what works? student retention and success change programme 2013-2016

What Works? Student Retention and Success Change

Programme

2013-2016

Institutions involved

• Birmingham City University• Bournemouth University• University of Chester• University of Glasgow• Glasgow Caledonian University• University of Gloucestershire• Newham College of Further Education• Newman University College• University of Salford• St Mary's University College, Twickenham• Staffordshire University• University of Ulster• University of Wolverhampton• York St John Universityfunded by the HEA and Paul Hamlyn Foundation

funded by the HEA and Paul Hamlyn Foundation

Ulster team

• CORE TEAM – Professor Ian Montgomery (Dean, ADBE) – Roisín Curran (Project Manager)– Grainne Dooher (Quality Assurance Manager)– Dr Aine McKillop (Faculty T&L Coordinator)– Catherine Rosborough (student)

• Plus seven discipline teams representing all faculties and campuses (see hand-out)


Programme Sponsor

PVC (Teaching & Learning) /Chair RIWG

Denise McAlister

Core Team

Programme Director

Ian Montgomery

Project Manager

Roisín Curran

Student

Catherine Rossborough

Data Analyst Manager

Grainne Dooher

Senior Lecturer

Aine McKillop

Programme Administrator

Elaine Fairweather

Arts

Discipline Team

Creative Technologies (M)

Paul Moore, Greg O'Hanlon, Paul McKevitt, Brian Bridges ,Mark

Cullen and Terry Quigley

Faculty Rep.: Lisa Fitzpatrick

Student Partners:

Year-1: Brandon McCann, Aislinn Mullin

Year-2: Conor Hanna, Marana McLoughlin

Year-3: Tiernan McAlister, James McSparron

Art, Design & the Built Environment

Discipline Teams

Building Engineering Materials (J)

Mark Hamill

Student Partners : Karl Lines, Abdulsalam Darwish and Siofra McAleer

Construction Engineering Management (J)

Karen McPhillips & Clare McKeown

Building Surveying (J)

Ken Boston

Student Partners : Grant Bartley and James Haveron

SCOBE T&L Coordinator

Michaela Keenan

Textile, Art Design & Fashion (B)

Alison Gault & Hazel Bruce, Barbara Dass, Janet Coulter and

Stephen King

Student Partners : Kirsty Riddle, Sophie Rathfield, Daryl Jones, Tara Marzuki, Alice Blackstock and

Helen Murray

Computing & Engineering

Discipline Team

Computing (C)

Michaela Black, Adrian Moore &

Janet AllisonLife & Health Sciences

Discipline Team

Mental Health Nursing (M)

Iain McGowan, Deirdre McNamee

Oonagh Carson, Ursula Chaney

Brian McGowan

Student Partners : Gary Rutherford and Elaine Cooke

Social Sciences

Discipline Teams

Law (M)

Alice Diver

Law (J)

Amanda Zacharopoulou

Ulster Business School

Discipline Team

Accounting (p/t @ J)Accounting (f/t @ J)

Dean Coulter, Greg McGrath, Helen Fee, Helen Foster, Heather Keanie, Justin Magee, Stephen McNamee, Ronnie Patton, Michael Pogue and

Judith Wylie

Student Partners: Sarah Tans, Brian McArdle, James Irwin, Amanda

Potsworth and Andrew Ellis

School T&L CoordinatorClaire McCann

Aim

• The aim is to improve student engagement, belonging, retention and success during the first year through to completion in your institution building on the learning from the What works? Programme through the HEA Change process, and to evaluate the process and impact of change.



Objectives

1. Use the learning from the What works? programme, institutional data and institutional review to identify strengths and challenges and priorities for change at the strategic and course/programme level .

2. Improve the strategic approach to improving the engagement, belonging, retention and success of students.

3. Implement or enhance specific interventions in the areas of induction, active learning, co-curricular activities in three selected discipline areas.

4. Evaluate the impact of the changes in both formative and summative ways, drawing on naturally occurring institutional data, bespoke student surveys and qualitative methods such as telephone or face-to-face interviews with staff and students.


Key Principles

1. Change must be informed by the What works findings, notably interventions in years 2 and 3 should be in the academic domain (induction, active learning and co-curricular engagement).

2. Senior managers must be actively engaged for institutional change to be effective.

3. Students must be actively involved in the process of change.

4. A commitment to the collection and analysis of data and evaluation are central to the wider success of the programme, for which funding is provided. Teams should design their interventions to ensure that impact can be analysed both qualitatively and quantitatively.


What Works? Key findings

1. At the heart of student retention and success is a strong sense of belonging in HE for students. This is most effectively nurtured through mainstream activities that all students participate in.

2. The academic sphere is the most important site for nurturing belonging.

3. Specific interventions cannot be recommended over and above each other. Rather the institution, department and programme should all nurture a culture of belonging.

4. Student belonging is an outcome of: supportive peer relations; meaningful interaction between staff and students; developing knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners; and an HE experience which is relevant to interests and future goals.


Change Programme details

• 3 + years (3 years implementation; additional year to measure impact).

• 16 institutional teams, with a core team and 3 discipline-level teams.


Overview of each year

• Year 1 (2012-13): identify strategic issues and discipline courses/programmes; implement changes at the strategic level; plan pilots at discipline level. Activities: start-up meeting, institutional visits, thematic workshops, residential, action plan.

• Year 2 (2013-14): implement strategic level changes and introduce discipline-level changes, and contribute to the formative and impact evaluation processes.

• Year 3 (2014-15): continue to implement strategic and discipline level changes, and contribute to the formative and impact evaluation processes.

• Year 4 (2015-16): contribute to the formative and evaluation processes and the dissemination of outputs.

Built Environment



Built Environment• Historically been significant amount of large shared

modules within Built Environment – some decoupling over recent years; however, examples

remain.

• Programmes were selected on basis of significant number of modules that can & are shared between programmes & significantly within semester 1 , year 1 - resulting in:-– Larger student cohorts– Arguably - loss of programme/student group identity?– Less opportunities for students from individual programmes to

form friendships – consequences for belonging?– Less opportunities to be taught directly by dedicated core team

members in some cases


Context

3 Programmes involved:-

1. BSc (Hons) Building Surveying

2. BSc (Hons) Building Engineering & Materials

3. BSc (Hons) Construction Engineering & Management

• Focus – INDUCTION – Programmes developing specific activities focussing upon

tailored induction and embedding extended transition.


Our Aims for INDUCTION: Driven By What Works:-

Effective Inductions

• Provide information• Inform expectations• Develop academic

skills• Build social capital• Nurture sense of

belonging

What Students Want?

• Have opportunities to make friends

• See course induction timetable in advance

• Understand nature of teaching and learning & be reassured that they will cope

• Understand how the course will benefit them in the future

• Have a timetable that fits around other commitments


Built Environment Strategic Approach

• All programmes moving to induction of year 1 undergraduates to week 0

• Provides the underpinning for the implementation of Built Environment Discipline Team Plans as:-– Staff can concentrate efforts solely on effective

and tailored induction– All core staff can be involved – More focussed group activities, trips etc– Stripped back in order to place emphasis upon

and promote ‘Just in Time Teaching’


BEM & CEMTailored Induction & Enhanced Transition

• Programmes interrelate & module change within 1 programme directly affected other

• CEM - Particular problem – semester 1, year 1 no modules taught by core team members & where student group were on own as programme cohort

1. Week 0 Tailored Induction

2. Introduction of Transition & Study Skills Module in Semester 1 on both programmes – led by Course Director– BEM – semester 1– CEM – across semesters 1 & 2

• promote on-going induction & transition• Include changes course team practices – also library intros; careers etc


Building Surveying

Year 1

Tailored Induction & Embedding Transition

- Week 0 Tailored Induction

- Extended Induction activities within existing modules/programme

Year 2

Active & On-Going Embedded Transition

Large numbers direct entry students into year 2• 1 day intensive welcome/welcome back

induction –group based• On-going induction activities focussing

on belonging & managing expectations• Embedded 2 modules with significant

amounts group work & modules interrelate

• Groups selected to ensure integration of existing & new students– Aid effective peer learning & to help

manage expectations of income students


Challenges

• Timetabling – the move to week 0 induction

• Student recruitment/participation– Critical to the development of the programme and

to build ethos of students as partners– Timing may have been a factor?

• Driven by Course Directors but as its induction success will rely on active involvement of core team

Computing


Computing

Martin McKinneyMichaela BlackAdrian MooreJanet Allison

New for Computing 2012-13• Group Mentors -

Influencing and Embedding the Curriculum• Group mentors (final years) became part of teaching team

- join the community of practice• Interviewed applicants• Induction training session

– Including curriculum design workshop• Periodic review sessions

– Feedback students experience and progress– Continue curriculum design workshops to enhance sessions

• Review student feedback via quiz (77 respondents)

Proposals from Group Mentors

• Split up large group assignment – Smaller practice group assignments which are linked– Smaller groups

• Leaders design range of group assignments– Real world problems– Teaching group review and approve

• White boards in all tutorials– Improve problem solving and sharing good practice

• Student groups design and create quiz questions for tutorial

49.33

45.33

5.33

Did you find the Group Structure a helpful support resource for starting University?

Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree

020406080

100

38.67

86.67

14.67

44.00 37.33

2.67

What aspects did you find the Mentors most useful with?

(You can select more than one option)

Peer Support Making New Friends

Developing Team Skills

Travel Together

Having a mentor

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

68.00 65.33 68.00

4.00

73.33

Which aspects of the Group Support Model did you find the most useful? (You can choose

more than one)

48.0050.67

1.33

Did you find the first practice mini-group assign-ment useful for starting the second larger version?

Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree

33.33

48.00

17.33

1.33

Did you find the smaller Group Size model bene-ficial for the group assignment?

Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly DisagreeUnanswered

2013-14 and Beyond

• Incorporate a more sense of BELONGING for the students leaders and the students in year 1

• Embed work from Peer to Peer Support Project and Transition +model [Jane Andrews & Robin Clark (Aston University)]

• Pedagogic Methodology:– Using Communities of Practice or focus of improvements– Implementing iterative cycle of curriculum design

workshops and reflective sessions using feedback and focus groups

Recruit Student Members August 2013 September 2013 Shortlist of members; Interview questions and scores

4 students selected for the Curriculum Project

Student Induction with some inclusion of student BELONGING using the Transition +model

September2013

September 2013 Student Project Induction Session with 2012-13 Feedback

Students project induction and training complete

Students will be provided with feedback from the various HEA workshops highlighting what works.We aim to introduce the students leaders to Peer to Peer Support Project and Transition + model presented by Jane Andrews & Robin Clark (Aston University)

First Curriculum Reflection & Design Workshop - Phase 1 -

September2013

September 2013 Students Recommendations for Curriculum Design - Phase 1

Phase 1 of 2013-2014 curriculum design for action within module

Certain priorities for the School and Faculty will be used to prioritize the generated recommendations if too many new designs or adjustments

Embed phase 1 curriculum designs into module

September 2013 December 2013 New curriculum design;

Enhanced student engagement with new design

Engagement will be assessed in a number of ways: lecture contribution, resource engagement online, attendance,

Phase 1 Reflection & Review Workshop 1

October 2013 October 2013 Reflection on success of new curriculum design and review any necessary changes that must be incorporated.

Amendments to curriculum design


October 2013 October 2013 Reflection on success of new curriculum design and review any necessary changes that must be incorporated.


Second Curriculum Reflection & Design Workshop - Phase 2

October 2013 October 2013 Following reviews of Phase 1 - Students Recommendations for Curriculum Design - Phase 2

Phase 2 of 2013-2014 curriculum design for action within module

Certain priorities for the School and Faculty will be used to prioritize the generated recommendations if too many new designs or adjustments


November 2013 November 2013 Reflection on success of new curriculum design and review any necessary changes that must be incorporated.



December 2013 December 2013 Reflection on success of new curriculum design and review any necessary changes that must be incorporated.


End of semester review at student/staff/mentor level

December 2013 January 2014 Feedback from all active parties: students/staff/mentors

Review of Phases 1 and 2 of 2013-14 curriculum design

This review process will use a combination of online questionnaires and focus groups with staff/students/mentors We would hope that some of student cohort will have that sense of belonging and can actively engage with leaders prior to curriculum design phase 3

Prepare a paper of of the two phases highlighting the focus of change, the reviews and the overall enhancement of the adaptions

January 2014 February 2014 Research paper highlighting the practices introduced to address certain cohort issues concluded with overall reflections and final review data from all parties

This paper will reflect on the process to date and present current findings in relation initiatives embedded. It can then act as a indicator for phase 3 in semester 2.

This paper will highlight the process of incorporating students into curriculum design, staged reviews and amendments needed and the final data collection from all parties involved including engagement data and sense of belonging

Law


Law-Rationale for involvement in the programme

• The LLB degree runs on two campuses (Magee and Jordanstown). Incoming students must achieve high level entry tariff points but fail rates in some year 1 modules are high. Variation in NSS scores (student satisfaction) existed between the two programmes (2012-13) but was generally high.

our plans for change - area of focus

• Focus is on induction (embedding ‘belongingness’) with the addition of a pre-arrival, pre-induction activity for freshers, tied to overall induction programmes.

• Students will be sent out a case to download from an open access legal database (bailii.org) and be required to read it carefully, make notes (500 word summary/analysis) and prepare for Q & A and discussion, in small groups, with their Studies Advisor

• This will serve as both ‘ice-breaker’ and tie in with the ‘Amazing Brains’ and ‘PASS’ induction activities as useful preparation for studying/reading law and doing legal research at degree level including e.g. court visit in semester 1 and required reading of case law across all other law modules

• Any students who are unsure of whether the LLB is their best degree choice, should also be able to gauge fairly quickly whether they have made the correct choice.

Our vision for the next three years

• PASS leaders will engage with incoming law students in supporting them through week zero induction activities and extended induction throughout the year

• Social networking/online support to continue e.g. ‘UUM Facebook’ page which currently exists – new students are encouraged to log on to this to meet their fellow law students and avail of pre-induction and semester-time opportunities e.g. to socialize, join study groups, buy 2nd hand books, vote for student reps, volunteer for law-related activities (e.g. CAB, Law Centre, charitable fund-raising events)

• Frontloading of skills development at Jordanstown across all Law programmes with dedicated workshops on learning legal skills in weeks one and two (pilot 2013 intake)


Nursing (Mental Health)

Enhancing Belonging and Identity in Mental Health NursingIain W. McGowan

Why Mental Health Nursing?

High attrition rate (13.6%) in comparison to faculty (7.4)

Annual cost- £99 million

High student satisfaction rates (90%+, NSS)

UK NI

Ulster

Liverp

ool

Napier

Huddersfield

Glamorga

n

Edge Hill

G Cal

Birmingh

am0

10

20

30

Attrition

Attrition

Why people leave

Personal Finance Childcare

Academic Module failure Lack of identification or belonging Content not obviously related to area of study

Professional Practice learning experiences

BSc (Hons) Nursing (Mental Health)

Year 1

Generic Modules

Care, compassion and Communication

Introduction to Professional

Nursing

Biology, Psychology, sociology

Evidence based Care

Fostering Safe and Holistic Care

Shared Modules

Person Centred Adult Nursing

Person Centred Mental Health

Nursing

Total cohort circa 250 (200 adult & 50 mental health)

5 groups of 50 (40 adult & 10 mh)

Enhancing belonging and identity

Pre-induction

Induction Mental Health Nursing specific activities

Semester long induction

Outcomes

Increased successful completion of year 1.

Increased student reported sense of belonging and identity.


References

• Building student engagement and belonging in Higher Education at a time of change: final report from the What Works? Student Retention & Success programme http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/retention/What_works_final_report.pdf

• HEA Retention and Success Resources http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/retention-and-success

• Student retention and success change programme: Implementing and evaluating the impact of the ‘What works?’ programme http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/change/SRS_12-13/SRS_info

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/retention/What_works_final_report.pdf

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/retention/What_works_final_report.pdf

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/retention-and-success

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/change/SRS_12-13/SRS_info




what works? student retention and success change programme 2013-2016

Documents

student retention

student engagement

stephen king student

judith wylie student

paul hamlyn foundation

success change programme

paul moore

j dean coulter