Enhancing student success and retention : an institution-wide strategy for peer programs

Higher Education's widening participation agenda prioritises improving access to university for low-SES students. Parallel with these ambitious national participation targets, is the challenge for universities to significantly improve student retention rates; hence, the need to implement strategies aimed to improve the quality of the student learning experience and build a 'sense of belonging'. Within the framework of the First Year Experience Program, Queensland University of Technology has embarked on establishing a whole-of-institution model for peer programs that aims to: 1) improve the student learning experience and outcomes; and, 2) establish quality assured and sustainable programs. This paper reports on the maturation university-wide peer program strategy and considers the challenges of implementing, evaluating and resourcing a sustainable and inclusive approach to peer programs.

Peer journeys : building graduate capabilities for life long learning

Students experience university as peers. Peer-to-peer interaction offers unique opportunities for fostering the academic, social and emotional wellbeing of students (Kuh, 2008). Peer programs provide a formalisation of this relationship enabling students to partake both as peer leaders and program participants. The success of such programs is reliant on the university having a reserve of motivated and trained peer leaders. From their initial experience of peer programs as participants in first year and their ongoing involvement as peer leaders, students grow their graduate capabilities and employability skills through scaffolded peer leadership and training opportunities. Universities aspire to produce graduates who are inspirational leaders, effective collaborators and competent professionals ready to participate in the global community (DEEWR, 2012; Shook & Keup, 2012). This poster describes a model which scaffolds the development of peer leaders’ graduate capabilities using a university-wide supporting framework to grow a range of peer-to-peer initiatives across a variety of coordinated peer programs underpinned by a social justice framework (Gidley, Hampson, Wheller & Bereded-Samuel, 2010; Nelson & Creagh, 2012).

Peer leadership and capability building in law and justice

The aim of this project was to create a model mapping the scaffolding and development of: peer leadership opportunities and capacity; and graduate capabilities, work-related skills and outcomes, across the range of peer assisted learning programs offered in the Faculty of Law during 2013. In doing so, it conceptualised Law and Justice students’ roles and opportunities for peer leadership across the whole of their learning experience and aimed to raise awareness of the benefits to leaders of participating in peer programs (relevant to the development of their graduate capabilities and employability). Through the mapping, the project also sought to increase student understanding of the range of peer leader opportunities available across the Faculty and therefore promote participation in such programs.

The QUT Training Model for Peer Leader Capacity Building

QUT has enacted a university-wide Peer Program’s Strategy which aims to improve student success and graduate outcomes. A component of this strategy is a training model providing relevant, quality-assured and timely training for all students who take on leadership roles. The training model is designed to meet the needs of the growing scale and variety of peer programs, and to recognise the multiple roles and programs in which students may be involved during their peer leader journey. The model builds peer leader capacity by offering centralised, beginning and ongoing training modules, delivered by in-house providers, covering topics which prepare students to perform their role safely, inclusively, accountably and skilfully. The model also provides efficiencies by differentiating between ‘core competency' and ‘program-specific’ modules, thus avoiding training duplication across multiple programs, and enabling training to be individually and flexibly formatted to suit the specific and unique needs of each program.

Peer Leader Roles Descriptors

Across QUT there are a spectrum of peer-to-peer programs and activities initiated by both staff and students that have been designed to build the capacity of all students to ensure they reach their full learning potential. Peer leader roles have in common a focus on building students' sense of belonging to the university, and in doing so, boosting their confidence as learners and capacity to succeed academically. This document provides a set of descriptors that provides details of the various peer leader roles across QUT and their associated responsibilities.

Facebook: A basis for forming a peer learning community for nursing students in a bioscience unit

First year nursing students commonly find bioscience to be challenging. A Facebook community site was established to support and engage these students. The site was facilitated by virtual peer mentors and the unit coordinator. The high participation rate and the strong recommendation to future students indicated that the site successfully enabled student interaction and engagement with their learning. The students found it to be a readily accessible network and valued the useful resources and learning strategies provided by their peers. The sharing of both learning challenges and successful learning practices can help students build a sense of belonging and an understanding of academic practices and behaviours that can contribute to their learning success at university.

Practices to enhance peer program implementation integrity to safeguard peer leaders and learners

The powerful influence of peers on fellow students’ learning engagement and their ability to foster self-efficacy is well recognised. A positive learner mindset can be fostered through establishment of guided meaningful relationships formed between peers. Recognising the value of peer connections in shaping the student learning experience, peer programs have been widely adopted by universities as a mechanism to facilitate these connections. While potentially beneficial, a lack of knowledge and inexperience by program implementers can lead to program outcomes being compromised. To mitigate this risk, QUT has established university wide systems and benchmarks for enacting peer programs. These measures aim to promote program implementation integrity by supporting and developing the knowledge and capabilities of peer leaders and program coordinators. This paper describes a range of measures that have been instigated to optimise the quality of programs and ensure outcomes are mutually constructive and beneficial for all stakeholders.

Start Smart : QUT’s trial support program for commencing undergraduate students who have not completed year 12 in the past two years

Commencing students in undergraduate degrees who identify as mature age students experience particular issues when faced with enrolment into university as an adult learner (Bird & Morgan, 2003). In line with QUT’s commitment to “supporting all commencing students to adjust successfully to study at QUT by providing a strong transition experience” (QUT, 2008, 6.2.1), the Start Smart trial program was developed and implemented for Semester 1, 2012. The Start Smart trial program consists of an orientation event, wrapped around and supported by existing First Year Experience (FYE) and Retention strategies within QUT, namely the Student Success Program (SSP) and the Peer Programs Strategy (PPS). This report examines the motivations for designing a program as a response to the needs of a cohort that are unique amongst all commencing undergraduate students. Participants will be asked to consider the implications of delivering special and unique orientation events to specific cohorts, and the long term sustainability of such programs within their own university structures.

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

A social justice framework for safeguarding student learning engagement

The set of social justice principles and the Social Justice Framework (SJF), developed as resources for the sector as part of an Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching project, adopt a recognitive approach to social justice and emphasise full participation and contribution within democratic society (Gale, 2000; Gale & Densmore, 2000). The SJF is contained within the major deliverable of the project, which is A Good Practice Guide for Safeguarding Student Learning Engagement (Nelson & Creagh, 2013) and is focused on good practice for activities that monitor student learning engagement and identify students at risk of disengaging in their first year. Examination of the social justice literature and its application to the higher education sector produced a set of five principles: Self-determination, Rights, Access, Equity and Participation. Each principle was defined and elucidated by a rationale and implications for practice, thus completing the SJF. The framework: reflects the notions of equity and social justice; provides a strategic approach for safeguarding engagement activities; and is supported by a suite of resources for practice and practitioners. The aim of this poster session is to engage in conversations about the SJF and how it might be applied to other types of student engagement activities critical to the first year of university life, such as orientation and transition programs, teamwork activities, peer programs and other academic support initiatives.

A pilot study utilising cross-age peer tutoring as a method of intervention for anxious adolescents

Anxiety disorders are the most common psychopathology experienced by young people, with up to 18% of adolescents developing an anxiety disorder. The consequences of these disorders, if left untreated, include impaired peer relationships, school absenteeism and self-concept problems. In addition, anxiety disorders may play a causal role in the development of depression in young people, precede eating disorders and predispose adolescents to substance abuse disorders. While the school is often chosen as a place to provide early intervention for this debilitating disorder, the fact that excessive anxiety is often not recognised in school and that young people are reluctant to seek help, makes identifying these adolescents difficult. Even when these young people are identified, there are problems in providing sensitive programs which are not stigmatising to them within a school setting. One method which may engage this adolescent population could be cross-age peer tutoring. This paper reports on a small pilot study using the “Worrybusters” program and a cross-age peer tutoring method to engage the anxious adolescents. These anxious secondary school students planned activities for teacher-referred anxious primary school students for a term in the high school setting and then delivered those activities to the younger students weekly in the next term in the primary school. Although the secondary school students decreased their scores on anxiety self-report measures there were no significant differences for primary school students’ self-reports. However, the primary school parent reports indicated a significant decrease in their child’s anxiety.

Which components of heart failure programs are effective? A meta-analysis of the outcomes of structured telephone support or telemonitoring as the primary component of heart failure management in 9,560 patients (Abridged Cochrane Review)

Aims--Telemonitoring (TM) and structured telephone support (STS) have the potential to deliver specialised management to more patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), but their efficacy is still to be proven. Objectives To review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of TM or STS on all- cause mortality and all-cause and CHF-related hospitalisations in patients with CHF, as a non-invasive remote model of specialised disease-management intervention.--Methods and Results--Data sources:We searched 15 electronic databases and hand-searched bibliographies of relevant studies, systematic reviews, and meeting abstracts. Two reviewers independently extracted all data. Study eligibility and participants: We included any randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing TM or STS to usual care of patients with CHF. Studies that included intensified management with additional home or clinic visits were excluded. Synthesis: Primary outcomes (mortality and hospitalisations) were analysed; secondary outcomes (cost, length of stay, quality of life) were tabulated.--Results: Thirty RCTs of STS and TM were identified (25 peer-reviewed publications (n=8,323) and five abstracts (n=1,482)). Of the 25 peer-reviewed studies, 11 evaluated TM (2,710 participants), 16 evaluated STS (5,613 participants) and two tested both interventions. TM reduced all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR 0•66 [95% CI 0•54-0•81], p<0•0001) and STS showed similar trends (RR 0•88 [95% CI 0•76-1•01], p=0•08). Both TM (RR 0•79 [95% CI 0•67-0•94], p=0•008) and STS (RR 0•77 [95% CI 0•68-0•87], p<0•0001) reduced CHF-related hospitalisations. Both interventions improved quality of life, reduced costs, and were acceptable to patients. Improvements in prescribing, patient-knowledge and self-care, and functional class were observed.--Conclusion: TM and STS both appear effective interventions to improve outcomes in patients with CHF.

Development and pilot test of a peer-support based Cardiac-Diabetes Self-Management program : a study protocol

Background: People with cardiac disease and type 2 diabetes have higher hospital readmission rates (22%)compared to those without diabetes (6%). Self-management is an effective approach to achieve better health outcomes; however there is a lack of specifically designed programs for patients with these dual conditions. This project aims to extend the development and pilot test of a Cardiac-Diabetes Self-Management Program incorporating user-friendly technologies and the preparation of lay personnel to provide follow-up support. Methods/Design: A randomised controlled trial will be used to explore the feasibility and acceptability of the Cardiac-Diabetes Self-Management Program incorporating DVD case studies and trained peers to provide follow-up support by telephone and text-messaging. A total of 30 cardiac patients with type 2 diabetes will be randomised, either to the usual care group, or to the intervention group. Participants in the intervention group will received the Cardiac-Diabetes Self-Management Program in addition to their usual care. The intervention consists of three faceto- face sessions as well as telephone and text-messaging follow up. The face-to-face sessions will be provided by a trained Research Nurse, commencing in the Coronary Care Unit, and continuing after discharge by trained peers. Peers will follow up patients for up to one month after discharge using text messages and telephone support. Data collection will be conducted at baseline (Time 1) and at one month (Time 2). The primary outcomes include self-efficacy, self-care behaviour and knowledge, measured by well established reliable tools. Discussion: This paper presents the study protocol of a randomised controlled trial to pilot evaluates a Cardiac- Diabetes Self-Management program, and the feasibility of incorporating peers in the follow-ups. Results of this study will provide directions for using such mode in delivering a self-management program for patients with both cardiac condition and diabetes. Furthermore, it will provide valuable information of refinement of the intervention program.

Structured Telephone Support or Telemonitoring Programs for Patients with Chronic Heart Failure

Background: Specialised disease management programmes for chronic heart failure (CHF) improve survival, quality of life and reduce healthcare utilisation. The overall efficacy of structured telephone support or telemonitoring as an individual component of a CHF disease management strategy remains inconclusive. Objectives: To review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of structured telephone support or telemonitoring compared to standard practice for patients with CHF in order to quantify the effects of these interventions over and above usual care for these patients. Search strategy: Databases (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Citation Index on ISI Web of Knowledge) and various search engines were searched from 2006 to November 2008 to update a previously published non-Cochrane review. Bibliographies of relevant studies and systematic reviews and abstract conference proceedings were handsearched. No language limits were applied. Selection criteria: Only peer reviewed, published RCTs comparing structured telephone support or telemonitoring to usual care of CHF patients were included. Unpublished abstract data was included in sensitivity analyses. The intervention or usual care could not include a home visit or more than the usual (four to six weeks) clinic follow-up. Data collection and analysis: Data were presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, all-cause and CHF-related hospitalisations which were meta-analysed using fixed effects models. Other outcomes included length of stay, quality of life, acceptability and cost and these were described and tabulated. Main results: Twenty-five studies and five published abstracts were included. Of the 25 full peer-reviewed studies meta-analysed, 16 evaluated structured telephone support (5613 participants), 11 evaluated telemonitoring (2710 participants), and two tested both interventions (included in counts). Telemonitoring reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.81, P < 0.0001) with structured telephone support demonstrating a non-significant positive effect (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.01, P = 0.08). Both structured telephone support (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87, P < 0.0001) and telemonitoring (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94, P = 0.008) reduced CHF-related hospitalisations. For both interventions, several studies improved quality of life, reduced healthcare costs and were acceptable to patients. Improvements in prescribing, patient knowledge and self-care, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class were observed. Authors' conclusions: Structured telephone support and telemonitoring are effective in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality and CHF-related hospitalisations in patients with CHF; they improve quality of life, reduce costs, and evidence-based prescribing.