Supporting student success: strategies for institutional ... · member [email protected] Email...

What Works? Student Retention & Success

Supporting student success:

strategies for institutional change

Ulster University

April 2017

By Roisín Curran, Grainne Dooher, Jason Grogan,

Avril Honan, Ian Montgomery and Aine McKillop

2

TABLE of CONTENTS

1. Description of the institution and its disciplines to provide contextual overview 4

1.1 Members of the core team ........................................................................................... 4

1.2 Participating disciplines, programmes, members of the discipline teams, What works

theme(s) addressed ............................................................................................................................ 5

1.3 Significant internal changes or context to be taken into account when reading this

report 9

1.4 External national context .............................................................................................. 9

2. Impact data ................................................................................................................. 9

2.1 Methodological section to be provided by WW national team. .................................. 9

2.2 Survey and institutional data to be added in by Mantz ................................................ 9

2.3 Commentary by HEIs..................................................................................................... 9

3. Planning for and implementing change ................................................................. 12

3.1 Details about how the teams were selected, interventions selected, how the teams

worked together, support etc. .......................................................................................................... 12

3.2 Team Working and Support provided ........................................................................ 17

3.2.1 Professional Development ................................................................................................. 17

3.2.2 Sharing information ........................................................................................................... 17

3.2.3 Funding support ................................................................................................................. 17

3.3 Case studies of particularly effective working ............................................................ 18

4. Evaluation strategy .................................................................................................. 18

4.1 Details of institutional evaluation approach/strategy ................................................ 18

5. Changes implemented at the institutional level ..................................................... 19

5.1 Strategy Development ................................................................................................ 19

5.2 Staff development, recognition and reward .............................................................. 19

5.3 Curriculum development and building learning communities ................................... 21

5.4 Availability and use of data ......................................................................................... 22

5.5 Student engagement .................................................................................................. 23

6. Impact ....................................................................................................................... 24

6.1 Evidence of impact or significance of institutional level changes and commentary

about impact of and learning about strategic enablers ................................................................... 24

6.2 Case studies of particularly effective working ............................................................ 25

7. Changes implemented at the discipline level and impact ..................................... 26

7.1 Description of interventions themed under four key impacts ................................... 26

7.1.1 Theme 1: Pre-entry contact ............................................................................................... 26

7.1.2 Theme 2: Mainstreaming pastoral care ............................................................................. 27

3

7.1.3 Theme 3: Ways of Thinking and Practising the discipline (WTP)....................................... 28

7.1.4 Theme 4: Peer support ...................................................................................................... 29

7.2 Evidence of Impact at the discipline level .................................................................. 30

7.3 Case Studies of particularly effective working ............................................................ 34

7.4 Commentary about impact and learning about effective practice in the disciplines 35

8. Sustainability ........................................................................................................... 38

8.1 Ways in which the programmes have become more widespread or embedded ...... 38

8.2 Plans and progress towards embedding ..................................................................... 40

8.3 Discussion about future sustainability ........................................................................ 41

9. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 41

9.1 Successes .................................................................................................................... 41

9.2 Challenges ................................................................................................................... 42

9.3 Drawing together impact and learning, and reflection on the process ...................... 42

9.4 Conclusions and implications ...................................................................................... 43

9.5 Recommendations/next steps .................................................................................... 43

Appendix 1. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….45

Table of figures

Figure 1 Student Belonging: in the first cohort entering 2013/14 Page 9

Figure 2 Student Engagement: First cohort entering in 2013/14 Page 10

Figure 3 Self Confidence: First cohort entering in 2013/14 Page 10

Figure 4 Self Confidence: Second cohort entering in 2014/15 Page 11

Figure 5 End of June first sit attrition statistics 4

Figure 6 End of year attrition statistics Page 35

Figure 7 Semester 1 attrition statistics Page 35

4

What Works? Student Retention & Success is a Paul Hamlyn Foundation initiative working

with the Higher Education Academy, Action on Access and 13 UK universities. The second

phase (What Works?2) builds on the first phase of the initiative (What Works?1). What

Works?1 culminated in the report: Building student engagement and belonging in Higher

Education at a time of change (Thomas 2012).

1. Description of the institution and its disciplines to provide contextual

overview Ulster University was established by Royal Charter on 1 October 1984, merging the New University of Ulster and the Ulster Polytechnic. It has four campuses at Belfast, Jordanstown, Coleraine and Magee in Derry~Londonderry. The University is characterised by a strong sense of regional mission and an excellent track record in widening participation, placing it at the forefront of social and economic development in Northern Ireland. Many programmes of study are strongly vocational and involve periods of placement in industry or carry accreditation or recognition by relevant professional, statutory or regulatory bodies (PSRBs). There is a strong focus on providing a transformational learning experience with increased levels of student engagement across all levels of the institution. Similarly, in looking at the whole student life cycle our excellent links with schools, FE institutions, employers, and professional bodies are key to attracting, recruiting, and successfully graduating a diverse student body. Improving student retention and progression initially in year one and its subsequent roll-out across all years is a key part of our ongoing strategy towards satisfying and where possible exceeding challenging internal targets and national benchmarks. As part of the wider monitoring process the University has established a Student Engagement Committee which reports directly to Senate. Ulster University elected to include seven discipline areas from its four campuses and representing several teaching types and attendance modes across the six Faculties in order to inform provide a catalyst for wider institutional roll-out of good practices and to clearly identify course challenges. However, more work is needed in some discipline areas and faculties are working hard with staff teams and the Students Union to meet retention challenges against a backdrop of improved institutional performance. A core team comprising student, academic and administrative functions was selected from across the University.

1.1 Members of the core team

Role Name Email

Institutional senior manager Professor Ian Montgomery

[email protected]

Team leader /project manager

Mrs Roisín Curran [email protected]

Data expert Ms Grainne Dooher [email protected]

Academic member of staff Professor Aine McKillop [email protected]

Student Union representative Ms Avril Honan [email protected]

Student Mr Jason Grogan [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]






5

1.2 Participating disciplines, programmes, members of the discipline teams, What Works? theme(s) addressed

Discipline/ subject area

Law Built Environment

Creative Technologies

Accounting Nursing (Mental Health)

Computing Textile Art, Design & Fashion

Thematic area for intervention

Induction Induction Active learning Induction Active Learning & Induction

Co-curricular activities

Co-curricular activities

Programme name

LLB at Jordanstown (JN) & LLB at Magee (ME)

BSc Hons Construction Engineering and Management (CEM) BSc Hons Building Engineering and Materials (BEM) BSc Hons Building Surveying (BS)

BSc Hons Creative Technologies (CT)

BSc Hons Accounting (Full-Time and Part-Time)

BSc Hons Nursing (Mental Health) Programme

BSc Hons Computing; BSc Hons Computing (Game Development); BSc Hons Computing (Internet Systems)

BA Hons Textile Art, Design and Fashion (TADF)

Full or part-time

Full-time Full-time Full-time Full and part-time Full-time Full-time Full-time

Expected cohort size (13/14)

JN: 90 f/t & 20 p/t. ME:50 f/t & 20 p/t.

30, 30 and 30 40 50 (f/t) 15-20 (p/t)

50 100 60

6






Discipline team leader Email

Mrs Amanda Zacharopoulou (Discipline Lead: Jordanstown) [email protected]

Dr Alice Diver (Discipline Lead: Magee) [email protected]

Dr Michaela Keenan (Discipline Lead) (Associate Head of School) [email protected]

Mr Terry Quigley [email protected]

(Discipline Lead & Course Director)

Mrs Claire McCann (Discipline Lead & Department L&T Coordinator) [email protected] Mr Dean Coulter (Discipline Lead/Course Director: part-time course) [email protected]

Mr Iain McGowan (Discipline Lead & Course Director) [email protected]

Dr Michaela Black (Faculty Learning & Teaching Coordinator) [email protected]

Mrs Alison Gault (Discipline Lead & Course Director) [email protected] Ms Hazel Bruce (Discipline Lead & Course Director) [email protected]

Team member name Email

Dr Eugene McNamee (Head of School) [email protected]

Mr Mark Hamill (Course Director) [email protected]

Mr John Harding [email protected]

Miss Helen Fee [email protected]

Ms Oonagh Carson [email protected]

Professor Martin McKinney (Head of School) [email protected]

Professor Barbara Dass Mentor [email protected]

Team member Email

Dr Esther McGuinness [email protected]

Dr Karen Davison (Course Director) [email protected]

Professor Paul Moore (Head of School) [email protected]

Mrs Helen Foster [email protected]

Mrs Deirdre O’Donnell (Associate Head of School) [email protected]

Dr Adrian Moore [email protected]

Lucy McMullen [email protected]

Team member Email

Mr John Kennedy [email protected]

Ms Clare McKeown (Course Director) [email protected]

Mr Greg O’Hanlon [email protected]

Mrs Danielle McWall [email protected]

Mrs Ursula Chaney (School T&L Coordinator) [email protected]

Mrs Janet Allison [email protected]

Mr Stephen King [email protected]

Team member Email

Dr Jacinta Miller [email protected]

Mr Ken Boston (Course Director) [email protected]

Mr Brian Bridges [email protected]

Mr Stephen McNamee [email protected]

Mr Brian McGowan [email protected]

Team member Email

Mr Taiwo Oriola [email protected]

Dr Trevor Hyde [email protected]

Mr Mark Cullen [email protected]

Mr Ronnie Patton [email protected]

Mrs Mary Findon-Henry [email protected]



















































7






Team member Email

Gina Bekker [email protected]

Dr Martina Murphy [email protected]

Professor Paul McKevitt [email protected]

Mr Michael Pogue [email protected]

Miss Stephanie Dunleavey [email protected]

Team member Email

Mr Mark Anderson [email protected]

Dr Murat Akser [email protected]

Mrs Judith Wylie [email protected]

Team member Email

Dr Bryan Magee [email protected]

Mr Paul Stewart [email protected]

Team member Email

Dr Michael Chapman [email protected]

Dr Mark Mulgrew [email protected]

Team member Email

Ms Joanne Coyle [email protected]

Professor Gillian Armstrong (Head of School) [email protected]

Team member Email

Dr John Rodgers [email protected]

Team member Email

Mr Rab McBurney [email protected]




















8






Student Partners

Year 4 Carmen Estrada Year 3 Joy Dalzell Ross White Taryn Luney David Martin Jason Grogan

Year 4 Siofra McAleer Conrad Dinsmore Stephen Toland Year 3 Karl Lines Emma McQuilkin Grant Bartley

Year 3 Kirsty Chatterton Dermot Hughes Year 2 Charlie Mullen Mark Beck Year 1 Rory Cooke Luke Kiernan Paddy Storey Joseph Cairns Oisin o Scolai Smith

Year 3 FT Sarah Tang Brian McArdle Year 1 FT Richard Hood Shauna Wilson Michael Kane Year B PT Andrew Ellis Year A PT Conor Rooney Niall Nixon

Year 3 Gary Rutherford Year 2 Rona Farrell Year 1 Gemma Lynch

Coaches: Year 4 Alison Campbell Alison Gillespie Shannon White Tom Neal Gerry Burke Year 3 Chloe Kernohan Year 2 Reps Jamie Shields Euan Cantley Year 1 Reps: Alex Colhoun Dylan Keys Matthew Heath Eleanor Heath Gemma Davidson Rebecca Brennan

Year 3 Kirsty Riddle Daryl Jones Tara Marzuki Helen Murray Amanda Nicholl Year 2 Sarah Hickland

9

1.3 Significant internal changes/context to be taken into account when reading this report

In relation to the student experience, the period covering the longitudinal study (2013-2016) has been one of relative calm within the institution. The sectoral introduction of Key Information Sets has led to increased visibility of all Key Performance Indicators, thereby placing more importance on national benchmarks in relation to employability, student satisfaction, non-continuation and success. In anticipation that the KIS will shortly include staff teaching qualifications and in line with the University’s organisational objectives, the University has agreed targets for the proportion of academic staff holding a HEA recognised teaching qualification commensurate with their role, this has been set at a minimum of 75% at the end of academic year 15/16 for all faculties and working towards 100% membership by the end of 2017.

1.4 External national context Ulster is a university with a national and international reputation for excellence, innovation and regional engagement. As the only University in Northern Ireland which is embedded in campuses across the province we make a major contribution to its economic, social and cultural development and play a key role in attracting inward investment. Despite our successes, it is important to recognise the significantly different environment in which Higher Education operates in Northern Ireland in comparison to England and Wales. Higher Education is a devolved matter and as such the NI Executive chose not to raise student fees in line with England and student numbers continue to be capped. This has led to a significant loss of funding for Higher Education in NI which has witnessed a decrease of around 20% in funding. Despite this, the University continues to perform well in the National Student Survey and is clearly focused on providing a transformational student experience across all modes and levels of delivery. Similarly, the University continues to perform extremely well in research and innovation and were successful in a variety of units of assessment in the 2014 REF and are now working towards further developing this success in research grant income and international research collaborations.

2. Impact data Brief details of how the programme was evaluated and presentation of institutional results.

2.1 Methodological section to be provided by WW national team.

2.2 Survey and institutional data to be added in by Mantz

2.3 Commentary by HEIs. Seven ‘belonging’ surveys containing 16 questions rated on a Likert scale have been administered to all first years in the seven discipline areas, one in November 2013 (n= 274), the second in April 2014 (n=230) to students who started their course in 2013, the third to the same cohort in second year (April 2015, n=239) and in third year (April 2016, n=146). The belonging survey was also administered to first-year students who started in September 2014 (n=356) and the same cohort of students in April 2015 (n=327) and in second year of their course (April 2016, n=243). These were analysed by Professor Mantz Yorke, Paul Hamlyn Foundation and compared with the SRS total figures for all institutions (approximately 2760 students).

10

Following implementation of the courses interventions:

Ulster (n=356) consistently improved in all three areas: belonging, engagement and self-confidence. Students in Semester 1 of first year had a greater sense of belonging, engagement and self-confidence than students who entered the course the year previous.

Students indicated that their sense of belonging at Ulster improved during the first year at Ulster, and this sense of belonging was higher than that achieved at other UK Institutions, when compared with combined UK data (Figure 1). In the second year of the interventions (second cohort), students responding positively in terms of their sense of belonging, with a higher score of 4.22 in Semester 1, than the year previous (4.05). Students feel at home at Ulster, and believe it is an enriching experience. The majority of students believe they chose the right University to attend. Students indicated that their department was welcoming, and they were shown respect by staff. Whilst there was an increase in belonging from Semester 1 into Semester 2, a slight decrease in student’s sense of belonging was observed in second year and this trend was also evident across other UK institutions (Figure 1).

Student engagement at Ulster improved from Semester 1 of first year (3.77), throughout Semester 2 (3.87), into second year (4.06) (Figure 2). Following introduction of the interventions in 2013/14, the second intake of students in 2014/15 indicated a higher level of engagement (3.89) than the year previous (3.77). Students indicated they were motivated towards their studies but could do more than what is asked of them. Students recognise that they are poor at seeking out academics to discuss topics (3.03).

3.40

3.60

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

Sem 1 2013/14Year 1

Sem 2 2013/14Year 1

Sem 2 2014/15year 2

Sem 2 2015/16Year 3

Sati

sfac

tio

n s

core

Time

Figure 1: Student Belonging: in the first cohort entering 2013/14

Ulster University

All Institutions

11

Student self-confidence at Ulster (3.55) is similar to other UK Institutions (3.51). Student’s self-confidence improved throughout first year (3.47 to 3.54) and remained high into second year (3.54) (Figure 3). Despite these improvements, students scored this area relatively low overall compared to the student belonging and engagement survey questions. Following the interventions at Ulster, the second cohort of students entering in 2014/15 were more confident than the first cohort (Figure 4). Also the second cohort of students at Ulster University appeared to be have more self-confidence that other UK institutions (Figure 4). Students appear to worry about the difficulty of their programme and their ability to study at University. This response is also observed across other Institutions in the UK

3.40

3.60

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

Sem 1 2013/14Year 1

Sem 2 2013/14Year 1

Sem 2 2014/15year 2

Sem 2 2015/16Year 3

Sati

sfac

tio

n S

core

Time

Figure 2: Student Engagement: First cohort entering in 2013/14

Ulster University

All Institutions

3.30

3.35

3.40

3.45

3.50

3.55

3.60

3.65

3.70

Sem 1 2013/14Year 1

Sem 2 2013/14Year 1

Sem 2 2014/15year 2

Sem 2 2015/16Year 3

Sati

fica

tio

n s

core

Time

Figure 3: Self Confidence: First cohort entering in 2013/14

Ulster University

All Institutions

12

In relation to the demographics of gender, age and whether student is ‘first in family’, the following was observed for first year students entering Ulster in September 2014:

Females report to feel a higher sense of belonging and more engaged than males whilst males’ self-confidence is higher than females. This trend continues in semester 2 although for both males and females there is a slight drop in their sense of belonging, their engagement and self-confidence in April 2015.

Students that are 20+ report to feel a higher sense of belonging, are more engaged and have higher self-confidence than those students under 20. Again this trend continues in semester 2.

Students that are ‘first in family’ report to feel a higher sense of belonging, are more engaged and have higher self-confidence that those students who are not ‘first in family’. In semester 2, we observe a change in this trend; students that are ‘first in family’ have the same sense of belonging to those that are not. Students that are not ‘first in family’ now have a higher level of engagement and are more self-confident.

3. Planning for and implementing change

3.1 Details about how the teams were selected, interventions selected, how the teams worked together, support etc.

In addition to the original three discipline areas chosen to participate in this programme, the University wished to replicate the change academy methodology internally to encompass the remaining three faculties. Hence seven discipline areas were included which represents all six faculties and four campuses of the institution. The programmes and rationale for inclusion is included in the table below and a full description of the interventions and resulting impact is detailed in the case studies (see Appendix 1) and summarised in section 7.

3.42

3.44

3.46

3.48

3.50

3.52

3.54

3.56

3.58

Sem 1 2014/15 Year 1 Sem 2 2014/15 Year 1 Sem 2 2015/16 Year 2

Figure 4: Self Confidence: Second cohort entering in 201415

Ulster University

All UK Institutions

13

Faculty & School Programme(s) Rationale for inclusion Interventions

1. Faculty of Social Sciences School of Law (Jordanstown and Magee campuses)

LLB at Jordanstown LLB at Magee

This broadly similar programme runs on two campuses. Incoming students have high entry tariff points but first year attrition and failure rates in some first year modules were high.

Thematic area: Induction Interventions included:

A pre-arrival activity;

Socialisation;

Peer Support.

2. Faculty of Art, Design and the Built Environment School of the Built Environment

BSc Hons Construction Engineering & Management BSc Hons Building Engineering & Materials BSc Hons Building Surveying

Built Environment has traditionally had high attrition rates and whilst the rates have improved over the years they still remain high in comparison to other areas. Courses in this School traditionally have shared modules with large student numbers in the first year of study. Students from different disciplines come together in shared modules creating difficulties for the students in seeing the relevance of some of the content to their programme and in creating a strong programme identity and sense of belonging resulting in poor student engagement, retention and success.

Thematic area: Induction Interventions included:

Pre-entry/ pre-induction personal contact;

Week 0 Induction;

Enhanced Studies Advice Pilot - Academic Mentors;

o Student Engagement Team - Academic Mentors also formed a Student Engagement Team to agree approaches share learning and good practice.

‘At Risk’ Student Monitoring;

o School escalation system for ‘students at risk’

14


Transition Modules introduced in two programmes using different models.

3. Faculty of Art, Design and the Built Environment Belfast School of Art

BA Hons

Textile Art,

Design and

Fashion

This programme brings together the five disciplines of Fashion, Textile Print, Weave, Knit and Textile Art and it is expected that this recently revalidation programme will bring some homogeneity to these disciplines. The physical environment is a unique factor with this programme as it is taught in a studio setting at our Belfast campus. Whilst the staff student ratio is good, there is a concern over poor NSS results.

Thematic area: Induction and Co-curricular activities Interventions included:

Pre entry - Summer school Induction;

Pre –entry Week 0 Induction

Colour and Community workshops throughout the academic year;

Professional Practice placements,

Mentor/mentee relationship building leading to continued engagement and growing confidence;

Co-curricular student trips;

Pre entry interview.

4. Faculty of Arts School of Creative Arts & Technologies

BSc Hons Creative Technologies

This programme initially taught across two faculties crosses the interface between Art and Science, and is challenged by the potential for dislocation and difficulty with discipline identity for the students. It is an economically relevant subject for Northern Ireland and whilst the

Thematic area: Active Learning Interventions included:

Incorporation and management of Active Learning strategies into Semester I modules;

15


Department for Employment and Learning (DEL) are keen to fund additional student places, percentage attrition in this area is a concern and NSS results have room for improvement.

Student field trip / Hackathon Activity;

Consolidation of shared student space.

5. Ulster University Business School Department of Accounting, Finance & Economics

BSc Hons Accounting FT/PT

There has been a considerable amount of positive work undertaken in this programme to improve success. However, there is variance in student retention between part-time and full-time students. Given the increasing focus on non-MASn activity the recruitment and retention of part-time students is key. This area is also of interest due to the variation in University regulations regarding the use of second year marks towards final degree classification.

Thematic area: Induction Intervention included:

The establishment of a Student Society to build collaboration and a partnership ethos

6. Faculty of Life and Health Sciences School of Nursing

BSc Hons Nursing (Mental Health)

The Faculty’s average student attrition is 7.4% with the overall nursing unit having an attrition rate of 10.4% and this programme had 13.6% attrition in 2011/12; some first year modules have a failure rate of above 15%. The BSc (Hons) Nursing (Mental Health) course was newly revalidated in 2011/12. Due to the fact that these are externally commissioned places there is a

Thematic area: Induction and Active Learning Intervention included:

Pre- Induction contact;

Extended induction;

Hold ‘Student led’ events;

Pilot model of sustainability.

16


need to improve student retention. Overall the NSS has demonstrated that for Nursing at Ulster, results have been very good (90% student satisfaction) so if students are retained they are very satisfied with the programme.

7. Faculty of Computing and Engineering School of Computing and Information Engineering

BSc Hons Computing; BSc Hons Computing (Games Development); BSc Hons Computing (Internet Systems)

A module within this programme has recently used student mentors in first year teaching. This has been very successful and the project was recently presented at the Centre for Higher Education Research & Practice (CHERP) and European First Year Experience (EFYE) conference on Student Engagement. As an area of good practice it would be useful to explore how this engagement has impacted on first year retention and success.

Thematic area: Co-curricular activities Intervention included:

Final year students coaching first-years;

Parallel projects within the Faculty;

Game Enhanced Learning game reintroduced;

Pilot a School Code of Practice for Programming for year 1 initially.

17

3.2 Team Working and Support provided The initial challenge of instilling a culture of team working was overcome by securing ‘buy-in’

from all the relevant stakeholders (Heads of School, Discipline Leads, First-year Tutors etc.)

in each discipline area. Regular meetings and opportunities for face-to-face communication

within and across the different teams were vital to maintain momentum and to recognise and

disseminate successes.

The evidence generated from the focus groups suggests that effective team working built on a shared ethos, leads to improvements in the student experience. See Case Study entitled ‘The importance of team work to benefit the student experience: changing the culture of a course team’ in appendix 1.

3.2.1 Professional Development

Staff have also been encouraged to seek further opportunities for professional development and recognition through internal CPD schemes (see HEA fellowship table below)

Students have been encouraged to reflect on their experiences within the programme as part of the Student Edge Award (This award has been designed to enhance the employability of Ulster students by providing official recognition and evidence of activities outside their programme of study).

3.2.2 Sharing information

Individual progress meetings were held with course teams at regular intervals – this provided an opportunity to discuss progress and address challenges.

Staff and students have access to a VLE area for the SRS programme which provides the opportunity for teams to view resources, including current and new research, and to share and disseminate their practice.

Discipline and core teams have participated in sharing practice events during 2013-14 and 2014-15, this brought together SRS staff/student teams to disseminate progress to date, to share issues and challenges, and to get external input from invited speakers.

In November 2013, Torgny Roxa, Lund University provided a keynote on distributed leadership and communities of practice.

In April 2014, Colin Bryson, Newcastle University, provided a keynote on partnership: possibilities and challenges.

In November 2014, an evaluation workshop was held facilitated by Colin Bryson. This allowed the core and discipline teams to discuss, refine and agree a project-wide evaluation strategy using the Appreciative Inquiry Approach for 2014-15.

In March 2015, a sharing practice event was held to allow staff to team work, share missions and review feedback from semester 1 student focus groups.

In October 2015, the core team and discipline team leads attended a two-day residential writing retreat which enabled sharing of all data to date and to engage in case study writing. Peer groups were formed which facilitated cross-disciplinary peer review before submission of case studies on 30 November 2015.

3.2.3 Funding support

Seed funding was made available to the discipline teams (up to £800 per team) for planned activities and evaluations during the 2013-14.

Further funding for collaborative projects across disciplines which focused on embedding effective practice was made available in 2014-15.

18

This resulted in one project involving four disciplines developing an ‘Infographic’ to be used at pre-entry with prospective students. Its aim is to clarify the nature, content and requirements of each course so as to help better recruit the right students onto each programme.

Funding was made available for pre-entry activities for new student cohorts in 2015-16

3.3 Case studies of particularly effective working The following case studies (representing two of ten Ulster case studies submitted) demonstrate the importance and impact of student-student and student-staff relationships in building capacity of students and staff to improve student belonging and engagement. Please see appendix 1 which includes all case studies.

Case Study Purpose, Methodology, Findings and Impact

Title: Peer Relations: a supportive ‘route’ to student success Author: Aine McKillop

This case study aimed to investigate and analyse the value of peer-support as an approach to (i) assist students in the transition to higher education (ii) build a supportive student community that responds to student diversity and (iii) contribute to the evidence base that demonstrates the impact of peer relations in the student learning experience. This case study provides evidence on how peer-peer relations when introduced from an early stage of the programme can be used to improve student engagement and belonging. This case study also provides a route map for the successful implementation of peer support more widely.

Title: Building capacity for

student engagement

through a staff-student

partnership approach

Author: Roisín Curran

The purpose of this case study is to explore the impact of a ‘students as partners’ approach in an institutional-wide Change Programme aimed at improving student retention and success. In order to better understand the ‘lived experience’ of working in partnership and how it impacts on the individuals involved, one-to-one hour-long semi-structured interviews (n=14) were conducted with staff (n=7) and students (n=7). Trigger questions were used and the interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using a six-stage approach to qualitative data analysis as detailed by Braun and Clarke (2006). This case study provides the basis for demonstrating how ‘students as partners’ as an ethos creates a more favourable learning environment in which individual learning is optimised by developing student capacity to engage and staff capacity to be engaging.

Title: The importance of team work to benefit the student experience: changing the culture of a course team Author: Avril Honan

This case study seeks to explore the impact of a strong ethos of team

working on the student experience, drawing on the findings of

feedback from staff involved in the What Works? Student Retention &

Success (SRS) Change Programme (2012-15). The benefits of team

working emerged from the institutional evaluation of the project as a

whole, and this case study aims to draw these out and show evidence

of the positive impact it can have.

4. Evaluation strategy

4.1 Details of institutional evaluation approach/strategy In year 1 – 2013/14 discipline teams carried out their own evaluations of interventions with their students, this comprised a variety of methods such as focus groups, questionnaires and online surveys.

19

In year 2 – 2014/15 an institutional evaluation strategy was implemented based on an Appreciative Inquiry approach. This involved focus groups with first-year students and focus groups with staff involved in the wider course teams. The focus groups, were in the main moderated by an external researcher who also carried out the transcriptions, data analysis and report generation. The feedback from students from the semester 1 focus groups and Semester 2 focus groups were provided to all the individual course teams to allow them to reflect and refine interventions. Appreciative Inquiry was chosen as the approach to evaluate the interventions in each discipline as it advocates a collective inquiry of What Works? best, identifying the key strengths in order to imagine was could work well in the future. The interventions in each discipline can be refined and prioritised and there can be the collective design of a desired future state. All research/evaluation undertaken as part of this change programme was considered by one of the University’s research governance filter committees which form an integral part of the University’s Research Ethics Committee. Approval to proceed was granted in June 2013 and again in 2014 following the adoption of an ‘appreciative inquiry’ approach outlined above.

Student focus groups In total, 17 focus groups were held with a representative sample of first-years from all discipline areas in semester 1 and semester 2.

Agreed standard questions were asked at 9 focus groups in semester 1 focusing on transition, induction and active learning.

Agreed standard questions were asked at 8 focus groups in semester 2 focusing on the semester 2 experience in relation to engagement, belongingness and confidence. Each discipline area added additional questions in relation to their specific interventions.

Staff focus groups Additionally, 9 focus groups were held with the wider discipline teams and the core team between June and October 2015. The aim of these was to gain a better understanding of team working and the enablers and challenges in leading and embedding change.

5. Changes implemented at the institutional level Description of changes implemented at the institutional level as part of this programme, such as:

5.1 Strategy Development The ethos of Ulster’s SRS programme is embedded in the University’s Learning and Teaching Strategy (2013/14-2017/18). The SRS programme has helped to create spaces to allow conversations to develop Strategic Aim 2 ‘To provide transformative high quality, learning experiences through the promotion of meaningful staff-student partnerships that engender a shared responsibility’. This Change Programme has created numerous opportunities for debate on the student experience at Ulster informed by the growing body of evidence generated by the projects. This has contributed to the development of Student Experience Principles which will provide a much needed framework for the design and delivery of a more student-centred curriculum. The roll-out and dissemination of the Principles begins in 2015/16. This awareness of the growing importance of the student experience is further evidenced by the establishment of the Student Engagement Sub- committee. This committee has subsumed the work of a number of other committees, including the retention implementation working group, ensuring oversight of the entirety of the student experience.

20

The Digital Futures Strategy 2015-18 (led by Access and Distributed Leaning ADDL) aims to provide a digitally adaptable academic ecosystem through which learning is vibrant, pedagogy is sound and blended, open and online learning is comprehensive, accessible and flexible. ADDL aims to maximise opportunities for further accessibility and to promote a range of educational opportunities to support learning. The technological outcomes of the implementation of this strategy will be used to enhance student engagement and over time will facilitate colleagues in analysing how students are engaging with their learning on an ongoing basis. A new Centre for Widening Access and Participation (WAP); a Centre for Flexible and Continuing Education (FCE); and an Office for Digital Learning (ODL) have also recently been established. These teams support staff across the University to deliver flexible and distributed learning, support outreach activities and further enhance the quality of digital learning and knowledge transfer. Embedding of new and emerging technologies and their associate pedagogies are key in driving this agenda forward.

5.2 Staff development, recognition and reward

Capacity building and leading change - 9 members of the SRS team have either completed or are participating in the Aspiring Leaders programme leading to ILM level 5 Certificate in Leadership and Management. Each participant completes an enhanced practice project as part of this programme.

Dr Michaela Black

Ms Janet Coulter

Dr Karen Davison

Miss Stephanie Dunleavey

Dr Michaela Keenan

Mrs Claire McCann

Mr Brian McGowan

Professor Aine McKillop

Mr Greg O’Hanlon

As a strategic priority, the University continues to support discipline teams in refining and developing their practice to achieve their independent and collective goals. Staff have the opportunity to align their practice to the UKPSF and seek recognition at one of the categories for HEA Fellowship through Ulster’s Professional Development Scheme. In addition to staff already holding a category of fellowship, since the SRS programme began, the following 19 staff members involved in this Change Programme have achieved recognition (1 AF, 7 F, 9 SF, 2 PF):

Staff Category of Fellowship

Ms Avril Honan AFHEA

Mrs Ursula Chaney FHEA

Miss Stephanie Dunleavey FHEA

Mrs Helen Foster FHEA

Dr Khanyisela Moyo FHEA

Mr Paul Stewart FHEA

Dr Murat Akser FHEA

Mr Stephen King FHEA

Dr Michaela Black SFHEA

Ms Hazel Bruce SFHEA

Ms Janet Coulter SFHEA

Ms Rachel Dickson SFHEA

Mrs Alison Gault SFHEA

Dr Michaela Keenan SFHEA

Mr Brian McGowan SFHEA

21

Professor Aine McKillop SFHEA

Ms Amanda Zacharopoulou SFHEA

Mrs Roisin Curran PFHEA

Professor Martin McKinney PFHEA

o As partners, students are encouraged and supported to engage with the University’s

student EDGE Award. To date 6 students have used their involvement in this Change Programme as one of the extra-curricular activities required for achievement of the EDGE award.

o All the final year coaches in Computing received EDGE recognition for their contribution to project with 4 of them receiving EDGE+

o One member of the core team, Aine McKillop (Professor of Biomedical Sciences), has been appointed to a Chair in Learning and Teaching and this project has helped to develop her expertise and leadership at University level

o The annual Students’ Union Learning & Teaching Awards launched in 2014, aims to raise the status of, and thereby promote and celebrate, excellent learning and teaching practice at Ulster. 2014

The category of ‘Partnership Award’ was jointly won by a member of the core team o Roisin Curran (Professional Development Manager, Staff Development)

Two staff members from Computing and Law respectively, were shortlisted in two other award categories

Dr Michaela Black (Senior Lecturer in Computing Science), ‘Excellence in Innovative Teaching Award’, (shortlisted)

Dr Jacinta Miller (Lecturer in Law), ‘Inspirational Teaching Award’, (Shortlisted) 2015

o The category of ‘Excellence in Student Representation’ was won by one of the Nursing (Mental Health) student partners

Gary Rutherford (Final year student), School of Nursing o The Social Sciences faculty were the recipients of the Partnership Award due to their

innovative work in developing representation, volunteer projects and student societies in partnership with the SU.

o The ‘Inspirational Teaching Award’ awarded to each faculty was won by two of the discipline leads in their respective faculties:

Dr Alice Diver (Lecturer in Law), Faculty of Social Sciences.

Dr Michaela Black (Senior Lecturer in Computing Science), Faculty of Computing & Engineering

2016

Amanda Zacharopoulou (Senior Lecturer in Law) was shortlisted for the Excellence

in Teaching Award (Social Sciences)

o In 2015/16, the following staff were promoted to new leadership roles:

Professor Ian Montgomery – Pro-Vice-Chancellor Global Engagement

Iain McGowan – Discipline Lead of School of Nursing

Hazel Bruce – Learning and Teaching Coordinator of the Belfast School of Art

Rachel Dickson – Associate Head of School of the Belfast School of Art

Dr Michaela Keenan - Associate Head of School of the Built Environment and Subject Partnership Manager

Dr Michaela Black - Head of School of Computing and Intelligent Systems.

5.3 Curriculum development and building learning communities

The project encouraged course teams to use statistics and feedback available to examine their approaches to teaching, learning and assessment in modules on an on-going basis.

22

This continuous evaluation and reflection will ensure that course teams are responsive to the needs of the students and has already led to improved student success across a number of programmes. This includes a renewed focus on small group teaching and the importance of creating a welcoming community to foster belongingness and ease the transition to higher education.

‘The What Works? Project at Ulster has been instrumental in developing a transformative learning experience for students across the Institution. One example is the recent curriculum review/revalidation of the provision in the School of Built Environment. The 3 courses taking part in the SRS project in the School of Built Environment achieved significant outcomes, creating innovative and good pedagogical practice. These activities have informed learning and teaching practices across the School as part of the current Institutional Review of their 21 undergraduate and postgraduate courses’.

Greater strategic focus on evaluation and reflection of data and metrics

The University’s Student Engagement Sub-committee (formerly Retention Implementation Working Group) continues to review and evaluate current practices and facilitates the sharing and embedding of effective practice across the institution, by making recommendations to the University’s Senate.

The implementation of the innovative Learning and Teaching Strategy with its key focus on the student experience has allowed course teams to analyse performance indicators holistically and encourages them to evaluate the student journey.

The new Learning and Teaching strategy provides a strategic focus for embedding meaningful student/staff partnerships to improve the quality of the learning experience. The monitoring of the student experience has ensured that schools and faculties received a range of individual reports, review processes, and metrics into a single dataset. All schools and faculties received a range of three year datasets aggregated from existing verified, comparative and published sources including (application numbers, firm and insurance offer rates and ratios, tariff points, clearing, retention, placement, NSS and DHLE scores) allowing course teams access to a comprehensive level of baseline data at course level. Course teams, schools and faculties considered these indicators along with qualitative data in reports from External Examiners, PSRBs, course committees, staff student consultative committees and other meetings. Schools and Faculties then developed action plans to bring under-performing courses to (at the very least) benchmark levels as well as identify areas for enhancement. Progress on these action plans will be monitored throughout the period of the Learning and Teaching Strategy.

These metrics are updated and reviewed on a regular basis and are considered at all levels within the University; Faculty, School and Course level as part of the annual monitoring process.

5.4 Availability and use of data

The core team worked closely with the Quality Management and Audit Unit (QMAU) which allowed us to regularly monitor institutional quantitative data for the discipline areas in relation to retention and success. After semester 1 each year, data for each discipline area, was made available which included: early leavers, non-returners, fails, repeats, resits, leave of absences and a total percentage attrition rate. Similarly, year-end data was provided and collated for the participating programmes.

This was supplemented by internal forms (action plans and progress reports) developed by the core team which discipline leads completed twice yearly in relation to progress of interventions and subsequent impact.

In addition, we placed a strong emphasis on gathering qualitative data (as outlined in section 4.1) in order to understand more fully the impact of the change programme on the student experience to enable us develop future L&T strategies and policies to sustain our work and impact across the institution.

23

5.5 Student engagement The University’s vision is illustrated in our impact on students, society and the economy. We wish to offer a student experience that leads to a satisfying, rewarding and assured career path. The work undertaken as part of this change programme has helped us to understand the experience at Ulster more fully, from the perspective of: students, staff, the institutional context and the wider socio-cultural context. The outcomes and outputs from this project will be utilised to help with the wider adoption of effective practice and a change of culture to embrace the values of openness, living knowledge, spirit and fresh-thinking. This project has led to the further recognition of the importance of engagement with all students initiated prior to their application to the University. To support this there has been an increasing focus on a variety of methods such as school visits, tailored open days and evenings, outreach projects and summer camps to support and inform potential applicants to the University. These aim to not only inform potential applicants about their subject area of interest – but also the expectations and realities of higher education. The project has demonstrated the positive effect of peer support e.g. peer coaching and PASS on the student experience. These initiatives have created belonging for first year students as they make connections with others at different levels of study and create informal and informal support networks. For the mentors and coaches, these peer relationships provide valuable experience and increase their engagement and confidence. Alongside this project, there has been an increased focus on enhancing the student voice at Ulster University. The Students’ Union has worked in partnership with key central departments and faculty staff to develop student representation at every level. Full time officers now sit on internal revalidations and play a role in the interview process for senior management roles within the university. At course level, a particular focus has been placed on electing and recruiting representatives – leading to a significant increase of representatives registering with the SU over the past five years. This in turn leads to an improved attendance at Students’ Union training and events which generates greater engagement and therefore representation. Another development has been the introduction of the ‘senior representative’ position over the last three years who are elected at School/Department level, and create an important link between course and faculty. A new faculty-level, informal meeting has been introduced following recognition that the student voice was not most effectively heard at the formal Faculty Meetings. These ‘Student Experience Forums’ allow students to lead on the agenda and informally discuss their course with their Dean and Head of School. Staff and students have reflected on these and there has been overwhelming support for their effectiveness in engaging everyone to positively contribute to all aspects of life at Ulster. Through the Change Programme, students as partners has been a key principal which underpinned implementation of the projects. This has enabled us to include students in the implementation of solutions as well as identification of challenges with curriculum design and delivery. As an approach to student engagement, we have evidence which strongly suggests that it enables capacity development for students to engage and staff to be engaging.

24

6. Impact

6.1 Evidence of impact or significance of institutional level changes and commentary about impact of and learning about strategic enablers

HEA Fellowship. The University targets for academic staff achieving HEA fellowship has prompted staff engagement with Ulster’s accredited professional development scheme, ENHANCE. This has encouraged staff to reflect on practice in relation to the UKPSF and through staff submission of portfolios of evidence, effective practice across disciplines has emerged. Dissemination of effective practice is being encouraged to promote further engagement with SOTL. To date 72% of staff, have a category of fellowship, this has increased from 28% in 2013. In addition, Senate have agreed UKPSF alignment to professional development, recognition and reward which will be implemented in 2016/17 for Senior Lecturer/Reader in Learning and Teaching and 2017/18 for Professorship.

Timing of Enrolment. Over the two years of project interventions, indicators of What Works? have emerged. These are fleshed out in further detail in the discipline-based case studies and four broad themes or learning points are discussed in section 7. Some immediate recommendations have been sent to course teams across the institutions highlighting What Works? so that these can be implemented for incoming students in 2016/17. One example of this is moving enrolment to the end of week zero! Longer-term institutional recommendations are outlined in section 9.

Staff-student partnership. In this project we have witnessed a shift in mind-set from viewing students as consumers to embracing the notion of students as partners. An evidence-base has been established which ascertains that students as partners builds capacity for: staff to be engaging, and for students to engage. Whilst this evidence base is confined to the seven discipline teams involved in the SRS Change Programme there is additional evidence that students as partners is becoming more widespread across the institution (see section 5.5).

Peer Support. Peer-peer relations when introduced from an early stage of the programme can be used to improve student engagement and belonging. This project has demonstrated that in times of transition, whether that is moving into higher education or during times of personal difficulties or during period of intensive assessment, peer-peer interaction and particularly study groups can provide the support necessary for success.

Effective team working leading to an improved student experience. The evidence collected from focus groups held with course teams leads to the conclusion that effective team working leads to improvements in the student experience, through increasing the focus of working together, enhancing engagement of staff and students and inspiring creativity. The culture of team working has assisted staff in the creation, delivery and dissemination of their initiatives – of which most have led to improvements in student retention and success within each area.

Increased L&T awareness and activities around innovative learning spaces: SRS projects at Ulster have involved interactive pedagogic approaches involving active and collaborative learning using existing and new flexible learning spaces on each campus. The SRS projects have generated a significant evidence base on the effectiveness of active learning and learning spaces which has informed the University’s current Learning Landscape Transition Project. The Learning Landscape transition project at Ulster aims to address the wider strategic goal for Learning, Teaching and Student Experience that learning spaces should be ‘student-centred’ rather than ‘teacher-centred’; have the necessary technology to meet student and subject needs; support pedagogic, multidisciplinary, multimedia formats that engage students and are flexible, ergonomically comfortable, functional and multi-usable. The SRS projects have provided the evidence base on how these different kinds of learning spaces and technologies operate creatively and productively in practice.

25

Ulster Student Experience Principles. The University (via a working group, commissioned by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Learning, Teaching and Student Experience, comprising a wide range of staff and the SU) has developed Student Learning Experience Principles aimed at staff and it is planned that these will be implemented from Summer 2016. The evidence-base from this project has been used to inform this initiative. The six Principles; the learning model; employability; internationalization; digital fluency; the research teaching nexus; and ethics and sustainability have been identified to: define what we mean by the student learning experience at Ulster and to provide a shared understanding across disciplines; bring together a range of current Learning and Teaching strategies; and to realise the University’s graduate qualities in all students. Whilst it is recognised that these are not new, it is hoped that in implementation they can provide a useful impetus for discussion amongst course teams. The Principles can be applied in any discipline, at any stage of the student journey and define a common learning experience which will be brought to life in different ways across different disciplines.

6.2 Case studies of particularly effective working

See Appendix 1

Case Study

Title: Peer Relations: a supportive ‘route’ to student success Author: Aine McKillop

Title: Building capacity for student engagement through a staff-student partnership approach

Author: Roisín Curran

Title: The importance of team work to benefit the student experience: changing the culture of a course team Author: Avril Honan

26

7. Changes implemented at the discipline level and impact

7.1 Description of interventions themed under four key impacts As can be seen in the table in section 3.1, seven discipline areas implemented and evaluated a range of activities within three thematic areas: induction, active learning, and co-curricular activities. Qualitative and quantitative data generated across the disciplines has been analysed and the evidence-base suggests that the greatest impact on student retention and success can be categorised into four themes or learning points: pre-entry contact, mainstreaming pastoral care, ways of thinking and practising the discipline, and peer support. These learning points are discussed below and each begins with an impact statement followed by evidence generated in one or more discipline area.

7.1.1 Theme 1: Pre-entry contact

Further detail is provided in the case studies (see Appendix 1) Case Study: Addressing student expectations and building confidence for the study of law through a pre-arrival activity Author: Amanda Zacharopoulou, Discipline: Law Case Study: Building the environment: Academic Mentors and enhanced communication supporting transition and building belonging Author: Michaela Keenan, Discipline: Built Environment Case Study: Improving first year student confidence, team working and success through active and collaborative learning strategies both inside and outside the classroom Author: Terry Quigley, Discipline: Creative Technologies

Impact statement

Early engagement at the pre-entry stage of the student journey enhances the transition process and is crucial in fostering confidence in first-year students both in terms of adapting to a less structured learning environment as well as learning new skills. It should be predicated on a strong course team ethos, which is: welcoming for new students, fosters belongingness, and enables students to integrate into a disciplinary community of practice in which they will develop.

What did we do?

Law: a pre-arrival activity which was given to all incoming law students which was discussed as an ice-breaker activity with studies advisors and PASS (Peer Assisted Study Sessions) students at week 0 induction programme.

Built Environment - The Academic Mentoring system which runs from pre-induction contact to end of year one. Critical to the work of the Academic Mentors has been pre-entry contact, usually by

telephone.

Creative Technologies - the use of an infographic to visually represent a course of study and to help prospective students make an infomed choice.

27

7.1.2 Theme 2: Mainstreaming pastoral care

Further detail is provided in the case studies (see Appendix 1) Case Study: Addressing student expectations and building confidence for the study of law through a pre-arrival activity Author: Amanda Zacharopoulou, Discipline: Law Case Study: Building the environment: Academic Mentors and enhanced communication supporting transition and building belonging Author: Michaela Keenan, Discipline: Built Environment

Impact statement

Academic staff have a critical role to play in student support, being best placed to observe behaviour in the learning environment that might indicate that a student is in need of support. Developing student capacity to engage and to deal with challenges through a sustained induction process which fosters staff student relationships results in students being more likely to have the energy and motivation to do well in their studies.

What did we do?

Law - sustained academic support and pastoral care throughout year involving advice sessions, court visits, feedback sessions, PASS sessions etc.

Built Environment - The Academic Mentoring system has embedded the role of the Mentor as a central element of the first year experience to: support transition to university across the first year on a linear two-semester basis and bridging the semester 1/2 break from formal studies

28

7.1.3 Theme 3: Ways of Thinking and Practising the discipline (WTP)

Further detail is provided in the case studies (see Appendix 1) Case Study: Cloth, colour and communities of practice: embedding co-curricular learning in Textile Art, Design and Fashion Author: Alison Gault & Hazel Bruce, Discipline: Textile Art, Design and Fashion Case Study: Improving first year student confidence, team working and success through active and collaborative learning strategies both inside and outside the classroom Author: Terry Quigley, Discipline: Creative Technologies Case Study: Strengthening collaborative partnerships between staff and students through the establishment of a student society Author: Claire McCann, Discipline: Accounting

Impact statement

Active-learning activities which are centred on the discipline allow students to gain not just subject-specific skills but also to develop WTP, values, and attitudes relevant to their professional area through working alongside experienced practitioners. This impacts positively on: student belonging, confidence, engagement, and professional awareness thereby enhancing graduate attributes and improving employability.

What did we do?

Textile Art, Design and Fashion - A co-curricular workshop: ‘Big Day of Colour’ engaging students from all year groups along with staff (technical and academic) in the activities. The students enjoyed seeing staff being enthusiastic for their practice and some of the feedback reflected this.

Creative Technologies – an overnight field trip involving active learning activities to develop team-working skills and to help build positive student-staff relationships.

Accounting – introduction of an active Student Society. Activities included professional networking events with local employers and professional bodies, activities to raise money for charity and an annual student Formal. As a result, continued opportunities for social networking and nurturing a sense of belonging were provided; and the encouragement of professional awareness and networking.

29

7.1.4 Theme 4: Peer support

Further detail is provided in the case studies (see Appendix 1) Case Study: Peer Relations: a supportive ‘route’ to student success Author: Aine McKillop Case Study: SPICE: Student Partners In Curriculum Enhancement Author: Michaela Black, Discipline: Computing Case Study: Enhancing induction to promote belonging and professional identity of mental health nursing students Author: Iain McGowan, Discipline: Nursing (Mental Health)

Impact statement

There is strong evidence of the impact of peer relations in the student learning experience. Peer-peer relations when introduced from an early stage of the programme can be used to improve student engagement and belonging. Peer support has developed a strong sense of belonging at Ulster and has provided the underpinning evidence to develop a road map of best practice to consider when embedding peer support activities.

What did we do?

Computing – Final year students (returning from a year-long industry-based placement) act as mentors for first years in a programming module where traditionally students have difficulty with grasping key threshold concepts.

Nursing (Mental Health) focus on identity-building at induction and during transition which involves higher-level students supporting new incoming students

30

7.2 Evidence of Impact at the discipline level Law Evaluation of the pre-arrival activity provided evidence that addressing student expectations prior to entry is important to students. Student feedback indicated that the pre-arrival activity and an induction programme were useful in providing insight into the study of law and the study techniques for the academic year. The pre-arrival and socialisation activities encouraged students to interact with fellow peers and teaching staff within the School. Peer support was a key feature of the induction and the transition process and the evaluation showed that early introduction to other year groups encouraged social ties and deepened students’ sense of belonging. Impact data: University attrition data for the Ulster Law School showed a positive trend. Attrition was reduced from 14.5% in 2013/14 to 11.4% at first sit (June) 2015/16 on the Jordanstown (JN) campus. At the Magee campus attrition was reduced from 17.1% in 2013/14 to 6.9% at first sit (June) 2015/16. Importantly, the failure rate for the core skills development module in semester one of year one (Introduction to Law) on both campuses was reduced. At the JN campus, the failure rate dropped from 26.5% in 2013/14 to 16% in 2015/16. At the Magee campus, the rate has dropped from 18.9% in 2013/14 to 6.7% in 2015/16. Interestingly, following the interventions there were fewer Extenuating Forms (EC1s) submitted and a greater number of students progressed from year 1 to year 2. The Belonging Survey indicated that, whilst Law students do not feel overly confident about their studies, they do feel a sense of belonging and are engaged with their discipline. Built Environment The package of measures, when combined, brought about a reduction in attrition and in addition, an enhanced student experience. For example, better success rates at the first attempt in relation to module pass rates. Impact data: University data from Semester 1 2014-2015 clearly demonstrated the significant and positive impact that this range of initiatives has brought for the School with the semester 1 attrition rate for the Built Environment falling from 9.3% 2013-2014 to 6.6% 2014-2015. Looking at full year comparisons retention significantly improved within the School with attrition in 2014-2015 falling to 14% in comparison to 22% in 2013-2014. When looking solely at the original 3 programmes included in the project retention has improved in the courses with, for example, BEM reducing from 36 to 30% from 2012-13 to 2014-15. CEM retention in 2013-14 was 33% in comparison to 21% in 2014-15 this marks a significant reduction in attrition with the actual number of students exiting the programme reducing from 14 to 5. Building Surveying has seen the most marked reduction in attrition moving from 25% in 2012-13 to 5% in 2014-15. The number of students that exited Building Surveying was 2 in the 2014-15 academic year. There has also been an improvement in the Building Surveying and BEMs courses in relation to success at the first attempt. Across the 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 academic years Building Surveying recorded 83%, 100% and 86% respectively under this indicator with BEM recording 63%, 75% and 76%. Qualitative data has provided evidence of the value of week 0 induction. Students described how they “feel sorry for” those students who did not attend induction as they feel that they

31

missed out on the opportunity to make friends at an early juncture. Evidence also demonstrated that peer support is vital whilst settling into university life as when asked, what do you think it's been that’s helped you settle in and stay here? The response was "... Friends, Friends”. Valuably the Academic Mentoring initiative has also been aligned to increased staff job satisfaction as evidenced below: “I have genuinely enjoyed getting to know our year 1 students and despite the enormous amount of paperwork, it has contributed to my job satisfaction and I believe enhanced the quality of the year 1 experience”. Textile Art, Design and Fashion There was clear evidence that the subject of ‘colour’, when moved into the workshops and studios, allowed better use of workshop/studio learning spaces particularly in terms of independent study, peer learning, and a sense of belonging. Across the course, there was greater confidence, collegiality and student independence. The group of students who were the first ‘student partners’ took the role very seriously and benefited greatly. Confidence was evidenced by attendance at New Designers (UK wide show) where one of the students was placed 2nd overall. Impact data: Retention and Attrition was 5.1% in 2012/13 rose to 9% in 2013/14 but dropped to 4.5% in 2014/15, when three students left the programme and 4.2% in the current academic year. We have had no fails in the first semester Studio Practice module this year, a fantastic outcome. The students have a base room and this has been used as a social space, attendance overall has improved and those who have had attendance problems have received support, studies advice and practical support from the staff, artists in residence, and 2nd year partners. Feedback was very positive: Creative Technologies As a result of the restructuring of module CRE104 in relation to active and collaborative strategies and assessment, 88% of students indicated they felt a strong degree of positivity towards collaborative work, validating the change to assessment practices in keeping collaborative work for the earlier, more basic technical/procedural (and lower stakes) assignment rather than the later assignment, in which creative practice plays a greater role. All students agreed that collaborative work on this module has contributed to fostering a sense of community within the class validating the general philosophy of embedding collaborative work and resultant active learning at some point in this module. Students also widely supported a change in assessment approach by staff to run collaborative assignments in a lower stakes mode to encourage creativity. The majority of students agreed that collaborative work happened at the right point in the module. 78% of students agreed that collaborative work makes it easier to learn new topics quickly. The student responses do not indicate an unsophisticated unqualified acceptance of collaborative practices in all cases, but indicate support where the manner of their introduction and management is appropriate to the particular topic and carefully planned. Impact data: Six from eight year one modules noted reductions in failure rates. The other two modules noted a one and two percent rise. In the Student field trip / hackathon activity, students clearly indicated a strengthening of peer / staff relationship and indicated how this could help them with aspects of their

32

academic learning. As a result of the student field trip and hackathon activity, 92% of students agreed or strongly agreed the trip allowed them to build relationships with both staff and peers. The same amount felt the experience helped develop team working skills as well as their own interests / goals within their area of study. Goal free evaluation also indicated that socialising with peers outside of the classroom environment helped build team-working skills and increase confidence levels. Consolidate shared student space: The majority of students indicated that the student space introductory presentation helped them consolidate their interest in the subject area. 75% also agreed that having access to such a space has enabled more meaningful interaction between staff and students. However, only 30% of students said they use the space often when not in class. Staff have observed that very few students use this space. It also tends to be the same students who use it repeatedly. The space is primarily used for individual work and never collaborative group work. Students have indicated informally that whilst they see the value in having a space, they don’t feel comfortable using this particular space for a variety of reasons such as, proximity to staff offices, lack of seating space and equipment. Accounting Evidence from questionnaires on the pre-enrolment induction activities has demonstrated new students’ appreciation of the opportunity to link with Student Society members studying the Accounting subject, as well as other new students to the subject. A number of first-year students commented in the pre-enrolment induction day feedback survey that the strong points of this event was “Talks with senior students and staff”. These surveys along with staff/student consultative committee meetings also continue to demonstrate positive recognition of opportunities, through the Society’s events, for social networking between students and between staff and students. This has provided an opportunity for greater interaction between students and staff in the academic sphere; and greater professional awareness. The activities also encouraged networking and professional awareness; receiving positive feedback from professional bodies and key graduate employers who support such initiatives. Impact data: Attrition has reduced from 7.5% in 2012/13 to 6.1% at first sit (June) 2015/16. Nursing (Mental Health) Students reported increased levels of belonging and engagement in comparison to their starting point. Students also reported increased satisfaction with the induction period as reported that they enjoyed and valued contact with their peers in years 2 & 3. We have reduced our attrition rate and increased overall satisfaction with the course. The induction model has worked well. Our current year 3 student representative has adopted a more supportive role to help her colleague in year 2. This has allowed our year 2 representative to become more active in engaging with the student body across all three years. There has been a noticeable impact, primarily for the individuals involved. Specifically, those students moving into year 3 have been appointed as senior faculty representatives within the students union- being able to use their work in year 2 within the SRS programme as indicators of their leadership qualities. In 2015 students engaged with the programme, either as student partner or in a facilitators of groups with junior students won national and regional awards. Again, the case study in the appendices provides further detail. Impact data: Attrition has reduced from 9.1% in 2012/13 to 5.9% at first sit (June) 2015/16.

33

Computing The feedback on using final year students as mentors has been consistently very positive from the year 1 students. The impact for the academics has also been very positive and productive. Additionally the final students have enhanced their employability with very positive feedback from industrial employers about their contribution and engagement in this intervention. These students also receive additional recognition under the Ulster EDGE award for this intervention: https://www.ulster.ac.uk/business/employers/edge-award. The findings from this project have been presented by students and staff at a number of conferences: Ulster CHERP ( 2013, 2014, 2015), RAISE (2015), EFYE (2015, 2016) This additional one-hour has allowed more effective feedback and planning of new interventions between the mentors and staff. This feedback and brain storming session allowed us to creative reactive dynamic learning sessions to suit the needs of the current cohort. It has been very apparent from this project that every year students and their needs change. This additional hour enabled the design of effective reactive dynamic sessions. Mentor and year 1 student feedback has been very positive regarding the interventions that have come from these design sessions. The students have been a lot more engaged and pro-active in the learning environments. The critical thinking area has shown very positive improvements with the students enjoying more engaging sessions with peer member and group support. This intervention had a very positive impact for both final year and year 1 students and also staff involved. We extended the SPICE model to another campus with similar courses and modules in year 1. The feedback and enhanced engagement of students was very positive. The two groups of mentors, from different campuses were able to meet and compare their differing experiences of the year 1 student’s progress and needs. These comparisons were then discussed at the one-hour feedback and design sessions with staff and mentors. This provided very insightful comparisons about the year 1 students’ progress and needs. It also showed that you do need to be dynamic and reactive to different needs across campuses. The mentors were very positive regarding the group meetings with mentors from other campuses. They found it very useful to share and compare findings and strategies. This parallel project did highlight the importance of at least one academic member of staff who acts as an ambassador to take the initiative forward. Without the ambassadors the initiative will not grow and embed well. This continues to have a very positive impact on engaging students in active learning sessions. The students’ feedback on this has continually been very positive and active learning sessions are creating very engaging, challenging yet rewarding sessions. Impact data: The improved student engagement has also shown improvements with respect to academic achievement. The attrition figures for the BSc Hons Games Development cohort have improved significantly from 13.6% in 2012-13 to 7.7% in 2014-15. For first sit (June) 2015-16 we achieved 7.1%. This is a very similar story for the BSc Hons Computing: 2012-13 (10.6%) and for first sit (June) 2015-16 (6.8%). The mentors can actively help design challenging components to this activity by designing new challenges for students to target an issue of area of difficulty. This closes the loop enabling the team to create very dynamic active learning sessions where the students feel comfortable to engage and proactively seek mechanisms to gain points for the teams. A School code of practice has been initiated and is being developed and designed with input from both the mentors, who have just returned from industrial placement, and the academic staff. This will then require input from the extending academic staff covering post year 1 for

https://www.ulster.ac.uk/business/employers/edge-award

34

final approval. This will provide a very consistent guideline for the students across there four years of academic study. This will help remove any confusion and ambiguity for the learners.

7.3 Case Studies of particularly effective working See Appendix 1

Case Studies

Title: Addressing student expectations and building confidence for the study of law through a pre-arrival activity Author: Amanda Zacharopoulou, Discipline: Law

Title: Building the environment: Academic Mentors and enhanced communication supporting transition and building belonging

Author: Michaela Keenan, Discipline: Built Environment

Title: Improving first year student confidence, team working and success through active and collaborative learning strategies both inside and outside the classroom Author: Terry Quigley, Discipline: Creative Technologies

Title: Strengthening collaborative partnerships between staff and students through the establishment of a student society Author: Claire McCann, Discipline: Accounting

Title: Enhancing induction to promote belonging and professional identity of mental health nursing students Author: Iain McGowan, Discipline: Nursing (Mental Health)

Title: Cloth, colour and communities of practice: embedding co-curricular learning in Textile Art, Design and Fashion Author: Alison Gault & Hazel Bruce, Discipline: Textile Art, Design and Fashion

Title: SPICE: Student Partners In Curriculum Enhancement Author: Michaela Black, Discipline: Computing

35

7.4 Commentary about impact and learning about effective practice in the disciplines Final June retention and progression statistics

Figure 5 represents the percentage attrition statistics following implementation of the

interventions in 2013/14. Overall, the average %attrition in these courses decreased from

12.4% in 2013/14 to 10.3% in 2015/16. Substantial improvements in the June period were

found with Law (MG) 21.1% attrition (14/15) to 6.9% (15/16); with Accounting 13% to 6.1%;

and a 25% reduction in attrition was observed in Construction Engineering & Management

and a 27% reduction in Mental Health Nursing between 14/15 and 15/16.

Figure 6 represents the end of year percentage attrition statistics (the 2015/16 end of year

data are not available yet). There was a 11% reduction in the average %attrition across the

courses between 2013/14 and 2014/15.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

%A

ttri

tio

n

Academic Year

Figure 5: End of June first sit attrition statistics

LLB Hons Law (JN)

LLB Hons Law (ME)

BSc Hons Const Eng& Mgt

BSc Hons Accounting

BSc Hons Nurs Mental Health

BSc Hons Computing

BSc Hons Comp Game Dev

BA Hons Textile, Des & Fashion

36

Figure 7 represents the percentage attrition after the examination period in Semester 1 of

each academic year. Law at MG seen a reduction from 1.43% to 9.1% to 0% attrition over

the past 3 years. Also in Computing, a reduction in %attrition was observed from 11.1% to

3.5% to 2.3% over the past 3 years. Following the interventions in 2013/14, BA Hons Textile

Art, Design & Fashion, BSc Hons Computer Game Development, BSc Hons Mental Health

Nursing maintained attrition levels below 10% each year.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

%A

ttri

tio

n

Academic Year

Figure 6: End of year attrition statistics

LLB Hons Law (JN)

LLB Hons Law (ME)


BSc Hons Building Survey

BSc Hons Accounting


BSc Hons Computing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

%A

ttri

tio

n

Academic Year : Semester 1

Figure 7: Semester 1 attrition statistics

LLB Hons Law (JN)

LLB Hons Law (ME)


BSc Hons Building Survey

BSc Hons Accounting


BSc Hons Computing



37

Further, there are some interesting statistics in relation to when the students are leaving, and the possible impact of the specific intervention. Early Leavers: Semester One (2012 -2016) Across the sample disciplines between 55% and 61.5% of all leavers exit in semester 1 which clearly indicates leavers in year one is an all-year problem. This emphasises the importance of mainstreaming pastoral care (Impact theme 2) across the entire year 1 programme. Of the 11 courses there was improved performance in semester one for Construction Engineering, Computing, Computing & Games, and Textiles (mainly up by 50%). However, there was no improvement in Building Surveying, Building Engineering, nor Nursing, and indeed the performance of Law, Creative Technologies, and Accounting all decreased. Clearly, better pre-entry contact (Impact theme 1) is vital to ensure that students make the right choice before enrolment – but that active student retention is an all-year round activity. Early Leavers: Year End (2012 -2015) By year end Construction Engineering, Building Surveying, Computing & Games, and Textiles all showed improved performance during the period. It is interesting to note that of the three areas who focused on Induction (Law, Built Environment, and Accounting) only Built Environment showed any improvement in student retention – which indicates their strong focus on team-working, pre-engagement, mentoring, and their high visibility Drop in Don’t Drop Out campaign has been successful (moving from 11.3% to 7.5% early leavers). Those areas focusing on WTP and Peer Support (Impact theme 3 and 4) (Computing and Textiles) managed to cut the number of early leavers during the cycle from 6.7% to 4.6% and 3.4% to 1.5% and respectively. However, the Active Learning projects undertaken by Creative Technologies and Nursing while achieving early success during the initial years of the project returned less favourable results by project end increasing early leaver attrition by 11.5% and 4.1% respectively. Although indication is positive for Nursing in 2015/16 with a first sit (June) early leaver attrition at 5.9% compared to a 2014/15 year end figure of 13.2%. Non-returners Although there are generally very modest student numbers involved it is pleasing to note that of the 11 courses 6 did not lose any students via the non-returner category. One improved by 50% (Computing), three courses lost one student each (Law at Magee, Construction Engineering, and Textiles) with only one course losing more (Accounting lost 3 students). Overall, this clearly indicates that Ulster does not have a problem with non-returners. Fails Between 2012 and 2015, almost 78% of all failed (leave and withdraw) students were in the Law and Built Environment disciplines which constituted 21% and 57% respectively of all fails across the three years.

38

Apart from these two discipline areas there are generally very small numbers of students completely failing the year. Textiles, Creative Technologies, Accounting, Nursing, and the Computing disciplines all averaged less than 5% fails across all years of the SRS programme. Academic success. Attrition data has improved across the University as a whole over the period of the project, however, this improvement has been variable and indeed performance in some of the courses involved in the project has been disappointing. However, there has been a more significant improvement in student performance amongst those students who remained on the course, the number of first year modules with a failure rate of above 35% has fallen significantly. Progression rates Analysis of the Institutional attrition and progression statistics identified a decrease in the number of high failing modules in the programmes during the project. This finding was also confirmed by the higher progression rates observed in many of the courses. For example, in the BSc Hons Computing programme, progression from Year 1 into Year 2 increased from 86% to 94% between the years 2012/13 to 2014/15. Also, across the same 3 years, a greater number of students progressed in courses such as Accounting (90% to 95%), Art & Design (95% to 97%) and Law (89% to 93%).

8. Sustainability

8.1 Ways in which the programmes have become more widespread or embedded

There is a clear move towards closer partnership working between the Students Union and the academic staff across all levels of the University and a focus on putting the student experience at the centre of what we do (see section 5.5). There has been widespread dissemination of effective practice about the project both internally and through external networks and conferences. It has also been a key source of information for the review of academic structures which has been undertaken during 2015/16. Examples of how effective practice has been become embedded include inter alia:

Computing’s approach to use final years as mentors has been introduced in other schools in the faculty. This model has been applied across other faculties.

Built Environment’s approach, which uses academic mentors instead of Advisers of Study, this has been implemented across the school, not just the three courses that are part of the SRS.

Moving student enrolment to the end of induction week has proved to be successful in one area as it allows students to ensure that their first choice is the right one. This has now been recommended across the University.

Research undertaken as part of this programme has informed the development of Ulster’s Student Learning Experience Principles (see section 6.1), in particular Principle 1: Ulster Learning Model (see Appendix 2).

39

Awareness-raising and dissemination of the SRS Change programme has been ongoing during 2013-15 and includes: Internal dissemination Presentation to Senate Regular updates (3 reports per year) to the Student Engagement Sub-committee (SESC) An SRS brief in the University’s Inside magazine (Ulster Staff Magazine) in March 2014 A presentation by the core team at CHERP’s annual Festival of Innovative Practice in

June 2014 and a report included in the festival booklet. A presentation by the core team and discipline teams at CHERP’s Annual Conference in

January 2015 and January 2016. The core team have presented key messages and evidence from the programme in

Semester 2, 2015/16 at all six faculty boards. This has raised awareness of key learning points and of the case studies of effective practice.

Faculty and School Learning and Teaching Coordinators were part of the wider SRS team, which enabled cross fertilisation of ideas and further dissemination within and across schools.

40

External dissemination European First Year Experience (EFYE) 2014 Conference, Nottingham Trent University,

9-11 June 2014. A paper presented by Hazel Bruce and Alison Gault from Textile Art, Design and Fashion.

Society of Legal Scholars Annual Conference, September 2014: Zacharopoulou, A and Diver, A, “Transition and belonging – a programme of change in induction practice for first year law students”

RAISE conference, Manchester Metropolitan University, 12-13 September 2014 – Ulster Symposium: A partnership approach in and between disciplines to improve student engagement, belonging and retention. Presented by staff and students (Michaela Black, Roisin Curran, Mark Hamill, Taryn Luney, Ross White)

European First Year Experience (EFYE) 2015 Conference, University of Bergen, Norway, 15-17 June 2015. o A paper presented by Terry Quigley, Creative Technologies o A paper presented by Michaela Keenan, Built Environment o A paper presented by Michaela Black, Computing

RAISE conference, Nottingham Trent University, 10-11 September 2015 o A paper presented by Michaela Keenan, Built Environment o A paper presented by Michaela Black & student, Computing

SEDA conference, Cardiff, 19-20 November 2015. Presentation by core team entitled ‘improving student engagement and belonging through student staff partnerships: outcomes from the HEA What Works? Programme at Ulster University’

A vodcast was produced which combined the key highlights of effective practice across the disciplines. This was disseminated on the internal University online channel for staff in December 2015. Subsequently, a short vodcast (less than 1 minute) accompanies each case study which is now available on the Ulster CHERP website. These vodcasts could also be made available on the HEA website with the Ulster case studies.

8.2 Plans and progress towards embedding The SRS project has changed the learning and teaching culture within the relevant discipline areas and has generated a significant evidence base on the effectiveness of various interventions aimed at improving student retention and success. It is imperative for us that this learning is disseminated and used to enhance the student experience at the discipline and institutional level. A key output from the project is the development of ten case studies of effective practice. These will be used to underpin the pedagogic rationale for activities in relation to the first-year student experience. The case studies are available via the University’s CHERP website (http://www.ulster.ac.uk/centrehep/index.html). See appendix 1. Each case study is accompanied by a short video highlighting effective practice and key messages. The core team and discipline leads wish to progress embedding of effective practice through some of the non-exhaustive examples given below. More strategic recommendations at the institutional level are outlined in section 9. Further embedding using the SRS evidence-base:

Discipline leads have indicated that the learning from this project is now impacting on other courses within their school. Further local dissemination at school and campus level can build on this.

The Learning Landscape transition project at Ulster aims to address the wider strategic goal for Learning, Teaching and Student Experience that learning spaces should be ‘student-centred’ rather than ‘teacher-centred’. At least two of the SRS discipline areas have secured funding for work in this area which will be grounded in pedagogy which supports the fostering of student belongingness, engagement and self-confidence.

Involvement in the development of resources and advice for all staff in the embedding of the Ulster Student Learning Experience Principles. It is expected that these will be implemented in academic year 2016/17.

http://www.ulster.ac.uk/centrehep/index.html

41

8.3 Discussion about future sustainability

The four key impact themes or learning points identified in section 7.1 and listed below, need to be embedded and used to underpin decisions taken across the University to support the first-year experience. The case studies give examples of some models (listed below) which can be easily translated to other disciplines. However, it is recognised that there are other sustainable models that already exist in the disciplines and these also need to be highlighted and disseminated centrally. Key impact themes and models of effective practice identified: Theme 1: Pre-entry contact

o A model for a pre-arrival activity for incoming students. o An infographic which visually represents a programme of study and helps

prospective students make an informed choice. Theme 2: Mainstreaming pastoral care

o A First year Retention and Success Plan which had five elements of which a school-based Academic Mentoring system is central.

Theme 3: Ways of thinking and Practicing the discipline o A co-curricular workshop model which embeds ways of thinking and practising the

discipline (WTP). o A student-led model for the creation and running of a discipline society

Theme 4: Peer support o A coaching model which enables first years to be mentored by final years. o An induction model which promotes identity building for incoming students through

peer support provided by higher-level students.

The core team and discipline leads also wish to explore the possibility of a book publication based on this work and further internal and external dissemination channels are being explored such as targeted journals on the first year experience.

9. Conclusions

9.1 Successes This SRS Change Programme has facilitated and enabled inter alia:

Improved retention and success in first-year in some areas (see section 7.4).

Tangible outputs in the form of: o an institutional final report o ten case studies of effective practice with accompanying short videos o research to underpin the Ulster Learning Model (Student Experience Principle 1) o a strong and continuously developing evidence-base incorporating three years of

quantitative data (seven belonging surveys, attrition statistics) and qualitative data (student focus groups and discipline team focus groups) on which the University can use going forward to underpin policies and strategies in relation to the Ulster student experience.

A University-wide recognition of the importance of first-year in the student life cycle and its impact on future success

A growing appreciation that student Performance Indicators should be considered along with contextual qualitative data in relation to the student experience and that this is an evolving area that requires on-going evaluation and reflection.

The development of staff capacity to undertake leadership roles thereby galvanising course teams to adopt a student-centred ethos to the first-year curriculum. This is

42

evidenced by the numbers of staff engaging in CPD and in particular gaining recognition as Senior Fellow of the HEA (see section 5.2).

The development of staff and student capacity to engage in pedagogic projects, which focus on L&T enhancement and innovation, and dissemination of outcomes has contributed to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) (see section 8.1).

A culture of team-working both within and between discipline teams (see section 3.2).

Further valuing of the student voice and the enhancement of practices to remove barriers which allow this to be fully embraced and utilised (see section 5.5)

The programme both in process and outcomes has contributed to the realisation of strategic aim 2 of the L&T strategy: ‘To provide transformative high quality, learning experiences through the promotion of meaningful staff-student partnerships that engender a shared responsibility’. (see section 5.1).

9.2 Challenges

The large number of discipline teams across four campuses involved in this Change Programme presented significant challenges in terms of; the breadth and diversity of the discipline areas, the geographical locations and different approaches to curriculum design and delivery.

The funding context that we were operating within over the course of the programme presented us with uncertainties and impacted on staff morale.

Implementing a students as partners ethos was challenging to operate immediately when a more traditional approach was prevalent.

Course team changes also presented some challenges in relation to continuity of approach.

9.3 Drawing together impact and learning, and reflection on the process

This change programme has highlighted for us the multifaceted nature of student

engagement. The outcomes and impact of the interventions suggest the importance of

maintaining a strong focus on the affect or emotional dimension of student engagement as

well as the behavioural and cognitive dimensions. Our research has allowed us to identify

four strong themes which we believe should become priority areas on which to focus further

enhancement of the student experience, these are: pre-entry contact, mainstreaming

pastoral care, ways of thinking and practising the discipline, and peer support. We have

found that the characteristics of effective practice across the discipline areas have included:

building of trust relationships between staff and student and student-student; engagement

through partnership; and the building of communities of practice which incorporate ongoing

formative feedback. We believe that the individual interventions chosen within each discipline

area, in the main, work well in that discipline but it has become evident that ‘one size does

not fit all’ and future implementation of enhanced practice needs to take account of

disciplinary differences. In addition, the course teams have identified two factors for

consideration. Firstly, that each year group can be very different and student diversity can

change the dynamics of each cohort. Therefore, each course team, whilst adopting What

Works? must remain vigilant and be prepared to adapt their practice to support the students

that they have in front of them on an ongoing basis. Secondly, that whilst interventions may

impact positively on first years in semester 1 and semester 2, there can sometimes be a dip

in belongingness, engagement and self-confidence amongst second years. Therefore, it will

be important to consider further the second year student experience and how this may be

enhanced.

9.4 Conclusions and implications

43

The SRS change programme at Ulster has been a very successful and highly visible project. There are tangible outputs which will be invaluable to the development of Ulster strategies and policies going forward. There has been learning at both the discipline and institutional level and further appreciation of the needs of today’s learner. Although the programme officially has ended, there is a strong impetus to continue the innovative work that has begun and through our recommendations below, we will continue to use the strong evidence base generated to make informed decisions regarding all aspects of the student journey. This will encompass the four impact themes identified:

Theme 1: Pre-entry contact Early engagement at the pre-entry stage of the student journey enhances the transition process and is crucial in fostering confidence in first-year students both in terms of adapting to a less structured learning environment as well as learning new skills. It should be predicated on a strong course team ethos, which is: welcoming for new students, fosters belongingness, and enables students to integrate into a disciplinary community of practice in which they will develop.

Theme 2: Mainstreaming pastoral care Academic staff have a critical role to play in student support, being best placed to observe behaviour in the learning environment that might indicate that a student is in need of support. Developing student capacity to engage and to deal with challenges through a sustained induction process which fosters staff student relationships results in students being more likely to have the energy and motivation to do well in their studies.

Theme 3: Ways of thinking and Practicing the discipline (WTP) Active-learning activities which are centred on the discipline allow students to gain not just subject-specific skills but also to develop WTP, values, and attitudes relevant to their professional area through working alongside experienced practitioners. This impacts positively on: student belonging, confidence, engagement, and professional awareness thereby enhancing graduate attributes and improving employability.

Theme 4: Peer support There is strong evidence of the impact of peer relations in the student learning experience. Peer-peer relations when introduced from an early stage of the programme can be used to improve student engagement and belonging. Peer support has developed a strong sense of belonging at Ulster and this project provides the underpinning evidence to develop a road map of best practice to consider when embedding peer support activities.

9.5 Recommendations/next steps It is recognised that University policies and processes should be updated to reflect the learning from this change programme. This may have resource implications. A number of Task and Finish groups are proposed which will involve the core team and discipline leads together with staff from across the University. It will be necessary for us to work closely with key areas such as: Centre for Higher Education Research and Practice (CHERP), Students’ Union, Access and Distributed Learning (ADDL), Employability and Marketing, Student Support etc. The purpose of the Task and Finish groups will be to consider the changes necessary in order to implement effective practice across the institution through the wider adoption of evidence-based pedagogic approaches. An over-arching recommendation is that the University rethinks its priorities, policies, processes and practices to enable a culture of belonging to be realised. This programme has identified four themes (see section 9.4) which provide a focus in which enhancements should be directed in order to improve first year student retention and success. In addition to these themes, it is also recognised that a culture of team working and an ethos of ‘students as partners’ should be further embedded across all discipline areas and include all staff and

44

students. Finally, it has become evident that second-year students can experience a lessening of their sense of belonging and that further research could be directed to this stage of the student journey. The following seven recommendations are proposed:

1. The University should review its policies and procedures with particular attention to: pre-entry information and contact; student registration and enrolment; existing Transition Policy; existing Policy for First Year Undergraduate Teaching; and students transferring to other courses in initial weeks.

2. In recognising the strong focus on pastoral care within Ulster, further consideration should be given to mainstreaming student support with a focus on student belonging, confidence and engagement and how it is fostered through an integrated pastoral and academic support system involving staff, students and professional services.

3. Building on the impact of peer relations in the student learning experience where peer

support has developed a strong sense of belonging and has provided the

underpinning evidence - develop a road map of best practice for consideration by all

course teams to embed peer support activities.

4. Promote and develop further ways of thinking and practising the discipline (WTP) through innovative use of active learning spaces to broaden graduate attributes and employability skills.

5. Re-focus pedagogic-based practice to enhance the second-year student experience building on the success of first-year interventions and which further foster and enhance student belonging, engagement and self-confidence. In particular, a focus on learning gain may be necessary in order to identify and measure how the learning from first-year can be built upon in order to focus on students learning from second year and beyond.

6. Recognising the evidence-base which suggests that effective team working leads to improvements in the student experience – prioritise and build capacity for team working, across and between teams (academic and professional) that positively impacts on the student experience in creative and innovative ways.

7. Sustain and develop established practices which embrace ‘students as partners’ and which further value and utilise the student voice - a partnership working culture should be developed across all programmes.

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the office of Professor Denise McAlister,

Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Learning, Teaching and Student Experience).

45

Appendix

1. Case study: Staff and Student Guide to Engagement through Partnership

Context

Decades of research show that effective student engagement promotes deep learning,

focuses on what the student does and engages students in active learning (Biggs and Tang,

2011; Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Entwistle, 2009; Thomas, 2002). This focus on students

acknowledges that learning is a joint activity, starts from the student’s experience and

changes the learner’s perspective on knowledge (Mezirow, 1991; Prosser and Trigwell,

1999). Learning therefore is less about the absorption of knowledge and more about how

we set the right conditions for conceptual change to take place. According to Biggs and

Tang (2011) conditions for such a change include inter alia: student motivation and students

working collaboratively with others, both peers and teachers.

The learning climate that promotes independent lifelong learners is one that is based on

high trust and the extent to which we lean more towards this trusting climate translates into

action at all levels of student-teacher interaction (McGregor, 1960; Gardner, 1993; Pintrich

& Schunk, 2002; Biggs & Tang, 2011).

More recently across the higher education sector, there is a focus on the process or ethos

of engagement with publications such as the NUS Manifesto for Partnerships (2013) and

the HEA Framework for engagement through partnership (2014). This framework illustrates

four overlapping areas of focus where partnerships may be fostered and this guide relates

to one of these areas; learning, teaching and assessment.

International research shows that if we engage our students as partners in learning and

teaching and this partnership is based on respect, reciprocity and shared responsibility then

we can make learning and teaching more engaging and effective for students and staff

(Cook-Sather, Bovill & Felten, 2014).

Partnership is understood as fundamentally about a relationship in which all involved…– are actively engaged in and stand to gain from the process of learning and working together. Partnership is essentially a process of engagement, not a product. It is a way of doing things, rather than an outcome in itself’

(Healey, Flint & Harrington, 2014, p.12).

At Ulster, Strategic Aim 2 of the Learning & Teaching Strategy (2013/14 – 2017/18) clearly

articulates how we should realise our goal

To provide transformative, high quality, learning experiences through the promotion of meaningful staff student partnerships that engender a shared responsibility.

Aim

This guide is aimed at all staff and students and articulates the benefits of adopting a

staff student partnership philosophy to student engagement. It is intended to inspire

and enhance practice through practical recommendations for staff and students.

46

What is the impact of staff-student partnership (SSP) on engagement?

The benefits of SSP are very similar for both staff and students and are outlined below under

two main themes: personal development and enhances the learning climate. For both

students and staff, it can challenge traditional norms in HE and provide each with an insight

into the other’s perspective thereby motivating each to adopt new approaches to staff-

student engagement.

47

Personal Development

New

ways

of

thinking

SSP encourages dialogue and mutual respect. For students; it provides an insight into the complex world of HE and challenges

them to question the adequacy of a passive role in their own learning.

For staff, SSP provides an insight into what it’s like to be a student in today’s world and challenges them to think about; assumptions

that they make about students; and the effectiveness of their current practice.

New

Skills

Students report that skills such as note-taking, being reflective, team working, writing and presenting have got better and with this

brings increased confidence, motivation and readiness for different learning situations.

Staff report that SSP prompted them to stand back, solicit ideas from the students and to take on the role of a facilitator. For some

staff SSP mimics the profession, which enhances students’ readiness for employment.

Enhances the learning climate

Builds

Relationships

SSP breaks down barriers which can impede learning. For students; getting to know staff within and outside of the classroom

reduces student anxieties and prompts them to approach staff for support and guidance.

For staff, SSP helps to see students as individuals with different goals and aspirations. Knowing their capabilities better allows

guidance and feedback to be better targeted. It also gives staff on-going feedback on their teaching practice.

Enhances the learning climate

Builds relationships Creates a ripple effect

Encourages active learning approaches

Personal Development

New ways of thinking

New skills

48

Creates

a

ripple

effect

SSP not only benefits staff and student directly involved in initiatives or projects. Students report that when enthused student

partners are more active in the classroom; it rubs off on the other students and promotes more collaborative learning for everyone.

Staff report that when learners get to know staff and each other outside of the classroom through course-based opportunities such

as; pre-entry contact, induction activities and field trips, the ripple effect is felt back in the classroom through a sense of a cohesive

team with everybody learning together.

Encourages

active

learning

SSP breaks down the ‘them and us’ situation and promotes active engagement. For students, they are more likely to ask questions

and put forward ideas and suggestions which leads to taking responsibility for their own learning and a better understanding of staff

expectations of independent learning.

For staff, SSP has provided the impetus to take more risks in the classroom – in the sense of ‘letting go’ complete control. It has

freed staff up to be innovative in their approaches to suit their contexts, which ultimately leads to a growing sense of a ‘discipline

community’.

49

How do I get started or build on what I’m already doing?

For staff, critically reflect on your approach to supporting and enhancing the student

experience. What opportunities are there for students to; build relationships; take on active

roles; exercise choice in tasks/assessments; learn collaboratively; practice their discipline;

engage in research; work on curriculum enhancements and so on…

For students, seek opportunities to develop your skills, confidence and performance. This

may mean that you have to step out of your comfort zone, and shift from a passive to an

active role in your own studies.

Recommendations

Developing strong partnership learning communities which engage staff and students is key

to embedding partnership as part of the culture and ethos of the institution (Healey et al,

2014). Here are some recommendations, to consider which are pedagogies of partnership.

Staff Students

Create a welcoming environment so that

students coming to HE can easily make friends,

find their way around and get ready to learn in

a different way.

What works?

Small group working to aid socialisation,

this is critical at pre-entry and induction to

promote belongingness. Information

overload at this stage should not be the

primary focus.

Introduce students to key staff that they will

come into contact with that year so that

relationships can be initiated.

Peer mentoring – students welcome the

wisdom and support offered by higher-level

students. Current students could be

involved at open evenings, pre-arrival and

induction activities.

Provide a tour of the campus, identifying

key spaces such as classrooms, seminar

rooms, library and catering facilities.

Be open and flexible and remember that

everyone is feeling the same at the start. Get

involved and participate in activities offered.

What works?

Attend all course induction and Week 0

activities.

Join in group activities and get to know

other students and staff

Seek guidance and support from your

Studies Adviser, Module Tutor or higher-

level students who have already been

through this.

Familiarise yourself with Student Support

on your campus. Advice and guidance is

available on health and wellbeing, disability

and medical conditions and student finance.

50

Staff Students

Make all timetabled sessions interactive so

that relationships are developed and learning is

collaborative, interesting and worthwhile.

What works?

Adopt a friendly approachable and

facilitative style – this is hugely valued by

students and has a considerable impact on

engagement

Small group activities especially in large

classes can promote a shift from passive to

active learning and enthuse students to

become involved

Consider how digitally based learning

resources can facilitate pre-reading and

revision of fundamental concepts thereby

freeing up time in-class for discussion and

clarification.

Provide clarity and direction of what is

expected in terms of independent learning.

Attend and participate in all timetabled

sessions and get to know staff and other

students.

What works?

Come prepared to all sessions by reading

module handbooks and learning resources.

Participate in discussion and ask questions.

Contribute to group work activities as you

can learn nearly as much with your peers

as with your tutor.

Consider your existing skill-set and avail of

support provided to develop this. This may

come from within your course, central

departments or online.

Use your unscheduled time to engage in

independent learning. Each module will

have a reading list with required and

recommended resources.

Provide opportunities for students to engage in

activities beyond the classroom which can

motivate students and help them to make

connections in their learning.

What works?

Industry-focused field trips which link theory

to practice and promote collaboration

between staff and students and amongst

students

Co-curricular activities which link modules

together and provide opportunities for

students to work across year groups

Subject-based society which actively

encourages debate and activities about the

profession and is accessible to all students

Create roles for students, which allow them

to work alongside staff in different ways.

Examples include; acting as ambassadors

at open evenings and induction activities,

peer-mentoring, curriculum planning etc.

Remember that not all learning happens in the

classroom. Your timetable only schedules

contact time with your tutors but there are other

opportunities to practice your discipline.

What works?

Avail of opportunities to participate in trips

and activities outside of normal class time.

Suggest other activities in which you might

wish to get involved

Attend SU events; join a club or your

subject society – its never too late to do

this, you can still join later in year 1 or year

2.

51

Staff Students

Design authentic assessment and feedback

tasks, which help students to test the

application of their knowledge and

understanding and to learn from constructive

feedback.

What works?

Authentic assessments, which are industry-

related and provide students with real-life

skills in preparation for employment.

Group-work activities that are well

structured allow students to gain team-

working skills and to learn from each other.

Choice in assessment allows students to

pick a topic of interest, which is highly

motivational and prompts responsibility-

taking for their own learning.

Assessments, which are clear and

unambiguous with assessment criteria

made available in advance.

Formative feedback available to all students

to help them self-correct and to learn from

mistakes. Cumulative assessment tasks

work well here.

Assessment and feedback tasks are not just

hoops to be jumped through. They are

opportunities to see how far you’ve come and

to receive feedback on how to improve.

What works?

Make sufficient time to complete

assessment tasks and submit on time

Be prepared to take on different roles within

a group task and contribute as part of a

team.

Familiarise yourself with the assessment

criteria, this will help you see where the

goal posts are and should allow you to

assess yourself before submission.

Use formative feedback to self-correct,

make an action plan for yourself in terms of

what you are going to do to improve.

Be prepared to give peers feedback, this

will help you to judge your own work more

adequately.

What are the challenges?

Staff-student partnerships are not without their challenges and these are also documented in

(Cook-Sather et al., 2014; Crawford et al., 2015; Curran & Millard, 2015; Healey et al.,

2014). They can include issues such as time; resistance and capacity (for both staff

and students) and how these challenges are addressed can differ across the disciplines.

Large class sizes can also seem like a deterrent to staff-student partnerships but it’s

worth remembering that students can learn nearly as much through facilitated conversations

with their peers as with their teachers. If you are thinking of adopting a student partnership

ethos, then the advice generally is to start small – situate it within a module and make

sure that all students are aware of what you are trying to do. Although only a few students

might put themselves forward initially, try to think of ways of getting others involved –

creating roles for students as indicated above is an excellent way of collaborating with

students.

52

Acknowledgements

This work was undertaken as part of the What works? Student retention and success

change programme, funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, co-ordinated by the Higher

Education Academy and Action on Access.

These guidelines are one of the outputs from research carried out during Ulster’s

involvement in this Change Programme (2012-2015) where the research involved:

An exploration of the ‘lived experience’ of staff and students involved in partnership during the change Programme, through semi-structured interviews.

Focus groups (17) with first-year students across seven discipline areas and focus groups with the staff involved in these course teams, using an Appreciative Inquiry methodology.

A Belonging survey which identifies changes over time in students’ sense of belonging to their institution, their academic engagement and their self-confidence. Four surveys containing 16 questions rated on a Likert scale have been administered to all first years in the seven discipline areas, the first of these in November 2013 (n=274), the second in April 2014 (n=230), the third in November 2014 (n=359) and the fourth in April 2015 to both first years (n=333) and second years (n=240). The data has been compared with the findings in other UK Universities (n=3718).

They are also informed by a 2014 HEA publication, Engagement through Partnership:

Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching in Higher education. These guidelines focus

specifically on student engagement through partnership in learning, teaching and

assessment.

Contact Roisín Curran, Project Lead What Works? Change Programme,

[email protected]


53

References and further reading

Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th edn. Berkshire:

McGraw-Hill.

Chickering, A. & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39: 3-7. Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C. & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging Students as Partners in Learning and Teaching: A Guide for Faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Crawford, K., Horsley, R., Hagyard, A. & Derricott, D. (2015). Pedagogies of Partnership:

What works. York: HEA. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/project/pedagogies-

partnership-what-works

Curran, R. & Millard, L. (2015). A partnership approach to developing student capacity to

engage and staff capacity to be engaging: opportunities for academic developers.

International Journal for Academic Development, 21.1,67-78. DOI:10.1080/1360144X.2015.1120212.

Entwistle, N. (2009) Teaching for Understanding at University: Deep Approaches and

Distinctive Ways of Thinking. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic

Books.

Healey, M., Flint, A. & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: students as

partners in learning and teaching in higher education. York: HEA. Retrieved from

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-

and-teaching-higher-education

McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw:Hill

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

NUS (2012). Manifesto for Partnership. Retrieved from

http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/a-manifesto-for-partnership

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/project/pedagogies-partnership-what-works

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/project/pedagogies-partnership-what-works

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher-education

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/engagement-through-partnership-students-partners-learning-and-teaching-higher-education

http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/a-manifesto-for-partnership

54

Pintrich, P.R. & Schunk, D.H. (2002). Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and

Applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.

Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning & Teaching: The experience in

Higher Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Thomas, L. (2002). Student Retention in higher education: the role of institutional habitus. Journal of Education Policy, 17, 4:423-42.

Ulster Principles of Assessment and Feedback for Learning (2011). Retrieved from

http://www.ulster.ac.uk/centrehep/resources.html

Ulster Student Learning Experience Principles (2016) Forthcoming…

Ulster Learning and Teaching Strategy, 2013/14 -2017-18. Retrieved from

http://www.ulster.ac.uk/tls/

http://www.ulster.ac.uk/centrehep/resources.html

http://www.ulster.ac.uk/tls/

Supporting student success: strategies for institutional ... · member [email protected] Email...

Documents

Transcript of Supporting student success: strategies for institutional ... · member [email protected] Email...