HERE Project

Nottingham Trent University

University of Bradford

Bournemouth University

Session outcomes

• Introduce 2 research strands

• Share findings from first year of study

• Play Family Fortunes (badly)

• Provide opportunity to spend some time looking at review/ audit tool

Background & Strand 1 Research

Background

• HERE Project set up as part of What Works? Programme

• Collaborative project– NTU– Bournemouth – Bradford

• Based on first principles– What do we know makes a difference?– Didn’t start by seeking to prove a particular piece of work?– Although strong interests in

• Transition

• Induction

HERE Project

•Two strands– Student doubters (first years)

– Higher number of students have doubts than leave– Some research into difference between doubters and leavers (Mackie,

2001 & Roberts 2003)– Survey conducted at each partner NTU, Bournemouth & Bradford – (873 respondents)– Actual withdrawals analysed in December 2009

– Programmes with better than peer rates of retention– Based on the observations of significant differences in rates of

retention between ostensibly similar programmes

Student Transition Survey (March – May 2009)

NTU UoB

Sample Size 656 128

% doubters 37% 27%

% male doubters 31% 27.5%

% female doubters 41% 28.2%

Age Slight rise as students age

Slight rise as students age

Disability 50% 46.7%

Part time 43% 50%

Differences between Doubters & Non-Doubters

• Tested against 17 statements

• For example– “I’m confident that I can cope with my studies’

• Asked students to report on importance and experience

• In most areas there was a gap between importance & experience– Importance being higher

• Largest gaps (all students)– Finance, quality of feedback and course organisation

• But in some, the experience was actually better– Social life, supportive students & family

• Universally doubters rated the experience more lowly

Who are the students who withdrew?

• NTU

• 16 students from 370 withdrew (4% of respondents)

• Gender – 8 female (3% of respondents)– 8 male (6% of respondents)

• Age– 11 were aged 18 – 21

• Disability– 1 student withdrew from 24 (4% of respondents)

• Mode of Study– 5 part time students withdrew (50% of respondents)

Impact of Doubting

•16 withdrawals from 370 students

– 12 were doubters (8.8% withdrawal rate)– 4 were non-doubters (1.7% withdrawal rate)– Non-doubters 5 times more likely to persist

Family Fortunes

Family Fortunes

• Really Simple

• Two teams

• With bells

• Start with head-to-head

• Then get the chance to collect all the points and stuff

A THING THAT FLIES…

MAIN REASONS WHY STUDENTS DOUBT

MAIN REASONS CITED BY DOUBTERS FOR STAYING

What made students doubt?Reasons Why Students Considered Leaving (NTU)

HERE Project (March - May 2009)(263 responses from 219 individual respondents)

112

38

28 2622

137 7 7

3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Course-related issues

Student lifestyle (accommodation & students)

Finance

Personal incidents/ problems

Personal /Emotional

Homesick/ Missing family

Other

Doubts about future goals

Lack of support

location

Reasons why Student Doubters stay at University

HERE Project March - May 2009 NTU data 198 responses from 171 first year respondents

55

3428 27

24

14

7 63

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

The Review/ Audit Tool

Producing the Review Tool

Findings Strand One

Research Method Strand Two

Review Tool

Quantitative analysis• Survey

Qualitative analysis • Survey• Focus group

Devise interview questions based upon findings of Strand One to explore retention in programmes

Use findings from programme research to develop the audit tool

19

First data set: different reasons given for leaving than staying

Second data set: doubters more likely to leave than non-doubters

Review tool structured around

• reducing leaving

• increasing staying

Using data from larger data set (doubting/non-doubting)

Findings Strand One

20

Focus groupsFocus groups May 2009 (NTU)

4 focus groups (1 hour workshops, 13 students in total)

– Control group of non-doubters– Selection of doubters– STEM subject doubters– Mature student doubters

Limitations– All students that we spoke to were female.– Of the doubters we spoke to, four students were mature students, one

student was a mature international student, one student was an international student and one student was a home student with English as a second language.

– This is not representational of the profile of the total respondents.

Focus group findings

Spectrum of reasons to stay

• From positive decision to ‘no choice’

Key differences between non doubters and doubters

• Relationship with staff

• Belonging“I don’t seem very involved with the University to be honest… probably if I see my

tutor on the road, he wouldn’t recognise me”.

Quantitative analysis of survey data

Pargetter et al (1998)

Used analysis of quantitative survey and focus groups to develop four scales that influence transition

Limitations of our method

•Not a representative sample

•Fairly small sample

12th October 2009 23

Current Course Experiences: Doubters vs. non-doubters

% is the number of students who agreed or strongly agreed with each statement

33%

34%

40%

44%

43%

49%

48%

46%

39%

54%

53%

58%

61%

78%

76%

73%

77%

55%

58%

55%

64%

68%

65%

66%

67%

78%

74%

75%

77%

81%

84%

88%

92%

91%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

I'll have enough money to finish my course

I feel valued by teaching staff

I know where to go if I have a problem

Feedback on my work is useful

My taught sessions are interesting

I like where I am living

My course is well organised

Assessment on my course is what I expected

I'm confident that I can cope with my studies

Lecturers are accessible

I have enthusiastic lecturers

My fellow students are supportive

I have an enjoyable social life

I have easy acess to University resources

My family is supportive

My subject is interesting

Completing my degree will help me achieve future goals

Non-doubters

Doubters

Base = 656 (doubters = 243, non-doubters = 413)

Reducing leaving Increasing staying

COURSE RELATED SUPPORT FROM FRIENDS & PEERS

RELATIONSHIP/COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF ADAPTING TO UNIVERSITY

ADAPTING TO THE COURSE

LIFE OUTSIDE OF STUDY DETERMINATION AND INTERNAL FACTORS

STUDENTS MORE LIKELY TO DOUBT FUTURE GOALS

Research Method Strand Two

Research interview format will form the basis of review tool

Programme research will explore these areas in programmes– What can we learn from programmes?– Is what has been identified by students as helping them to stay actually what

helps them to stay? (can we find this out?)– Gather activities, examples and practices to share

Results from programme research will be used to further develop the review tool

Review Tool

Activity

• Please work in small groups/ pairs and take a look at the review tool

• We’d be grateful on any thoughts about the design/ structure of the tool

• What examples do you have of good practice in the areas identified in the audit tool?– Where does this chime with your experiences?

Thanks very much for your time

Any Questions?

References

PARGETTER, R., McINNIS, C., JAMES, R., EVANS, M., PEEL, M., DOBSON, I., 1998. Transition from Secondary to Tertiary: A Performance Study [online]. Available at: http://www.dest.gov.au/archive/highered/eippubs/eip98-20/contents.htm [Accessed 1 March 2010].