The first year experience What do UK students say? Mantz Yorke mantzyorke@mantzyorke.plus

1. The first year experience What do UK students say? Mantz Yorke mantzyorke@mantzyorke.plus.com Conference: Strategies for Student Retention University of Ulster, 14 June 2007

2. The general plan • The First Year Experience Survey – an outline • Some findings • A brief note of similarities/differences re Australia • Theory, and why there’s no magic bullet • Some implications for institutions • What makes an institution successful?

3. Origins • Study of non-completion for HEFCE (1997) • Pre-dated Labour’s new fees policy • Fee regime again changed in AY 2006-07 • First year crucial for many students • FYE little researched in UK, cf US, Australia • Widening participation agenda • Sponsored by the Higher Education Academy

4. Purposes of the study • To provide the sector with data that • is informative • can be used as a baseline for comparison with future • studies, particularly in a context of ‘top-up’ fees • can be used comparatively, within and across both • subject areas and institutions, to inform both policy • development and quality enhancement activity • Bernard Longden of Liverpool Hope University is • co-director of the study

5. The HE Academy FYE study Phase 2 Spring 2007 Survey of ‘withdrawn’ at/before end acad yr 05-06 All subject areas 23 institutions Phase 1 Spring 2006 Survey mid-1st year 9 subject areas 23 institutions

6. Choices 9 Broad subject areas, spanning the spectrum 25 Varied higher education institutions (became 23) 1st year FT students (home and overseas) Phase 1 questionnaire survey, completed in class time

7. Sampling (Institutions as in early 2005) Post92 universities Colleges Pre92 universities Allied to Med Bio Sci Psychology Computer Sc Eng & Tech Social Studs Bus & Admin Humanities Creative A&D

8. Responses (as at 6 August 2006) Sent out to HEIs c20,000 Distributed in HEIs Far fewer, but not known Returned 7,442 Blank 314 Jocular/offensive 5 ‘Yea-sayers’ (?) 8 ‘Middlers’ 6 Usable 7,109 Completion rate of returns ~95%

9. Some demographics (valid %) • Age: 18-21: 75% Over 21: 25% • Gender: Male: 39% Female: 61% • Ethnicity: White: 81% • Family background: Managerial/profess’l: 39% Other known: 41% • Previous HE experience: 33% • Considered withdrawing: 29% • Proportion of whom wishing to switch straightaway: 52%

10. Some comparative findings Family background: little difference re FYE Older students: more motivated more positive relationship with staff Gender: females more motivated, engaged Knowing a lot about programme: more positive about FYE Knowing a lot about HEI: - ditto - 1 day/week on private study: least positive about FYE Hours/week on PT employment: very slight differences about FYE

11. Five factors • Factors relating to teaching and learning • Stimulating learning experience • Supportive teaching • Understanding academic demand • Coping • Feedback Health warning In all the subject comparison charts that appear later, differences are emphasised at the expense of similarities

14. Two considerable risk factors

23. All HEIs, excluding UU Level of PT working, hours/week All HEIs

26. 74% of students provided a written comment Best features of the first year experience • New friends • Academic matters • Social side of HE Worst features of the first year experience • Workload and time management • Assessment and feedback • Teaching • Learning-related • Finance

27. A brief comparison: Australia and the UK • Similarities • Satisfaction levels re FYE generally high • Motivation: good (F>M), save for a significant minority • Older students more positive • SES: surprisingly little difference • PT employment levels similar • High confidence in obtaining a graduate-level job • Nearly 30% considered discontinuing • c70% communicated with peers re academic work • High satisfaction with institutional resources

28. A brief comparison: Australia and the UK • Main differences • Feedback helpful: UK 57%, Australia 33% • International students: differences more marked in Australia • Ethnicity: Some variation in UK • Coping: Substantial minority found academic work • harder than expected • c40% UK students claimed to keep to themselves, • compared with c25% Australians (save Indigenous)

29. Why do students leave?

30. Why do students leave? Factors Yorke 1999 Davies & Elias 2003 N = 2151 FT/SW N = 1510 FT/SW Wrong choice Wrong choice Academic difficulties Financial problems Financial problems Personal problems Poor student experience Academic difficulties Dislike environment Wrong institution Poor institutional provision & FYE survey Phase 2 N = ~450 FT/SW

31. Why do students leave? Top reasons Yorke, 1999 Wrong choice of prog 39 Lack of commitment 38 Financial problems 37 Prog not as expected 37 Teaching didn’t suit 31 Lack of acad progress 30 Needed a break 28 Prog organisation 27 Lack staff support 24 Teaching quality 23 Prog not relev/career 23 Emotion, health probs 23 Stress re programme 22

32. Why do students leave? Top reasons Yorke, 1999FYE Phase 2, 2007 Wrong choice of prog 39 Prog not as expected 44 Lack of commitment 38 Wrong choice of prog 40 Financial problems 37 Teaching didn’t suit 39 Prog not as expected 37 Lack of pers engage’t 36 new Teaching didn’t suit 31 Lack staff contact 36 Lack of acad progress 30 Lack of acad progress 35 Needed a break 28 Prog organisation 34 Prog organisation 27 Lack of commitment 31 Lack staff support 24 Financial problems 29 Teaching quality 23 Teaching quality 29 Prog not relev/career 23 Inst’n not as expected 28 Emotion, health probs 23 Prog not relev/career 27 Stress re programme 22 Quality of feedback 26 new

33. Why do students leave? Top reasons Yorke, 1999FYE Phase 2, 2007 Wrong choice of prog 39 Prog not as expected 44 Lack of commitment 38 Wrong choice of prog 40 Financial problems 37 Teaching didn’t suit 39 Prog not as expected 37 Lack of pers engage’t 36 new Teaching didn’t suit 31 Lack staff contact 36 Lack of acad progress 30 Lack of acad progress 35 Needed a break 28 Prog organisation 34 Prog organisation 27 Lack of commitment 31 Lack staff support 24 Financial problems 29 Teaching quality 23 Teaching quality 29 Prog not relev/career 23 Inst’n not as expected 28 Emotion, health probs 23 Prog not relev/career 27 Stress re programme 22 Quality of feedback 26 new

34. Why do students leave? I felt quite isolated in terms of studying. Lecturers spoke during lectures and then would leave the room, with no time for questions. During my entire first year I never once met my personal tutor. There seemed to be no interest in students’ personal needs. I did NOT enjoy my experience what so ever, due to the lack of support from staff. I was never introduced to my personal tutor and felt like a number – not a person in a new [overwhelming] environment. Not one of my tutors spoke to me as an individual …

35. Why do students leave? Found it very difficult to maintain employment & academic study. The more I wanted to progress at Uni – the more money I needed – so needed to work more to get more money – I received no grants. I had a lot of debt so had to work a lot of hours to meet my Outgoings. This in turn effected my attendance in class. […] I would love to go back to university but I still have financial difficulties.

36. Why do students leave? Issues around being a mature student in an environment geared towards school leavers. I … didn’t settle into my accommodation and I only connected with one of my flatmates. Conflict of interests – I felt peer pressured into partying every night when I didn’t want to. Coupled with being homesick, I couldn’t stay. I felt that living at home excluded me from a lot of the ‘student life’ that I wanted to experience.

37. What help does theory offer?

38. Some relevant theorists or users of theory Dweck (1999): self-theorising Pintrich & Schunk (2002): motivation Bandura (1997): self-efficacy Flavell (1979): metacognition Sternberg (1997): practical intelligence Salovey & Mayer (1990): emotional intelligence Biggs (2003): constructive alignment in pedagogy Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick (2006): formative assessment Bourdieu & Passeron (1977): cultural and social capital

39. I n t e g r a t i o n Academic experiences Intentions, goals, commitments Intentions, goals, commitments Pre-entry attributes Departure decision Social experiences After Tinto, 1993

40. Adventitious happenings Psy of Indiv Instit’l context Broader society

41. Theory in this area is complex My ‘take’ on theory is that we should be aware of it, but not fall into the trap of assuming simple causality between ‘intervention’ and student response. There are simply too many variables in play (student behaviour is said to be ‘overdetermined’ by theory). ‘… students change in holistic ways and that these changes have their origins in multiple influences in both the academic and non-academic domains of students’ lives.’Pascarella & Terenzini 2005, p.603. Knowing what we do, we can only seek to ‘bend the odds’ in favour of student success.

42. Some challenges facing UK institutions in mass HE • Institutional approach • Curriculum design • Pedagogy for student engagement • Dealing with the part-time employment issue • Staff development

43. ~250,000 Institutional approach • Sustained visible commitment to student learning • Managing expectations • Institutional and departmental leadership • Institutional structures and practices • Emphasis on 1st year in resource allocation • Celebration of pedagogic achievement • Learning space (‘active learning’; ICT) • NB The ‘demographic dip’ • after 2011 (from • Bekhradnia, 2006)

44. Curriculum design • FYE: early start on academic study • Formative assessment • Curricular interconnectedness

45. The holistic nature of learning suggests a clear need to rethink and restructure highly segmented departmental and program configurations and their associated curricular patterns. Curricula and courses that address topics in an interdisciplinary fashion are more likely to provide effective educational experiences than are discrete courses accumulated over a student’s college career in order to produce enough credits for a degree. Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005, p.647

46. Curriculum design (continued) • FYE: early start on academic study • Formative assessment • Curricular interconnectedness • The problem of learning outcomes • Risk-taking in study, or playing safe? • The valuing of collaborative learning • Employability

47. Pedagogy for student engagement • ‘Active learning’ • Generating a ‘buzz’ • Social engagement

48. With striking consistency, studies show that innovative, active, collaborative, and constructivist instructional approaches shape learning more powerfully, in some forms by substantial margins, than do conventional lecture-discussion and text-based approaches. Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005, p.646

49. Pedagogy for student engagement (ctd) • ‘Active learning’ • Generating a ‘buzz’ • Social engagement • Student networking • Formative assessment (again) • Supporting development of personal attributes • and qualities • Staff-student interaction

50. Student part-time employment • Blurring of FT and PT study: implications for • - curriculum design • - funding • - performance indicators • Exploiting part-time employment: • - drawing on student experiences • - awarding credit • - being bolder?