ACTIVITIES HELD BY STUDENTS AT

THE AUTONOMOUS LEARNING

SUPPORT BASE
Mariana Maués Barreto

Advisor: Walkyria Magno e Silva, PhD.

CONTENTS
o RATIONALE
o THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
o CONTEXT
o GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
o METHODS
o RESULTS
o CONCLUSION
o REFERENCES
RATIONALE
■ Previous research that assessed activities promoted and held by
students at the Autonomous Learning Support Base (ALSB);
■ Duration of the activity X participants’ dropout rate.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
■ Peer interaction;
■ Vygotsky’s Social Development Theory (1991);
■ Communities of Practice (CoP) (WENGER, 2008);
■ Limitations in SACs innovative experiences among students

“Students learn a great deal by explaining their ideas to others and by

participating in activities in which they can learn from their peers” (BOUD;
COHEN; SAMPSON, 2001, p. 3).
 CONTEXT
■ The ALSB;
■ The activities held at the SAC can
be proposed by teachers, students
or members of the community.
GOAL
■ To assist students who are conducting activities at the
ALSB.

OBJECTIVES
■ To help the conductor meet participants’ needs in order to
maintain their motivation to attend activities;
■ To address the issue of participants’ dropout.
 METHODS
■ Assistance of two activities held by peer
students at the ALSB over the period of
one month;
■ Parallel survey after each session;
■ Interviews with conductors;
■ Analysis of attendance lists.
RESULTS
ACTIVITY ONE
■ CLOSE QUESTIONS:
o Conductor’s self-criticism;
o Participants and conductor’s interaction;
o The activity effectiveness.

■ OPEN QUESTIONS:
o Conductor’s impression X compliments given by participants;
o Participants’ suggestions.
RESULTS
ACTIVITY TWO
■ CLOSE QUESTIONS:
o Conductor’s excellent teaching skills and self-confidence;
o Participants' satisfaction with the activity.

■ OPEN QUESTIONS:
o Participants’ suggestions;
o Conductor’s response to participants’ feedback.
INTERVIEWS
CONDUCTOR ONE
■ “In the places where I worked before, I had to be attached to a specific
methodology … but here at the ALSB I have more freedom”.
■ ”It was nice because I could understand what they expected from the
activity... because even though I proposed the activity, it is not only mine, it is
also theirs... So, I want to know what they want to do”.

CONDUCTOR TWO
■ “With no modesty? I know that I can teach well”.
■ “I wish I had more time, but I didn’t… but I always finished what I planned…
When I could not finish everything I had planned for that day, I continued on
the next meeting”.
DROPOUT RATE

Number of participants
Session 1 Session 2 Session 3

Activity one (Watch n’ Learn) 7 6 7

Activity two (Super Deutsch) 7 7 6

CONCLUSION
■ Students who conduct activities are an essential resource to
a self-access center.
■ The use of students in peer-teaching is an opportunity for
self-access centers to develop and to help students reach
their highest potential.
■ The questionnaire application positively affected participants’
engagement.
■ The sharing of participants’ comments encouraged the
activity conductors to continue improving.
REFERENCES
■ BOUD, D.; COHEN, R.; SAMPSON, J. Peer learning in higher education: learning from
& each other. London: Kohan Page Limited, 2001.
■ VYGOTSKY, L. S. A formação social da mente. Tradução de Monica da Silva. São
Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1991.
■ WENGER, E. Communities of Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
ACTIVITIES HELD BY STUDENTS AT
THE AUTONOMOUS LEARNING
SUPPORT BASE
Mariana Maués Barreto

Advisor: Walkyria Magno e Silva, PhD.