Here project ntu staff 2012


Published on

HERE Project Staff Workshop

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • At NTU, most had decided to stay
  • Small number of non-doubters who withdrew
  • THIS IS THE TOOLKIT – WILL BE AVAILABLE ON WEBSITE – SUMMARY IS HERE – 9 THEMESONE THEME LOOKS LIKE..CARDS BASED PER THEME.Developed areas into nine themes – became recommendations in report (some weren’t highlighted by staff so became less prominent in report) and ALL ARE INTERLINKED eg belonging/social would combine again.Based on Feedback from doubtersInterviews and feedback from programme teamsContains 9 recommendations for programme teams to improve retentionEach with suggested actionsDiagnosis comes as part of the first themeBroadly around two themesReducing doubting in the first placeSupporting doubtersDesigned as a resource for discussion and staff developmentSuggest teams implement strategies that work for themAim of toolkit to raise awareness of themes found to support retention and success. Expected programme teams will consider the nature of their own cohort and devise an action plan that is best suited to their own context (programme as expert).
  • Who do you think are most at risk of withdrawing from your programme? Are there, for example, particular groups of students that are more at risk of withdrawing? When are the key times that students are at risk of withdrawing? Are there students that may be less likely to engage with their programme? Is this related to times of the year? Can you tell us how you know the answers to the above?Do you use formal data to understand retention issues? If so, what data do you use and how could this be improved?Do you use less formal data such as attendance monitoring, monitoring of assignment submission/collection? In what way?Do you use both types of data together (5 and 6) to understand retention issues? Is this done retrospectively or in real time? (Do you, for example, use information from data monitoring to make changes for the next cohort(s) or do you use information to understand the issues that your current students have – either collectively or as individuals?) What data would you like to be able to access but currently are unable to? How would you like to be able to use this data?
  • Found most useful – as summaryTool for discussionTeam meetingsAway daysStaff development eventsSummary (give out) – 9 themes – rather than toolkit! Finding – address in different ways Solutions come from within programme – idea to address themes of importance from strand one (hence cards).Cards – intention is to prompt thinking (starting point rather than solution see Ed card) – currently pilotingStart - what do you know about your studentsGiven what you know how do you address these? What works well? What could you share? What could be improved?Experiences so farStaff just grateful for the opportunity to discussInteresting that communication across programmes weaker than we expectedStaff tend to just ‘leap in’- often more than one issues – eg not feeling part of course because little personal prior communication.
  • Here project ntu staff 2012

    1. 1. HERE to Stay? Findings from the HERE Project2008 - 2011Ed Foster & Sarah Lawther - Nottingham Trent University
    2. 2. Warming up your brains • Please decide • For you, which is the most important factor for student retention Friends &Knowing your students? Academic transition? social engagement?• Go to the relevant sign• Agree as a team your two most persuasive arguments why• We’ll be sharing them in a few minutes
    3. 3. HERE ProjectHigher Education: Retention & EngagementTwo areas of work- Impact of doubting on student retention- Impact that programme teams can make on retentionFocus on first year
    4. 4. Doubting• Defined as having doubts about the course/ university serious enough to consider leaving• How many students are doubters in the literature? – 21% Rickinson and Rutherford (1995) – 39% Sodexo (2010) – Yorke & Longden (2008) – 25% (rising to 40% if less informed about course)• Doubting as a cause of withdrawal – Gradual accumulation of doubts - Ozga and Sukhnandan (1998)• Differences between doubters and leavers – Internal factors - Mackie (2001), ability to adapt - Roberts et al (2003)• But UK progression is good – NAO (2007) suggests that progression to yr 2 is approx 90% – Our work is therefore also about engagement
    5. 5. Engagement• Retention is the minimum form of engagement• Kuh et al (2008) describe student engagement as: – “the quality of effort students themselves devote to educationally purposeful activities that contribute directly to desired outcomes and the effort institutions devote to using effective educational practices”. – „… positive, statistically significant effect on persistence, even after controlling for background characteristics....‟ (Kuh et al, 2008, p551)• Astin (1985) - engagement (involvement) along a continuum• Hardy and Bryson (2010) student engagement – Belonging, emotional engagement – More than the classroom activities – Multiple loci
    6. 6. Methodology• Strand 1 – Doubting• Welcome Week Surveys & Student Transition Surveys (2009 & 2011) to all first year undergraduates (online) (n=2,995)• Student focus groups with doubters and non doubters• Analysis of persistence• Strand 2 – programme team impact• Interviews with 10 programme teams – what do programmes do to support retention?• Survey of students on same programme• Created case studies of 10 programmes across the three institutions
    7. 7. Key Findings
    8. 8. Finding a)Approximately one third of first year students haveexperienced doubts sufficiently strong to make themconsider withdrawing at some point during the first year
    9. 9. Finding b)Doubters are more likely to leave than non-doubters• 483 students granted us permission to monitor their persistence – 182 doubters – 301 non-doubter • Tested Dec 2009 - Overall progression better than institutional benchmarks• Implications – Links to other UK research & supports Ozga & Sukhnandan’s model • Withdrawal not due to a sudden shock
    10. 10. Finding c)Doubters reported a poorer quality experiencethan students who have not doubted• Measured 17 student experience factors – For example „my subject is interesting‟ – Tested both the importance and actual experience of a factor – In most instances importance was higher than the actual experience • Exceptions – social, peer & family support – Average gap for non-doubters = 12% – Average gap for doubters = 29% – Tested seriousness in 2011, more serious doubts = poorer experience reported – Factor analysis grouped the Student Experience Factors into 3 variables • Academic Experience Variables • Support, Resources and Future Goals • Student Lifestyle – Strongest link between academic experience and likelihood of early withdrawal
    11. 11. Poorer quality experience cont.• Doubters reported: – Less likely to understand differences between FE & HE – Less likely to have had difference explained – Less likely to find pre-arrival course accurate – Finding course less enjoyable – Fewer friends & less likely to find course ‘friendly’ – Less likely to feel that they belonged “I don‟t seem very involved – Studies harder to cope with with the University to be honest … • At UoB actually scored lower grades probably if I see my tutor on the road, – Feeling less confident to ask for help he wouldn‟t recognise me”.• Overall gave an impression of being far less well engaged with their peers, their course and their university• Evidence about UCAS tariff was inconclusive
    12. 12. Finding d)Students usually report more than one reasonfor doubting• Doubting appears to become a state of mind• Looked for differences between doubters who stayed & doubters who left• Doubters who left reported a more negative experience overall
    13. 13. Finding e)The primary reasons for doubting areassociated with student perceptions of thecourse• Similar to other studies – for example Yorke & Longden 2008• Course was the main focus for most students• Most important academic reason was ‘doubts about coping’2009 Student Transition Survey
    14. 14. Finding f)There were four main reasons cited bydoubters for staying• ‘Support from friends and family’• ‘Adapting to course/ university’• ‘Determination/ internal factors’• ‘Future goals/ employment’• Impact of friends & family undervalued by students – Importance 13th of 17 Student Experience Factors – More likely to experience supportive friends – In 2009, open question • Friends & family most important (friends at university) – In 2011, when asked to choose from options, most important reason • Friendship features scarcely at all
    15. 15. Finding g)The primary times for considering leaving areimmediately before and after Christmas• Weather, tiredness & January blues will play a factor, but• Also key times around first assessments & feedback• Relatively few of our respondents stated that they had doubts before arriving at University – Perhaps had already withdrawn, or had forgotten early stresses
    16. 16. Finding h)Students reported different degrees ofdoubting
    17. 17. Finding i)Some student groups appear more likely todoubt than others• Students are more likely to be doubters if they are in the following groups – Female – but less likely to actually leave • Prior US studies suggest that female students suffer a dip in confidence during the first year not recovered until the second • Male doubters were far more likely to leave – Student with disabilities – more likely to have doubts – Part-time students – more likely to leave – Accommodation (living in private halls more likely to doubt)
    18. 18. Discussion• To what extent does this chime with your experiences/ understanding?• Do you have any questions/ thoughts/ observations/ limericks that you’d like to share?
    19. 19. The HERE Project Toolkit
    20. 20. The HERE Project Toolkit•Findings from Strand 1 –Doubters experience difference from non doubters? Consider factors that reduce leaving and increase staying –Findings led to programme survey questions•Strand 2 –Appreciative enquiry approach - what works? –Case study questions –Survey of students on same programme
    21. 21. Findings•Different programmes addressed different themes according to nature of cohort•No magic bullets, but lots of small interventions that when combined make a difference•Influences how we work with programmes•Knowing your students23
    22. 22. The HERE Project toolkit• 9 recommendations to improve retention and engagement• Broadly around two themes – Reducing doubting in the first place – Supporting doubters• Each with suggested actions• Diagnosis comes as part of the first theme• Suggest teams implement strategies that work for them
    23. 23. Using the ToolkitStage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3Take Stock Consider ‘student Review‘Identify students transition’ &at risk’ ‘social integration’ Subsequent teamProgramme Team meeting/ meetingsleader away day ReviewLook at formal & Reflect on own progress, reflectinformal data practices, discuss and considerAsk questions recommendations other themes- What do you & make plans already know?
    24. 24. Using the Toolkit•Summary•Cards – designed as a resource for discussion and staff development –Intention is to prompt thinking•How do you address themes? What works well? What could you share? What could be improved?
    25. 25. Using the Toolkit• Aimed at programme teams – Tool for discussion – Team meetings – Away days – Staff development events – In a perfect world, would be facilitated• Experiences so far – Staff just grateful for the opportunity to discuss – Interesting that communication across programmes weaker than we expected – Lots of interest in the cards – generated sharing of good practice
    26. 26. Using the HERE resources
    27. 27. Using the recipe cards • We’re going to vote to look at two of the three themes Friends &Knowing your students Academic transition social engagement
    28. 28. Discussion task• Would like you to read and discuss the sets of cards – Then in your groups sort into two sets – We already do this well/ it’s a low priority for us – I would like to do something with this in my team
    29. 29. Toolkit review• Normally, we’d ask teams to develop an action plan from the cards, but clearly given the fact that people are from very different teams, that’s not possible• However, if we presented your team with a set of cards, what guidance/ further information would you need to make them more (or even just) useful
    30. 30. Review
    31. 31. Quick review• Doubting appears to increase the risk of leaving• Students who withdraw early report a poorer quality experience – Particularly around the academic sphere• Withdrawal therefore tends not to be because of sudden crisis – Although there are likely to be tipping points• Factors that appear to work – Relationships with peers and tutors – Transition to learning in HE – Engaging learning & teaching – Goals & motivation – Sense of belonging
    32. 32. Resources• More info at• Compendium of Effective Practice retention/Compendium_Effective_Practice