1 / 20

University of Groningen, The Netherlands 13 - 15 May 2009

European First Year Experience Conference. University of Groningen, The Netherlands 13 - 15 May 2009 . A holistic approach to the support and engagement of first year students: a retention strategy. Karen Nelson, John Clarke & Sally Kift Queensland University of Technology

phiala
Download Presentation

University of Groningen, The Netherlands 13 - 15 May 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. European First Year Experience Conference University of Groningen, The Netherlands 13 - 15 May 2009 A holistic approach to the support and engagement of first year students: a retention strategy. Karen Nelson, John Clarke & Sally Kift Queensland University of Technology Brisbane, Australia

  2. This session … • QUT’s institutional context and approach to the FYHE • Transition pedagogy • Key FYHE strategies at QUT • Student success initiative • Grounded in research & experience • Project overview & key partners • Activities and outcomes • Discussion and questions

  3. QUT’s Institutional Context • 40,000 students and 7 faculties over 3 campuses • Close to 10,000 commencing students each year • History of attention to transition / FYHE issues • FYE Program driven by three guiding principles • Students must encounter curriculum that acknowledges their realities, engages them in their learning, and mediates access to life and learning support • The institution will provide timely access to support, and • will facilitate a sense of belonging to the university, their discipline and to the professions.

  4. Our approach to the FYHE • All our students have qualified for a place and we must ensure that they have equitable opportunities to make the most of their HE experience. • Transition and retention are social justice issues. “If we are to maintain our high standard of living, underpinned by a robust democracy and a civil and just society we need an outstanding, internationally competitive HE system” Emeritus Professor Denise Bradley Australian Review of Higher Education http://deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Review/Pages/default.asp

  5. Transition Pedagogy • Conceptual model for the FYHE • Enacted through the FYE Curriculum Design Principles • Institutional plan and activities intentionally transcend boundaries  partnerships • One of these key partnerships enables curriculum–mediated life and learning support – this strategy Kift, S., & Nelson, K. (2005) Beyond curriculum reform: embedding the transition experience. Paper presented at HERDSA 2005: Higher Education in a Changing World, University of Sydney, Australia. July 3-6, 2005

  6. Focus of QUT’s FYE Strategies FY Curriculum Principles (Kift ALTC Senior Fellowship) Student Success Project Curriculum New Student Support People FY Practitioners’ Network “A three part symphony”

  7. A holistic approach to the support and engagement of first year students: a retention strategy. The Student Success Project Proactive & tailored to identify, and support students at risk of not engaging “ a bridge to success”

  8. Grounding • Bridges’ (2003) conceptualization of a sequence of transitions into HE • Critical nature of the first of these processes • (for e.g. see: Tinto 1987, Pascarella & Terenzini 1991, McInnis et al 2000, Tinto 2001, Krause et al 2005, Upcraft et al 2005, Reason et al 2005) . • Multiple & complex reasons explain why students leave before completion including: academic & social adjustment, varied and unmet expectations, extra-curricular commitments & constraints, financial issues, isolation, inadequate orientation, poor attendance, adverse teaching & learning… • for e.g. see: Tinto 1993, Trotter & Roberts 2006, Kift & Nelson 2005

  9. Grounding • Responsibility for engagement lies with students and with institutions and their teaching staff (Coates, 2005, Tinto 2008) • Notion of institutionally-initiated engagement activities (Reason et al 2005) • Lawrence’s 2005 notion of multiple discourses • http://sleid.cqu.edu.au 2(3), pp. 16–33. 2005 • Successful programs enable students “to adjust … and be successful both academically and socially” (Schrader & Brown 2008, p.317) or adapt themselves to suit student context

  10. Positions QUT to respond to National HE imperatives “the reach, quality and performance of a nation’s HE system will be key determinants of its economic and social progress” Emeritus Professor Denise Bradley • Key recommendations endorsed by Federal Govt • By 2025 - 40% 25-34 year Australians will have a u/g qual • By 2020 - 20% participation of low SES students

  11. Student Success Project Overview • Identify target subjects and relevant at-risk indicators • Collect descriptive and academic performance data • Create call / contact lists of at-risk students • Contact students on list by phone (email back-up) • Email all students attempted to contact with plan • Follow up after 2 weeks • Evaluate outcomes: student persistence & success

  12. Key Partners: Academic Staff • Process tailored for cohort / subject / faculty • Large first year subjects – that have been designed in alignment with the FY curriculum principles • Motivated subject coordinators who understand the difficulties faced by their students • Negotiated specific at-risk indicators and data available • As much ‘automated’ data collection as possible to reduce overhead for academic staff

  13. Key Partners: Professional Staff IT – custom built – version 3 contact management system “OUTREACH” that stores at-risk indicators, supports SSP operations, enables tracking and evaluation of interventions. Counselling Services Training and support of Advisors Warm “hand-off’s” for students in possible distress Management of referrals to specialist services

  14. Types of At-risk Indicators Descriptive Member of a known at-risk cohort Failure or ‘at-risk’ in previous semester Did not attend faculty orientation event Low entry score Academic Performance Non-participation in subject (tutorials) Not participating in teamwork activities Not submitting 1st early first assessment Failure of 1st assessment item Non-submission or failure of subsequent assessments Sometimes in combination – depending on resources available

  15. Existing Services • QUT Specialist Service Providers: • Counselling, Disability, Equity • Careers and Employment • International Students Services • QUT Learning Support: • Kick Start/Study Smart, • Library Help Desks, • Scheduled Workshops, • Academic Skills Advisors • Faculty Learning Support: • School / Discipline Support, • Unit specific support, • FY/Academic Advisors • Peer Learning Advisors, Duty Tutors, PASS schemes, Student Success Project Model ... Specialist Support FYE Consultant - Life Support StudentSuccess Advisors General & Discipline Advice “Warm Hand-Off” Academic Skills Advisors - Learning Support Commencing Student Information Indicators of student activity Referral to Existing Services Skills Development Workshops - Following early diagnostics Descriptive Information Academic Performance Information StudentSuccess Project Team Leaders “Outreach” Target cohort details Weekly “students at risk” reports QUT Student Guild Contact Information Limited information

  16. Student Success Project Activities 2008 2009 All 7 faculties Variety of approaches 3 x diagnostic – co-curricula 4 x curriculum embedded 6000 students ~ 1500 “at risk” As of 7th May (week 10) 2769 contact attempts and emails 778 (28%) of students showing at-risk indicators contacted by phone • Sem 1 • 350 students in 5 FY subjects in Faculty of IT • Significant changes to persistence and academic performance. • Sem 2 • 2696 students in 7 FY subjects in 5 faculties were monitored • 1915 outbound calls made; 650+ “successful calls”

  17. Outcomes: Persistence and Success S1 2008 ~600 students (1 faculty) Persistence (as an indicator of attrition) ~84% of the “at-risk phone contact” students persisted ~42% of the “at-risk not-contacted” students persisted Academic performance p<0.001 t-test The average grade of the “at-risk phone contact” students was 4.51 The average grade of the “at-risk not-contacted” students was 3.37 S2 2008 ~2700 (results of 2 faculties) for persistence (as %)

  18. Issues arising Post-hoc design for statistical analysis only ethical model possible Features of our S2 cohorts Less attention to orientation for commencing students Often transferring from other degrees High proportion of repeating students Possible ceiling effects “Goodness” / reliability of indicators Compounding effects (SSP + unit interventions)

  19. Thank you for listening Questions ?

  20. European First Year Experience ConferenceUniversity of Groningen/University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands 13 - 15 May 2009 A holistic approach to the support and engagement of first year students: a retention strategy. Karen Nelson, John Clarke & Sally Kift

More Related