Exploring the ‘student experience’

An exploration of student and staff perceptions of factors behind student withdrawal among first year undergraduate

students at a North London University

Deeba Parmar - M00013483March 2012

Research contextDrivers

• Changes in funding structures• Increased competition -KIS• Government directives• Significant amount of withdrawals

Increasingly important for institutions to keep the students they attract (Anagnostopoulou and Parmar 2010)

Research focus

The key research question is:• What are the perceived factors behind student withdrawal among level 4

undergraduate students at a North London university?

The related objectives:• To explore the perceptions held by students of the factors that contributed to

their withdrawal• To understand the perceptions held by staff of the factors that contribute to

student withdrawal (based upon their experiences)• To analyse the similarities and differences between the perceptions of these two

groups of participants• To identify what factors are perceived to aid student progression• To inform institutions in targeting resources in alleviating the barriers perceived by

students and staff that lead to withdrawal

New knowledge: New conceptual model for student withdrawal and persistence based on perceptions of students and staff

Literature• Body of literature

o Citing issues common in withdrawal; course choice, expectations, academic preparedness, academic concerns, administrative and/or organisational concerns, social factors, personal factors, dissatisfaction with the student experience at the institution, financial concerns (Martinez, 1997; Yorke,1999; Mackie ,2001; Thomas,2002; National Audit Office, 2007; Harvey et al 2007)

o Focuses on groups of students, issues of age (McGivney, 1996), social class (Ball et al, 2002), international students (Johnston, 2003)

o Or specific aspect; influence of employment (Henderson, 2007), friendships (Wilcox et al, 2005), culture of the institution (Berger & Braxton, 1998; Thomas, 2002), what the institution can do to aid retention (Fitzgibbon & Prior, 2003; Morgan, 2011)

o Often from perspective of the student alone

• Theory o Tinto’s integration theory (1975; 1987; 1993)o Motivation theory (Bandura ,1977, 1986; Dweck, 2000; Rotter, 1975, 1990)o Bourdieus theory of habitus (1977)

Individual factors

Institutional factors

Academic factors

External factors

Persisting

Withdrawing

Integration

MotivationHabitus

Self efficacy

Methodology and Methods• Interpretavist/Phenomenological approach• Sample

o Groups of staff (senior managers, academics and administrative)

o Level 4 students that had withdrawn during week 0-9• Data collection tools:

o Interviews (8) conducted with staff during September – December 2010

o Questionnaires (30) and interviews (2) with students during collected during December 2010 – January 2011

• Framework for analysis of a 5 step model

Ethical Considerations

• Confidentiality • Insider-

outsider researcher

• Negotiating gate keepers

• Positionality• ‘Whole truth’

• Interpretation and representation of data

• Ethics of ‘care’

Student

Staff

Persistance

Withdrawal

Entering with expectations and experience

Academic Acultrisation

Social

Integration

Mutual respect

Communication

Decision made

Individual-Motivation- Engagement- Friendship groups-Relationships with staff-Confidence

Institutional-Procedural barriers/enablers-Belonging to institution-Support mechanisms-Personalised experience

Academic- Learning barriers/enablers- Issues of understanding- Experience of programme

External- Support networks-Family responsibilities-Employment -Support/understanding-Time commitments

Coping strategies

Choice made in selecting programme/HEI

Original contribution

Parmar’s holistic model of student withdrawal

Student

Staff

HEI Communication

Engagement

Smooth Transition

Parmar’s holistic model of student persistence

Original contribution

Student findings

• Programme/course choice• Motivation for studies• Sense of belonging/‘fitting

in’• Levels of support

experienced/managing student life

• Fragmented student life • Experience of programme• Learning barriers

Staff findings

• Dissatisfaction with their course choice

• Lack of engagement with the university

• Frustration with administrative processes

• Feeling unsupported• Students not managing to

juggles studies and external commitments

• Finding/offered full time employment

Conclusions….

• Institutions need to create a personalised system• Build institutional commitment to student retention demonstrated by

senior leadership within the university and resource commitment - strategy

• Ensure good communication channels• Institutional strategies should be actively promoted in order for staff to

understand the ‘wider picture’ • Encourage collaboration across the university• Ensure the timeliness of user friendly retention and progression data is

circulated and communicated to all staff in order for data to have impact.• Ensure students have access and to pre-entry information, advice and

guidance Developing a sense of belonging to the university accomplished through activities centred on student engagement and social activities.

• Create a smooth transition into university with multiple points of contact between staff and students.

• Develop peer groups or learning communities

Recommendations

Student

Staff

Persistance

Withdrawal

Entering with expectations and experience

Academic Acultrisation

Social

Integration

Mutual respect

Communication

Decision made

Individual-Motivation- Engagement- Friendship groups-Relationships with staff-Confidence

Institutional-Procedural barriers/enablers-Belonging to institution-Support mechanisms-Personalised experience

Academic- Learning barriers/enablers- Issues of understanding- Experience of programme

External- Support networks-Family responsibilities-Employment -Support/understanding-Time commitments

Coping strategies

Choice made in selecting programme/HEI

Parmar’s holistic model of student withdrawal

Finance

ImpactProfessional:

• Pedagogy/critical dialogue with academic community • Attitudinal /culture/pedagogical research • Development of understanding of the relationships between and betwixt

Organisational:• Teaching and learning strategy, progression and achievement strategy • Location of student experience issues mapped over different areas within the

HEI• Deficiencies in communication channels • Culture of competition between Schools/departments

Personal:• Challenge assumptions and values • Reframe my understandings and my own engagements with students• Engage in wider professional and academic community on critical dialogue of

the student experience

References• Anagnostopoulou, K. and Parmar, D. (eds.) (2010). Supporting the First Year Student Experience through the use of Learning

Technologies. Middlesex University, London.• Ball, S. J. (2002). Class Strategies and the Education Market: The middle classes and social advantage. London, Routledge

Falmer.• Bandura, A. (1977). Self Efficacy: Toward a Unifying theory of Behavioural Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.• Berger, J. B., & Braxton, J. M. (1998). Revising Tinto's interactionalist theory of student departure through theory

elaboration: Examining the role of organizational attributes in the persistence process. Research in Higher Education, 39, 103-119.

• Bourdieu P. (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.• Dweck, C (2000). Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development Psychology Press. • Fitzgibbon, K. and Prior, J. (2003) Student expectations and university interventions-a timeline to aid undergraduate student

retention. Paper presented at LTSN BEST Conference.• Giorgi, A. (1997). The Theory, Practice and Evaluation of the Phenomenological Method as a Qualitative Research

Procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 28(2), 235- 261.• Harvey, L., Drew, S and Smith, M. (2007). The first-year experience: A review of literature for the Higher Education Academy.

February 2007. Higher Education Academy.• Henderson, M. (2003). Overview of retention issues. [Online]. Available at:

www.ukadia.ac.uk/.../student.../mo_henderson_retention_lit_review.doc [Last accessed 22nd August 2011].

• Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) (2008/9). PIs: Non-continuation rates. [Online]. Available at: http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2064&Itemid=141 [Last accessed 14th April 2010]

• Johnston, V. (2003). Using Research to Improve Student Retention and Progression: The Experiences of the Student Retention Project at Napier University. Paper presented at the Institutional Research to Widen Participation Symposium.

• Kumar, V., Aaker, D. A. and Day, G. S. (1999) Essentials of market research. USA: John Wiley and Sons.• Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative Research in Education. A User’s Guide.London: Sage Publications.• Mackie, S.E. (2001). Jumping the hurdles-undergraduate student withdrawal behaviour. Innovations in Education and

Teaching International, 38(3), 265-76.• Martinez, P. (1997). Improving student retention: a guide to successful strategies. Further Education Development Agency. • McGivney, V. (1996) Staying or leaving the course: retention and non-completion of mature students in further and higher

education. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education.• Morgan, M. (ed) (2011). Improving the Student Experience. London: Routledge.• Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.• National Audit Office (NAO) (2007). Staying the course: The retention of students in higher education. HC 616 Session 2006-

07. London, Stationary Office.• House of Commons Select Committee on Education and Employment. (2001b). Seventh Special Report. Higher Education:

Student Retention. London, HMSO.

• Rotter, J.B. (1975). Some problems and misconceptions related to the construct of internal versus external control of reinforcement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology ,43, 56–67.

• Rotter, J.B. (1990). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45, 489–93.

• Thomas, L. (2002). Student retention in Higher Education: the role of institutional habitus. Journal of Educational Policy, 17( 4), 423-32.

• Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from Higher education: a theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Education Research, 45,89-125.

• Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, University of Chicago.• Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd edition). Chicago, University of

Chicago Press.• Wilcox, P., Winn, S and Fyvie-Gauld, M. (2005). ‘It was nothing to do with university, it was just the people’: the role of

social support in the first year experience of Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education. 30(6), 707-722.• Yorke, M. (1999). Leaving Early: Undergraduate Non-completion in Higher Education. London, Falmer Press.• Yorke, M. & Longden, B. (2004). Retention and Student Success in Higher Education. SHRE and Open University Press,

Maidenhead.

• All images purchased from iStock.