Hardwiring Student Success: Building Disciplines for Retention and Timely Graduation

This study profiles innovators’ efforts to elevate student success initiatives from the current patchwork of support services to an actively managed enterprise process that is designed to systematically identify and rapidly intervene with students exhibiting behaviors predictive of attrition or graduation delays. Based on nearly two years of work and hundreds of interviews with colleges and universities across the country, the report presents 16 best practices in the areas most critical to improving student persistence and graduation.

Embedded use of iPads to enhance student engagement and retention in technical education

This paper focusses on attracting and retaining young people into technical disciplines. It introduces a new model of technical education from age 14 that the UK Government initiated in 2008. A concept of University led Technical Colleges (UTCs) for 14-19 year olds. These state supported schools, sponsored by a University, have technical curricula, technologically enabled learning environments and strong engagement with employers. As new schools they have been able to recruit outstanding staff that are conversant with the use of technology to enhance learning and all students have their own iPads. The Aston University Engineering Academy opened in September 2012 and a recent survey of staff, students and parents has provided both qualitative and quantitative data on the benefits to motivation and learning of these embedded iPads. The devices have also had advantages for the management of data on student achievement from a leadership, teaching staff and parental view point.

It takes an institution's village to retain a student: A comprehensive look at two early warning system undergraduate retention programs and administrators' perceptions of students' experiences and the retention services they provide students in the early warning system retention programs

Institutions have implemented many campus interventions to address student persistence/retention, one of which is Early Warning Systems (EWS). However, few research studies show evidence of interventions that incorporate noncognitive factors/skills, and psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes in the EWS. A qualitative study (phenomenological interview and document analysis) of EWS at both a public and private 4-year Florida university was conducted to explore EWS through the eyes of the administrators of the ways administrators make sense of students' experiences and the services they provide and do not provide to assist students. Administrators' understanding of noncognitive factors and the executive skills subset and their contribution to retention and the executive skills development of at-risk students were also explored. Hossler and Bean's multiple retention lenses theory/paradigms and Perez's retention strategies were used to guide the study. Six administrators from each institution who oversee and/or assist with EWS for first time in college undergraduate students considered academically at-risk for attrition were interviewed. Among numerous findings, at Institution X: EWS was infrequently identified as a service, EWS training was not conducted, numerous cognitive and noncognitive issues/deficits were identified for students, and services/critical departments such as EWS did not work together to share students' information to benefit students. Assessment measures were used to identify students' issues/deficits; however, they were not used to assess, track, and monitor students' issues/deficits. Additionally, the institution's EWS did address students' executive skills function beyond time management and organizational skills, but did not address students' psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes. Among numerous findings, at Institution Y: EWS was frequently identified as a service, EWS training was not conducted, numerous cognitive and noncognitive issues/deficits were identified for students, and services/critical departments such as EWS worked together to share students' information to benefit students. Assessment measures were used to identify, track, and monitor students' issues/deficits; however, they were not used to assess students' issues/deficits. Additionally, the institution's EWS addressed students' executive skills function beyond time management and organizational skills, and psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes. Based on the findings, Perez's retention strategies were not utilized in EWS at Institution X, yet were collectively utilized in EWS at Institution Y, to achieve Hossler and Bean's retention paradigms. Future research could be designed to test the link between engaging in the specific promising activities identified in this research (one-to-one coaching, participation in student success workshops, academic contracts, and tutoring) and student success (e.g., higher GPA, retention). Further, because this research uncovered some concern with how to best handle students with physical and psychological disabilities, future research could link these same promising strategies for improving student performance for example among ADHD students or those with clinical depression.

A holistic approach to the support and engagement of first year students : a retention strategy

Institutions should enact holistic approaches that address students’ personal, social and academic engagement in the early weeks of first year to facilitate retention (Nelson, Kift & Clarke, 2008). This holistic approach is central to the FYE program at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), which was established to maximise learning engagement and hence positively influence the retention of commencing students. The program aims to • engage students in their learning through an intentionally designed and enacted curriculum (Kift, 2008) • facilitate timely access to life and learning support • promote a sense of belonging to the discipline, cohort and profession. The FYE program’s aims are achieved by strategic alliances between academic and professional staff across the institution.

A holistic approach to the support and engagement of first year students : a retention strategy.

Institutions should enact holistic approaches that address students’ personal, social and academic engagement in the early weeks of first year to facilitate retention (Nelson, Kift & Clarke, 2008). This holistic approach is central to the FYE program at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), which was established to maximise learning engagement and hence positively influence the retention of commencing students.

Acknowledging social justice and equity through good practice for monitoring student learning engagement in FYE

As higher education institutions respond to government targets to widen participation, their student populations will become increasingly diverse, and the issues around student success and retention will be more closely scrutinised. The concept of student engagement is a key factor in student achievement and retention and Australasian institutions have a range of initiatives aimed at monitoring and intervening with students who are at risk of disengaging. Within the widening participation agenda, it is absolutely critical that these initiatives are designed to enable success for all students, particularly those for whom social and cultural disadvantage have been a barrier. Consequently, for the sector, initiatives of this type must be consistent with the concept of social justice and a set of principles would provide this foundation. This session will provide an opportunity for participants to examine a draft set of principles and to discuss their potential value for the participants’ institutional contexts.

Ensuring student success : the role of support services in improving the quality of the student learning experience

This paper is based on the premise that universities have an obligation to provide adequate student support services, such as learning assistance (that is, assistance with academic writing and other study skills) and that in order to be effective such services must be responsive to the wider policy and social implications of student attrition and retention. The paper outlines briefly some of the factors that have influenced the development of learning assistance practices in Australia and America. This is followed by an account of experiences at one Australian metropolitan university where learning assistance service provision shifted from a decentralised, faculty-based model to a centralised model of service delivery. This shift was in response to concerns about lack of quality and consistency in a support model dependent upon faculty resources yet a follow up study identified other problems in the centralised delivery of learning assistance services. These problems, clustered under the heading contextualised versus decontextualised learning assistance, include the relevance of generic learning assistance services to students struggling with specific course related demands; the apparent tensions between challenging students and assisting students at risk of failure; and variations in the level of collaboration between learning advisers and academic staff in supporting students in the learning environment. These problems are analysed using the theoretical modelling derived from the tools made available through cultural historical activity theory and expansive visibilisation (Engeström & Miettinen, 1999).

Applying a social justice framework to ensure good practice in monitoring student learning engagement

A current Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) funded action research project aims to provide a set of practical resources founded on a social justice framework, to guide good practice for monitoring student learning engagement (MSLE) in higher education. The project involves ten Australasian institutions, eight of which are engaged in various MSLE type projects. A draft framework, consisting of six social justice principles which emerged from the literature has been examined with reference to the eight institutional approaches for MSLE in conjunction with the personnel working on these initiatives during the first action research cycle. The cycle will examine the strategic and operational implications of the framework in each of the participating institutions. Cycle 2 will also build capacity to embed the principles within the institutional MSLE program and will identify and collect examples and resources that exemplify the principles in practice. The final cycle will seek to pilot the framework to guide new MSLE initiatives. In its entirety, the project will deliver significant resources to the sector in the form of a social justice framework for MSLE, guidelines and sector exemplars for MSLE. As well as increasing the awareness amongst staff around the criticality of transition to university (thereby preventing attrition) and the significance of the learning and teaching agenda in enhancing student engagement, the project will build leadership capacity within the participating institutions and provide a knowledge base and institutional capacity for the Australasian HE sector to deploy the deliverables that will safeguard student learning engagement At this early stage of the project the workshop session provides an opportunity to discuss and examine the draft set of social justice principles and to discuss their potential value for the participants’ institutional contexts. Specifically, the workshop will explore critical questions associated with the principles.

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

Gaining a competitive edge in the area of the engagement, success and retention of commencing students is a significant issue in higher education, made more so currently because of the considerable and increasing pressure on teaching and learning from the new standards framework and performance funding. This paper introduces the concept of maturity models (MMs) and their application to assessing the capability of higher education institutions (HEIs) to address student engagement, success and retention (SESR). A concise description of the features of maturity models is presented with reference to an SESR-MM currently being developed. The SESR-MM is proposed as a viable instrument for assisting HEIs in the management and improvement of their SESR activities.

The evolution of QUT’s Student Success Program : 20,000 students later

“The Student Success Program (SSP) is a monitoring and early intervention program in operation at QUT designed to identify and support those students deemed to be at risk of disengaging for their learning and their institution” (Nelson, Quinn, Marrington & Clarke, 2011, p. 83). This report reflects on the development of the program since its inception in 2007. In acknowledging similar initiatives within the sector that monitor student learning engagement, the Nuts & Bolts session allows for identification and discussion of the critical success factors for these intervention and support programs.

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

Essential elements for recruitment and retention : Generation Y

Purpose: Generation Y (Gen Y) is the newest and largest generation entering the workforce. Gen Y may differ from previous generations in work-related characteristics which may have recruitment and retention repercussions. Currently, limited theoretically-based research exists regarding Gen Y’s work expectations and goals in relation to undergraduate students and graduates. Design/methodology/approach: This study conducted a theoretically-based investigation of the work expectations and goals of student- and working-Gen Y individuals based within a framework incorporating both expectancy-value and goal setting theories. N = 398 provided useable data via an on-line survey. Findings: Overall, some support was found for predictions with career goals loading on a separate component to daily work expectations and significant differences between student- and working- Gen Y on career goals. No significant differences were found, however, between the two groups in daily work expectations. Research limitations/implications: Future research may benefit from adopting a theoretical framework which assesses both daily work expectations and career goals when examining the factors which motivate Gen Y’s decisions to join and remain at a particular organisation. Practical implications: At a practical level, based on the findings, some examples are provided of the means by which organisations may draw upon daily work expectations and career goals of importance to Gen Y and, in doing so, influence the likelihood that a Gen Y individual will join and remain at their particular organisation. Originality/value: This research has demonstrated the utility of adopting a sound theoretical framework in furthering understanding about the motivations which influence organisations’ ability to recruit and retain Gen Y, among both student Gen Y as well as those Gen Y individuals who are already working.

Good practice for safeguarding student learning engagement in higher education institutions : Final Report 2012

The project 'Good practice for safeguarding student learning engagement in higher education institutions' commenced in late 2010 as a Competitive Grant with funding provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council. The project is now overseen by the Office for Learning and Teaching within the Australian Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. The project was completed in December 2012. The project was lead by QUT and comprised of the project team: Professor Karen Nelson, (project leader), Ms Tracy Creagh, (project manager) and Adjunct Professor John Clarke. Commencing in late 2010 the project invited a total of eight institutions across Australia and New Zealand (including QUT) who had either: existing programs and activities that monitored student learning engagement (MSLE); were in the early stages of implementing MSLE programs, or; who were piloting MSLE activities. As well, the project involved an advisory group and project evaluator comprising of academic and professional staff across two additional universities.

The application of a set of principles to safeguard student learning engagement

Student engagement is a key contributor to student achievement and retention. Increasingly, international and Australasian universities are introducing a range of specific initiatives aimed at monitoring and intervening with students who are at risk of disengaging, particularly in their first year of study. A multi-site case study formed the focus of a national learning and teaching project to develop a suite of resources to guide good practice for safeguarding student learning engagement that were consistent with the notions of equity and social justice. Pivotal to the suite of resources is the Social Justice Framework and a set of social justice principles that emerged through a synthesis of existing literature and were further refined through the examination of qualitative data collected across the participating institutions. These social justice principles reflect general notions of equity and social justice, embrace the philosophical position of recognitive social justice, and are presented in an interconnected and co-dependent way within the framework. Participants will be provided with the opportunity to identify and discuss the practical applications of the principles to student engagement activities in their own institutions.