Transcript Developing our agenda for the Higher Education White Paper

An era of change:
the context for students’ and
understanding the student
experience
Art, Design, Media Creative Learning &
Teaching Day
Aaron Porter
November 2011
Overview
- Introduction
- Who is going into HE, student trends
- Student Experience research
- Implications from the HE White Paper
- Key questions to consider for the future
Who is going into HE?
Changing Demographics
Student Numbers
2006: Top-up fees
introduced
350000
1992 HE Act: 44
"new" Universities in
England
300000
250000
200000
150000
1970s: PostRobbins
Expansion of
HE Sector
1998: First
tuition fees
1990: First
student loans
100000
50000
19
63
6
19 4
65
6
19 6
67
6
19 8
69
7
19 0
71
7
19 2
73
7
19 4
75
7
19 6
77
7
19 8
79
8
19 0
81
8
19 2
83
8
19 4
85
8
19 6
87
8
19 8
89
9
19 0
91
9
19 2
93
9
19 4
95
9
19 6
97
9
19 8
99
0
20 0
01
0
20 2
03
0
20 4
05
06
0
All subjects
Medicine & Dentistry
Languages
Hist & Philosophical studies
Linguistics and Classics
Physical Sciences
Engineering, Technologies
Social Science combined with arts
Architecture, Build & Plan
Interdisciplinary, other combined subjects
Biology, Vet Sci,Ag & related
Social Studies
Law
Creative Arts & Design
Science combined with social science
Mass communication and Documentation
Mathematical & Comp Sci
Business & Admin studies
Subjects allied to Medicine
Education
0
10
20
30
Managerial and Professional Occupations
40
50
Intermediate Occupations
60
70
80
Routine and manual Occupations
90
65% of students believe that if they
are expected to pay more for their
university experience they would
have higher expectations
NUS/HSBC Student Experience Report (2010)
School students are likely to think university
will be very different from school
94%
%
Being organised and using my time
111
02 7
efficiently will be key to university 1
I will have a whole new lifestyle at
2113 4 7
university
25
62
82%
19
28
35
79%
Doing well at university will require
31124 10
learning to think differently
Most of the time at university, there will
be a lecturer or tutor available that I can
go to for advice or information
22
30
27
75%
412 5 8 6
20
33
22
65%
I will see an academic tutor, lecture etc.,
regularly and really get to know them
Base: All school
leavers (300)
Don't know
1 - Totally disagree
3
5
7 - Totally agree
8 22 5 5
14
30
21
14
No experience of
2
4 - Neither agree nor disagree
6
Chart 2: Students that fall into the lowest socio-economic group,
DE, most likely to be motivated to choose a university that is
close to home
Q3. What were the main reasons for choosing your university? Please indicate your top
three reasons
%
53
31
30
31
22
Close to home
Base: All first year students (630), A (100), B (157), C1 (132), C2 (68*) DE (68*)
*small base
A
B
C1
C2
DE
How do students currently
consider themselves?
• 37% of students strongly agreed that they
are a “student engaged in a community of
learning”
• However, 18% strongly thought that they
were a “customer and expect the service
that I have paid for”.
NUS/HSBC Student Experience Report, 2010
However, there are significant
differences by subject
• “student engaged in a community of learning”
– 54% of medical students strongly agreed
– 22% of business students strongly agreed
• “customer and expect the service that I have
paid for”.
– 23% business students strongly agree
– 15% medical students strongly agree
Bols, 2011
Chart 1: Reasons for wanting to go to university influenced by
institution type
Q1. What were the main reasons for wanting to go to university? Please indicate your top
three reasons
%
73
76
Total
Russell group
Pre 1992
Post 1992
Other institutions
68
63
62 62
55
53
48
52
49
44
44
38
35 34
34
32
29
23
To gain
qualifications
Improve my
Improve my
chances of getting a earning potential
job
For the experience
Base: All first year students (630), Russell Group (143), pre 1992 (161), post 1992 (287), other institutions (38)
Chart 3: Reasons for choosing university influenced by institution
type
Q3. What were the main reasons for choosing your university? Please indicate your top
three reasons
%
79
81
Russell group
Pre 1992
Post 1992
Other institutions
71
61
58
45
41 39
39
24
28 26
24
19
17
9
Had the subject/
course I wanted
Academic
reputation of the
university
Close to home
Suitable entry
requirments
Base: All first year students (630), Russell Group (143), pre 1992 (161), post 1992 (287), other institutions (38)
• How would you rate the quality of the
teaching and learning experience?
– 2008:
– 2009:
85%
89%
• How involved do you believe you are
in shaping the content, curriculum or
design of your course?
– 2008 5-7
– 2009 5-7
57%
62%
23%
31%
How would you like to be involved in
shaping the content, curriculum or
design of your course?
– Being a course representative 18%
– Being involved in setting assessment
criteria
31%
– Providing feedback on course design
74%
Chart 5: Information students received before starting
course
Q 8. What information did you receive from your university before starting your course?
Please select all that apply
86
Accommodation options and costs
Sources of financial support sources and application
procedures
74
69
Students’ Union
65
Course content
60
Student advice & guidance services
Social/ cultural/ sporting activities/ clubs
55
37
Reading lists
27
Disability/ dyslexia support
26
Materials/ supplies requirements
Course timetable
23
Quantity of teaching/ contact hours
23
22
Private/ individual study requirements
Quality of teaching
Course marking scheme including exams and other
assessment procedures
Base: All first year students (630)
19
17
%
Chart 13: More contact time is the main thing that students say
would improve the quality of their teaching and learning
experience
Q24. What would improve the quality of the teaching and learning experiences at your
university?
More interactive group teaching sessions/ tutorials
38
More individual teaching sessions/ tutorials
38
36
More contact time with personal tutor
35
Lecturers/ tutors with better teaching skills
27
Availability of facilities for practical work
22
More lectures
Additional support such as study skills training
20
Wider range of lecturers/ tutors
19
15
Subject based networks
Internet discussion forums
14
Library support
14
Lecturers/ tutors with better academic
qualifications
Base: All answering section 3 (940)
9
• Male:
• 18 year olds:
• Disabled:
78% vs
80% vs
66% vs
Subject:
Contact hours
Medicine and life sciences
Physical sciences and related
Arch., building and planning
Law
Business and admin. studies
Mass comms and doc.
Education
Creative arts and design
Social studies
Languages
Historical and philosophy
Female: 73%
Over 21 year olds: 73%
non-disabled: 77%
19
18
14
13
13
13
13
13
12
10
9
Satis. with contact hrs
80%
84%
68%
69%
73%
76%
78%
68%
65%
65%
66%
Chart 5: Majority of students receive their feedback on
coursework within a month
Q37. How long – on average – does it take for you to receive feedback on your
coursework?
%
33
18
16
7
4
Less than a
week
One to two
weeks
Base: All who receive feedback (967)
Three to four
weeks
Five to six
weeks
Seven weeks
or more
Would you like to receive feedback on
your exams?
– Yes
– No
– Don’t know
90%
6%
4%
Those that currently only receive written grades/
marks and/ or do not receive any feedback
Languages
Historical and philosophy
10
9
65%
66%
Chart 12: The majority of students use the internet and social
networking sites on a daily basis as part of their studies
Q48. How often do you use these during term time as part of your studies?
Internet as a source for
information
69
Virtual Learning
Environment (VLE) such
as Blackboard, Moodle
45
Social networking sites
such as Facebook
10 11
20
55
14
41
42
61
Mobile phone
Web-discussion forums
26
20
27
34
9
6 2
15
5 2
16
6
%
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Termly
Less than one a term
Base: All using the internet as part of their studies (964); all using VLEs as part of their studies (709); all using
social networking sites as part of their studies (406); all using mobile phones as part of their studies (276); all
using web-discussion forums as part of their studies (258)
Chart 13: 46% of students agreed that ICT has enhanced their
studies
Q50. To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the information
and communication technology at university?
46%
I feel that the use of ICT
has enhanced my studies
3 4
14
34
45
1
38%
I feel that ICT has
enhanced my time at
university in general
3 6
20
33
37
1
54%
My ICT skills meet the
standard required to 2 3
enhance my studies
11
30
53
1
%
1 - Totally disagree
2
3
4 - Neither agree nor disagree
Base: All answering section 6 (1003)
5
6
7 - Totally agree
Chart 8: International students were significantly more
likely to say they felt integrated with domestic students
Q65. How integrated do you feel with domestic students?
Q68. How integrated do you feel with international students?
How integrated do
you feel with
domestic students
(only asked of
international
students)
How integrated do
you feel with
international
students (only asked
of domestic
students)
1 - Not at all
%
55%
5
12
24
31
24
29%
16
17
2
34
3 - Somewhat
Base: All international students (204); All domestic students (804)
18
4
11
5 - Fully
Chart 9: International students were significantly more
likely to think that integration with domestic students
was important
Q66. How important do you think that integration with domestic students is?
Q69. How important do you think that integration with international students is?
%
How important do
you think that
integration with
domestic students 21 3
is? (Only asked of
international
students)
How important do
you think that
integration with
international
students is? (Only
asked of domestic
students)
1 - Not important at all
70%
20
15
18
37
58%
5
3
7
2
25
3
20
4 - Somewhat important
Base: All international students (204); All domestic students (804)
17
5
21
6
7 - Very important
Chart 8: Students in higher socio-economic groups are the
least likely to be concerned about their levels of debt
Q85. Are you concerned about your current levels of debt?
A
39
B
c1
c2
DE
31
42
27
Not concerned (net)
29
28
30
31
28
%
27
42
31
25
Neither concerned nor not concerned
36
47
Concerned (net)
Base: A - with debts (145); B - with debts (214); c1 - with debts (127); c2 - with debts
(108); DE - with debts (77)
“We cannot seriously believe that the
present quality assurance model is
sufficient to deal with the cut and
thrust of the new market. It is too
vague, too slow, and too distant
from the student. I believe a firmer
and more direct approach to quality
monitoring should be taken and I
think the QAA should have a totally
changed structure and remit.”
Aaron Porter, Student Experience Conference,
11th November 2010
White Paper – Students at the
Heart of the System
(Really?)
• Sustainable and Fair Funding
• Well informed students driving teaching
excellence
• A better student experience and better
qualified graduates
• A diverse and responsive sector
• Improved social mobility through fairer
access
• A new, fit for purpose regulatory
framework
Sustainable and Fair Funding
• Biggest single shift in source of funding in history of
HE. Little time for preparation, or consideration to
some unintended consequences.
• Loss of state funding for teaching for arts,
humanities & social sciences.
• Two pools for competition of places (AAB & £7.5k).
New competition from FECs and Private Providers.
• Consider the demography of students that gain
AAB, and consider which institutions they will
progress to.
• Postgraduate funding…. Kicked into the long grass
(again).
Well informed students
driving teaching excellence
• Tone from Government that the KIS and Student Charter is
either a justification for higher fees, or the solution to the
‘information gap’. In isolation they are neither.
• KIS, cautious welcome. But prepare for unintended
consequences. The metrics chosen will now be the focus
of attention. Contact time? Graduate earnings? Feedback
turnaround?
• Student Charters. Building on the recommendations from
the Beer/Porter Student Charter group which reported in
January 2010. Only has value if they are ‘living’
documents, revisited on an annual basis between SU exec
& institution. Ideally used in induction for students and
staff.
• Inherent contradiction between more sophisticated analysis
of quality – Professor Graham Gibbs’ ‘Dimensions of quality’,
and narrow, utilitarian measures from govt (contact time etc.)
A better student experience &
better qualified graduates
• Increased student engagement – welcome. But
needs to be done through the lens of co-production,
and a move away from the ‘narrow box’ of student
engagement.
• Risk based quality assurance. A more flexible
approach.
• Improved links between HEIs and employers.
• Increased focus on academic representation.
• Time limits on OIA cases.
• More focus on information relating to graduate
destinations. DLHE inadequate?
Diverse and responsive sector
• Increased competition for student places over
time (AAB and £7.5k).
• What about subjects which may not have critical
mass, or poor employment prospects?
• Too deep, too fast?
• Emergence of a two-tier system?
• Removal of barriers to entry for new providers:
Easier to gain university title and change to legal
status.
• The spectrum of potential private providers is
vast.
Improved social mobility
through fairer access
•
•
•
•
•
Mountain to climb.
Impact of student demand (and institutional supply)
New powers for OFFA. Long grass.
Future progression to postgraduate study?
Removal of key access infrastructure. AimHigher,
EMA. Slap dash National Scholarship Programme
introduced.
• National Careers Guidance is crucial, but little
detail to date.
• Review to consider the introduction of a PostQualification Application system.
A new, fit for purpose
regulatory framework
• Browne’s proposal to merge HEFCE, QAA, OIA &
HEA rejected.
• Reform of the powers and focus away from HEFCE.
Previously a ‘funding council’. Now to be ‘lead
regulator’ and ‘student champion’. Overseeing
financial health of HEIs & delivering on
strategic/Govt objectives.
• A “single, transparent regulatory framework” which
should provide a level playing field for all providers
(inc FECs and private providers). But also access to
Degree Awarding Powers and access to student
funding (loans) and remaining teaching grant.
Opportunities for the future
• Undoubtedly a testing period, but also a period of great
opportunity.
• The prevailing ‘hierarchy’ of institutions may start to get
challenged.
• Renewed political pressure on institutions that have
poor records on fair access & widening participation.
• Employer-engaged institutions likely to thrive, as student
demand could re-shape the sector.
• Induction is critical. What are new students coming into?
Thank you
Questions?
Aaron Ross Porter Consultancy
[email protected]