BERA Annual Conference, 6-9 September 2006, University of Warwick

______

The First Year Undergraduate Experience in Non-professional Education Programmes

Ginny Saich(email )

Derek Young (email )

HE AcademyEducationSubjectCenter (ESCalate)

Division of Academic Innovation and Continuing Education

University of Stirling

Stirling FK9 4LA

Scotland

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Warwick, 6-9 September 2006

Abstract

This research examinedstudents’ experiences on educational studies programmes and courses forming a parallel, and complementary, study with ongoing HE Academy research (by Yorke and Longden) within other disciplinary fields. Building upon research data on student retention, this study examined students’ experience in terms of their initial expectations on entry to their programme and the degree to which these were met by their programme of study and the learning environment. Resulting issues and concerns were identified with a view to informing enhancements within the first year of non-professional education programmes across the UK. Sectoral comparisons, at the disciplinary level, highlight the needs and concerns of differing groups of students. Potential implications for academic and support practititioners are highlighted at departmental and sectoral level.

Introduction

The importance of the first year in HE for student retention, progression and completion of programmes of study has been identified within a range of research literature (Johnston, 1997;Pitkethly and Prosser, 2001; Tinto, 1993; Tinto, 2004). In particular, it has been noted that ‘students are at their most vulnerable in the first year in terms of their likelihood of academic failure’ (McInnes, 2001:106).

Students who withdraw from their programmes of study are frequently very similar to those who stay. This suggests that student persistence is not dependent exclusively upon personal characteristics and that it may relate to a more complex combination of factors. Indeed, Lawrence (2005:18) confirms that more recent research has acknowledged ‘the complexity involved in the first year experience’, and the relevance of academic transition alongside both social and personal factors.

In adapting to the demands of an HE environment, students are presented with a number of challenges, including: ‘marrying’ their expectations with the reality of their experiences; developing their learner autonomy; engaging with diverse individuals and balancing a range of activities (both academic and personal) competing for their time.

All first year students undergo a period of transition, whether entering directly from school, further education college, paid employment or any other context. Individuals’ experiences of the first year may vary considerably and will depend upon personal circumstances and characteristics, combined with prior experiences and levels of competence. Student feedback on the first year experience will, therefore, reflect personalised experiences of the first year and may differ considerably from one individual to another.

Institutional student surveys identify issues for their first year students, however many do not subsequently differentiate this data by discipline and/or student groupings (Davidson and Young 2005). This may lead to institutional decisions that are less than optimal for some stakeholders. The variability of institutional surveys precludes direct comparisons across the Sector, and supports the use of large-scale sectoral surveys to collate data for the identification of trends and common issues relating to the first year.

Research Methodology

A mixed method approach was used within this project. A cross-sectional survey elicited both quantitative and qualitative data from first year students about themselves, their experiences and their study context. The survey covered a range of different aspects of the first year experience and elicited data from both pre- and post-1992 institutions. This was supplemented by staff focus groups, conducted at an international two-day practitioner conference, identifying examples of successful strategies for supporting first year students, enhancing retention and progression. Perspectives on, and views of, the first year experience were therefore elicited from both staff and students, providing the opportunity to identify commonality and inconsistencies in perceptions within and between these two groups. A holistic view of the student experience was embedded within the research protocol. Students’ levels of satisfaction, and staff views, were elicited across the spectrum of the first year experience, incorporating academic, support and institutional elements.

The questionnaires were distributed and collected by institutional staff ‘in class’ during April, May and June 2006. Survey participants were undergraduate studentson programmes of study within education departments. Responses were subsequently analysed to distinguish data from students currently on non-professional and professional education programmes (where the latter led to a teaching qualification).

The survey instrument wasadapted from an original designby Mantz Yorke and Bernard Longden for HE Academy-funded first year experience research during 2006 across a range of disciplines (excluding Education). The survey instrument contained a combination of original items, supplementing those adapted from the existing questionnaires of: the US National Student Survey of Student Engagement, the Australian Course Experience Questionnaire, the Australian First Year Experience Questionnaire, the UK National Student Survey, the UK Indicators of Programme Quality and the UK Survey of Foundation Degree Students.

The survey items were in the form of statements with a 5-point Likert (agree/disagree) scale. Items were jumbled rather than logically grouped, and some statements were expressed negatively in order to minimise biasing of responses. Potential sources of bias remain within the research design, however it is difficult to assess their possible impact. In particular, the distribution of questionnaires to students by institutional teaching staff may have influenced responses. In addition, students absent when the questionnaire was distributed could not be accounted for, and this could favour students with higher levels of attendance (potentially linked to other factors such as a greater commitment to study, or fewer other commitments on their time).

The practitioner conference provided direct access to information from staff involved with first year students, including details of their practice, their concerns and issues they associated with the first year.

Research Outcomes

The demographics of respondentsappeared broadly comparable with those obtained within the larger cross-disciplinary survey undertaken in February/March 2006 with a very similar survey instrument (see table 1.0 below).

Table 1.0 Respondent Demographics

Respondent Characteristic / Education Survey / Multi-disciplinary Survey (Yorke and Longden, 2006)
Mature (over 21) / 58% / 25%
Female / 77% / 60%
White ethnicity / 90% / 80%
Family background:
managerial/professional / 62% / 40%
First in family to enter HE / 49% / 45%
Previous HE experience / 44% / 32%
Considered withdrawing / 25% / 30%

The main areas of discrepancy relate to higher percentages of mature and female students studying education. Interestingly education students were more likely to come from managerial/professional backgrounds but were also more likely to be the first in their family to enter HE and were more likely to have previous HE experience. Education students were also less likely to consider withdrawing, however this may have been related to the higher percentage of mature students studying education, given that analysis of the data identified that younger students are more likely to consider withdrawing. 30% of younger students considered withdrawing as opposed to 22% of mature students. Overall, the survey results appeared to indicate that older students were more motivated and generally considered that they had more positive relationships with staff.

Consideration of gender in education identified that 24% of female students considered withdrawing from their programme of study, whereas 31% of male students considered doing so. Survey responses indicated that female students generally appeared to be more motivated and engaged than their male counterparts.

Those students who spent more time on private study were more likely to express positive views across the spectrum of the first year experience. It is not possible, however, to ascertain from the survey whether their positive experience led them to study more or whether their increased study led to a more positive experience.

Financial considerations were a possible contributory factor in students’ consideration of withdrawal. 34% of those with financial concerns considered withdrawing from their programme, compared with 24% for those who did not indicate financial concerns. Finances and time management were most frequently cited as the worst aspects of students’ first year experiences in HE, including statements such as:

  • “juggling home life/study”
  • “the time commitment”
  • “running into debt”
  • “financial debt and management”

Social Isolation

Within the study, 33% of those indicating the highest levels of social isolation had considered withdrawing from their programme of study, compared with only 8% for those with the lowest levels of social isolation. This supports studies in American universities (Tinto, 1993; Braxton et al 1997) and more recently in the UK (Bowl, 2003; McGivney, 2003) highlighting social isolation as a key factor causing student withdrawal. The implications of this are apparent at both institutional and departmental level. Facilitating students’ transition into HE requires consideration of both their academic and social integration.

42% of students felt that no two members of staff knew them by name. Given that most institutions have personal tutoring schemes requiring one-to-one interactions this was rather disappointing, although perhaps not unexpected given that first year classes are frequently very large at many institutions. Practitioners admitted to frequently using photographs to enable them to recognise individual students but found this was impractical in large lecture theatres and instead employed strategies to avoid having to use individuals’ names.

Practitioners demonstrated a clear awareness of the importance of social integration with other students and were able to identify a number of alternative approaches for facilitating this process. Groupwork, peer tutoring and peer assessment were most common within the curriculum, with an increasing number of departments initiating (or considering establishing) peer mentoring and/or buddying schemes (including some based in residences and some preceding the start of semester). Some schemes were running at institutional level whilst others remained at departmental level according to need and differing institutional cultures. In some cases such schemes were being piloted at departmental level with a view to ‘rolling out’ such schemes across the institution. Online discussion boards were suggested for facilitating social interaction between distance learning and commuting students. Text messaging services were increasingly being explored for maintaining contact with students, however they were currently largely restricted to reminders and emergency messages such as lecture cancellations.

A worryingly high 44% of students in the survey tended to keep to themselves within the institution. 45% of these students were mature students and 27% lived off campus. Only 38% of students met up with others outside the formally timetabled activities to discuss academic work, which was particularly disturbing given that 60% claimed that their programme required them to collaborate with other students.

Interestingly the most frequent responses from students identifying the best aspect of their first year experience in HE related to social interactions, such as:

  • “meeting new people, learning new things”
  • “the social aspect”
  • “the social benefits of living in halls and meeting new people”
  • “meeting new people from different social backgrounds to myself”

In addition, the most frequent changes students suggested they would want to make to their first year experience related to their engagement with the University or their studies. For example:

  • “more practical involvement”
  • “to get more involved in societies and clubs”
  • “I wish I read more”
  • “more group and one to one contact with appropriate tutors”

Expectations

Research has shown that many students who withdraw from University claim to have entered with ‘inaccurate expectations’ and/or that their expectations were not met (Aldridge and Rowley, 2001;Bousted and May, 2003). Complementary research indicates that realistic expectations are related to student success (Mackie, 2001; Yorke, 1999). Expectations, however, may cover a wide range of areas, including: expectations about what university is like, what will happen there, what university is for and how it will impact upon individuals.

It would appear that preparation is a key element in ensuring student persistence. It is disappointing therefore that only 49% of first year education students claim a good knowledge of their institution on entry, and it is not surprising that 35% of students find that the institution turns out to differ from their expectations. 66% of students claim a good knowledge of their programme on entry and students with prior knowledge of their programme of study are less likely to consider withdrawing. Of those with a low prior knowledge of their programme of study, 33% considered withdrawal in contrast with 19% with a high prior knowledge.

‘Poor choice of course’, possibly linked to a lack of preparation, is another reason often cited by students for leaving a course (Davies and Elias, 2003). Within the education survey, however, 96% of students considered that they had made a good choice of subject(s) to study and nearly three quarters considered that they had received appropriate information prior to enrolment. 64% felt that their expectations of the programme had been realistic with only 9% feeling that they had been unrealistic.

80% of students considered that staff made it clear what was expected of them, and 59% felt that they were helped to get off to a good start academically from the moment they enrolled. Although not ideal, perhaps these figures indicate that, although students are not undertaking the preparation that would benefit them prior to entry, they are receiving the support they require to ‘catch-up’ once they begin their HE course.

Teaching and the Support of Student Learning

Students were largely very positive about the teaching and learning support they encountered. 90% of students agreed that the teaching staff were good at explaining things and 70% were satisfied with their level of tutorial support.Nearly three-quarters of students were able to contact staff when they needed to, and found the teaching on their programme stimulating.

Not surprisingly, given the timing of this questionnaire survey, some students used their free text responses to comment on the ‘action short of a strike’ underway by academic colleagues across the sector in support of their pay claim. A small number of students entered this as the worst aspect of their first year experience, however surprisingly few took this opportunity (7% of those entering free text responses) and overall their feedback did not appear to have been unduly influenced by the context within which the research was undertaken.

Students appeared less satisfied with support services, with only 37% of students expressing satisfaction and 51% expressing no view. This may, however,relate more to a lack of awareness and use of the services than any particular dissatisfaction with service received. By contrast, 79% found the library resources and services good enough for their needs and 77% had been able to access general computing resources when required.

Assessment

79% of students found that assessment had helped them to focus their learning, however 80% focused their learning on passing assessments despite the fact that 89% claimed to focus their learning on understanding the subject. Although on the surface this may appear contradictory, this is not necessarily the case, since given the pressures on their time students may be exhibiting strategic learning strategies that use assessments to reduce the volume of material with which they engage, enabling them to spend their time ensuring that they develop their understanding in these areas.

As anticipated, given findings from the recent QAA enhancement theme of assessment (QAA, 2005), feedback was a particular area of concern. Only 32% of students considered that feedback on their work had been prompt, although 73% felt feedback had helped them in their learning. The latter may include recognition by students that not all feedback is written and that feedback is given throughout the course and not just on submitted assessed work.

Study Trends

44% of students admit to havingmissed some of the formally timetabled sessions, yet only 18% claim that this is because of other demands on their time. 32% feel that they were not as motivated towards their studies as they should be which may, at least partially, contribute towards explaining this apparent discrepancy.

Balancing academic and other commitments is difficult for 34% of students. This appears a relatively low figure, however, given that 76% need to undertake paid employment in order to help fund their studies,36% undertake more than 18 hours of part-time employment during term time, and 40% feel that they have to give time to looking after others (such as parents, children, partners etc.).