150 likes | 169 Views
Exploring early indicators of ‘at risk’ students; using JISC SETL (“Student Engagement Traffic Lighting”) as a case study Jean Mutton, Project Manager & Jake Hibberd, Project Assistant “Digging for Gold” HEA Conference , NTU, June 2012.
E N D
Exploring early indicators of ‘at risk’ students; using JISC SETL (“Student Engagement Traffic Lighting”) as a case studyJean Mutton, Project Manager & Jake Hibberd, Project Assistant“Digging for Gold” HEA Conference, NTU, June 2012
Builds on work of the DERBI project – student enrolment (1st year JHS) • Service design & enhancement techniques e.g. blueprinting, story-telling, modelling • Current students – focussing on retention, progression and achievement • Project runs from 1 March 2011 to 31 August 2012
Intended Outcomes • Scoping out of an IT solution to ‘traffic light’ students who may be in need of additional support ultimately improving retention, progression and achievement • Academic and support staff access to this information: not intended to be a student facing/self diagnosis tool – but that may come later • Supportive, university-led interventions • Review of support mechanisms and communications
Methodologies • Project committee • Academic literature • Statistical research • Withdrawal calendar • Progression & completion statistics • “Risks” of changing study • Student personas and storyboarding • Service mapping • Face-to-face contact with students and staff • Sector practice and JISC clusters
Academic background • The concept of “engagement” is too difficult to pin one single definition to (Trowler, 2010) • “…one of the most significant periods of crisis for first year undergraduate students is at the immediate commencement of their studies.” (Fitzgibbon & Prior, 2006, p.18) • Dropping out is not always negative for the student; an institution’s perception of withdrawal is not always reflected in certain individual experiences (Quinn et al., 2005) • “Institutions often use assessment to explain why something has failed but pay little attention to explaining why something succeeds.” (Siegel, 2011, p.13)
Bringing all of this together… • Student Dashboard – both staff- and student-facing versions • Improving support mechanisms (formal and informal) • Identifying areas of good practice • Informing other projects where relevant • Ongoing recommendations to the University’s Executive
References - Fitzgibbon, K. and Prior, J. (2006) Students’ early experiences and university interventions – a timeline to aid undergraduate student retention, Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 8 (3), pp.17-27. - Quinn, J., Thomas, L., Slack, K., Casey, L., Thexton, W. and Noble, J. (2005) From life crisis to lifelong learning: Rethinking working-class ‘drop out’ from higher education, (York; Joseph Rowntree Foundation). - Siegel, M. J. (2011) Reimaging the Retention Problem; Moving Our Thinking from End-Product to By-Product, About Campus, 15 (6), 8-18. - Trowler, V. (2010) Student engagement literature review (York: Higher Education Academy). - Yorke, M. and Longden, B. (2008) The First-Year Experience of Higher Education in the UK; Final Report (York: The Higher Education Academy). - Zepke, N., Leach, L. and Prebble, T. (2006) Being learner centred; one way to improve student retention? Studies in Higher Education, 31 (5), pp.587-600.
For further information visit: www.derby.ac.uk/ssis/JISC-projects or http://twitter.com/myderbi