S4.3.1

=Institutional standards define requirements for student personal and learning support that are explicitly linked to institutional e-learning strategies. =

Evidence
Evidence of capability in the practice is seen in clear documentation, complying with a consistent institutional template, setting out the information necessary for accessing all available student services. Policy should require that this information be accurate, regularly reviewed and provided to students in advance of enrolment. Templates should be provided to ensure a consistent organisation and content. Elements that are standard to all courses should use wording prescribed by policy.

Tait (2000) describes such support as ‘the range of services both for individuals and for students in groups which complement the course materials or learning resources that are uniform for all learners’ (p. 289). He proposes that student support has cognitive, affective, and administrative concerns: ‘1. cognitive: supporting and developing learning through the mediation of the standard and uniform elements of course materials and learning resources for individual students; 2. affective: providing an environment which supports students, creates commitment, and enhances self-esteem; and 3. systemic: establishing administrative processes and information management systems which are effective, transparent and overall student-friendly’ (p. 289). Tait observes that although support is usually considered an administrative process, all three concerns are ‘essential and interdependent’ (p. 289). He comments further that while the affective consequences of poor administrative support are usually recognised, there is less appreciation of the adverse affects of poor support on student’s cognitive functions: ‘Where the support of students mediates teaching embodied in courseware, then it clearly relates to learning, and…cognitive outcomes. It also…relates to…providing an environment where students feel at home, where they feel valued, and which they find manageable. In this way we can see that the three core functions are truly interrelated and interdependent’ (p. 289). Tait envisions a student support framework that interrelates the management system, technological infrastructure, and course requirements with student cohort characteristics, geographical issues, and the scalability of the programme: ‘The success of the planning process lies in identifying within the core elements of the study support system which specific compromises provide optimal results’ (p. 297).