Upload
cilassslideshare
View
3.013
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The University of Sheffield has considered strategically the induction process undertaken by departments during Intro Week in order to facilitate the transition to university for new students. The approaches from three departments Human Communication Sciences, Automatic Control and Systems Engineering, Mechanical Engineering will be showcased in the symposium. Two main aims were: (i) welcome students into the department and discipline, (ii) begin the education of students into a new way of learning, specifically independent learning. Topics included: How was intro week organised to meet the aims? Which aspects of good practise might be usefully summarised for other departments?
Citation preview
Intro Week Induction and Inquiry-based Learning:
Varying Approaches
L Gray, A Rossiter, J Rowson, M Freeman, M Morley
UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
Background Influences on initial plans:
Frameworks for learning Entwistle et al. 2002
First Year Experience Lim, 2005; Yorke & Langden, 2006;Harvey, 2006
Enabling students to cope with complexityGamache, 2002;Keenan, 2005
The changing concept of induction
Edward, 2003; Laing et al, 2005;Wingate, 2007
Our ‘local’ experienceStudent feedback
– ‘too much information’– ‘lost in a crowd’– ‘Need to find my way
around’
Framework for learning Entwistle et al. (2002)
The First Year Experience
Lost, lonely, confused
Don’t know what to expect of university life
Unsure of standards expected
Don’t understand lectures, language, terminology
Want to learn and develop new skills but don’t know how…
Financial realities: student loans, part time work
Transition difficulties
From families with no previous HE experience
Independence and responsibility can be frightening
Expect more support and guidance
Information overload
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/events/media/Helena_Lim_Presentation.ppt#259,3,Research Findings
‘Traditional’ Induction
• Information delivered ‘intensively’ & out of context – Information overload– ‘boring’ (Edward, 2003)
• Induction did not meet student needs– did not understand course expectations – felt unprepared for learning– students seek support from each other– many did not approach personal tutors– felt lonely/isolated and considered leaving
• Positive experiences of induction impacted on retention– Edward (2003); Lim (2005); Yorke & Langdon ( 2006)
Organisational cogs for first year engagement (Duff, A. et al., 2007*)
* Cited by Johnson, H et al. (2007) Cutting the cloth to fit new needs and communication preferences. Journal of Academic Language and Learning,
HCS -CILASS IBL (2006) project planned to:
• facilitate social interaction and orientation– supported by current students (’guides’)– based on treasure hunt theme (Edward, 2003)– ‘wind round’ course meetings & SU activity
(To emphasise work life balance)
• encourage discussions about learning, from the start & provide experience of IBL
• Include intro to resources (Libraries, IT, WebCT, etc)
What HCS did, 2006 & 2007
2006 TASK•Video clips as trigger, •Explore aspects of Male/Female communication behaviour
Feedback: ‘Task= bit naff’/‘too subject specific/ not inclusive’
2007 TASK•Use PC software to measure voice•Compare with normative data•Display as poster, compare with peers
ORGANISATION 2006•Student ‘Guides’ paid by the hour!•Organised ‘tours’•Provided induction to ALL resources
ORGANISATION 2007•Students volunteered•Facebook and social activities•Librarians and IT techs bookable
ONGOING INDUCTION, 2006•Personal tutors…PDP etc
ONGOING INDUCTION, 2007•Scheduled sessions, Semester 1 and some, in Semester 2
HCS Student Feedback• There was always the worry of ‘information overload!’ • However the gentle pace and support of current students meant that we
were eased into the course, able to absorb the information, and all this without any stress or worry!
• All of the students agreed that having second year students act as ‘guides’ was a very useful aspect of induction week.– It allowed us to experience campus tours from a fellow student’s
perspective…as well as ask any burning questions in an informal and relaxed way.
• However, above all this, it gave us comfort knowing that these were people, like us, who had been through this last year and survived!
• Induction week was an extremely positive and informative experience, one which we all wished we had, when starting our undergrad degrees and an experience that we will be happy to share with the new students in 2008.
• http://cilass-student-journal.group.shef.ac.uk/reviews/reviews_issue2_1.html
ACSE: Positive triggers for change
Students: High failure rate in level 1, poor attendance at lectures, labs and tutorials, Students not knowing about/not using resources provided, …
Shared good practice: Several University department initiatives to improve induction disseminated.
Focus on IBL: IBL profile in the UoS raised by CILASS, IBL approach implicit in engineering processes, CILASS funding/support.
What ACSE did before and after
BEFOREHODs welcome1st year tutor talkTalk from libraryTalk on H&S,…Session on VLE. Meet tutor for
tea+biscuitsNO SOCIALISATIONMOSTLY DIDACTIC
AFTERHODs welcomeSession on VLE and
group formationLearning trail in groupsDesign and buildLearning trail solutions
and meet tutors.
LOTS SOCIALISATION and IBL.
Pre-arrival task
Learning Trail: Questions Process
People and places in UoS and in ACSE
Getting involvedPersonal DevelopmentThings to do with
academic work and with rules and regulations
The LibrarySafetyStaff/Student Committee
A group exercise
Prizes
Tues lunch to Friday am
Resources made available:– Staff and students act
as guides/experts– Pointers given on
information location.
Marked pub quiz style
ACSE: Student feedback positive
• Fun• Learning Trail helped students find their way
around (e.g. IC, MUSE, MOLE)• Teamwork helped with building relationships• Robot Project was a good taster for future lab
work • They felt that the intro week activities required
independent, unguided effort• As a result of Intro Week, they felt more
confident about finding resources and learning for themselves
MechEng: Review of Intro Week
• There are too many welcome meetings– One general welcome to engineering– Learning trail - interactive style information getting, could be set
up on • Meet the tutors is important• Compulsory maths test • Students do not know what to expect
– Expectations of the course - contact time/self study/play time life balance.
– Session on how to take notes, read supporting textbooks and generally approach lectures etc.
• Intro week schedule looks very formal, full and complicated to work out what is compulsory and what isn’t
MechEng: Intro Week
2006Pre-entry information packRegistration and intropackMaths test Departmental administration HODs welcomeMeet the tutorIntroduction to the department:
Labs, Notetaking, Engineering skills, Safety, Independent study,
Plagiarism and collusionLearning TrailAll day design problem - design and build task. Within task students meet their tutor
2007Pre-entry information packRegistration and intropackMaths test Departmental administration HODs welcomeMeet the tutorIntroduction to the department:
Labs, Notetaking, Engineering skills, Safety, Independent study,
Plagiarism and collusionLearning TrailAll day design problem - design and build task.
Design and build Task
DetailsAll day design problem in tutor groupsChance to meet tutor informallyStart thinking about solving problems
DriversTo set up the rules of the learning style Start the process of independent learning Fun task that got students talking to each otherMeet the tutor was too formalStart the competition!
MechEng: Reflection and Feedback
• Keep what worked last year (simplicity, learning trail and design task)
• Maths test completely removed• Better integration of 2nd year and MSc students • Improve induction process (again)
‘The group activity was fantastic, a lot of fun and a great way to get to know people’
References• Edward, N (2003) “First impressions last: an innovative approach to
induction”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 226-41
• Entwistle, N., McCune, V. & Hounsell, J. (2002) Approaches to Studying and Perceptions of University Teaching-Learning Environments: Concepts, Measures and Preliminary Findings.
http://www.tlrparchive.org/cgibin/search_oai_all.pl?pn=11&no_menu=1&short_menu=1
• Johnson, H et al. (2007) Cutting the cloth to fit new needs and communication preferences. Journal of Academic Language and Learning (available via Google)
• Lim. H (2005) Innovations in the First Year Experience @ SSUInnovations in the First Year Experience @ SSUhttp://www.heacademy.ac.uk/events/media/Helena_Lim_Presentation.ppt#
• Yorke, M., Longdon, B (2007) The first-year experience in higher education in the UK. HEA Report
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/FYE/web0573_the_first_year_experience.pdf