Engaging students who are at risk of academic failure: Frameworks and Strategies Professor Keithia...

Keithia Wilson FYHE Conference - June 2012

Engaging students who are at risk of academic failure:

Frameworks and Strategies

Professor Keithia WilsonGRIFFITH UNIVERSITY

ALTC National Fellow for the FYE (2010-2012)2007 ALTC Australian University Teacher of the Year

Acknowledgment to Country

In the Spirit of ReconciliationFollowing on from Sorry Day

I would like to acknowledge & honour the Traditional Custodians of the land we are meeting on today, Turrbal and the Jagera

People, and pay respect to their Elders past, present & emerging

And acknowledge the contribution of our First Nation People to Higher Education & Learning



Overview What is our focus?

1. A Decision-Making Framework Understanding the markers or predictors of commencing student

potential difficulty in academic adjustment, engagement or success.

2. A Strategic Intervention Framework Understanding how to design an effective strategy for proportionally

supporting the success of a diverse student population.

3. A Practice Framework Understanding the culture and capabilities for optimally engaging

a diverse student population.



1. A Decision-Making Framework Understanding the markers or predictors of

commencing student potential difficulty in academic adjustment, engagement or success.


Understanding the complex nature of student risk

Risk is not an inherent quality of individual students, as in the term “at-risk student”

Risk is a function of the interaction between a student and their university

Honesty in ConceptionA fuller understanding of “student risk” requires us to

consider how the design and conduct of our learning environments and assessment practices may inadvertently increase students’ risk of non-engagement or academic failure


An educational system designed to support success?


Student beliefs or behaviours designed to support success?


Multiple Sources of student risk

Students misjudge or

assume expectations & requirements

(Inform, educate & contract with

students)

)





(Inform, educate &

contract with students)

Staff misjudge or assume student capabilities

(design transition supportive courses &

programs)





(Inform, educate &

contract with students)

Staff misjudge or assume student capabilities

(design transition supportive courses &

programs)

Students experience personal or

systems blocks to help-seeking

(Scaffold student help &

outreach)


Risk across the lifecycleNot all risks are created equal!


Risk and Success across the lifecycleNot all factors are created equal!

DistalWhat students

bring with them

Proximal



DistalWhat students

bring with them

Proximal

ProximalWhat

students actually do



Where you come from

Proximal What you do Where you end up!



DistalWhat students

bring with them

Proximal


Distal or Pre-entry FactorsWhat do our students bring to university?

Our students’ backgrounds and life circumstances:

Have relevance to the extent that they name or resonate with predictive validity for

performance at universityOtherwise their use is an exercise in student

labelling


What resources and capital do our students bring to university?

Motivational

Capital

Personal Acade

mic

Capital

Family Acade

mic

Capital

Social Capital

Life Experience Capital

Time

and

Energy Capital

Financial Capital


Identifying Distal FactorsCharacteristics: Who am I?Age, gender, cultural identity History: Where have I come from?Family academic capital, social capital, prior educational experiences and

achievement, life experience capital (personal & cultural resources)Context: What are my circumstances?Socio-economic standing, social capital (family support, support networks), time &

energy capital (family roles & responsibilities), financial capital (economic circumstances)

Expectations: What are my beliefs?Family academic capital (grasp of uni expectations), motivational capital (aspirations,

preferences) personal academic capital (academic efficacy & belief in success)Capabilities: What are my knowledge, skills & attitudes?Academic skills & Academic capital

Understanding Student DiversityTraditional Students (TS)• medium-high SES• second generation• higher entry levels• full time• on-campus

elite model of HE

Non-Traditional Students (NTS)• low SES• first-in-family • lower entry levels• full-time & working• on-campus less• Indigenous • International• NESB (including refugees)• disability• home care responsibilities• from rural & remote settings mass model of HE



Effects of Distal/Pre-entry FactorsDifferent strokes for different folks

Distal factors have different impacts on students’:Aspirations and motivationSense of inclusion and belongingEarly engagement with studyPerformance on particular tasksPersistence with studyThus, each of these dimensions may be influenced

or moderated by different distal factors


Effects of Distal/Pre-entry FactorsDifferent strokes for different folks

Moderate academic performance: In the domains of assumed knowledge early in the

lifecycle (Academic Skills & Academic Capital) In the development/negotiation of new identities

(university student, professional) At points of stress or high performance expectations,

especially with assessment tasks (e.g., efficacy beliefs, social support, available buffers, resources)

In the development of higher order meta-cognitive /self-regulatory capabilities (critical thinking, independent learning)


What do we know about the effects of Distal Factors on early student achievement?

Lizzio & Wilson (2010) study at Griffith:2006 cohort (n = 2,587) of commencing

students tracked for 3 years (2006-2008)examined the effects of distal & proximal

factors on semester 1 student performance & year 1 retention

Starting@Griffith survey (weeks 6-8) and feedback process

Findings robust for age, gender, discipline & domestic/International student status

What distal factors predict commencing students’ first semester academic outcomes?

Semester 1 academic

achievement

Academic CapitalLow SES

First in FamilyEnglish as a Second Language

Competing DemandsTime in employment

Time as carer

Prior Academic AchievementEntry Level Scores (OPs) Enhances

Reduces

Reduces



What is the influence of Distal Factors across the student lifecycle?

Non-Traditional students with low academic capital – Do less well academically in their first year than Traditional

students (Lizzio & Wilson, 2010) By year 2 they evidence the same pass rates as Traditional

students (Lizzio & Wilson, 2010) They graduate at the same rate as Traditional students

(Bradley et al., 2008) NT students from low SES backgrounds graduate at 97%

compared to TS (Bradley et al., 2008) With high levels of support, NT students out-perform their

medium & high SES peers (Monash, UWA, UniSA)



DistalWhat students

bring with them

Proximal

ProximalWhat

students actually do


Identifying Proximal FactorsWhat is happening for our students now?

Proximal factors things that students do & feel in the university

context which predict academic success, & retention

and are amenable to influence & development

Understanding Student Transition: The ‘Five-Senses’ of Student Success

(Lizzio, 2006)

Sense ofStudentIdentity

Sense of Connectedness

Sense of Capability

Sense of Purpose

Sense of Resourcefulness

Keithia Wilson GU - May 2012

What do we know from research about proximal predictors of success in first year?

Students are more likely to succeed at university if they:

Sense of Capability Invest time on task time spent studying each week is the strongest predictor Regularly attend lectures & tutorials increased learning opportunities also a strong predictor Have some sense of academic self-confidence predicts success (self-efficacy & an

expectation of success (hope) are foundational to success for Non-Traditional students)

Sense of Connection Develop a social network at uni knowing one student & staff name is a protective factor

against dropping out

Sense of Purpose Have a clear goal or purpose for attending uni (sense of vocational direction & degree

alignment especially) a strong predictor of academic success & retention into year 2

Sense of Resourcefulness Engage with the online environment moderates success at university Balance work-life-study commitments (working on average not more than 15 hours a week in

paid employment) making appropriate time for study predicts success


What do we know from research about proximal risk factors in first year?

Students are more likely to drop-out and/or fail if they:

Sense of Capability Don’t study & invest time on task Don’t regularly attend lectures & tutorials (with the exception of a small group of young, very

intellectually bright males) Don’t believe that they can be successful (hope)

Sense of Connection Don’t develop a (small) social network at university

Sense of Purpose Don’t have a sense of purpose (esp vocational purpose) in their degree

Sense of Resourcefulness Don’t have access to or engage with the online environment Do work more than 25 hours per week while studying full time



Relative importance of distal & proximal factors to student engagement & success

Research findings indicate consistently that:

• Proximal factors (viz. what students do at university) are more controllable, empowering & predictive of student success than are distal factors (viz. what students bring to university)

What distal & proximal factors predict commencing students’ first semester academic outcomes?

Semester 1 academic

achievement

Academic CapitalLow SES

First in FamilyESL

Competing DemandsTime in employment

Time as carer

Prior Academic AchievementEntry Level Scores to HEd

Task Engagement @ UniAttendance at Orientation

Time on task/studyStrongly Enhances

Enhances

Reduces

Reduces


What distal & proximal factors predict commencing students’ retention into Year 2?

Semester 1 GPA

Academic Capital -

Competing Demands -

Prior Academic Achievement +

Task Engagement @ Uni +

Sense of Purpose + + +

Student Satisfaction +

StudentRetention



Greater importance of proximal factors to student engagement & success

Research findings indicate consistently over the last 9 years that –

• Low SES students graduate at 97% the success rates of their medium to high SES peers (Bradley et al, 2008:30)

• Provided they receive appropriate types of support at university (financial assistance & greater academic support, mentoring & counselling services) (Transforming Australia’s Higher Education System, Commonwealth of Australia, 2009:14)


Risk across the lifecycleNot all factors are created equal!

DistalFactors

Can influence, but can also be

managed

Proximal

Factors


Implications for effective interventionWhat might this mean?


Implications for effective interventionWhat might this mean?

Strategy should emphasise factors which are within both our own and our student’s

control & are thus optimally amenable to development & influence


Posting ‘warning signs’ is not enough to effectively help students


False independenceThe ‘you have been told’ approach


Zone of Optimal Influence and Investment

Factors which

students can

control

Factors which we can control


A quick break to gather our thoughts and chat



1. A Decision-Making Framework Understanding the markers or predictors of commencing

student potential difficulty in academic adjustment, engagement or success.

2. A Strategic Intervention Framework Understanding how to design an effective strategy for

proportionally supporting the success of a diverse student population.


Framing our strategy

• The meta-goal of early university education is purposefully “scaffolding students’ capacity for independence & self-regulation”

• Help-rich learning environments do not necessarily “create dependence” & high levels of student help-seeking may equally indicate badly designed curriculum & assessment as much as limitations in student ability or motivation

• Our strategy for supporting at-risk students is therefore necessarily multi-layered

Levels of Prevention & Intervention with student risk

(Adapted from Caplan, 1964)

Targeted/Selective Primary PreventionWhat do we do for specific groups of students?

General/ Primary PreventionWhat do we do for all students?



Prevention is better than cure!


General/Primary PreventionWhat do we do for all students?

Strategies which are designed to benefit all of our students, and are thus foundational and universal

and function to reduce the types of risk that result from a mismatch or misappraisal of study demands and student resources.


General/Primary Prevention Strategies

Examples include curricular & co-curricular strategies

Universal curriculum designScaffolding self-helpProgrammed helpPeer helpStaff developmental help



1. Universal Curriculum Design The design of FY courses & related assessment practices to enable successful transition to university study

Well judged, well-paced, well aligned curriculum Making assumed entry level knowledge explicit Programs & courses that strengthen students’ sense of purpose &

build sense of connection Design of early, formative, low stakes assessment tasks to build skill

& confidence Active scaffolding of student engagement with assessment tasks &

provision of resources Developing program level mechanisms for increasing consistency

between first year courses



2. Scaffolding Self-Help Supporting students to self-manage in the early stages of their academic life to develop the meta-goal of self-regulation

Providing timely information about forthcoming choices and decisions (e.g., key dates).

Providing ‘attention getting’ cues and prompts for timely completion of tasks (e.g., Have you done....? By now you should have....if you haven’t we encourage you to.....)

Offering task/time relevant or appropriate help (e.g., If you would like to talk to someone about........then....)

Legitimating and normalising concerns and giving permission to seek help (e.g., It’s common around this time for students to be feeling......)

Building self-efficacy by offering assurance, encouragement and hope



3. Programmed Help Providing students with scheduled opportunities to access support and information. These types of generic activities can range from –

Strategic welcome, orientation & induction process, involving realistic “job appraisal” for the student role

preparatory workshops (academic skills) common time processes with just-in-time interventions

(lifecycle orientation & transition across the first semester), academic advising These may be offered ‘centrally and generically’ and/or ‘locally

and specifically’. Just-in-time activities are generally more widely used and therefore more effective.



4. Peer Help Peers represent an underutilized capacity in our schools and programs. Senior students are particularly credible and accessible translators of ‘the university experience’ to commencing students. Peer processes can be –

formal (e.g., using peer mentors, and/or peer tutors as per the PASS model)

informal (e.g., establishing learning groups), or incidental (e.g., providing opportunities for discussion in class)

or community-based (e.g., discussion boards). The focus can be academic (e.g., PASS) and/or social (e.g., peer mentoring) integration.



5. Staff Developmental Help Encouraging, predictable and systematic arrangements for staff-student contact are a key aspect of a universal success enabling and problem prevention strategy. Staff help can take many locally appropriate forms:

responsive (e.g., consultation sessions), community-based (e.g., moderated discussion boards), systematic (e.g., feedback summaries to whole class), opportunistic (e.g., chatting to students) or just-in-time (e.g., linked to major assessment tasks). The availability of staff is a key protective factor against

student withdrawal in the face of difficulty.


General/Primary PreventionWhat is the role of assessment in student success?


Assessing the explicit and hidden curriculum


How do our commencing students understand their early assessment? (Wilson & Lizzio, 2012)

Assessment ManageabilityHow accessible and clearly

explained are our assessment tasks?


How do our commencing students understand their early assessment?



Assessment MotivationHow engaging are our

assessment tasks?






assessment tasks?

Assessment PurposesWhat are the useful

purposes of our assessment tasks?






assessment tasks?



Assessment EfficacyHow well do I feel that

I can successfully manage our

assessment tasks?






assessment tasks?



Assessment LearningHow effective are our assessment tasks in helping me learn?

Assessment EfficacyHow well do I feel that

I can successfully manage our

assessment tasks?


What do our commencing students say about their early assessment?

Assessment Manageability

Agree 60%

Assessment Motivation

Agree 67%

Assessment Useful Purposes

Agree 67%

Assessment Learning

Agree 75%

Assessment Efficacy

Agree 65%


What do our commencing students say about the useful purposes of assessment?

Academic CapabilityDevelop my academic

skills

Academic ConfidenceDevelop my academic

confidence

Student RoleBetter understand uni

expectations

Developmental FeedbackGive me early feedback about

how I’m going

Scaffolding Self ManagementHelp me study regularly and

keep up to date

Peer Learning NetworksHelp me to work with other

students

Discipline SocialisationHelp me to appreciate my

chosen field


What do our commencing students say about the useful purposes of assessment?

Academic Capability

Agree 76%Academic Confidence

Agree 57%Student Role

Agree 78%

Developmental Feedback

Agree 46%Scaffolding Self Management

Agree 62%

Peer Learning Networks

Agree 63%Discipline Socialisation

Agree 50%


Take-Away MessageA rising tide lifts all boats equally

Well-designed and well-managed assessment is a ‘high-return’ primary prevention strategy

for all of our students.

It dramatically reduces the need for co-curricular support interventions.


Another quick ‘think and chat’


Targeted/Selective Primary Prevention Strategies

Targeted primary prevention strategies are population-specific, targeting students identified from university databases using distal factors (e.g., first-in-family, low SES, slow degree preference ranks, high achievers, Indigenous, international students)

Intended not a substitute for, but as a complement, to universal strategies

Griffith students at risk of discontinuation 1/2012 on Distal risk markers

(Low entry scores x Low degree preference x LOTE x Low SES)

HealthFoundationProgram(5 Schools)

Bachelor of Nursing

Bachelor of Business

School of Humanities

BachelorUrban & Env’mental Planning

CohortSize

856 703 550 468 127

High risk studentnumbers

3% (28/856)

6% (40/703)

12% (68/550)

19%(91/468)

24% (31/127)



Targeted/Selective Primary Prevention Strategies

Targeted primary prevention strategies Can be relatively informal (e.g., a welcome phone call to

Indigenous & country students, early introductions to tutors), or

More structured (e.g., dedicated workshops or ongoing contact/support)

Include online ‘just-in-time and just-for-me’ support programs which provide messages (information, invitation or outreach) specifically tailored to the likely needs and experiences of particular groups of students who may be potentially at-risk


Secondary Prevention

Secondary Prevention strategies aim to create a safety net for students experiencing difficulties to support their academic recovery utilising proximal data

Commencing students face a number of predictable lifecycle tasks and milestones in their first-semester at university which provide us with timely information on students’ early academic engagement and performance, and can thus function as useful early-alert or early-warning ‘risk markers’.

Students who trigger these predetermined indicators (e.g., non-attendance, failure of early assessment) may have an increased level of risk of subsequent academic failure.


Secondary Prevention

Based on the premise that ‘early engagement is a good predictor of later success’ and

the corollary ‘early non-engagement is a good predictor of risk of failure’,

....it is proposed that universities ‘front-load’ monitoring and outreach to emphasise the first semester of commencement.


Griffith Risk Markers across first semester lifecycle

W 1 •Readiness: Attendance at orientation or incompletion of online orientation

W2-3 •Early engagement: Online engagement & Small class attendance

W 2-4 •Early performance: Submission of first or early assessment

W5-7 •Early outcomes: Passing of first or early assessment

S/B •Cumulative outcomes: Passing of first-semester first year courses

Operation Student Success Trial: Early Patterns for 1/2012

RiskMarker

School of Nursing – Bachelor of Nursing

HealthFoundationProgram

School of Humanities

BachelorUrban & Env’mental Planning

Bachelor of Business

CohortSize

703 856 468 127 550

1 O-Day 160 (23%) 130 (15%) 114 (24%) 22 (17%) 82 (15%)

2 On-line access

51 (7%) 200 (22%) 65 (14%) 17 (13%) 62 (11%)

3 ClassAttend

148 (21%) 36 (4%) 110 (24%) 19 (15%) 67 (12%)



Secondary PreventionWhat do we do for identified at-risk studentsUse a series of proximal or just-in-time risk markers to identify under-

engaged or under-performing students & provide focused outreach Early contact to welcome incoming students who missed Orientation &

provision of resources Early contact to encourage on-line access & class attendance Opportunities for late submission of first assessment tasks Limited opportunities to re-submit first semester assessment tasks to

achieve a passing grade Advising for academic recovery Diagnostic testing & follow-up supplemental instruction Normalising contacting of students as an expected part of supporting

student success

First-Assessment First-Feedback Academic Recovery Intervention

Key Idea: Efficacy building for students who ‘fail’ or ‘marginal pass’ first

assessment in a core/threshold course (Wilson & Lizzio, 2008; Lizzio & Wilson, in press)

Key Aspects: • Students complete a self-directed workbook• Individual structured session with tutor leading to an action

plan• Follow-up phone or email contact• 40% uptake• Participation results in a 10% increase in submission rates &

20% increase in pass rates for 2nd assessment item, & 40% increase in passing the course overall

• Trialled at other Australian universities (USC, UWS, JCU, UTAS)Keithia Wilson FYHE Conference - June

2012

First-Assessment First-Feedback Academic Recovery Intervention

At-risk students’ self-reported evaluations of the process were uniformly positive (7-point scale):

Academic related learning (5.7) Personal development (5.0) Insight into reasons for under-performance (5.6) Increased efficacy & optimism (5.6) Process rated as non-aversive (5.3)Tutors reported stronger relationships with students, higher

attendance at tutorials by those students, & greater student engagement



Combination of Targeted/Selective Primary Prevention & Secondary Prevention Strategies

What do we do for specific risk profiles?Use demographic (distal) & early lifecycle risk markers

(proximal) to identify particular groups of students & to provide ongoing targeted support or developmental activities

Outreach to highest at-risk student profiles (e.g., low OP x low preference x LOTE x Low SES)

Distal data Intrusive academic outreach to offer early, pre-semester, study and assessment planning & support

Proximal data Facilitating the academic recovery of those same students (e.g., non-submission/failure on early assessment) throughout the student lifecycle in the first year


Tertiary PreventionWhat do we do for failing students?Providing outreach to commencing students who have failed first

semester courses/units & involves a smaller group of students usually with challenging circumstances –

Contacting students at the end of semester to offer academic recovery planning

Helping students to understand reasons for their failure Helping students to develop appropriate actions ranging from minor

adjustments (time m’gt, study skills), re-positioning of priorities (shift to part-time enrolment), to more fundamental revisions (change of degree)

Contacting first year students on probation to offer academic recovery planning



1. A Decision-Making Framework Understanding the markers or predictors of commencing student potential

difficulty in academic adjustment, engagement or success.

2. A Strategic Intervention Framework Understanding how to design an effective strategy for proportionally

supporting the success of a diverse student population.

3. A Practice Framework Understanding the culture and capabilities for

optimally engaging a diverse student population.


7 Working Principles1. University wide consistency Adopting a consistent set of risk markers (What will we monitor?) across the university & minimum level of response (How will we help?) in all degree programs2. Student Partnership Transparently communicating our at-risk strategy to all of our students so they are informed about the factors within their control that lead to success3. Local relationship focused responses Locally relevant approaches to supporting at-risk students which are consistent with university minimum standards4. Linkage with current technology Monitoring & communication systems which interface with university information systems


7 Working Principles

5. Coordinated Local Responsibility Clarifying and coordinating roles & responsibilities of

key staff in the ‘business of student success’6. Coordination of local & central contributions Coordinating between school/program and central

university services and strategies. 7. Evidence-based effectiveness Continuous monitoring and evaluating both centrally

& within programs, within an agreed evaluation framework


Staff Partnerships

Supporting student success and reducing academic risk necessitates that we develop new and creative partnerships between academic, administrative and professional staff.

Thus, supporting student success may involve shifts in our traditional strategies, skills and roles, and is genuinely everyone’s business.


Staff partnerships...helping students succeed is a team sport!


A final reframe on the importance of help-seeking


A final reframe on the importance of help-seeking

A meta-goal of early university education is purposefully “scaffolding students’ capacity for independence & self-regulation”

Facilitating student independence is not incompatible with providing & encouraging students to seek appropriate assistance

Students who recognise when they need help or assistance to ‘go to the next level’, and who feel empowered to do so, are more likely to succeed and to feel good about themselves

Help-seeking is thus a key element of effective self-regulation & success at university


Thus....our contract with each other....

Engaging students who are at risk of academic failure: Frameworks and Strategies Professor Keithia...

Documents

Transcript of Engaging students who are at risk of academic failure: Frameworks and Strategies Professor Keithia...