• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
HERE Project workshop 22 March 2011
 

HERE Project workshop 22 March 2011

on

  • 456 views

HERE Project staff development workshop showing findings and discussing the draft tool kit as it stands March 2011

HERE Project staff development workshop showing findings and discussing the draft tool kit as it stands March 2011

Statistics

Views

Total Views
456
Views on SlideShare
456
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

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
  • AIM OF SESSION Introduce here project Doubting and withdrawal Why some students have doubts and what helps these students to stay Evaluate teaching Course Summary (maximum 250 Characters): The HERE Project is a three year project that is part of the HEFCE/Paul Hamlyn Foundation ‘What Works? Student Retention & Success Programme’ . It has been looking at what it is that helps students to stay at university, with the aim of devising a toolkit that programmes can use to support student retention and success. This workshop will inform participants of the HERE findings so far (both with students and programme teams) and how this has led to the development of the HERE toolkit. Participants will also be given an opportunity to consider how they might change their own practice in light of the research findings. Aim(s): Find out more If you would like to find out more please contact Sarah Lawther [email_address] Objectives/Learning Outcomes : By the end of this event participants will: Understand the relationship between doubting and withdrawal Understand why some students have doubts and what may help these students to stay Evaluate their own teaching – how can we as lecturers and programme teams support students to stay? Aimed at : Lecturers, particularly programme leaders who want to improve retention. Staff interested in retention and student engagement. Delivery methods : Workshop Pre-requisites : None Assessment: None Min/max numbers per course : 25 (max) Length of course: 1.5 hours
  • End of this slide – hello who ar you, why are you here.
  • Last 3 year – research on retention Funded by HEFCE/PHF. Came about – NAO Staying the course – PAC – critical of retention interventions 7 projects Ours – with Brad and Bourn– we are lead. By end of project will have toolkit – programmes can use to support retention and engeagement –brought beginnings of it to look at – if interested in seeing final copy please email me. Any comments or feedback always happy especially in this development stage. Aim is very much evidence based changes to practice to improve retention. Our outputs are – Report every year – ffits in with overall research by HEFCE Final report due – This toolkit is practical application - based on our findings about what helps students to stay, programmes can use to review own practice and support retention in their programmes
  • Why did students withdraw? Yorke and Longden Yorke & Longden’s (1998) large multi-institutional study of the first year found that 40% found that The 5 strongest reasons for considering withdrawing were: Programme not what was expected The way the programme was taught did not suit me I simply realised that I had chosen the wrong field of study A lack of personal engagement with the programme The amount of personal contact with academic staff “ Further analysis indicates that ‘variations between subjects and types of institution are largely due to the characteristics of students, including their level of pre-entry qualifications’. From their analysis they go on to suggest that when all other factors are taken into consideration: a full-time, first-degree student is much more likely to continue their studies into a second year than a similar part-time student; a full-time student with three A levels at grade A is much more likely to continue than a similar student with two A levels at grade D; and a part-time student registered with a higher education institution but taught in a further education college is more likely to continue than a similar student in a higher education institution.” (NAO 2007) Ie more likely to stay if full time, higher entry grades, and studying at FE college rather than HE
  • Tinto model from Ed’s book of social/academic integration Rickinson and Rutherford Other doubting research Kuh engagement and retention quote – programmes not retention issue but engagement? Students who are doubting are less engaged, not just indicator of withdrawal, also poor engagement. – glass half empty perspective. Different studies have shown that between 21% (Rickinson & Rutherford, 1995) and 46% (Ozga & Sukhnandan, 1998) of students have considered leaving their programme. In 2004-05, 8.4% of UK students did not progress into the second year (NAO, 2007). Clearly the decision to withdraw, and process of doing so, is more complex than a simple binary "yes/no”; and we believe that there are many lessons that can be learnt from analysing these doubters. For example, Mackie (2001) found that the only significant difference between leavers and doubters was that doubters had the drive and self-confidence to overcome adversity. However, Roberts et al (2003) also found that doubters stayed when they could perceive the benefits, particularly employment benefits, of remaining on the course. These studies were both conducted with business studies students and we aim to test these and other hypotheses on a wider student population.
  • Probably the most widely used description of engagement comes from Kuh et al (2008) who describe student engagement as ‘the quality of effort students themselves devote to educationally purposeful activities that contribute directly to desired outcomes’. (*****) However, our research suggests that student engagement also takes place outside the curriculum and we are therefore interested in definitions that encompass the whole student, not just the student as learner. Hardy & Bryson (2010) suggest that student engagement is a multi-dimensional and complex interplay between students and institutions. They found that both a sense of belonging, and emotional engagement amongst peers and between peers and tutors were particularly important. The two major surveys of student engagement both offer a comprehensive means to measure different aspects of students’ academic engagement. In the US, the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) explores five themes: challenge, enriching educational experiences, collaborative learning, support and interaction (Kuh, et al 2008). The Australasian Survey of Student Engagement (AUSSE) measures seven themes: five broadly the same as the NSSE and also online and extra-curricular activities (Krause & Coates, 2008). Bryson & Hand (2007) invite us to consider student engagement as a continuum. At one end of the spectrum there will be highly engaged students who as Harris et al (2004) suggest will engage ‘in the activities of a course programme with thoroughness and seriousness’ (****). McInnis (2005) also argues that these students are likely to adopt beliefs of the academy and take on approaches akin to that of their tutors. At the opposite end of the spectrum are those students who are struggling to engage at all, who are scarcely participating in lectures, with assessments and the institution, with the concomitant risk of early withdrawal. Hand & Bryson (2008) identified two groups of students who had adopted engagement strategies somewhere between these two extremes. They describe the first group as false engagers; these students were engaged with achieving a particular grade, not with the curriculum or the wider learning experience. They describe the second group as ‘disengaged’, these students were simply seeking achieve a pass and no more. We would suggest that a more useful phrase might be ‘minimally-engaged’. To us, ‘disengaged’ implies the absence of engagement and might more usefully be used to describe students falling away and even departing from their studies.
  • (informal/formal/data?/contact with students?)
  • All first year undergraduates May 2009 Limitations Voluntary responses May not be accessing students not engaged with university NEXT TIME – UCAS TARRIF, WHAT DOES GET STUDENTS ENGAGED ETC. Talk about changes…ask more quantiative questions and explore where we need further information – when they doubted,
  • Sarah – transition – transition to living independently And first person in immediate family to go to university – so may not have picked up what we do here through socialisation/family (may be through TV – eg Christine Hardy – Hollyoakes)
  • Similar at other 7 projects – put quotes from other projects Say 1/3 considered withdrawing in first year Some programmes say not problem with retetin but engagement This what helps stay – also help engaged- put engaged quotes from ed’s chapter Similar at other 7 projects – put quotes from other projects Say 1/3 considered withdrawing in first year Some programmes say not problem with retention but engagement This what helps stay – also help engaged- put engaged quotes from ed’s chapter
  • Student doubters are more likely to withdraw
  • ON AVERAGE EXPERIENCE REPORTED BY DOUBTERS IS 20% LOWER THAN NON DOUBTERS (Ntu) Q5 Please rate the following aspects of your studies, where 1 = “strongly disagree” and 5 = “strongly agree”, on balance, 91% said either agree or strongly agree Also noticeably lower is – feel valued by teaching staff, knowing where to go if they have a problem, assessment not being what is expected… What we have been told by FE tutors when we present this research (transitions) is that it is the C-D students that get the most of this kind of support – chasing by tutors, help with writing and so on so perhaps it is these C-D students that have to make the biggest transition. We have permission to track some students grades so it will be interesting to see if there is a link between these C-D grades and these kinds of experiences among these student – such as don’t feel confident to cope with studies, don’t feel valued by teaching staff, that assessment is not as expected and so on.
  • Why had students considered withdrawing? NTU figures. Why students said they had doubts (qualitatively)
  • A Cramers V test was applied to 17 variables that asked students about learning and teaching. The variable with the strongest association with doubting was ‘I feel confident that I can cope with my coursework’. Examples of 17 variables were - My fellow students are supportive My family is supportive I have easy access to University resources (e.g. computers, library books that I need) I would know where to go within the university if I had a problem I like the house/flat/halls that I am living in I have an enjoyable social life I am confident that I will have enough money to complete my course Completing my degree will help me achieve future goals (eg career) Further analysis was carried out that looked at confidence in coping with studies and the progression of students within the sample. FIGURE 2 The box plot (Figure 2) illustrates those students who had not had doubts rated their confidence to cope with coursework higher than those students who had doubts and stayed. The students who rated their confidence lowest were students who had doubts and left. This suggests that strategies to increase student confidence in coping with their studies may decrease their likelihood of doubting and subsequent withdrawal. The box plot (Figure 1) illustrates how the scores given by these students in answer to the statement ‘I feel confident that I can cope with my studies’ (rated from 1-5 where 1= strongly disagree and 5= strongly agree) varies among students who have had no doubts and stayed (non-doubters), have had doubts and stayed, had have doubts and left and have had no doubts and left. The ‘box’ illustrates the middle fifty percent of cases. The thick black line across the box illustrates the median value. The vertical lines either side of the box (with a T at each end) indicate the remaining cases except the outliers which are indicated by a dot (with the reference number of each case alongside). Interesting group – no doubts and leave – but 4 are non doubters (12 left who were doubters)
  • Need to find out about ucas tarrif… Less clear impact on doubting is ethnicity, personal tutors. What the statistics said about doubters. Demographic Factors Demographic factors do appear to have influenced doubting. The most important of which was gender. Female students were more likely to have doubts than their male peers, 10% more so at NTU (Foster & Lefever, 2011). However, male students were more likely to actually withdraw. It appears that the important difference between the two sexes is that whilst female students are more likely to have doubts, they also appear to be better able to deal with those factors causing them to do so. Whilst fewer male students expressed doubts, doing so appears to be far more serious and much more likely to lead to withdrawal. Students with disabilities were also more likely to doubt and more likely to withdraw, although in our study the numbers of student respondents were low. Student ethnicity and age provided a more mixed picture, there were no clear patterns across the three partners, although as we have stated above, non-doubters who withdrew did tend to be more mature students.
  • What made students stasy? Also links with focus groups/interviews – also look at focus groups - differences between doubters/non doubters – sense of belinging, being recognised, feeling ‘known’ and someone could go to.
  • “ The second term is when I started to feel more at home because in the first term you are always referred to as a fresher and 2nd term you are a first year student and I know quite a lot of people in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th year from the societies and sport and they are all really supportive as well and I found a bit in the first term I used to feel isolated because just compared to School I found it really weird cos there was no set day as it were and you would go on to 8.00 and I did find it quite difficult a bit but. In the first term I knew lots of people because I was joining the societies but now I’ve cut down a bit, but in 2nd term I’ve got more friends, more like friendships rather than just knowing lots of people”
  • Belonging The two students who described staying because they had no other choice both described that they didn’t feel part of the university,that they didn’t ‘fit in’, “I don’t seem very involved with the University to be honest”. A theme that emerged here was one of recognition, that “probably if I see my tutor on the road, he wouldn’t recognise me” . Charlie, on the other hand, who had had doubts but made a positive decision to stay, described that now she could recognise places and people, “I feel better now because now I feel like I know where everything is and I always see someone walking around that I know if I want to stop and talk to them” . All of the students who had no doubts could all describe the time when they felt that they belonged to the university, either through societies, or again, through recognising others “ I think it starts when you walk down the street and you see someone and you go hey … I know them from University and that’s what made me feel like it [like I belonged]” . More background….. Student doubters who had decided to stay There seemed to be a spectrum of reasons why students who had had doubts had decided to stay, ranging from those students that were staying only because they felt they had no choice to do otherwise to those that had made a positive decision to stay . There were two students, Michelle and Sharon, who stated that the only reason they were staying was because they felt that they couldn’t leave because of finances and time. These students described a focus on placements and employment upon leaving. At the other end of the spectrum were two students (Sara and Charlie) that had made a conscious decision to stay and were happy with their choice to stay. There were three students in the middle of this spectrum. One student (Jane), for example, described that she was staying because it was her ‘last chance’ because of her age, but also that she had resolved some of the difficulties that she had had at the beginning of the course and now feeling ‘more comfortable’ here. Key differences between doubters who had decided to stay and those students that had never had doubts. Relationship with personal tutor/staff The two students who described staying because they had no other choice both described having no-one to talk to “I could die next week and probably they will realise next year that I didn’t go to uni”. Of the three students in the middle of the spectrum, two also described having no-one to talk to and one described having one tutor that had been of help. The two students who had described making a positive decision to stay both described having a tutor that they could talk to and who had helped them to stay. All of the students who had never had doubts about being at university all described that they had someone that they could talk to (either a personal tutor or a lecturer). Belonging The two students who described staying because they had no other choice both described that they didn’t feel part of the university,that they didn’t ‘fit in’, “I don’t seem very involved with the University to be honest”. A theme that emerged here was one of recognition, that “probably if I see my tutor on the road, he wouldn’t recognise me” . Charlie, on the other hand, who had had doubts but made a positive decision to stay, described that now she could recognise places and people, “I feel better now because now I feel like I know where everything is and I always see someone walking around that I know if I want to stop and talk to them” . All of the students who had no doubts could all describe the time when they felt that they belonged to the university, either through societies, or again, through recognising others “ I think it starts when you walk down the street and you see someone and you go hey … I know them from University and that’s what made me feel like it [like I belonged]” . Finance Both non-doubters and doubters described struggling with finance. However, doubters also complained that they felt that they were not receiving good value for money. If, for example a lecturer failed to attend a lecture, doubters complained that they weren’t the service they had paid for.
  • So relates very much to tintos model of academic and social integration – but social as a reason to stay. (may be also a reason to leave but not so easy to say…)
  • Throughout 2009-10, researchers at the partner institutions surveyed ten academic programmes to find examples of these sub-themes in practice. The opinions of staff and students were sought about themes that our evidence suggested might help. In 2010-11, the project team wrote a retention toolkit designed for programme teams to self-assess their own practice and consider approaches for improving retention. 3 parts to toolkit The toolkit has three basic stages. Programme teams are invited to reflect on their current position and prioritize areas for exploration. We then suggest investigating one theme to reduce doubting: ‘transition into higher education’ and one to support doubters: ‘social integration’ . Users are encouraged to action plan and set review dates. Where possible, we suggest that they explore further themes that appear relevant to them. And based around our findings – what reduces leaving, increases staying – though two are interlinked. Our evidence suggests that the following strategies can be adopted by programme teams to help reduce doubting and increase engagement .
  • XXASQ10002: Resources to Support Academic Writing It doesn't work as a link as such, but if they key this into the search bar in reviewer status, it will bring the room up. Alternatively, I can enrol staff into the room if they email me directly. The WAC pack is now in the room. Let me know if you need any other information. Cheers, S WAC PACK learning room/now Learning room.
  • AUTHOR, Year of publication. Title . Edition. Place of publication: Publisher AUTHOR, Year of publication. Article title. Journal title , volume number (issue or part number), page numbers.
  • AUTHOR, Year of publication. Title . Edition. Place of publication: Publisher AUTHOR, Year of publication. Article title. Journal title , volume number (issue or part number), page numbers. BAWDEN, David, 1988. Citation indexing. In: C.J. ARMSTRONG and J.A. LARGE, eds. Manual of online search strategies. Aldershot: Gower, 1988, pp.44-83. FRITZ, Charles E.,

HERE Project workshop 22 March 2011 HERE Project workshop 22 March 2011 Presentation Transcript

  • What have we learned from the HERE project? Ed Foster & Sarah Lawther – LLR
  • Aim of session
    • About the HERE project
    • What is the relationship between doubting and withdrawal?
    • Why do some students have doubts and what may help these students to stay?
    • How can we as lecturers and programme teams support students to stay?
    • Before we get started…introductions and why are you here?
  • HERE project
    • HEFCE & PHF funded Project (2008-2011)
      • What Works? Student Retention & Success Programme
      • NTU leads one of 7 projects
        • BU & UoB
    • Research
      • Strand One: why do some first year students have doubts, but stay?
      • Strand Two: what do programmes do to support retention? What practice and examples can we learn from and share?
  • Retention
    • Yorke and Longden (2008) – seven factors that contribute to withdrawal
    • National Audit Office (2007) – five main reasons why students withdrew
    • Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) – academic and social integration
    • Harvey and Drew (2006) - social integration important to retention
    • Buote et al (2007) - friendships
    • Johnston (1997) – financial reasons?
  • Doubting
    • Rickinson and Rutherford (1995)
    • Ozga and Sukhnandan (1998)
    • Mackie (2001)
    • Roberts et al (2003)
  • 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”.
    • ‘ Student engagement in educationally purposeful activities during the first year of college had a positive, statistically significant effect on persistence, even after controlling for background characteristics, other college, experiences during the first year, academic achievement and financial aid.’ (Kuh et al, 2008, p551)
    • Bryson and Hand (2007) - student engagement as a continuum
    • Hardy and Bryson (2010) student engagement - belonging, emotional engagement
  • Before talk about the findings…
    • What retention and/or engagement issues do you have on your programme?
    • How do you know?
  • Methods
    • Strand One: why do some first year students have doubts, but stay?
      • Student Transition Survey (2008) to all first year undergraduates (online)
      • Student focus groups with doubters and non doubters
      • Student interviews
    • Strand Two: what do programmes do to support retention?
      • Interviews with programmes– what do programmes do best to support retention?
      • Student survey
      • 10 programmes across the three institutions
  • Student Transition Survey
    • March – May 2009
      • Using NTU data
      • 2 stages
        • Initial responses – 656 respondents (9% of first year)
        • Students granted permission to track progress
    • Core questions
      • Have you considered withdrawing (leaving) at any point during your first year at NTU?
      • Please tell us what made you consider leaving NTU?
      • If yes - What has helped you decide to stay at NTU?
    • 17 Student Experience Factors
      • (for example – “I feel confident that I can cope with my coursework”)
      • How important? (1-5)
      • How positive has the experience been (1-5)
  • Student Profile - Demographics
    • 62% females, 38% males
    • Majority aged 19-21 (67%), 17% 18 or under, 16% 22+
    • 94% UK, 6% international / EU
    • Majority classified themselves as White (80%)
    • 6% said they have a disability
    • 21% said they originate from the East Midlands, 13% more specifically in Nottingham, 8% Nottinghamshire and 58% rest of the UK.
    • 49% currently live in university owned halls, 15% private rented, 14% private halls, 11% are living with relatives and 11% in their own home.
    • 64% said this was their first time living independently
    • 82% said NTU was their first choice University
    • 48% said they were the first person in their immediate family to go to university
    Base = 656
  • Findings (NTU)
    • Over a third (37%) of our sample said that they had considered withdrawing from their studies at some point so far in their first year.
      • 63% had never considered leaving
      • 28% had considered leaving but had since decided to stay at NTU
      • 8% had not yet made up their minds about whether to stay or leave
      • 1% had decided to leave NTU
    Base = 656 (doubters = 243, non-doubters = 413)
  • How many went on to leave? (NTU)
    • December
        • 370 students provided permission to monitor data
        • 354 were still in higher education in the new academic year
        • 16 failed to ‘persist’ (4.3%)
          • 12 were doubters (8.8% withdrawal rate)
          • 4 were non-doubters (1.7% withdrawal rate)
          • Non-doubters 5 times more likely to persist
    • So student doubters were more likely to become leavers
  • Characteristics Associated with Non-Doubters
    • Non-Doubters – 63% of first years had not considered withdrawing
    • Overall rated the experience more positively than doubters
    • In particular
      • Positive academic experience
      • Positive experience of social support & future goals
      • Positive experience of student life
  • Current Course Experiences: Doubters vs. non-doubters
    • % is the number of students who agreed or strongly agreed with each statement
    Base = 656 (doubters = 243, non-doubters = 413)
  • Can you tell us why you had doubts?
  • Reducing leaving: course factors
  • Confidence
    • Cramers V test*: strongest association with doubting was ‘I feel confident that I can cope with my coursework’.
    * Statistical analysis for the project carried out by Nick Foard, School of Social Sciences, NTU
  • Prior information
    • Before you started your course at NTU, did you read any materials to help prepare you for your course (e.g. prospectus, course induction materials)?
      • 88% Yes
      • 12% No
    Was the information from NTU before starting your course: % of students in each group who had considered leaving Very accurate 27% Reasonably accurate 37% Not very accurate 73% Very inaccurate 67%
  • 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%
  • Summary - Who are the doubters?
    • Students are more likely to be doubters if they are
      • Dissatisfied with the academic experience (confidence common theme here)
      • Unclear about the transition into HE
      • Unhappy with aspects of institutional publicity
      • Struggling with their studies
      • Working very hard (or not hard at all)
      • Less academically ambitious
      • Dissatisfied with the student life experience (social life, accommodation etc)
      • Feel less supported by their family and fellow students
    • Students are more likely to be doubters if they are in the following groups
      • Female
      • Student with disabilities
      • Part time students
      • Accommodation (living in private halls more likely to doubt)
  • Reasons why doubters stayed
  • 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
  • Belonging: non doubters
    • All of the students who had never had doubts could all describe the time when they felt that they belonged to the university
    • “ I think it starts when you walk down the street and you see someone and you go hey … I know them from University and that’s what made me feel like it [like I belonged]”.
    • “ The more people you know through other clubs and stuff the more you feel part of the University”.
    • “ The second term is when I started to feel more at home because in the first term you are always referred to as a fresher and 2nd term you are a first year student…I’ve got more friends, more like friendships, rather than just knowing lots of people”
  • Belonging: doubters
    • Theresa, had had doubts and still describes herself as having difficulty ‘fitting in’. She has stayed because she doesn’t feel she has much choice.
      • “ I don’t seem very involved with the University to be honest”. A theme that emerged here was one of recognition, that “probably if I see my tutor on the road, he wouldn’t recognise me” .
    • Charlie, on the other hand, who had had doubts but made a positive decision to stay, described that now she could recognise places and people,
      • “ I feel better now because now I feel like I know where everything is and I always see someone walking around that I know if I want to stop and talk to them” .
  • “ I was not sure if university was for me. I disliked earlier education … and, although my course is satisfactory enough, I don't LOVE it. I think my good friends in halls/good friends in my seminar group/social life have kept me here.” “ I have found that the workload at times is too much to cope with, not the difficulty but the volume. ….. It has been the social side of it that has kept me here”
  • Programme research
    • 3 institutions – ten academic programmes
    • Staff interviews, student surveys
    • Retention toolkit for programme teams to self assess their own practice and consider approaches for improving retention
  • Using the Toolkit Self assess & data gathering Goal setting Reducing Doubting/ increasing engagement Supporting Doubters Agree Goals & Review dates We recommend that these stages are conducted as a staff development activity
  • Change tool
    • Retention can be tackled within the programme
    • But to do so requires buy in from programme staff
      • Initiative overload
    What gets buy in from you? What would you want to see in a toolkit?
  • Toolkit
    • Reducing leaving
    • Transition into HE
    • Engaging students
    • Choosing the right course & early communication
    • Relationships and communication with staff
    • Increasing staying
    • Social integration
    • Central student support
    • Belonging
    • Motivation, goals and determination
    It is a course that I really want to do, and even though it has been hard sometimes I know that in the end it is definitely worth it (BU student) [The] Learner Development [unit]...has been the biggest support ever, I couldn’t, I wouldn’t be here without [them] that’s it... (UoB student comment) ‘ This period of crisis where I didn't really know what to do and if I was managing with my studies, I guess getting that tutor support… that kind of broke some barriers that I had in my head’ (UoB student)
  • For further information . . .
    • HERE project, Transitions Research, Welcome Week Research
    • [email_address]
    • [email_address]
    • Student Mentors, Cafés, Workshops and Resources on NOW and in NTU Learning Repository:
    • [email_address]
    • Icebreakers http://www.ntu.ac.uk/cadq/welcome_week_student_transition/resources/index.html
    • Induction guide http://www.ntu.ac.uk/cadq/welcome_week_student_transition/induction/index.html
  • References
    • BUOTE, V.M., PANCER, S.M., PRATT, M.W., ADAMS, G., BIRNIE-LEFCOVITCH, S., POLIVY, J. and GALLENDER WINTRE, M. (2007) The importance of friends: Friendship and adjustment among 1st-year university students, Journal of Adolescent Research , 22(6): 665-689.
    • BRYSON, C., and HAND, L., 2007. The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 44 (4), 349-362.
    • HARDY, C., and BRYSON, C., 2010. Student engagement: paradigm shift or political expediency? Networks (Spring 2010), 19-23.
    • HARVEY, L., DREW, S. with SMITH, M., 2006. The first year experience: a literature review for the Higher Education Academy . York: HE Academy.
    • JOHNSTON, V., 1997, ‘ Why do first year students fail to progress to their second year? An academic staff perspective ’, paper presented at British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of York, 11–14 September, 1997. Available at: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000000453.htm
    • KUH, G., CRUCE, T., SHOUP, R., KINZIE, G. and GONYEA, R., 2008. Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79 (5), 540-563.
    • MACKIE, S., 2001. Jumping the hurdles - undergraduate student withdrawal behaviour. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 38 (3), 265-276.
    • NAO (National Audit Office), 2007. Staying the course: the retention of students in higher education . London: The Stationary Office.
    • OZGA, J., and SUKHNANDAN, L., 1998. Undergraduate non-completion: developing an explanatory model. Higher Education Quarterly, 52 (3), 316-333.
    • PARGETTER, R., 1998. Transition from Secondary to Tertiary: A Performance Study.
    • RICKINSON, B., and RUTHERFORD, R., 1995. Increasing undergraduate retention rates. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 23 (2).
    • ROBERTS, C., WATKIN, M., OAKEY, D. and FOX, R., 2003. Supporting Student 'Success': What can we Learn from the Persisters?
    • THOMAS, L., 2002. Student retention in Higher Education: the role of institutional habitus, Journal of Educational Policy , Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 423–32.
    • TINTO, V., 1993. Leaving college : rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago ; London: University of Chicago Press.
    • YORKE, M. and LONGDEN, B., 2008. The First Year Experience of Higher Education in the UK . York: Higher Education Academy.