Enhancing Student Success in ODL: Unisa's Integrated Student Success & Support

Frameworks and Strategies

Presented at NADEOSA Conference, 30 August 2011

,Prof George Subotzky

Executive Director: Information & Strategic Analysis, Unisa

Dr Paul PrinslooODL Coordinator & Acting Director, IODL

Acknowledgements

• The efforts of numerous DISA staff members in gathering and preparing information is acknowledged

• In particular, the help and support of Robert Lightbody, admin Asst/caregiver to Prof Subotzky, was invaluable in preparing this presentation

Background

• Enhancing student success is a worldwide challenge

• This challenge is particularly formidable at Unisa, which now has +340 000 mainly non-traditional, older, part-time, underprepared students

• They face challenging socio-economic circumstances, particular work-related and domestic responsibilities, which impede on student success

Focus

• To address this, Unisa recently developed an integrated Student Support & Success framework, which is a central component of the implementation of its ODL plan

• This presentation focuses on:• A brief background• Elements of the framework• The conceptual model of all factors

impacting on student success• The profiling, assessing & predictive

modelling of risk• An overview of the tracking system• Key assumptions & principles of

student support

National 5-Year Graduation, Retention & Attrition Rates, 2000 Cohort

Institutional Type

Graduatedwithin 5 years

Still registeredafter 5 years

Left withoutgraduating

Universities (excluding Unisa) 50% 12% 38%

Unisa 14% 27% 59%

All Universities 38% 17% 45% Technikons (excluding TSA) 32% 10% 58%

Technikon SA 2% 12% 85%

All Technikons 23% 11% 66%

All Institutions 30% 14% 56%

Source: Scott et al, 2007

The Nature of the Problem

• Unisa’s course success rate has steadily risen to 62,4% in 2010 – just below the new 2013 ministerial target of 63%

• Cohort analyses indicate that:– First-year dropout in various qualification levels

can be as high as 70%– Many students stop out of studies more than

once for various academic and non-academic reasons

– Time-to-completion is generally satisfactory• The main challenge in improving student success

remains retention

Imperatives to address the problem

• Unisa has a moral obligation to ensure that enhancing student access in the ODL environment is accompanied by effectively enhancing success

• Persistent failure and dropout has significant financial implications for students and, increasingly, for Unisa

• Ongoing poor success, retention and graduation rates diminish student and staff morale as well as institutional reputation

Unisa’s Student Success Framework

Conceptual Modeling M & E

Statistical & Analytic

Modelling producing Actionable Intelligence

Data Gathering via

Tracking System,

including Surveys

Identifying what is

relevant, measurable, available & actionable

Student Support

Framework

Processes:• Informed responsibility & ‘choice’• Ontological/epistemological dev.• Managing risks/opportunities/

uncertainty: Integration, adaptation, socialisation & negotiation

Domains:• Intra-personal• Inter-personal

Modalities:• Attribution• Locus of

control• Self-

efficacy

Processes:• Informed responsibility &

choice• Managing

risks/opportunities: Transformation, change management, org. learning, integration & adaptation

Modalities:•

Attribution

• Locus of control

• Self-efficacy

Domains:• Academic• Operational• Social

TRANSFORMED INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES:

STUDENTIDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES:

• Situated agent: SES, demographics• Capital: cultural, intellectual, emotional,

attitudinal• Habitus: perceptions, dispositions,

discourse, expectations

Success

INSTITUTIONALIDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES:

• Situated organisation: history, location, strategic identity, culture, demographics• Capital: cultural, intellectual, attitudinal• Habitus: perceptions, dispositions,

discourse, expectations

SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as uncertain)• Social structure, macro & meso shifts: globalisation, political economy, policy; National/local culture & climate

• Personal /biographical micro shifts

SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as he uncertain)• Social structure, macro & meso shifts: globalisation, internationalisation, political economy, technology, social demand

• HE/ODL trends, policy• Institutional biography & shifts; Strategy, business model & architecture, culture & climate, politics & power relations

Choice, Admission

Learning activities

Coursesuccess

Gradua-tion

THE STUDENT WALK: Multiple, mutually constitutive

interactions between student, institution & networks

• Managing complexity/ uncertainty/ unpredictability/risks/opportunities• Institutional requirements known &

mastered by student• Student known by institution through

tracking, profiling & prediction

FIT

FIT

FIT

FIT

Employ-ment/

citizenship

TRANSFORMED STUDENT IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES:

FIT

FIT

FIT

FIT

FIT

FIT

FIT

FIT

Retention/Progression/Positive experience

Student as Situated Agent

Student Walk

Institution as Situated Agent

Background:• Demographics• Past SES- Educ.

Background- Family

Background- Role Models

• Satisfaction• Graduatene

ss

Quality of Academic Services

Quality of Admin

Services

Social: Institutional Culture & Practices

Fit: Academic Choices & Activities

Academic Readiness & Ability

Meta-Cognitive

Skills

Psycho-logical

Attributes &

Outcomes

Formative Assessmen

t

Course Success

Intra-Personal

Utilisation of Admin/ Support Services

Fit with Institutional Culture & Practices

Graduation

Success

Inter-Personal

Student’s Effective Management of:• Life Circumstances & Risks• Learning Expectations &

Opportunities

Integration, Engagement & Transformation

Institutional Services, Practices & Culture

Current SES & Life Circumstances:

- Time & Opportunity

- Stability & Support

Institution’s Effective Management of:

• Academic & Support Processes/Risks

• Student Profile/Risk & Communication

Proposition 1

Student success is broadly interpreted as course success, retention, progression through the main phases of the student walk, and ultimately successful graduation and effective entry into the labour market and/or citizenship.

Success also incorporates a positive student experience as a result of student-centred service excellence and efficient operations provided by the institution.

Proposition 2

Student success and positive experience is the outcome of sufficient fit between the transforming identity, attributes and performance of both the student and the institution through all phases of student walk.

Proposition 3

Fit arises when elements of the student and institutional identity and attributes (capital and habitus) are optimally aligned at each successive stage of the student walk. Fit at these various points is the outcome of the specific individual student and institutional preconditions.

Proposition 4

In order for fit to arise at each successive stage of the student walk, relevant transformative changes in the identity and attributes of the student and the institution are required.

Proposition 5

The student walk comprises a series of multiple, mutually constitutive interactions between the situated student and the situated institution and between the student and his/her various networks through all points of the walk

(Articulation with ODL model)

Proposition 6

The formation and transformation of student and institutional identity and attributes is continuously shaped by overarching conditions at the macro, meso and micro levels

Assessing Academic Risk

• It is self-evident that the lack of academic readiness constitutes a major risk to student success.

• DCCAD has developed an instrument for academic self-assessment, to be administered during the second half of 2011.

• The tracking system tracks, profiles & predicts academic risk, utilising the predictive model, drawing from all factors identified through statistical analysis

• As indicated, all this information will be circulated to relevant roleplayers in the Student Support Framework

Assessing & Addressing Non-AcademicRisk • In the ODL context, non-academic factors impact

strongly on student success. • Tracking, profiling and prediction of students' non-

academic readiness/risk is therefore essential to the integrated student success and support frameworks.

• A key source of information is the Student Profile Survey which provides information on:• students' socio-economic and educational background, • current socio-economic status and life circumstances, • metacognitive skills and knowledge and• psychometrics focusing on relevant attributes and

aptitudes. • This information allows the segmented profiling of

Unisa's highly heterogeneous student population. This involves the definition of various student risk categories, based on the permutations of three key student-related factors impacting on success, namely: academic ability, metacognitive/psychological attributes and skills, and life circumstances.

Assessing & Addressing Institutional Risks• The conceptual model identifies mutual

responsibility for success• Assessing & addressing all institutional

risks is therefore a central component of the framework

• The tracking system, as part of Unisa’s emerging Organisational Intelligence Framework, tracks all relevant academic, operational and administrative processes to provide dashboard scorecards and early alerts of identified risks to relevant roleplayers

• Other processes such as QA, risk management and internal audit processes also contribute to mitigate risks

Overview of the Tracking System

• It incorporates relevant student and institutional information, academic and non-academic information and qualitative and quantitative information.

• It tracks students' academic progress at the institutional, college, school/department, qualification and course levels.

• It also tracks key administrative and academic processes• It provides customised automated early warnings of student-

related and institutional risks to success. • These are circulated to the appropriate roleplayers (tutor, e-

tutor, e-coach, counsellor, lecturer, supervisor, administrative & support departments) within the student support framework, according to approved procedures, roles and responsibilities.

• By means of segmentation techniques and data mining, risk profiles of students can be created utilising the tracking system information and other sources so that at-risk groups can be targeted for specific proactive support interventions.

TRACKING SYSTEMProfiling, Tracking & Predicting Risk at the level of Student/Module/Qualification/Institution

Senate

School/College TLSC

STLSC

Student Success Forum

DCCAD

SMPPDLibrary

DSAADSAR

Admin StructuresTSDL

Academic Department

Student Support Coordinator

Lecturer/Supervisor/Online Mentor/Tutors/Regions

Professional Structures

Academic Admin

DISALibrary

Student Information

•Applications/Registration•HEMIS•Assessment Performance/Scores•Academic Readiness Self-Assessment•Student Profile Survey•Student Satisfaction Survey•Exit/Tracer Surveys•ICMAs

Operational Processes

•Application/Registration•Study Material•Assessment Management•Finance•HR

Communication/Engagement•College/School/Department/

Regions•E-Tutor/F2F Tutor/Online Mentor•Counsellor•Call Centre•Admin Department•Tutorial Attendance•myUnisa/Library•Student Course Evaluation

USGS Dean of Stud.Affectiv

e

i. Student-centred ii. Efficient and affordable iii. Formalised and planned as well as informal and

spontaneous iv. Integrated coherently into the main learning

experience • curriculum planning• planning of formative and summative assessment• offering of tutorial and counselling services and • the use of technologies.

v. Offering appropriate, and where possible, customized student support

The Unisa Student Support Framework describes student support as...

Unisa Student Support Framework

Identifies three distinct (but related and often overlapping) phases for student support:

• Entry phase (advising, profiling, diagnostic testing, orientation, etc)

• Teaching and learning phase (cognitive and emotional development, formative and summative assessment, student tracking system and timely interventions)

• Exit phase (towards registration, graduation, lifelong learning, etc)

The implementation of the above conceptual framework sees the roll-out of three types of student support, namely

• Administrative support (registration, assignments, materials, etc)

• Academic support (cognitive subject related support)

• Affective or pastoral support (emotional, personal development support)

Key Principles & Assumptions

i. Not all students require the same type of support (academic, non-academic and administrative) throughout the whole of the semester, or at all.

ii. Not all students want the same type of support iii. Not all students who need different types of

support recognise or acknowledge this. iv. Unisa commits itself to provide all students

with well-integrated systems and effective systemic support.

v. Any student should have access to reliable and effective support when they need it.

vi. Unisa proactively identifies students’ potential and risk and provides appropriate support for students to develop their potential and to address their risks through well-designed and appropriate interventions based on a careful segmentation of students’ potential and risk-profiles.

vii. Self-assessment of potential and risk is a crucial part of increasing the self-efficacy of students and ensuring that students are aware of their potential for being successful and/or risk of failure.

viii. Students’ needs for support differ according to different factors which identified in the conceptual and predictive models.

Key Principles & Assumptions (2)

ix. Student support (academic and non-academic support) does not need to be face-to-face. There is a range of technologies available which allows student support at Unisa to take advantage of synchronous and asynchronous forms, which, if used appropriately and effectively, may form part and parcel of a total student support strategy.

x. Student support contains both academic and non-academic elements and is delivered in an integrated and well-coordinated way by different stakeholders, internally and externally (such as industry, etc).

Key Principles & Assumptions (3)

• To address the imperatives of enhancing student success, Unisa has developed an integrated student support and success framework comprising:• Conceptual and predictive modelling of academic,

non-academic (affective & administrative) risk• Gathering required information by the tracking

system and other sources• Analysing this information in order to track, predict

and profile risk• Addressing this through the Student Support

Framework• Evaluating impact over time

• Feedback has indicated that the framework is innovative, cutting-edge and in alignment with best practice

• Over time, the effectiveness of the conceptual and practical foundations of the framework will become apparent

Conclusion

Thank you!