Project leader: Katrina Barker
Project report: Katrina Barker
LTAP project no: P7251
Table of Contents
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
Project aims 3
Actual outcomes achieved 3
Comments 3
Evaluation of the project 3
Scalability of the project 4
Sustainability of project 4
Project implementation issues 4
Dissemination of project outcomes 4
SECTION 2: DETAILED REPORT, RELATED DOCUMENTS AND MEDIA 5
Aim 1 Outcome 5
Aim 2 Outcome 5
Aim 3 Outcome 6
Appendices 7
Appendix 1: Assessment Task 8
Appendix 2: Student Feedback 10
Appendix 3: Panel Discussion 12
Appendix 4: LTAP Good News 13
UWS Learning and Teaching Action Plan Projects
LTAP Project Completion Report
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project aims:
1. Design and evaluate an adapted version of the MASUS instrument
2. Provide counselling, linguistic and cross-cultural support to students identified by the MASUS as causing concern
3. Inform teaching staff in the SOE of the issues faced by international students and how best to support cross-cultural transfer.
Actual outcomes achieved
A key outcome of this project was the development of a tool used to identify students who require additional linguistic and cross-cultural support. Members from the School of Education literacy units and staff from the Student Learning Unit adapted elements of the Measuring Academic Skills of University Students (MASUS) instrument to develop the Inventory of Academic Skills for Teaching (IAST). This tool has proven useful for the Primary and Secondary Programs in the School of Education as it facilitates the identification of students who are most likely to drop out or withdraw from the Masters of Teaching course. Students identified from the IAST as unsatisfactory received counselling and significant support throughout the semester and will be monitored throughout their completion of the degree. It is pleasing to note that all of the students identified from the IAST as initially causing concern have successfully completed one semester of study and have commenced semester two. The identification and support mechanisms put in place as a result of this project has led to improvements in the students’ sense of self and motivation as well as providing the best opportunities for success. The Program Support staff (Primary – Katina Zammit and Secondary – Loshini Naidoo) have received positive feedback from students, in the form of emails, acknowledging their increased motivation and improved results.
Improvement to learning and teaching was evident from this project in the establishment of communities of practice. A panel discussion on teaching overseas-born students (regardless of residential status) was presented to over 40 members of the School of Education (SoE) staff in December 2007. SoE staff were invited to provide questions to the panel members. The panel members received these questions two weeks in advance so as to prepare responses. At the panel discussion, SoE staff were highly engaged and participated lively in the discussion with experts from the field. A number of myths were dispelled about teaching international students and the community of practice was informed of issues facing international students and how best to support cross-cultural transfer. An unexpected outcome of this panel discussion was the acknowledgement of workload for each program in the SoE to support international students. This workload ensures the sustainability of this project.
Comments
Staff in the SoE are more familiar with the issues facing international students and are aware of strategies/systems in place to support cross-cultural transfer. Students who are likely to withdraw early or drop out of the course have valued the counselling and support mechanisms in place because they feel as though they are set up for success rather than failure.
Evaluation of the project
The evaluation included examining students’ results, feedback from SFU/SFT data, anecdotal evidence and interviews. The team will be submitting ethics approval to formally research the 2008 Spring semester cohort. The focus of the evaluation was on the instrument designed to identify students at risk/causing concern that were most likely to withdraw, fail or drop out of the course. The evaluation also involved examining the support processes designed to be available for these students.
Scalability of the project
There is the potential for this project to be scaled up. Currently two programs in the SoE have trialled the project and it will be introduced to the Early Childhood team for consideration in Autumn 2009. The instrument designed for this project is specifically for Education students but the tool could be modified for various areas of expertise.
Sustainability of project
The LTAP project provided time for staff in the SoE and staff from the Student Learning Unit to meet and design an instrument to identify students who require additional support. The instrument was refined after its initial use and is now a sound measurement tool that will be used each semester with the new cohort of students entering the Master of Teaching. The Head of the SoE has provided workload for each program to continue supporting students after their identification with the adapted instrument.
Project implementation issues
The project included tailoring a unit specifically for the students identified from the instrument. Unfortunately this aspect of the project was unsuccessful. Instead, the team identified existing units that may be helpful e.g. English for Academic Purposes. The IELTS level at UWS for Education has not been increased as anticipated although the Institute of Teachers has acknowledged that testing of students at the completion of their degree will be conducted and the expected level is IELTS 9 in order to teach in NSW schools. Team members of this project continue to pursue the possibility of IELTS increasing to be more in line with the Institutes expectations.
Dissemination of project outcomes
The project team presented a panel discussion at the SoE retreat in December 2007. A member from the School of Humanities attended the retreat and reported back to their school on how the SoE supports at risk students and in particular students from international backgrounds. Janice Caterall, the Head of the Student Learning Unit was invited to attend and Sue Starfield, the Director of the Learning Centre from UNSW participated in the panel discussion. The panel also comprised the overseas born, Jinghe Han, who recently completed her PhD and lectures in literacy at Charles Sturt University. In addition, the panel included Paul Parker and Neera Handa from the SLU and Ian Nicol, a psychologist from STARTTS. The project team will present the outcomes of the project at a Special Issues Forum in September and once ethics approval is sought, will present at national conferences.
SECTION 2: DETAILED REPORT, RELATED DOCUMENTS AND MEDIA
The project aimed to:
1. Design and evaluate an adapted version of the Measuring Academic Skills of University Students (MASUS) instrument
2. Provide counselling, linguistic and cross-cultural support to students identified by the MASUS as causing concern
3. Inform teaching staff in the SOE of the issues faced by international students and how best to support cross-cultural transfer.
Aim 1 Outcome
The ISSP team developed and implemented a diagnostic tool specifically designed to facilitate the identification of students who require additional linguistic and cross-cultural support. The Measuring Academic Skills of University Students (MASUS) instrument influenced the design of the Inventory of Academic Skills for Teaching (IAST). Although the initial objective was to design one instrument for the Secondary Program and another for the Primary Program, the team reconsidered this. The team agreed that there were generic skills common across Primary and Secondary teaching and therefore one tool would fulfil the stated objectives. Consequently one tool was developed and successfully implemented across the two programs. Please refer to the attachment titled ‘Assessment Task ‘ for the IAST.
The team was conscious of presenting the IAST in a positive manner for the students in their initial Compulsory Course Commencement week. It was not to be viewed as a ‘test’ but rather a task that will help staff in the Programs to identify students who may require additional support. To address this, PowerPoint presentations were produced for both the Primary and Secondary Programs to precede the completion of the IAST. Please refer to the attachments titled ‘Writing Task_primary’ and ‘Writing Task_secondary’ to view these presentations.
In its initial implementation in February 2008 (1H08) with the Primary Program, the IAST identified 30 students from a total 250, who required additional support. Of the 30 students, 25 were given a caution grade and sent an email to notify them of their need to improve and some strategies to do this. The remaining 5 students were identified as unsatisfactory and were provided intensive additional support. The mid-year (2H08) cohort recently completed the IAST in the primary program. 16 students from 190 were notified of a caution grade and 3 students were identified as unsatisfactory. The IAST has provided a useful tool to identify students who require additional support in language skill development for teaching and enculturation.
Aim 2 Outcome
The second aim of this project was to develop and implement counselling and support mechanisms for the students identified as unsatisfactory from the IAST. All students identified as unsatisfactory attended an individual meeting with their nominated program support person (i.e. Primary – Katina Zammit; Secondary – Loshini Naidoo). The purpose of this meeting was to determine the specific needs of each student and the appropriate mechanisms for support.
The mechanisms for support that were available for the program support person to recommend comprised:
· Encouraging students to reconsider their pattern of study i.e. instead of opting for the accelerated mode of study (12 months), selected students were encouraged to change to the full-time (18 months) or part-time (24 months) mode of study. This has been particularly useful for some students as it delays their In-School Professional Experience and provides time for cultural-transfer and some improvement to literacy skills.
· Directing students to complete specific units. Units that have been recommended include: English for Academic Purpose and Crossing Borders.
· Directing students to complete relevant Student Learning Unit workshops. The SLU in consultation with the program support staff have designed workshops that focus on skills for beginning teachers. Neera Handa has worked with Loshini Naidoo from the Secondary Program and Paul Parker has worked with Katina Zammit from the Primary Program.
· Resource schools have been provided for the students to visit. These school experiences facilitate with cultural-transfer and provide a model as well as expectations of teachers for the students.
· The Secondary Program has an embedded 10 credit point unit (Professional Practice III) where students work on self-initiated projects equivalent to 60 hours. Students identified from the IAST were directed to work on academic literacy skills and/or cross-cultural transfer projects for the duration of the unit.
· Katina Zammit and Loshini Naidoo meet regular with these students across the semester and monitor their progress throughout the completion of the Masters of Teaching degree. The support staff worked with the students on assignment guidelines and requirements as well as providing feedback to the students on their work prior to submission.
· A new initiative which was developed after the review of the project (at the end of the Autumn semester) is for staff teaching these students to forward a copy the marked assignments to the program support person. The program support person will examine the work and discuss their analysis with the students.
The second aim of the project has been, and continues to be successfully addressed. The attachment titled ‘student feedback’ provides email correspondence between the Primary Program support person with various IAST identified students, highlighting their appreciation. It is pleasing to note that all of the students identified as unsatisfactory have continued their studies and not withdrawn or dropped out of the course. The team acknowledges this as a direct result of the support and monitoring available for these students.
Aim 3 Outcome
The third aim of the project was to inform staff from the School of Education of issues and strategies to support enculturation of international students (regardless of residential status). Five experts from the field were invited to contribute to a panel discussion. The panel members comprised:
Sue Starfield – Director of the Learning Centre at the University of NSW
Neera Handa – UWS Lecturer from Student Learning Unit
Rosemary Suliman – UWS Senior Lecturer in School of Humanities and Languages
Jinghe Han – Lecturer at the University of Charles Sturt
Ian Nicol – psychologist from STARTTS
Paul Parker – Panel Chair from UWS Student Learning Unit
The questions asked of the panel members can be viewed from the attachment titled ‘Panel Discussion’. The panel was successful at meeting its aim as over 40 members of staff from the School of Education were in attendance and participated in the panel discussion. Janne Malfroy, the Head of the Student Learning Unit attended and commented on the success of the panel discuss (refer to attachment ‘re: LTAP good news’). An unexpected outcome of this panel discussion was the Head of School provided workload for the program support person. This workload ensures the sustainability of supporting students who are likely to withdraw or drop out earlier. It ensures that students identified as causing concern are appropriately supported and monitored throughout their studies in the Masters of Teaching.
The ISSP team believes this project has been successful at addressing the three key aims. The LTAP grant has provided an opportunity to establish and maintain support mechanisms for students who cause concern and are the most likely to withdraw or drop out of the course.
Appendices
1. Assessment Task
2. Student Feedback
3. Panel Discussion
4. LTAP Good News
Appendix 1: Assessment Task
Carefully read the case study “A Tick for Chris” then answer the questions on the attached sheet in the spaces provided.
A Tick for Chris (from McInerney & McInerney, 2006)
Chris had been disruptive during class on a few occasions and had already been in Time-Out twice during the past two weeks. On this particular afternoon, the students were writing out their favourite recipes to make a class cookbook. Chris was slow in starting his work and he was spending his time talking loudly to the neighbouring children at his group table. Meredith, his new teacher, gave him one warning about the rule he was breaking, but he did not change his behaviour. She was concerned about putting him in Time-Out again because he seemed to be experiencing failure only lately and was not responding to any such punishment so she took him aside for a talk.