Transcript What works? Facilitating an effective transition into

Building student engagement and belonging
in Higher Education at a time of change
Dublin Institute of Technology, 22 February 2013
Professor Liz Thomas, Higher Education Academy & Edge Hill
University, UK
Overview and objectives
1. To consider student non-continuation and
completion in the UK.
2. To examine the key factors that impact on
undergraduate student retention and success in HE.
3. To consider the importance of student engagement
in retaining students.
4. To highlight practical examples of effective
induction, active learning and teaching and cocurricular activities to improve retention and
success.
Informed by What works? Student retention and success
programme. (HEFCE/Paul Hamlyn Foundation)
2
Retention: non-continuation and
completion
Continuation rate: proportion of an institution’s intake which
is enrolled in HE in the year following their first entry to HE.
• The average non-continuation rate was 8.4% for entrants to
English higher education institutions in 2009-10;
• Non-continuation rates varied between English institutions
between 1.2% and 21.4% in 2009-10;
Completion rate: proportion of starters in a year who
continue their studies until they obtain their qualification, with no
more than one consecutive year out of higher education.
• The average completion rate for students entering institutions
in England in 2009-10 was projected to be 78.4%;
• Completion rates were projected to vary between institutions
between 53.8% and 97.2% in 2009-10.
3
Thinking about leaving HE
What percentage of students think about leaving HE?
• Between 33% (1/3) and 42% (2/5) of students think about
withdrawing from HE.
Why do students think about leaving HE?
Most students having more than one reason. Top three reasons:
• Academic issues.
• Feelings of isolation and/or not fitting in.
• Concern about achieving future aspirations.
When are students most likely to consider leaving?
• After Christmas.
• During the first semester.
4
What works? Student retention and
success programme
• NAO (2007) and PAC (2008): Lack of progress and lack of
evidence about what works.
• £1 million (Paul Hamlyn Foundation and HEFCE) to
support 7 projects involving 22 HEIs to identify, evaluate
and disseminate effective practice.
• The primary purpose of the programme is to generate
robust, evidence-based analysis and evaluation about the
most effective practices to ensure high continuation and
completion rates.
5
Key messages
•The key message from the programme is the
centrality of students having a strong sense
of belonging in HE; this is most effectively
nurtured in the academic sphere.
•This puts high quality student-centred
learning and teaching at the heart of
effective student retention and success.
6
Key messages
Student belonging is an outcome of:
•Supportive peer relations.
•Meaningful interaction between staff
and students.
•Developing knowledge, confidence and
identity as successful HE learners.
•An HE experience which is relevant to
interests and future goals.
7
Institutional management and
co-ordination
Student capacity
building
Staff capacity
building
Academic
Social
Service
Early engagement extends into HE and beyond
8
Implementation: Characteristics of
effective interventions and approaches
Mainstream
Monitored
Collaborative
Proactive
Belonging
Relevant
Well timed &
appropriate
media
9
What works process
Implementation
(activity)
Engagement
(level 1
outcomes)
Belonging
(level 2
outcome)
Retention
and success
(impact)
10
Small group activity: Student stories
• Find a person or people near you with the same
student story.
• Read the student story.
• Discuss and make a note of the reasons why this
student left or thought about leaving higher
education.
11
Effective practice
Three types of intervention
• Induction
• Active learning and teaching
• Co-curricular activities
12
Induction
13
Mature students study skills
summer school, Social Sciences
Implementation
Mainstream
Proactive*
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Monitored*
2 day non-residential pre-entry study skills
summer school for mature students
All mature students, all levels and FT &PT
All students encouraged to attend
Explicit academic focus on skills
Just before new academic year begins.
Develops skills rather provides information.
Includes strong social element, lunch with
staff and students.
Qualitative feedback and review of data.
Are non-participants followed up?
14
Mature students study skills
summer school, Social Sciences
Outcomes
Focus groups with students and analysis of
institutional data
Peer relations
Developed long-term friendships.
Interaction with staff Got to know programme staff.
Developing capacity Increased students confidence and skills.
Relevant to current/ The academic focus was particularly
future goals*
welcomed.
Sense of belonging
Created cohort identity.
Retention & success Better retention rates compared to
students who did not participate.
15
Mature students study skills
summer school, Social Sciences
“...I felt much more able when I realised ‘we all were learning this’
and I wasn’t the only one, and I now had people to share this
with and keep me going [...] and they did when I needed it.”
“…make friends, it’s not what I came here to do and didn’t really
want to, but it was kind of part of the [weekly] work... I kind of
had to... and, I wouldn’t be here if I hadn’t.”
“we’ve kept each other going and it’s all from the very start, from
the lunch. Knowing we’d be in [the same] classes together
brought us together. We said ‘we can help each other’ and
that’s what we did, and we’re all mates and y’know have a coffee
and a chat, about Uni and about, well...”
Mature students, University of Hull
16
Local field trip, Tourism
Implementation
Compulsory local field trips during induction
Mainstream
Part of academic induction for all level 1
students.
Compulsory so all students participate.
Helps students get to know the local area and
is relevant to their study.
Proactive
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
At the start of the year. Find out by doing.
Monitored*
Are non-participants followed up?
Involves programme staff and students work
in groups.
17
Local field trip, Tourism
Outcomes
Peer relations
Focus groups with students and analysis of
institutional data
Students got to know each other and
support each other.
Interaction with staff Students got to know members of staff.
Developing capacity Provided students with experiences to
inform studying.
Relevant to
current/future goals
Sense of belonging
Field trips referred to and used in first year
curriculum.
Created a sense of belonging even for local
students.
Retention & success
Progression remained constant (82-86%)
despite doubling of cohort.
18
Local field trip, Tourism
Local students felt isolated and that students in accommodation
were better integrated: “It’s mostly all the halls, like everyone staying
in halls and then local people” .
Students felt that the field trip “strengthens the whole group on a
social basis” and this in turn “created a positive environment within
the class” .
“I met people during the day yeah. We did a little run around the
city, getting into different things. I thought it was a bit tedious, but
now when I actually look back it was just getting people to
familiarise themselves with the city which was quite clever.”
“I feel more part of the group than before, which makes my course
easier because I can ask anyone in my course if I’ve got any
difficulties.”
19
T-shirt induction activity, Chemical
Engineering and Advanced Materials
Implementation
Mainstream
Proactive
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Monitored*
Fun, semi-structured approach to group
formation during induction in engineering
Activity takes place as part of academic
induction for all level 1 students.
All students participate.
It is led by senior lecturer as part of the
course. Groups then undertake projects.
During first week. Emphasis is on forming
groups rather than providing information.
Promotes peer interaction and group working.
Structured to promote mixing.
Qualitative feedback and review of data.
Are non-participants followed up?
20
T-shirt induction activity, CEAM
Outcomes
Surveys and focus groups with students and
analysis of institutional data
Peer relations
Groups continued to work and socialise
together one year later (58%)
Opportunity to get to know a key member
of staff.
Interaction with staff
Developing capacity
Relevant to
current/future goals
Students help each other (44% reported
receiving help)
Group working in the curriculum, and
relevant to engineering employment.
Sense of belonging
Created a belonging always or mostly (81%)
Retention & success
Better annual retention rates (75%-93%) and
compared to other engineering schools.
21
T-shirt induction activity, CEAM
“....it kind of makes....you don’t just feel like one individual person
on a course, it is kind of like you are in a conglomerate of people
kind of thing...I think it does definitely make you feel part of the
group or part of something within the year group rather than just
one lone person.”
“First year is bad because you don’t know anyone....if you don’t set
up the design group you have got to make friends, where are you
going to make friends kind of thing.....well you wouldn’t
usually.....and if it was all individual work. You have to stick around
to do the work and obviously if it is group work you are forced to
meet people....”.
“…I think if you are part of the kind of group then if, if you are
going to drop out then.... or if you are struggling academically then
you have got people there to support you as well”.
22
Active learning and teaching
Problem-based learning in groups,
Psychology
Implementation
Mainstream
Proactive
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Monitored*
Core level 1 course using problem-based
learning in groups of 8 students.
This is part of mainstream curriculum.
All students participate, and group work is
assessed.
Relevant to current learning and team
working in employment.
During first week. Emphasis is on forming
groups rather than providing information.
Uses the academic sphere to facilitate social
integration. Staff work with groups of 8
students.
Qualitative feedback and review of data.
24
Problem-based learning in groups,
Psychology
Outcomes
Peer relations
Surveys and focus groups with students and
analysis of institutional data
Students worked in groups outside of the
classroom and made friends.
Interaction with
staff*
Developing capacity
Opportunity to get to know staff in small
groups.
Supported to work in groups through
coaching and other staff support.
Relevant to
current/future goals.
Able to relate to own experiences and
interests.
Sense of belonging
Created a sense of belonging.
Retention & success
Better retention rates year on year from
77% to 85%.
25
Problem-based learning in groups,
Psychology
“I made [friends] through my seminars, really. I got four
really good friends, and I’ve just clicked with them straight
away, and then we sit together in lectures and stuff. And
now I’m working on this project with them and we’ve been
meeting up outside of Uni and stuff.”
“[...]I like that you can work together and somebody can
bring a piece of information that you’ve never heard of, and
you can bring something that somebody else has never
heard of, and then you can swap them and find out how
they found it and what’s in the research. I like that.”
26
Group learning, Mechanical and
Systems Engineering
Implementation
Divided into groups of 5 students on first day
of Semester 1 for collaborative study and
undertook team building activities.
Mainstream
Group work required in two core modules
that all MSE students take in Semester 1.
All students participate; tasks are assessed.
Proactive
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Monitored*
They are core modules; also stress the
relevance for employability.
First semester.
Promotes peer interaction and group working.
Qualitative feedback and review of data.
Are non-participants followed up?
27
Group learning, Mechanical and
Systems Engineering
Outcomes
Surveys and focus groups with students and
analysis of institutional data
Peer relations
The majority of students (84 & 92%) either
‘very much’ or ‘somewhat’ enjoyed working
as part of an Engineering team.
?
Interaction with staff
Developing capacity
Relevant to
current/future goals
Sense of belonging
Retention & success
Team working skills developed.
Group working in the curriculum, and
relevant to engineering employment.
The majority of respondents (72% & 83%):
being part of an Engineering team had helped
them to feel that they ‘belong’ in the School.
Better annual retention rates (85%-94%) and
compared to other engineering schools.
28
Group learning, Mechanical and
Systems Engineering
“In the first hour... you were sat in the introductory lecture
thinking ‘I don’t know anyone’, ‘how am I going to make
friends?’ and they said ‘we are going to put you in these
teams’ and instantly there was... straight away there was
like 10 or 11 other people you knew straight away”.
“...if I am stuck with anything and they are just good
support...it works both ways too [...] and if you have people
straight from the beginning that you can bounce stuff
off...that helps, because you don’t always need to go to the
lecturer and try and find them”.
29
Co-curricular activities
PASS: Personal and Academic
Support System, life sciences
Implementation
Mainstream
Proactive
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Monitored
Group tutorials developing academic skills and
working relationships with staff and students.
Part of the compulsory skills module.
All students participate; those who are failing
are followed up one-to-one.
Assessed coursework set through PASS
contributes 30% of the module assessment.
Meet 4-5 times per semester; more frequent
meeting in first semester. Face-to-face and
text book.
Emphasis on learning with each other and
from each other.
Attendance monitored and followed-up.
31
PASS: Personal and Academic
Support System, life sciences
Outcomes
Peer relations
Student survey, interviews, focus groups;
attendance monitoring; and data.
Students learn from each other and feel
more confident.
Interaction with staff 89% reported sufficient contact with staff
through PASS; 88% confident now to ask for
academic help.
Developing capacity Develop skills of all students; including
failing students.
Relevant to
Taught by academics from their discipline,
current/future goals. so perceived as relevant
Sense of belonging
Shows that the dept cares/they belong.
Retention & success
83% in 2004-05 to 92% in 2007-08.
32
PASS: Personal and Academic
Support System, life sciences
[We] learn how others are feeling about the course and
how they are getting on. The atmosphere is relaxed and
friendly and that helps everyone have a voice, which is
important for those who wouldn’t speak up in a lecture.
Made me feel… that there were people to talk to if needed.
I feel it is a great system to get to know your academic
advisor and this makes me feel more involved in the Life
Science department.
33
Fundraising, Childhood Studies
Implementation
Mainstream
Proactive
Relevant
Collaborative fundraising for children’s
charities.
Initially small scale fundraising in class.
Activities chosen to maximise engagement,
including of mature students with children.
Children’s charities selected to be relevant to
curriculum area.
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Throughout the year. Promoted in class by
staff.
Students work together. This has evolved to
larger scale activities outside of the class.
Monitored*
It is not compulsory, but up to 200 students
involved in mini Olympics 2011.
34
Fundraising, Childhood Studies
Outcomes
Peer relations
Interviews and focus groups with students
and staff and analysis of institutional data
Students are spending more time on
campus and working together across levels.
Interaction with staff Students got to know members of staff.
Developing capacity Provided students with experiences to
inform studying.
Relevant to
current/future goals
Sense of belonging
Shared interest in children, and likely to
want to be employed in related sector.
Created cohort identity and a sense of
belonging.
Retention & success
Improved attainment. Progression from level
1 to level 2 increased from 85% to 93%.
35
Fundraising, Childhood Studies
“…most of the students aren’t spending enough time at the University,
they were coming in and going out and we want to encourage more
social integration and more of a sense of community.” (Staff)
“They really do try and get you to do it. They do lots to get people
involved. The lecturer who runs it stops you and questions us on why
you’re not doing it.” (Mature student)
“Because of the relationship between the 2nd year students and the 3rd
year students we see the 3rd year students preparing students for
their transitions into their final year, especially making them aware of
the expectations and how to manage their time.” (Staff)
“Sense of belonging has been increased and you can develop a better
relationship with teachers as well as other students. It also shows that
we generally care about children and that is why we do the Childhood
Studies course.” (Student)
36
Peer mentoring
Implementation
Mainstream
Proactive
Relevant
Well-timed &
appropriate media
Collaborative
Monitored
Centrally co-ordinated, implemented by
academic schools, opt-out model.
Operates in all academic schools for all
students.
Opt-out.
The emphasis is on social integration, but
matching students and situating in the
academic sphere makes it more relevant.
Begins on arrival and extends throughout the
first year.
Emphasis on creating peer networks. Groups
of 5 students to one peer guide.
Yes.
37
Peer mentoring
Outcomes
Peer relations
Survey of mentors and mentees.
85% had received general peer guide
support with social integration.
Interaction with staff 31% had been encouraged to seek help
from staff.
Developing capacity
Relevant to
current/future goals
Sense of belonging
Retention & success
71% had received support via small group
or individual meetings.
Mentors: 78% increased communication
skills and 75% increased leadership skills.
19% said the scheme had been important in
their decision to choose Bangor.
Higher rates of retention than benchmark
and national average.
38
Peer mentoring
My Peer Guide made sure I was comfortable from the moment
my parents left.
He made us feel as if we fitted in with the students of the 2nd
and 3rd years.
She was very helpful when asked questions and thorough with
the personal advice given.
My Peer Guide helped people through all year and helped
point us in the right direction whenever we needed her.
The peer guides talked to us about the modules, helping us
decide … they were like, “Well do you want exams or do
you want like assignments to do?” And if we said that, “Well
like I’ll do this one because …” they helped us choose. And
also they told us which lecturers are nice and stuff like that.
39
Group activity
• Discuss interventions or approaches that you are
familiar with that would have helped the student
you discussed earlier.
• Be prepared to feedback to the group one
intervention that might have helped and why.
40
Strategic implications
1. Institutional commitment demonstrated through leadership and
institutional documents.
2. A priority for all staff; all staff responsible for R&S.
3. Staff capacity: through accountability, recognition, support and
development and reward.
4. Student capacity: through clear expectations, purpose and value;
development of skills; and providing opportunities.
5. High quality data to monitor curriculum performance.
6. Monitor student behaviour.
7. Partnership with students and staff.
41
Thank you
Contact details:
[email protected]
What works? Reports and compendium of effective practice
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/what-works-retention
Change programme
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/change/SRS_1
2-13/SRS_Call
Other HEA retention and success resources
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/retention-and-success
42