The first year student experience: student engagement through peer support and curriculum design

1. The first year student experience: student engagement through peer support and curriculum design Dr Catherine Bovill & Dr Jane MacKenzie Academic Development Unit University of Glasgow

2. Overview • Scottish Quality Enhancement Themes context • Peer support project • Curriculum design project • What you are currently doing to enhance the first year experience • What you plan to do to enhance the first year experience

3. Quality Enhancement Quality Enhancement Framework • Institutional review of subjects/disciplines • Enhancement-led institutional reviews (ELIR) • Improving information about quality • Greater student representation in quality systems • National programme of enhancement themes

4. Quality Enhancement Themes Previous themes Assessment Responding to student needs Employability Flexible delivery Integrative assessment The first year Research-teaching linkages New theme Graduates for the 21st Century: Integrating the Enhancement Themes

5. First year experience projects • Sector wide discussion: the nature & purposes of first year • Student expectations, experiences and reflections • Curriculum design • Transition to and during the first year • Peer support • Personal development planning • Personalisation • Transforming assessment and feedback • Introducing scholarship skills

6. First year projects’ brief • Literature review • Gathering of case studies • Recommendations for • policymakers • practitioners • Students • Student engagement and empowerment

7. Peer support in the first year Jane MacKenzie, Learning and Teaching Centre and Fiona Black, Recruitment, Admissions and Participation Service

8. Student integration Favoured model in student retention research arising from the work of Tinto and others Integration needs to be both Academic and Social and with the Institution

9. Peer support – belonging “For some students, a sense of belonging will develop as a matter of course; for others this may not happen unless the institution makes an effort.” Longden and Yorke (2004)

10. Some definitions First year – the first year a student, whether undergraduate or postgraduate, spends in higher education Peer – our focus is on students from the same institution but from any year Horizontal – same year group Vertical – older years supporting younger Support – means both academic and social support Explicit and implicit support - interventions/practice that aid student integration – in some instances the practice is solely to support and in others it’s a ‘side effect’

11. Explicit Implicit Buddying/mentoring Peer Assisted Learning Online networks e.g. VLEs, FaceBook Student Learning Communities/Freshman Interest Groups Student societies Self-selected study groups Friends Residences Small group learning opportunities, e.g. tutorials/labs Collaborative learning opportunities/group projects

12. Kember, Lee & Li (2001) point out that a sense of belonging is more likely to develop in small groups. “the logical consequence is then to attempt to build a sense of belonging with relatively small units such as departments rather than large impersonal bodies like a university”

13. Space for engagement Engagement involves learning, accepting and conforming to the norms of the institution. From the point of view of peer support in the first year, learning the norms of the institution and thus engaging with it can be encouraged by providing first year students with suitable ‘space’ where they can interact with peers in an academic and a social context.

14. Recommendations: Space for engagement Institutional policy makers: to demonstrate through policy, practice and funding an institutional philosophy that recognises the benefit of collaborative learning and opportunities for students to meet in small groups to aid social and academic integration Practitioners: to design curricula, courses and learning activities that build-in small group learning opportunities

15. Voice for empowerment Providing students with a voice means that we need to accept that students might make decisions that do not ‘fit’ the institutional view. They might: challenge the authority of the tutor, department or institution; question the status quo and act in a way that does not fit the model of the ideal student, for example by not attending lectures.

16. Recommendations: Voice for empowerment Institutional policy makers: to publish the outcome of annual evaluations in formats accessible to students and to make public changes implemented in response to that feedback Practitioners: departments should consider setting up peer support partnerships where student representatives work in pairs to attend staff-student liaison committees. Institutional policy makers/practitioners: to consider finding opportunities for students (including first years) to work as student sabbatical officers or student interns to engage in areas of priority for the university.

17. Curriculum design for the first year Dr Catherine Bovill Academic Development Unit University of Glasgow Dr Kate Morss & Dr Cathy Bulley, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh

18. Focus of the project • first year of undergraduate programmes • many overlaps with other projects

19. Data collection methods • Literature review • Staff workshops x 2 (n=60) ‘ideal first year curriculum’ • Student focus groups x 3 (n=21) • Case studies (n=25 → 8 + 5 mini) - FY practitioners (QAA database) - HEA subject centres - enhancement themes website - contacted FY & curriculum authors

20. Key themes: Content 1) early and regular feedback (all data sources) 2) active learning and problem-based learning approaches (literature, staff and case studies) 3) ‘learning communities’ to enhance transferable skills and a sense of belonging (literature and case studies)

21. Key themes: Process 1) students should be participants (staff, students, case studies + more general literature) 2) ‘ideal’ process for curriculum design (literature):  identify start and end points (abilities on entry; programme aim) through consultation with students, graduates and employers  facilitate progression of learning through strategic use of L&T and assessment strategies across the programme and first year in particular  evaluate student engagement and empowerment before and after curriculum redesign

22. Cautionary note Most literature reviewed provided: • suggested strategies or • examples of innovation with no evaluation As a result there is a danger of building a “…massive but trivial literature” McInnes (2001:112) Recommendations made in this context

23. Recommendations staff need support in the form of: • dedicated time and rewards for innovation • institutional support for improving the FY experience • resources for further evaluation, research and scholarship there is also a need for: • a ‘birds-eye view’ approach • pragmatism: start small (module-level strategies) • involvement of first year students in design • further evaluation, research and scholarship focusing on curriculum design

24. Resources • QAA(Scotland) Quality Enhancement Themes Website http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/default.asp • QAA (Scotland) Peer support in the first year report http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/documents/firstyear/PeerSupport_FinalReport.pdf • QAA (Scotland) First Year curriculum design report http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/documents/firstyear/Curriculum_Design_final_report.pdf • First year student learning experience questionnaire http://senate.gla.ac.uk/qa/studentvoice/1st_Year.pdf • Retention Working group action plan • First year course co-ordinators’ meeting 29th May 2009

25. Small groups (1) What are you currently doing to encourage students to get together academically and socially? OR What are the current opportunities in your course for students to become involved in curriculum design?

26. Small groups (2) What could you redesign about one of your courses that would enable students to get together? OR What could you redesign about one of your courses that would enable students to become more involved in curriculum design?