions were not timetabled along with other elements of a
programme or were allocated to evenings, then student attendance was poor
and perceptions of the scheme were that it is marginal.

Haggis suggests a number of areas of focus for moving towards a model of ‘collec-
tive enquiry’ (Haggis, 2006, p. 530) that could form the core of an LD approach to
peer learning, including:

• making explicit and questioning assumptions in broad academic practice (e.g.

that students will know how to use a reading list; or will understand the
meaning of plagiarism);
• exploring the range of motivations and forms of engagement students from
diverse social and cultural backgrounds may take;
• understanding the orientation of an academic discipline in terms of specific
expectations to display ‘critical thinking’, or use data or evidence;
• the problems of language in terms of decoding disciplinary and pedagogic dis-
course in subject terminology and assessment criteria (Adapted from Haggis,
2006, pp. 526–530).

Given the rise of approaches stressing ‘students as partners’ (Plymouth University,

2012); ‘the student as producer’ (Hagyard & Watling, 2011) and ‘the student voice’
(Edinburgh Napier, 2012), there are some indications that the time is right to pro-
mote such initiatives. Student-led sessions could offer ‘third-space’ opportunities to
assimilate and gain confidence in academic discourse, as advocated by PALS lead-
ers in this study.
 252 J. Hilsdon

The legitimation of peer learning would be likely to influence discourse prac-

tices by affording more participative roles for students generally, underpinning their
right to be listened to, interrupt, to ask questions and to offer their own viewpoints.
As in a communities of practice framework, this greater emphasis on legitimate par-
ticipation and critique is a key part of what (so our PALS leaders report) enhances
learning for all. Indeed, as Moje points out, literacies-focussed work in ‘third space’
contexts, which PALS could become, offers potential for:

... the development of ability to produce and represent knowledge in multiple forms,
the ability to analyse how others have represented knowledge and therefore to assess
truth claims ... to challenge long-standing – even mainstream – claims to knowledge
and, ultimately, to produce new knowledge that will benefit society. (Moje, 2007,
p. 33).
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

Such an approach stresses the situated nature of learning and reveals that knowl-
edge is constructed or challenged through practice. In terms of supporting student
learning in higher education, this puts the focus on legitimating participation in
communication, writing and language use under conditions where power is shared
as widely as possible. Lea and Street point out that the purely skills-based models
which have dominated support provision in HE (such as those common in conven-
tional student services study advice centres) are unable to address effectively the
‘issues of identity and the institutional relationships of power and authority’ (1998,
p. 157).
Increased competition between UK universities; the impact on institutions of the
disciplines of the market for HE (for example, to provide Key Information Sets
(KIS); and to appear in league tables based on student satisfaction, choice and suc-
cess measures) could help draw attention to initiatives such as peer learning. This
may be the case where their positive impacts on student experience, retention and
success can be demonstrated. To embed peer learning widely, however, cultural
transformations would be needed at the levels of pedagogy and institutional practice
and, as this is likely to challenge existing practices and power relations, it may be
very difficult – or at least take a long time – to achieve.

Notes on contributor
John Hilsdon is Associate Professor and Head of Learning Support and Wellbeing at
Plymouth University, leading the LD, Disability Assist and Counselling teams. He is also a
National Teaching Fellow. His work has contributed to LD as a distinct field of practice in
Higher Education. He helped set-up the UK network of learning developers in 2002 and was
the first Chair of the Association for LD in Higher Education (see www.aldinhe.ac.uk). He
is also co-editor of the Journal of LD in Higher Education (JLDHE - see www.aldinhe.ac.
uk/ojs).

References
Archer, L., Hutchings, M., Leathwood, C., & Ross, A. (2003). Widening participation
in higher education: Implications for policy and practice. In L. Archer, M. Hutchings, &
A. Ross (Eds.), Higher education and social class: Issues of exclusion and inclusion
(pp. 193–202). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
 Innovations in Education and Teaching International 253

Arendale, D. (1994). Understanding the supplemental instruction model. In D. C. Martin

& D. Arendale (Eds.), Supplemental instruction: Increasing achievement and retention
(pp. 11–22). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.),
Speech genres and other late essays (Trans. V. W. McGee) (pp. 60–103). Austin, TX:
University of Texas Press.
Barnett, R. (1997). Higher education: a critical business. Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Bhaba, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge.
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (Eds.). (2001). Peer learning in higher education:
Learning from and with each other. London: Kogan Page.
Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2005). Peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education.
Studies in Higher Education, 30, 501–516.
Bourdieu, P. (1992). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity.
Congos, D., & Schoeps, N. (1993). Does supplemental instruction really work and what is it
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

anyway? Studies in Higher Education, 18, 165.

D’Andrea, V., & Gosling, D. (2001). Joining the dots: Reconceptualising educational
development. Active Learning, 2, 65–81.
Edinburgh Napier University (2012). Hearing the student voice. February 19, 2012,
Retrieved from: http://www2.napier.ac.uk/studentvoices/
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
Fallows, S., & Steven, C. (2000). Building employability skills into the higher education
curriculum: A university-wide initiative. Education & Training, 42, 75–83.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New
York: Pantheon Books.
Galbraith, J., & Winterbottom, M. (2011). Peer-tutoring: What’s in it for the tutor? Educa-
tional Studies, 37, 321–332.
Gosling, D. (2001). Educational development units in the UK – what are they doing five
years on? The International Journal for Academic Development, 6, 74–90.
Gutiérrez, K. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading
Research Quarterly, 43, 148–164.
Haggis, T. (2006). Pedagogies for diversity: Retaining critical challenge amidst fears of
‘dumbing down’. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 521–535.
Hagyard, A., & Watling, S. (2011). The student as producer, learning by doing research. In
P. Hartley, J. Hilsdon, C. Keenan, S. Sinfield, & M. Verity (Eds.), Learning development
in higher education (pp. 169–182). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hampton, D., & Potter, J. (2009). The rise and development of peer learning within UK
Universities. In D. Hampton, & J. Potter, (Eds.), Students supporting students (pp. 5–8).
SEDA Special 26: Birmingham: SEDA.
Hilsdon, J. (2004). Learning development in higher education network: An emerging
community of practice? Educational Developments, 5, 12–15.
Hilsdon, J. (2011). What is learning development? In P. Hartley, J. Hilsdon, C. Keenan,
S. Sinfield, & M. Verity (Eds.), Learning development in higher education (pp. 13–27).
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hurley, M., Jacobs, G., & Gilbert, M. (2006). The basic SI model. New Directions for
Teaching and Learning, 106, 11–22.
Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic
writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies
approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23, 157–172.
Lillis, T. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation and desire. London: Routledge.
Lundell, D., & Higbee, J. (Eds.). (2002). Histories of developmental education. The Center
for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy University of Minnesota.
Lillis, T. (2003). Student writing as ‘academic literacies’: Drawing on Bakhtin to move from
critique to design. Language and Education, 17, 192–207.
 254 J. Hilsdon

Moje, E. (2007). Developing socially just subject-matter instruction: A review of the litera-
ture on disciplinary literacy teaching. Review of Research in Education, 31, 1–44.
Moje, E., McIntosh Ciechanowski, K., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T.
(2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday
funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 38–70.
NCIHE. (1997). Higher education in the learning society (the Dearing report). London:
National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education.
Neary, M., & Winn, J. (2009). The student as producer. In N. Neary, H. Stevenson, & L.
Bell (Eds.), The future of higher education: Policy, pedagogy and the student experience
(pp. 192–210). London: Continuum.
Parkinson, M. (2009). The effect of peer assisted learning support (PALS) on performance in
mathematics and chemistry. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46,
381–392.
Plymouth University (2012). Students as partners. February 02, 2012, Retrieved from http://
www1.plymouth.ac.uk/studentgateway/Pages/studentsaspartners.aspx
Downloaded by [University of Ulster Library] at 10:23 18 February 2015

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

Simpson, R. (1996). Learning development in HE: Deficit or difference? In S. Wolfendale &
J. Corbett (Eds.), Opening doors: Learning support in higher education (pp. 17–30).
London: Cassell.
Stout, M. L., & McDaniel, A. (2006). Benefits to supplemental instruction leaders. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 106, 55–62.
Topping, K. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A practical guide for teachers. Northampton,
MA: Brookline Books.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Cambridge: CUP.
Wolfendale, S. (1996). Learning support in higher education: Principles, values, continuities.
In S. Wolfendale & J. Corbett (Eds.), Opening doors: Learning support in higher
education. London: Cassell.