Ready, Set, FLY [First Learning Year]: A CAUSAL MODEL FOR RISK AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA Juan-Claude Lemmens jlemmens@up.ac.za Department for Education Innovation: Unit for Higher Education Research & Innovation (HERI)
Outline • Aim of the research • Motivation for the research • Background • Methodology • Questionnaire design • Results ( Quantitative & Qualitative ) • Conclusion
Aim of the research AIM OF STUDY PROFILING RISK OF FIRST YEAR STUDENTS QUALITATIVE STUDY QUANTITATIVE STUDY EXIT INTERVIEWS WITH ACADEMIC READINESS STUDENTS SURVEY SYNTHESIS RISK MODEL AND PROFILE FOR EARLY WARNING
Motivation for the research • Improve retention • Lower drop-out • Non-cognitive entry characteristics The Dean of Economic and Management Sciences commissioned and investigation
Background South African Higher Education Landscape (1994 – 2005) • Equitable system with access to all the racial groups • Increase and broaden participation African Coloured Indian White Overall 1993 9% 13% 40% 70% 17% 2000 13% 9% 39% 47% 16% 2005 12% 12% 51% 60% 16% Gross participation rates for South Africa (Scott et al., 2007, p. 10; Bunting in Cloete, et al., (eds.), 2006b, p. 106)
Background South African Higher Education Landscape (2000 cohort) • High withdrawal and low graduation rates of student who are in the system Grad within Still registered Left without 5 years after 5 years graduating SA Universities 50% 12% 38% All degrees Academic first B- 50% 7% 43% degrees Business/Management National graduation rates (Scott, Yeld & Hendry, 2007, p. 12)
Background University of Pretoria Context (2001 cohort) • Contact institution • Tuition in both English and Afrikaans Grad within 5 Still registered Left without years after 5 years graduating Total UP 54.8% 18.4% 26.8% White 59.4% 17.3% 23.3% Coloured 50% 19.6% 30.4% Indian 31.5% 16.1% 22.4% African 36.8% 23% 40.2% Graduation rates of all Academic first B-degrees (BIRAP, 2009)
Background Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences Context • Contributed 24.6% of all undergraduate enrolments for the 2008 cohort • Academic and professional first B-degrees over a three year period Grad within 5 Still registered Left without years after 5 years graduating Total EMS 58.2% 17.1% 24.7% White 63.5% 14.5% 22% Coloured 56% 20% 24% Indian 59.3% 22.1% 18.6% African 40.7% 24% 35.3% Graduation rates of Academic first B-degrees, 2001 cohort (BIRAP, 2009)
Data collection First phase (2007) Literature study : entry characteristics and biographical variables that correlate with withdrawal and academic performance QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE Second phase (2008) Third phase (2008) • • Academic Readiness Exit interviews at the end of Questionnaire administered the academic 2008 year to students from the Faculty • Discovering the main reason of Economic and for withdrawal from studies, Management Sciences in as well as sub-reasons that the beginning of February may have contributed to the 2008 during the orientation decision to discontinue week studies. • Biographical data (BIRAP)
Questionnaire development • Theoretical foundation – Social and academic integration (Tinto, 1993) – Psychological model of College Student Retention (Bean & Eaton, 2005) – Psychological perspectives: Constructs that have been related to student success: Internal locus of control, expectancy theory, self-efficacy theory, and motivational theory – Structured questionnaires • Non-cognitive Questionnaire (Tracey and Sedlacek, 2004) • Survey of Academic Orientations (Davidson, Beck & Silver, 2001)
Questionnaire development • Academic Factors Alpha Readiness 1. Achievement Motivation 0.76 Questionnaire 2. Learning efficacy 0.75 – 70 items and 0.74 3. Planning is answered 4. Integration and support 0.63 on a five point 0.74 5. Reading behaviour Likert-type scale • Factor Analysis Total variance explained = 57.9% – N=829 – 11 Items discarded
Entry characteristics Definition Achievement Motivation The degree to which one values higher education and showing an interest in academic work. Learning efficacy The degree of confidence in one’s own ability to achieve one’s academic goals. Planning The degree to which one is able to plan your studies. Integration/support The degree to which the student has institutional, social and financial support. Reading behaviour The degree to which one finds pleasure in reading. M-score A metric score based on the six best senior certificate subjects. (Range between 0 – 30) Parental education One or both parents completed a degree. Housing Where a student is living while attending university. School location Distance of school from the university. Risk for withdrawal Students, who were discontinued, are on probation or have withdrawn from their studies. Risk for failure Students who passed less that 100% of the credits registered for and who are at risk for withdrawal. Academic success The degree of academic achievement at university. Credits registered Number of credits registered divided by the number of credits prescribed.
Description of the sample 2008 Intake African Coloured Indian White University of 30.2% 2.2% 4.0% 63.5% Pretoria Faculty of 37.4% 2.2% 5.7% 54.7% EMS Sample 24.4% 2.5% 2.7% 70.4%
Description of the sample Enrolment status Frequency Percent Discontinuation 25 3.0 Withdrawal 53 6.4 Probation 18 2.2 Promotion 2nd 733 88.4 Total 829 100.0
Cross-tabulations • Explore the relationship between the dependent variables, Risk for withdrawal and Risk for failure and each of the independent variables: – Race, M-score, Parental education, Gender, Age, Housing, School location, Home language, Language of instruction, Achievement motivation, Learning efficacy, Planning, Integration/support and Reading behaviour
Results – Risk for withdrawal Logistic Regression Analysis • Full model (16, N=829 ) = 76.64, p<.000 • The model explained 11% - 21.3% of variance • Race, M-score and number of credits registered made a unique statistical significant contribution to the model • Partial effects causal model based on the maximum likelihood analysis of variance (CATMOD) – N=601 missing values for any variable are omitted from the analysis – Race language
Results - Risk for Withdrawal Category n Odds Index Mean 601 15.07 Race language* African 134 3.844 Afrikaans 385 0.491 English 82 0.529 M-score* Low 133 0.423 Medium 285 0.967 High 183 2.447 Credits registered* <1 193 0.436 =1 217 3.145 >1 191 0.729 Partial effects causal model for Risk for withdrawal
Results - Risk for Withdrawal • Gender – Male students are at risk • Parental education – Students whose parents have a tertiary education are at risk • Distance from school – The farther away a student attended school, the more a student is at risk for withdrawal • Housing – Students who live in university residence are at risk for withdrawal Trends based on Partial effects causal model for Risk for withdrawal
Results - Risk for Withdrawal • Achievement motivation – Student with medium or high achievement motivation scores are at risk • Learning efficacy – Students with medium learning efficacy scores are at risk • Planning – Student who are less able to plan their study time are at risk • Integration and support – Students from all three categories are virtually at baseline (1) • Reading behaviour – Students who are average readers are most at risk for withdrawal Trends based on Partial effects causal model for Risk for withdrawal
Results – Risk for failure Category n Odds Index Mean 601 0.294 Race language* African 134 2.245 Afrikaans 385 0.639 English 82 0.697 M-score* Low 133 0.089 Medium 285 1.011 High 183 11.14 Reading behaviour f5 Low* 190 1.433 Medium 184 0.944 High 227 0.739 Partial effects causal model for Risk for failure
Results - Risk for Failure • Gender – Female students are at risk • Parental education – Students whose parents have a tertiary education are at risk for failure • Distance from school – Student attending schools in other provinces are at risk for failure. • Housing – Students from all three categories are virtually at baseline (1) Trends based on Partial effects causal model for Risk for failure
Results – Risk for failure • Achievement motivation – Student with low or high achievement motivation scores are at risk for failure • Learning efficacy – Students with medium or high learning efficacy scores are at risk • Planning – Students less able to plan their study time are at risk for failure • Integration and support – Students with low or high integration and support scores are at risk for failure • Reading behaviour – Students who enjoy reading are at risk for failure Trends based on Partial effects causal model for Risk for failure
Recommend
More recommend
