Second year undergraduate retention study

1. Second year undergraduate retention study ESCHEA Mini Project 2004-05 Dr Linda Juleff, Napier University

2. Objectives • Analyse student performance in order to identify the principal sources of failure • Collect qualitative information from students regarding their perceptions of the causes of success/failure

3. Statistical Analysis • 2003-04 Cohort • Year 1– 24 out of 27 students progressed, (20 of whom had passed by June), 2 withdrew and 1 is repeating year 1 • Year 2– 15 out of 26 students progressed (11 in June), 1 withdrew, 5 were withdrawn, 5 are repeating year 2

4. Principal Sources of Failure (1) • Year 1 – no obvious pattern • Year 2 – students repeating the year were more likely to fail the year • Students who failed semester 1 modules were also more likely to fail semester 2 modules • Students with poor attendance records were more likely to fail

5. Principal Sources of Failure (2) • The three year 2 students who were carrying modules from year 1 all failed year 2 modules • The modules most commonly failed were: Management Science and Statistics, Financial Services and Business Planning, and Comparative Economic Studies

6. Activity 1 • In groups, discuss which demographic groups you think were most likely to fail year 2 of their programme: • 1) Male or female? • 2) Aged under 21, 21 to 25, over 25? • 3) Students living at home or those living away from home? (10 minutes)

7. Demographic Factors • Male students are more likely to fail than female students • Students who are 21-25 years old when they reach year 2 are more likely to fail than either younger or older students • Students living away from home are more likely to fail • Students from elsewhere in the UK are more likely to fail than either Scottish or overseas students

8. Qualitative Analysis • Two types of interviews were undertaken with students: • 1) Focus group interviews with students who were still on the programme • 2) One to one interviews with those who had left the programme • Questions covered a range of areas including both the academic and social aspects of the programmes

9. Qualitative Analysis • Some students left for positive reasons, e.g. transfers to other universities/jobs • Students who lost contact with their cohorts were more prone to drop out • Financial pressures also contributed significantly to failure • Other personal reasons were also cited

10. Activity 2 • What other reasons do you think the students may have given regarding why some of them a) succeeded, and b) failed their programme of study? (10 minutes)

11. Reasons for success • Self-motivation/determination • Devoting sufficient time to study • Attending classes • Maturity • Good student support at critical times

12. Reasons for failure • Non- attendance • Lack of commitment • Laziness • Choosing the wrong course • Being away from home for the first time

13. Conclusion • Students leave courses for a variety of reasons but non-academic reasons were cited more frequently than academic ones • Timely intervention by staff to support failing students can make a difference • No consistent pattern has emerged, all cases are individual