Facilitating first year students’ engagement with planning education : utilising student affinity for technology to increase cohort cohesion and decrease attrition

First year students overwhelmingly indicate that a strong interest in a field of study prompts them to enrol in university (McInnis et al 2000), yet over a quarter indicate that they have seriously considered dropping out of studies during their first year, with boredom most frequently cited by those domestic students who do depart before graduation (Coates and Ransom 2011). While it may be comforting to write off such withdrawals to the presumed apathy of youth, student “disquiet (in) their first year on campus may be a result of courses and institutions that do not match their needs and objectives, rather than any uncertainty or lack of purpose on their part” (James et al 1999). Voting with their mouse clicks, The current research investigate two conceptualized types of student participation in online discussion forums to increase understanding of student affinity for technology and its potential for fostering social network development amongst first year students.

Moving beyond transition pedagogy: Maturity models and student engagement

Australian higher education institutions (HEIs) have entered a new phase of regulation and accreditation which includes performance-based funding relating to the participation and retention of students from social and cultural groups previously underrepresented in higher education. However, in addressing these priorities, it is critical that HEIs do not further disadvantage students from certain groups by identifying them for attention because of their social or cultural backgrounds, circumstances which are largely beyond the control of students. In response, many HEIs are focusing effort on university-wide approaches to enhancing the student experience because such approaches will enhance the engagement, success and retention of all students, and in doing so, particularly benefit those students who come from underrepresented groups. Measuring and benchmarking student experiences and engagement that arise from these efforts is well supported by extensive collections of student experience survey data. However no comparable instrument exists that measures the capability of institutions to influence and/or enhance student experiences where capability is an indication of how well an organisational process does what it is designed to do (Rosemann & de Bruin, 2005). This paper proposes that the concept of a maturity model (Marshall, 2010; Paulk, 1999) may be useful as a way of assessing the capability of HEIs to provide and implement student engagement, success and retention activities. We will describe the Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM), (Clarke, Nelson & Stoodley, 2012; Nelson, Clarke & Stoodley, 2012) we are currently investigating. We will discuss if our research may address the current gap by facilitating the development of an SESR-MM instrument that aims (i) to enable institutions to assess the capability of their current student engagement and retention programs and strategies to influence and respond to student experiences within the institution; and (ii) to provide institutions with the opportunity to understand various practices across the sector with a view to further improving programs and practices relevant to their context. The first aim of our research is to extend the generational approach which has been useful in considering the evolutionary nature of the first year experience (FYE) (Wilson, 2009). Three generations have been identified and explored: First generation approaches that focus on co-curricular strategies (e.g. orientation and peer programs); Second generation approaches that focus on curriculum (e.g. pedagogy, curriculum design, and learning and teaching practice); and third generation approaches—also referred to as transition pedagogy—that focus on the production of an institution-wide integrated holistic intentional blend of curricular and co-curricular activities (Kift, Nelson & Clarke, 2010). The second aim of this research is to move beyond assessments of students’ experiences to focus on assessing institutional processes and their capability to influence student engagement. In essence, we propose to develop and use the maturity model concept to produce an instrument that will indicate the capability of HEIs to manage and improve student engagement, success and retention programs and strategies. References Australian Council for Educational Research. (n.d.). Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/research/ausse/background Clarke, J., Nelson, K., & Stoodley, I. (2012, July). The Maturity Model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention: New horizon or false dawn? A Nuts & Bolts presentation at the 15th International Conference on the First Year in Higher Education, “New Horizons,” Brisbane, Australia. Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010) Transition pedagogy - a third generation approach to FYE: A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), pp. 1-20. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (n.d.). The University Experience Survey. Advancing quality in higher education information sheet. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Policy/Documents/University_Experience_Survey.pdf Marshall, S. (2010). A quality framework for continuous improvement of e-Learning: The e-Learning Maturity Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 143-166. Nelson, K., Clarke, J., & Stoodley, I. (2012). An exploration of the Maturity Model concept as a vehicle for higher education institutions to assess their capability to address student engagement. A work in progress. Submitted for publication. Paulk, M. (1999). Using the Software CMM with good judgment, ASQ Software Quality Professional, 1(3), 19-29. Wilson, K. (2009, June–July). The impact of institutional, programmatic and personal interventions on an effective and sustainable first-year student experience. Keynote address presented at the 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, “Preparing for Tomorrow Today: The First Year as Foundation,” Townsville, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers09/ppts/Keithia_Wilson_paper.pdf

Verifying a Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM): A reality check of the model using data derived from three universities

Australian higher education institutions (HEIs) have entered a new phase of regulation and accreditation which includes performance-based funding relating to the participation and retention of students from social and cultural groups previously underrepresented in higher education. However, in addressing these priorities, it is critical that HEIs do not further disadvantage students from certain groups by identifying them for attention because of their social or cultural backgrounds, circumstances which are largely beyond the control of students. In response, many HEIs are focusing effort on university-wide approaches to enhancing the student experience because such approaches will enhance the engagement, success and retention of all students, and in doing so, particularly benefit those students who come from underrepresented groups. Measuring and benchmarking student experiences and engagement that arise from these efforts is well supported by extensive collections of student experience survey data. However no comparable instrument exists that measures the capability of institutions to influence and/or enhance student experiences where capability is an indication of how well an organisational process does what it is designed to do (Rosemann & de Bruin, 2005). We have proposed that the concept of a maturity model (Marshall, 2010; Paulk, 1999) may be useful as a way of assessing the capability of HEIs to provide and implement student engagement, success and retention activities and we are currently articulating a Student Engagement, Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM), (Clarke, Nelson & Stoodley, 2012; Nelson, Clarke & Stoodley, 2012). Our research aims to address the current gap by facilitating the development of an SESR-MM instrument that aims (i) to enable institutions to assess the capability of their current student engagement and retention programs and strategies to influence and respond to student experiences within the institution; and (ii) to provide institutions with the opportunity to understand various practices across the sector with a view to further improving programs and practices relevant to their context. Our research extends the generational approach which has been useful in considering the evolutionary nature of the first year experience (FYE) (Wilson, 2009). Three generations have been identified and explored: First generation approaches that focus on co-curricular strategies (e.g. orientation and peer programs); Second generation approaches that focus on curriculum (e.g. pedagogy, curriculum design, and learning and teaching practice); and third generation approaches—also referred to as transition pedagogy—that focus on the production of an institution-wide integrated holistic intentional blend of curricular and co-curricular activities (Kift, Nelson & Clarke, 2010). Our research also moves beyond assessments of students’ experiences to focus on assessing institutional processes and their capability to influence student engagement. In essence, we propose to develop and use the maturity model concept to produce an instrument that will indicate the capability of HEIs to manage and improve student engagement, success and retention programs and strategies. The issues explored in this workshop are (i) whether the maturity model concept can be usefully applied to provide a measure of institutional capability for SESR; (ii) whether the SESR-MM can be used to assess the maturity of a particular set of institutional practices; and (iii) whether a collective assessment of an institution’s SESR capabilities can provide an indication of the maturity of the institution’s SESR activities. The workshop will be approached in three stages. Firstly, participants will be introduced to the key characteristics of maturity models, followed by a discussion of the SESR-MM and the processes involved in its development. Secondly, participants will be provided with resources to facilitate the development of a maturity model and an assessment instrument for a range of institutional processes and related practices. In the final stage of the workshop, participants will “assess” the capability of these practices to provide a collective assessment of the maturity of these processes. References Australian Council for Educational Research. (n.d.). Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.acer.edu.au/research/ausse/background Clarke, J., Nelson, K., & Stoodley, I. (2012, July). The Maturity Model concept as framework for assessing the capability of higher education institutions to address student engagement, success and retention: New horizon or false dawn? A Nuts & Bolts presentation at the 15th International Conference on the First Year in Higher Education, “New Horizons,” Brisbane, Australia. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (n.d.). The University Experience Survey. Advancing quality in higher education information sheet. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/HigherEducation/Policy/Documents/University_Experience_Survey.pdf Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010) Transition pedagogy - a third generation approach to FYE: A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), pp. 1-20. Marshall, S. (2010). A quality framework for continuous improvement of e-Learning: The e-Learning Maturity Model. Journal of Distance Education, 24(1), 143-166. Nelson, K., Clarke, J., & Stoodley, I. (2012). An exploration of the Maturity Model concept as a vehicle for higher education institutions to assess their capability to address student engagement. A work in progress. Submitted for publication. Paulk, M. (1999). Using the Software CMM with good judgment, ASQ Software Quality Professional, 1(3), 19-29. Wilson, K. (2009, June–July). The impact of institutional, programmatic and personal interventions on an effective and sustainable first-year student experience. Keynote address presented at the 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, “Preparing for Tomorrow Today: The First Year as Foundation,” Townsville, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers09/ppts/Keithia_Wilson_paper.pdf

The Socratic classroom : reflective thinking through collaborative inquiry

This book was written to serve two functions. First it is an exploration of what I have called Socratic pedagogy, a collaborative inquiry-based approach to teaching and learning suitable not only to formal educational settings such as the school classroom but to all educational settings. The term is intended to capture a variety of philosophical approaches to classroom practice that could broadly be described Socratic in form. The term ‘philosophy in schools’ is ambiguous and could refer to teaching university style philosophy to high school students or to the teaching of philosophy and logic or critical reasoning in senior years of high school. It is also used to describe the teaching of philosophy in schools generally. In the early and middle phases of schooling the term philosophy for children is often used. But this too is ambiguous as the name was adopted from Matthew Lipman’s Philosophy for Children curriculum that he and his colleagues at the Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children developed. In Britain the term ‘philosophy with children’ is sometimes employed to mark two methods of teaching that have Socratic roots but have distinct differences, namely Philosophy for Children and Socratic Dialogue developed by Leonard Nelson. The use of the term Socratic pedagogy and its companion term Socratic classroom (to refer to the kind of classroom that employs Socratic teaching) avoids the problem of distinguishing between various approaches to philosophical inquiry in the Socratic tradition but also separates it from the ‘study of philosophy’, such as university style philosophy or other approaches which place little or no emphasis on collaborative inquiry based teaching and learning. The second function builds from the first. It is to develop an effective framework for understanding the relationship between what I call the generative, evaluative and connective aspects of communal dialogue, which I think are necessary to the Socratic notion of inquiry. In doing so it is hoped that this book offers some way to show how philosophy as inquiry can contribute to educational theory and practice, while also demonstrating how it can be an effective way to approach teaching and learning. This has meant striking a balance between speaking to philosophers and to teachers and educators together, with the view that both see the virtues of such a project. In the strictest sense this book is not philosophy of education, insofar as its chief focus is not on the analysis of concepts or formulation of definitions specific to education with the aim of formulating directives that guide educational practice. It relinquishes the role of philosopher as ‘spectator’, to one of philosopher ‘immersed in matter’ – in this case philosophical issues in education, specifically those related to philosophical inquiry, pedagogy and classroom practice. Put another way, it is a book about philosophical education.

Please take out your phones : on the spot solicitation of student feedback in class

The use of mobile devices such as smart phones and tablets in classrooms has been met with mixed sentiments. Some instructors and teachers see them as a distraction and regularly ban their usage. Others who see their potential to enhance learning have started to explore ways to integrate them into their teaching in an attempt to improve student engagement. In this paper we report on a pilot study that forms part of a university-wide project reconceptualising its approach to the student evaluation of learning and teaching. In a progressive decision to embrace mobile technology, the university decided to trial a smart phone app designed for students to check-in to class and leave feedback on the spot. Our preliminary findings from trialling the app indicate that the application establishes a more immediate feedback loop between students and teachers. However, the app’s impact depends on how feedback is shared with students and how the teaching team responds.

Student feedback systems in higher education: a focused literature review and environmental scan

In recent times, higher education institutions have paid increasing attention to the views of students to obtain feedback on their experience of learning and teaching through internal surveys. This article reviews research in the field and reports on practices in other Australian universities. Findings demonstrate that while student feedback is valued and used by all Australian universities, survey practices are idiosyncratic and in the majority of cases, questionnaires lack validity and reliability; data are used inadequately or inappropriately; and they offer limited potential for cross-sector benchmarking. The study confirms the need for institutions to develop an overarching framework for evaluation in which a valid, reliable, multidimensional and useful student feedback survey constitutes just one part. Given external expectations and internal requirements to collect feedback from students on their experience of learning and teaching, the pursuit of sound evaluation practices will continue to be of interest at local, national and international levels.

Promoting student well-being and resilience at law school

University can be a psychologically distressing place for students, particularly those studying law. Legal academics have been concerned about this for some time. In the United States, in particular, it has been found that symptoms of psychological distress rise signifi cantly for students in their fi rst year of law (compared to levels in the general population at that time), and persist throughout the degree to post-graduation. Recognised symptoms include depression, obsessive compulsive behaviour, feelings of inadequacy and inferiority, anxiety, hostility, paranoia, and social alienation. Many students experience law school as an isolating, adversarial and competitive environment, which impacts negatively on their values and motivation...

A framework for mathematics graphical tasks : The influence of the graphic element on student sense making

Graphical tasks have become a prominent aspect of mathematics assessment. From a conceptual stance, the purpose of this study was to better understand the composition of graphical tasks commonly used to assess students’ mathematics understandings. Through an iterative design, the investigation described the sense making of 11–12-year-olds as they decoded mathematics tasks which contained a graphic. An ongoing analysis of two phases of data collection was undertaken as we analysed the extent to which various elements of text, graphics, and symbols influenced student sense making. Specifically, the study outlined the changed behaviour (and performance) of the participants as they solved graphical tasks that had been modified with respect to these elements. We propose a theoretical framework for understanding the composition of a graphical task and identify three specific elements which are dependently and independently related to each other, namely: the graphic; the text; and the symbols. Results indicated that although changes to the graphical tasks were minimal, a change in student success and understanding was most evident when the graphic element was modified. Implications include the need for test designers to carefully consider the graphics embedded within mathematics tasks since the elements within graphical tasks greatly influence student understanding.

Catherine or Kate : the tertiary spaces of collaboration, performance and humour in contemporary art

The traditional model of visual arts practice is one that privileges highly individuated and predominantly material investigations and outcomes. This approach overlooks and devalues the formal and informal dialogues and collaborations that take place in the process of making art. This Masters research project considers how the experience of working in collaboration can generate a new model for thinking about practice-led methodologies in visual arts. It aims to do this by mapping out and elaborating on the processes and approaches to making that fellow Masters student Catherine Sagin and I have come to use in our alliance as ‘Fiona Mail’, ‘Catherine Sagin’ and ‘Catherine or Kate’ respectively. The fluidity of our collaborative moniker is one example of the way this project creatively explores and re-assesses the implications of collaboration. Drawing upon the contextual frames of conceptual art, performance art, and comedy this research looks at the significance of and possibilities for working as a collaborative duo.

Enhancing capacity for 'systematic' thinking in public health

The concept of being evidence based or evidence informed is widely acknowledged as an important component of decision-making. It is perhaps most universally referred to in medicine, however has extended into many other disciplines over the past decade, including public health. Evidence-based public health has been defined as the ‘conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of communities and populations in the domain of health protection, disease prevention, health maintenance and improvement (health promotion)’.1 More recent literature favours the use of the term evidence informed over evidence based to acknowledge the varying influences on decisions in this complex field.2,3 Evidence-informed activities in any discipline require a specific set of skills in critical thinking. These skills include identifying the questions to be resolved, collecting relevant evidence, and assessing, synthesizing and distilling evidence in a way that can inform the set of activities to be undertaken as a result.

From tiers to tables – enhancing student experience through collaborative learning spaces

BACKGROUND Collaborative and active learning have been clearly identified as ways students can engage in learning with each other and the academic staff. Traditional tier based lecture theatres and the didactic style they engender are not popular with students today as evidenced by the low attendance rates for lectures. Many universities are installing spaces designed with tables for group interaction with evolutions on spaces such as the TEAL (Technology Enabled Active Learning) (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, n.d.) and SCALE-UP (Student-Centred Activities for Large-Enrolment Undergraduate Programs) (North Carolina State University, n.d.) models. Technology advances in large screen computers and applications have also aided the move to these collaborative spaces. How well have universities structured learning using these spaces and how have students engaged with the content, technology, space and each other? This paper investigates the application of collaborative learning in such spaces for a cohort of 800+ first year engineers in the context of learning about and developing professional skills representative of engineering practice. PURPOSE To determine whether moving from tiers to tables enhances the student experience. Does utilising technology rich, activity based, collaborative learning spaces lead to positive experiences and active engagement of first year undergraduate engineering students? In developing learning methodology and approach in new learning spaces, what needs to change from a more traditional lecture and tutorial configuration? DESIGN/METHOD A post delivery review and analysis of outcomes was undertaken to determine how well students and tutors engaged with learning in new collaborative learning spaces. Data was gathered via focus group and survey of tutors, students survey and attendance observations. The authors considered the unit delivery approach along with observed and surveyed outcomes then conducted further review to produce the reported results. RESULTS Results indicate high participation in the collaborative sessions while the accompanying lectures were poorly attended. Students reported a high degree of satisfaction with the learning experience; however more investigation is required to determine the degree of improvement in retained learning outcomes. Survey feedback from tutors found that students engaged well in the activities during tutorials and there was an observed improvement in the quality of professional practice modelled by students during sessions. Student feedback confirmed the positive experiences in these collaborative learning spaces with 30% improvement in satisfaction ratings from previous years. CONCLUSIONS It is concluded that the right mix of space, technology and appropriate activities does engage students, improve participation and create a rich experience to facilitate potential for improved learning outcomes. The new Collaborative Teaching Spaces, together with integrated technology and tailored activities, has transformed the delivery of this unit and improved student satisfaction in tutorials significantly.

Self-directed student work groups using blended learning

This paper provides a description of an innovative teaching approach designed to facilitate student work groups using a blended learning approach that incorporates both traditional face-to-face teaching methods and an online student work group facility. The teaching approach is designed to accommodate a large introductory human resource management subject positioned within an undergraduate business degree.