Closing the gap: Closing the gap: an exploration of first-year students’ an exploration of first-year students’

expectations & experiences of learningexpectations & experiences of learning

PLAT 2010, Edinburgh Napier University

Morag Williamson, Phyllis Laybourn, Janis Greig & Hilary Tait

School of Health, Life & Social SciencesSchool of Health, Life & Social Sciences

Research funded by the Edinburgh Napier University Teaching Fellows’ Research Fund.

OverviewOverview• An in-School qualitative investigation of the 2007-08 first-year

cohort of Psychology students identified factors influencing withdrawal in a small sample of non-continuing students

• In the current study the emphasis has shifted onto successful progression to Trimester 2, by adopting an action research approach to explore first-year students’ expectations and experiences of Trimester 1:

o amongst a larger sample, comprising the majority of students in the cohorts of interest

o using data in the form of written reflections

• Data are interpreted within the theoretical framework of the ‘psychological contract’

• Findings are informing the design of an intervention for the 2010-11 cohort

ContextContext

• First-year student success and retention are key elements of University strategy, informed by first-year experience (FYE) literature

• “Good learning” “success” “retention” (Yorke & Longden, 2008) “Students who learn are students who stay” (Tinto, 2006)

• Strong focus on enabling academic transitions

• Staff observe:

- wide variation in student attitudes & behaviours in relation to study and learning

- rapid development of group norms during Tri 1

• Importance of social integration for student learning

• Staff expectations may be implicit rather than explicit to students

• Analysis of student trajectories

FYE: Deal or No Deal? FYE: Deal or No Deal? the recurrent theme of a ‘mis-match’the recurrent theme of a ‘mis-match’

• the ‘mis-match’ of interest in the current research is the gap between staff and student expectations of university

• the better the match, the better the outcomes for the student

• the notion of a ‘deal’ appears to have currency amongst students (e.g.Smith, 2008)

• a mis-match occurs if the ‘deal’ struck between institution and students is perceived differently by the two parties

• psychological contract theory embodies this notion of the ‘deal’; it is used as the theoretical framework for interpretation of the data in the current research

The Psychological ContractThe Psychological Contract

• Rousseau (1995): “... an exchange between individuals and their organisation...”

• a form of social exchange theory• two versions of the concept: unilateral and bilateral• research mainly in the employment / organisational context,

but...• ...“psychological contract theory is not limited in scope to this

specific exchange relationship” (Rousseau, 1995) • limited application in educational contexts (Charlton et al,

2006)

Psychological contract as an over-arching Psychological contract as an over-arching theoretical framework theoretical framework

Range of relevant psychological theories can apply to FYE, including:•Individual differences

•Intrapersonal processes

•Developmental processes

•Social-psychological explanations

Such processes can influence students’ perception of the ‘deal’, and are thus compatible with psychological contract theory.

Research aimsResearch aims

• Gain in-depth qualitative accounts of first-year students’ expectations and experiences of their first Trimester

• Interpret their experiences within the framework of psychological contract theory

• Provide a basis for devising a schedule of extended induction and on-course support to address specific issues at strategic points during the first Trimester

MethodMethod

• Two related semi-structured questionnaires were used to obtain written reflections of first-year students from the three degree programmes taking psychology at Edinburgh Napier.

• Trimester 1 Questionnaire was administered in Week 1 of Trimester 1 and elicited ‘expectations’ of new entrants in the 2009-10 academic year

• Trimester 2 Questionnaire was administered in Week 1 of Trimester 2 and elicited Trimester 1‘experiences’; this was used with both the 2008-09 and 2009-10 cohorts

• Data were collected from first-year students at three points in time:

1 2 3Tri 2 Questionnaire

2008-09Tri 1 Questionnaire

2009-10Tri 2 Questionnaire

2009-10

(n = 86) (n = 62) (n = 43)

Method Method (continued)(continued)

• The students’ reflections were obtained in a small group context as part of the normal Week 1 induction activities

• The Tri 1 Questionnaire asked students to consider what they expected to learn, what they might find challenging and how they might meet such challenges

• The Tri 2 Questionnaire mirrored the first one, asking what had been learned, what the main challenges had been and how they had met these challenges; it also asked them what advice they would give to new first-years

• No data were available for Tri 1 of the 2008-09 cohort; it was the richness of the Tri 2 data from that cohort that led to more systematic collection of reflections from the new cohort in Tri 1 2009-10

Analysis Analysis

• Tri 1 data set 2009-10

• Contrast with the rich data from Tri 2 of 2008-09 and Tri 2 of 2009-10 – these data sets were the focus of analysis

• Search across the data for repeated patterns

• Analysis procedure: thematic analysis (see Braun and Clarke [2006] )

Themes derived from the Tri 2 dataThemes derived from the Tri 2 data• wide range of experiences and concerns• experiences arising from changed learning environment, changed

nature of demands • expectation of independent learning, but worries about motivation and

help-seeking • writing and speaking - students for whom English is not their first

language• preoccupation with time management – by far the most dominant

theme• range of specific academic skills featured strongly - some comments

showing metacognitive awareness

A thematic map was constructed to organise main themes, sub-themes and sub-sub-themes.

Rationale for interventionRationale for interventionAn intervention is in preparation, to address issues arising in the data and promote development of effective psychological contracts.

First-year students will be supported in:•establishing appropriate expectations from the outset

•improving self-/time-management

•developing a more metacognitive approach to their learning

•developing appropriate perceptions of autonomy v. help-seeking

The planned intervention will: •make implicit expectations explicit

•be longitudinal

•facilitate expression of “the student voice”

Planned Planned ‘REAL’ ‘REAL’ intervention:intervention:

Planned Planned ‘REAL’ ‘REAL’ programme of activities, for first-year programme of activities, for first-year social sciences students, Trimester 1, 2010-11social sciences students, Trimester 1, 2010-11

Year 1, Trimester 1

Intervention times Time-specific aims Week 1 Focus on psychological contract & metacognition

- Transition to H.E.- Social Engagement- Staff/student expectations

Week 3 - 4Focus on time structuring & metacognition

- Learning to learn- Review patterns of study so far - Effective planning

Week 6 - 7Focus on reflection on performance /metacognition

- Review experience of first assignment- Link personal actions and quality of learning

Further researchFurther research

• Evaluation of the ‘REAL’ intervention

• Social identity / self-categorisation / group membership processes in transition

• Prospective study of student trajectories from 2010-11 first-year cohort throughout their programme

ReferencesReferences

• Baxter Magolda, M. (2004). Evolution of a constructivist conceptualization of epistemological reflection. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 31-42.

• Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101

• Charlton, J.P., Barrow, C. and Hornby-Atkinson, P. (2006). Attempting to predict withdrawal from higher education using demographic, psychological and educational measures. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 11, 31-47.

• Clegg, S. and Bufton, S. (2008) Student support through personal development planning: retrospection and time. Research Papers in Education, 23:4, 435-450.

• Rousseau, D. (1995) Psychological Contracts in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage

• Smith, I. (2008) Empowering the learner through enhanced engagement at Napier University. In QAA Quality Enhancement Themes: personalisation of the first year, pp.47-52

• Tinto, V. (2006) Taking student retention seriously. York: Higher Education Academy Resources.

• Yorke, M. and Longden, B. (2008). The first-year experience of higher education in the UK: Final Report. York: Higher Education Academy Resources

Contacts:

Phyllis Laybourn – p.laybourn@napier.ac.uk

Morag Williamson – m.williamson@napier.ac.uk