Retention Convention 2010
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Retention Convention 2010

on

  • 233 views

Convention 2010

Convention 2010

Statistics

Views

Total Views
233
Views on SlideShare
223
Embed Views
10

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 10

http://web105.extendcp.co.uk 10

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Retention Convention 2010 Retention Convention 2010 Presentation Transcript

  • HERE Project Nottingham Trent University University of Bradford Bournemouth University
  • Session outcomes
    • Introduce 2 research strands
    • Share findings from first year of study
    • Play Family Fortunes (badly)
    • Provide opportunity to spend some time looking at review/ audit tool
  • Background & Strand 1 Research
  • Background
    • HERE Project set up as part of What Works? Programme
    • Collaborative project
      • NTU
      • Bournemouth
      • Bradford
    • Based on first principles
      • What do we know makes a difference?
      • Didn’t start by seeking to prove a particular piece of work?
      • Although strong interests in
        • Transition
        • Induction
  • HERE Project
    • Two strands
      • Student doubters (first years)
          • Higher number of students have doubts than leave
          • Some research into difference between doubters and leavers (Mackie, 2001 & Roberts 2003)
          • Survey conducted at each partner NTU, Bournemouth & Bradford
          • (873 respondents)
          • Actual withdrawals analysed in December 2009
      • Programmes with better than peer rates of retention
          • Based on the observations of significant differences in rates of retention between ostensibly similar programmes
  • Student Transition Survey (March – May 2009) NTU UoB Sample Size 656 128 % doubters 37% 27% % male doubters 31% 27.5% % female doubters 41% 28.2% Age Slight rise as students age Slight rise as students age Disability 50% 46.7% Part time 43% 50%
  • Differences between Doubters & Non-Doubters
    • Tested against 17 statements
    • For example
      • “ I’m confident that I can cope with my studies’
    • Asked students to report on importance and experience
    • In most areas there was a gap between importance & experience
      • Importance being higher
    • Largest gaps (all students)
      • Finance, quality of feedback and course organisation
    • But in some, the experience was actually better
      • Social life, supportive students & family
    • Universally doubters rated the experience more lowly
  • Who are the students who withdrew?
    • NTU
    • 16 students from 370 withdrew (4% of respondents)
    • Gender
      • 8 female (3% of respondents)
      • 8 male (6% of respondents)
    • Age
      • 11 were aged 18 – 21
    • Disability
      • 1 student withdrew from 24 (4% of respondents)
    • Mode of Study
      • 5 part time students withdrew (50% of respondents)
  • Impact of Doubting
    • 16 withdrawals from 370 students
      • 12 were doubters (8.8% withdrawal rate)
      • 4 were non-doubters (1.7% withdrawal rate)
      • Non-doubters 5 times more likely to persist
  • Family Fortunes
  • Family Fortunes
    • Really Simple
    • Two teams
    • With bells
    • Start with head-to-head
    • Then get the chance to collect all the points and stuff
  • A THING THAT FLIES…
  • MAIN REASONS WHY STUDENTS DOUBT
  • MAIN REASONS CITED BY DOUBTERS FOR STAYING
  • What made students doubt?
  •  
  • The Review/ Audit T o ol
  • Producing the Review Tool Findings Strand One Research Method Strand Two Review Tool
    • Quantitative analysis
    • Survey
    • Qualitative analysis
    • Survey
    • Focus group
    Devise interview questions based upon findings of Strand One to explore retention in programmes Use findings from programme research to develop the audit tool
    • First data set: different reasons given for leaving than staying
    • Second data set: doubters more likely to leave than non-doubters
    • Review tool structured around
    • reducing leaving
    • increasing staying
    • Using data from larger data set (doubting/non-doubting)
    Findings Strand One
  • Focus groups
    • Focus groups May 2009 (NTU)
    • 4 focus groups (1 hour workshops, 13 students in total)
      • Control group of non-doubters
      • Selection of doubters
      • STEM subject doubters
      • Mature student doubters
    • Limitations
      • All students that we spoke to were female.
      • Of the doubters we spoke to, four students were mature students, one student was a mature international student, one student was an international student and one student was a home student with English as a second language.
      • This is not representational of the profile of the total respondents.
  • Focus group findings
    • Spectrum of reasons to stay
    • From positive decision to ‘ no choice ’
    • Key differences between non doubters and doubters
    • Relationship with staff
    • Belonging
      • “ I don’t seem very involved with the University to be honest… probably if I see my tutor on the road, he wouldn’t recognise me” .
  • Quantitative analysis of survey data
    • Pargetter et al (1998)
    • Used analysis of quantitative survey and focus groups to develop four scales that influence transition
    • Limitations of our method
    • Not a representative sample
    • Fairly small sample
  • Current Course Experiences: Doubters vs. non-doubters
    • % is the number of students who agreed or strongly agreed with each statement
    12 th October 2009 Base = 656 (doubters = 243, non-doubters = 413)
  • Cramers V
    • Tests the association between doubting and variables
      • I feel confident that I can cope with my coursework
      • My subject is interesting
      • I feel valued by teaching staff
    • Factor analysis: 3 main underlying factors
      • Aspects of the course
      • Support networks in place (eg friends and families)
      • Aspect of life outside of study (accommodation, finances, social life)
    • Logistic regression – indication of a doubter or non doubter?
      • Aspects of the course
      • Aspect of life outside of study
      • Support networks in place
      • Small indication
  • Understanding Differences
    • Since coming to university has anyone at NTU explained to you the difference between learning at university and your prior learning, particularly learning since age 16 (e.g. A’ Levels, BTEC)?
      • 52% Yes
      • 48% No
    Do you feel that you understand the differences between learning at university and earlier learning? % of students in each group who had considered leaving Yes, in some detail 30% Yes, a little 38% No 62%
  • Research Method Strand Two Reducing leaving Increasing staying COURSE RELATED SUPPORT FROM FRIENDS & PEERS RELATIONSHIP/COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF ADAPTING TO UNIVERSITY ADAPTING TO THE COURSE LIFE OUTSIDE OF STUDY DETERMINATION AND INTERNAL FACTORS STUDENTS MORE LIKELY TO DOUBT FUTURE GOALS
    • Research interview format will form the basis of review tool
    • Programme research will explore these areas in programmes
      • What can we learn from programmes?
      • Is what has been identified by students as helping them to stay actually what helps them to stay? (can we find this out?)
      • Gather activities, examples and practices to share
    • Results from programme research will be used to further develop the review tool
    Review Tool
  • Activity
    • Please work in small groups/ pairs and take a look at the review tool
    • We’d be grateful on any thoughts about the design/ structure of the tool
    • What examples do you have of good practice in the areas identified in the audit tool?
      • Where does this chime with your experiences?
  • Thanks very much for your time Any Questions?
  • References
    • PARGETTER, R., McINNIS, C., JAMES, R., EVANS, M., PEEL, M., DOBSON, I., 1998. Transition from Secondary to Tertiary: A Performance Study [online]. Available at: http://www.dest.gov.au/archive/highered/eippubs/eip98-20/contents.htm [Accessed 1 March 2010].