Transition pedagogy : a third generation approach to FYE : a case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector

Current research and practice related to the first year experience (FYE) of commencing higher education students are still mainly piecemeal rather than institution-wide with institutions struggling to achieve cross-institutional integration, coordination and coherence of FYE policy and practice. Drawing on a decade of FYE-related research including an ALTC Senior Fellowship and evidence at a large Australian metropolitan university, this paper explores how one institution has addressed that issue by tracing the evolution and maturation of strategies that ultimately conceptualize FYE as “everybody's business.” It is argued that, when first generation co-curricular and second generation curricular approaches are integrated and implemented through an intentionally designed curriculum by seamless partnerships of academic and professional staff in a whole-of-institution transformation, we have a third generation approach labelled here as transition pedagogy. It is suggested that transition pedagogy provides the optimal vehicle for dealing with the increasingly diverse commencing student cohorts by facilitating a sense of engagement, support and belonging. What is presented here is an example of transition pedagogy in action.

Developing a transition pedagogy : intentional curriculum design in first and final year law programs

This chapter will first consider the rationale for a transition pedagogy for first and final year law students. It then discusses the elements of a transition pedagogy for both years, noting the synergies and differences between programs designed to assist transition into and out of a law degree. In doing so, the authors attempt to explore the extent to which the first year curriculum principles identified by Sally Kift under an Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) Senior Fellowship may also be applied to the final year university experience. During the course of the discussion, examples are drawn from universities and Law Schools in Australia and internationally which seek to address these imperatives...

A transition pedagogy for student engagement and first-year learning, success and retention

This chapter argues that higher education institutions (HEIs) must direct coordinated, whole-of-institution attention to changing, both culturally and structurally, the fundamental and prevailing character of the first-year experience (FYE). It leverages evidence from the sector(Nelson, Kift and Clarke, 2011), from research-led practice in our institution (for example, Kift, Nelson and Clarke, 2010; Nelson et al.,in press) and from research conducted under an Australian Learning and Teaching Council Senior Fellowship (Kift, 2009a, 2009b, 2009c) to assert that student engagement and success should not be left to chance, particularly those aspects such as curriculum design and enactment that are within our institutional control.

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

Transition Pedagogy Handbook : A Good Practice Guide for Policy and Practice in the First Year Experience at QUT

This Handbook has been specifically designed for academic and professional staff responsible for managing first year students and curriculum and co-curricular programs at QUT. As well as presenting examples of good practice, the handbook provides a brief overview of QUT’s First Year Experience Program, a summary of QUT’s First Year Experience and Retention Policy and the Transition Pedagogy that frames both curricular and co-curricular activities. We hope you find this resource both useful and informative.

Like our page : using Facebook to support first year students in their transition to higher education

Facebook is approaching ubiquity in the social habits and practice of many students. However, its use in higher education has been criticised (Maranto & Barton, 2010) because it can remove or blur academic boundaries. Despite these concerns, there is strong potential to use Facebook to support new students to communicate and interact with each other (Cheung, Chiu, & Lee, 2010). This paper shows how Facebook can be used by teaching staff to communicate more effectively with students. Further, it shows how it can provide a way to represent and include beginning students’ thoughts, opinions and feedback as an element of the learning design and responsive feed-forward into lectures and tutorial activities. We demonstrate how an embedded social media strategy can be used to complement and enhance the first year curriculum experience by functioning as a transition device for student support and activating Kift’s (2009) organising principles for first year curriculum design.

Towards inclusion: Provision for diversity in the transition to school

Policies of inclusion challenge the construct of readiness and require schools to prepare for the diversity of children as they transition to school. However, there is limited empirical evidence concerning how this challenge is met. This paper presents two Australian studies that investigate inclusive practices in the transition to school. Study 1 examined the predictors of child outcomes across a sample of 1831 children in 39 schools. The results indicate that both quantity and quality of programme provision influenced outcomes and that programme effects were particularly potent for children with diverse abilities and backgrounds. Study 2 focuses on pedagogy in three of the schools to highlight how this provision can be achieved. Results show that provisions were reactive, that saliency of children’s needs directed school practices and that professional knowledge impacted on measures of quality. Inclusive processes accounting for both child progress and broader family and teaching influences are necessary for improved transition to school.

Harnessing assessment and feedback in the first year to support learning success, engagement and retention

It has been argued that intentional first year curriculum design has a critical role to play in enhancing first year student engagement, success and retention (Kift, 2008). A fundamental first year curriculum objective should be to assist students to make the successful transition to assessment in higher education. Scott (2006) has identified that ‘relevant, consistent and integrated assessment … [with] prompt and constructive feedback’ are particularly relevant to student retention generally; while Nicol (2007) suggests that ‘lack of clarity regarding expectations in the first year, low levels of teacher feedback and poor motivation’ are key issues in the first year. At the very minimum, if we expect first year students to become independent and self-managing learners, they need to be supported in their early development and acquisition of tertiary assessment literacies (Orrell, 2005). Critical to this attainment is the necessity to alleviate early anxieties around assessment information, instructions, guidance, and performance. This includes, for example:  inducting students thoroughly into the academic languages and assessment genres they will encounter as the vehicles for evidencing learning success; and  making expectations about the quality of this evidence clear. Most importantly, students should receive regular formative feedback of their work early in their program of study to aid their learning and to provide information to both students and teachers on progress and achievement. Leveraging research conducted under an ALTC Senior Fellowship that has sought to articulate a research-based 'transition pedagogy' (Kift & Nelson, 2005) – a guiding philosophy for intentional first year curriculum design and support that carefully scaffolds and mediates the first year learning experience for contemporary heterogeneous cohorts – this paper will discuss theoretical and practical strategies and examples that should be of assistance in implementing good assessment and feedback practices across a range of disciplines in the first year.

The development of a "Good Practice Guide" for first year curriculum development, revision and evaluation : a moving feast

Since 2002 QUT has sponsored a range of first year-focussed initiatives, most recently the Transitions In Project (TIP) which was designed to complement the First Year Experience Program and be a capacity building initiative. A primary focus of TIP was The First Year Curriculum Project: the review, development, implementation and evaluation of first year curriculum which has culminated in the development of a “Good Practice Guide” for the management of large first year units. First year curriculum initiates staff-student relationships and provides the scaffolding for the learning experience and engagement. Good practice in first year curriculum is within the control of the institution and can be redesigned and reviewed to improve outcomes. This session will provide a context for the First Year Curriculum Project and a concise overview of the suite of resources developed that have culminated in the Good Practice Guide.

Good practice for enhancing the engagement and success of commencing students

There is widespread recognition that higher education institutions (HEIs) must actively support commencing students to ensure equity in access to the opportunities afforded by higher education. This role is particularly critical for students who because of educational, cultural or financial disadvantage or because they are members of social groups currently under-represented in higher education, may require additional transitional support to “level the playing field.” The challenge faced by HEIs is to provide this “support” in a way that is integrated into regular teaching and learning practices and reaches all commencing students. The Student Success Program (SSP) is an intervention in operation at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) designed to identify and support those students deemed to be at risk of disengaging from their learning and their institution. Two sets of evidence of the impact of the SSP are presented: First, its expansion (a) from a one-faculty pilot project (Nelson, Duncan & Clarke, 2009) to all faculties and (b) into a variety of applications mirroring the student life cycle; and second, an evaluation of the impact of the SSP on students exposed to it. The outcomes suggest that: the SSP is an example of good practice that can be successfully applied to a variety of learning contexts and student enrolment situations; and the impact of the intervention on student persistence is sustained for at least 12 months and positively influences student retention. It is claimed that the good practice evidenced by the SSP is dependent on its integration into the broader First Year Experience Program at QUT as an example of transition pedagogy in action.

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 first year experience : looking back to inform the future

The importance of the first year experience (FYE) to success at university has been a focus of attention in the Australian higher education sector since the 1990s. For students a successful transition into university during their first year is now regarded as crucial for student engagement, success and retention. In this review we summarise a decade of research into FYE in the Australasian context. We draw on the findings arising from this comprehensive review of FYE programs and practices to describe FYE trends through the dual lenses of the first year curriculum principles and the generational approach to FYE initiatives. We contend that the generational approach to conceptualising the FYE and first year student engagement has made a useful but limited contribution to our understanding of the first year experience. Acknowledging the criticality of student engagement in a successful FYE, we propose an alternative— the Student Engagement Success and Retention Maturity Model (SESR-MM)— as a sophisticated vehicle for achieving whole-of-institution approaches to the FYE. The SESR-MM embodies the aspirations and characteristics of the transition pedagogy, highlights the need for institutional level evaluation of the FYE, focuses attention on the capacity of institutions to mobilise for first year student engagement, and importantly builds on the generational approach to allow an assessment of institutional capacity to initiate, plan, manage, evaluate and review institutional FYE practices.

Transition: Exchange establishing a visual arts practice based on personal pedagogy

There is a perceived tension in the relationship between the roles of art teacher and artist that led to the question: can an art teacher use their professional training and experience to establish an authentic artistic identity? This self-study tracked and analysed how the process of making her own art enabled an art teacher to also identify as an artist. Drawing on Lamina, the public exhibition of her multimedia artworks, the final exegesis proposes five conditions for art teachers in developing their own art practice: developing an identity as artist, using time and space mindfully, tolerating uncertainty, mentoring, and privileging the process.

Enhancing transition : an enhanced model of clinical placement for final year nursing students

Specialised support for student nurses making the transition to graduate nurse can be crucial to successful and smooth adjustment, and can create a path to positive and stable career experiences. This paper describes an enhanced model of final year nursing student placements which was trialled in 2006 at the Queensland University of Technology. The model involved collaboration with two major urban health services and resources were developed to support effective transition experiences. Ninety-two students, including 29 trial participants and 63 non-trial participants were assessed on preparedness for professional practice, before and after the trial semester. Results indicated an increase in preparedness across the entire sample, but students participating in the trial did not differ significantly in overall preparedness change from those who did not participate. Higher baseline preparedness in the trial group highlighted the possibility that proactive students who choose enrichment experiences tend to be likelier to gain benefit from such options than those who do not. Qualitative findings from focus groups conducted with 12 transition group students highlighted that one of the main beneficial aspects of the experience for students was the sense of belonging to a team that understood their learning needs and could work constructively with them.

Towards research-based innovation and reform: Singapore education in transition

The challenges facing the Singapore education system in the new millennium are unique and unprecedented in Asia. Demands for new skills, knowledges, and flexible competencies for globalised economies and cosmopolitan cultures will require system-wide innovation and reform. But there is a dearth of international benchmarks and prototypes for such reforms. This paper describes the current Core Research Program underway at the National Institute of Education in Singapore, a multilevel analysis of Singaporean schooling, pedagogy, youth and educational outcomes. It describes student background, performance, classroom practices, student artefacts and outcomes, and student longitudinal life pathways. The case is made that a systematic focus on teachers' and students' work in everyday classroom contexts is the necessary starting point for pedagogical innovation and change. This, it is argued, can constitute a rich multidisciplinary evidence base for educational policy. (Contains 1 figure, 1 table and 3 notes.)