RETENTION ~ AN INTERNATIONAL CONCERN [t]he average freshman - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Student learning communities, the student experience and the institutional value proposition:

a research led first year experience strategy delivers

Wayne Clark

Presentation to the 21st International Conference on the First Year Experience

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

“[t]he average freshman retention rate for the top 25 US universities, for the freshman years of 1996 through 1999, is reported as 96%” Comparable UK figure for the top 25 universities … for students in the years 1998 through 1999 is 92%” The 2002 attrition rate for all domestic students was 18.5% and for international students, 17.7%. For these groups these are the lowest rates since 1994 ” “Fifty-one percent of those who had started a qualification in 1998 had left without completing it five years later, and nine percent were still studying towards it five years later.”

RETENTION ~ AN INTERNATIONAL CONCERN

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

“Nearly 15 per cent of first year undergraduates at the university, which has branches in Reading, London and Slough, dropped out. Out of more than 100 universities in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland only a few institutions had higher drop out rates than the Reading college. Universities in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland where more students left included UHI Millennium Institute, Ulster (Ireland), Paisley, Napier, Bell College (Scotland) and Glamorgan (Wales).”

Reading Evening Post Article by Anna Roberts 9/6/2008

RETENTION ~ A NATIONAL CONCERN

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand Dé Máirt, 17 Nollaig 2002 Tuesday, 17 December 2002

“In the case of the universities the average drop out rate was found to be 15% while in the case of the institutes of technology it was found to be 42%. It should be noted, however, that there were differences between fields of study in both surveys with the subject areas of computer science, engineering and science registering higher non-completion rates than the humanities and business studies. The Dublin Institute of Technology also conducted a similar study and shows an overall non-completion rate of 39.46% for … full- time first-year students.”

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

A WORD ABOUT WORDS

Meaning in context: Persistence means staying beyond first year and remaining enrolled for the duration of the program/programme. Sometimes interchangeably uzed with retenshun. Other typos = creative genius

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

A WORD ABOUT WORDS

Meaning in context: Persistence means staying beyond first year and remaining enrolled for the duration of the program/programme. Sometimes interchangeably uzed with retenshun. Other typos = creative genius

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

A WORD ABOUT WORDS

Meaning in context: Persistence means staying beyond first year and remaining enrolled for the duration of the program/programme. Sometimes interchangeably uzed with retenshun. Other typos = creative genius

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• Trouble adjusting to campus life
• Finding it hard to adjust to the commitment required
• Feeling overwhelmed with a different environment

(McInnis)

• Feeling isolated
• Lack of social and academic engagement

(Krause)

• Teaching and learning paradigms that are different to

those used to in high schools

(Meade)

DIFFICULTIES IN TRANSITION TO STUDENT LIFE

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

These include

• developing an appropriate identity
• becoming socially integrated into the

university

• attaining learning and generic skills such as

critical thinking and intellectual rigour.

RESEARCH LED STRATEGY

PREMISE: First year students face a number of problems in adjusting to university life.

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Formulated to integrate functions that support transition and retention. Increase recognition of the importance of the transition process for new students entering the university environment. Recognises the general needs of all students as well as the unique requirements of identified groups. Improve and enhance the student experience. Is research led

STUDENT SUPPORT STRATEGY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Sorting Supporting Connecting Transforming the Student Transforming the Institution

Grouping students into appropriate subsets Enhancing all aspects of the teaching & learning and the working environments Stimulating the student to improve attainment levels and skills Developing & fostering relationships between students and the institution Supporting students in their lives

• utside

university

BEATTY-GUENTER MODEL

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• Grouping students into appropriate subsets
• Sorting is by voluntary participation

– Into peer mentoring groups – Into residential groups

• Supporting students on campus in the “living and learning”

environment

• Develop and foster relationships between students and between

students and the institution

• Socialisation strategies include:

– student community events – peer support – advisor support – transition monitoring

SORTING, SUPPORTING AND CONNECTING STRATEGIES

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• Student transformation focused on

ensuring the student understands and engages with the social, support, living and personal environment

STRATEGIES TO TRANSFORM THE STUDENT

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• “Soft” approach
• To improve all aspects of teaching and

learning, and the student support environment

• There is no attempt to transform the

institution from a core operational (academic) perspective

STRATEGIES TO TRANSFORM THE INSTITUTION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

For students to be fully integrated and involved in university life they need to develop a sense of belonging and an appropriate identity as a university student.

A SENSE OF COMMUNITY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

A learning community is a group of individuals within an educational context who constructively share information, communications, technologies, common values and beliefs, in order to promote collaborative and cooperative connections through actively engaging in learning together and from each other

(Goodyear, De Laat & Lally, 2006).

LEARNING COMMUNITY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• A Residential Learning Community differs from a Faculty

Learning Community (UniGuides)

• UniGuide Assisted Learning Community:

– Is a heterogeneous "self select” programme – Participation even after self selection in not compulsory – Members can ‘opt out’ at any stage – Only a short term commitment

• A Residential Learning Community

– is an engineered, selected, governed community (e.g. academic record, leadership qualities, community and civic service). – Is more homogeneous – There is no option to simply leave, or to not participate. – Commitment is social, academic, and longer term.

DESCRIBING LEARNING COMMUNITIES

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

The University introduced the ‘UniGuide’ Programme in Semester 1, 2004, with the intention of assisting first-time students to adapt to campus life and reduce the drop-out rate.

UNIGUIDE PROGRAMME AND STRATEGY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• Provide assistance and advice to new students during the first

6 weeks of the Semester

• Inform and direct students to campus facilities
• Encourage new students to participate in campus activities
• Support and nurture new students during their transition to

campus life.

• Establish a one-to-one relationship with students in the group

and providing a personalised support for the transition

UNIGUIDES

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

The programme exceeded expectations, with the dropout rate for all first-time entering undergraduate students declining by almost 50%

UNIGUIDE PROGRAMME OUTCOMES

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

2003 Prior to UniGuides 2004 Introduction of UniGuides 2005 Expansion of UniGuides 2006 Incremental expansion of UniGuides

Percentage of all students who withdrew from their course of study after Semester One:

10.94% 5.27% 4.92% 4.57% RESULTS SO FAR…

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Percentage of students with UniGuides who withdrew from their course of study in Semester One…

2005 0.73% 2006 0.49% 2004 1.12% 2007 0.47%

THE UNIGUIDE EFFECT

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

“The primary objective of residential learning . . . is to provide an environment where students can explore the interconnected relationship between what is learned and what is lived.” “The communities bring together diverse groups of residents with common intellectual, political and/or social interests.” “provides a living and learning environment that encourages personal enrichment and the achievement of shared educational goals.” “ .. . students who chose to live together because they share something in common, such as academic endeavours, social concerns or humanitarian pursuits”

A RESIDENTIAL LEARNING COMMUNITY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

1.UniGuides (n=633) Faculty groups, voluntary First Time Entering Undergraduates Full Time (90points)/ All 2.Control Group (n=675) Random selection excluding UniGuide Assisted, non residential FTEU 3.Residential (n=253) FTEU not UniGuide, not Control, Full Time First Year at University of Auckland

RESEARCH PARAMETERS

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand Enrolled Students by Semester - 2004 Cohort

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

Percent

All FTEU with Uniguide 100.0% 97.0% 91.1% 88.7% 85.6% 84.4% FT FTEU with Uniguide 100.0% 97.4% 91.6% 89.3% 86.3% 85.2% All FTEU Control Group 100.0% 92.2% 78.1% 74.7% 69.2% 66.4% FT FTEU Control Group 100.0% 92.7% 79.2% 75.8% 69.9% 67.2% FT NUoA Residential 100.0% 97.1% 88.5% 85.6% 82.7% 82.7% FTEU Residential 100.0% 97.8% 87.9% 85.3% 83.2% 83.5% Semester 1 2004 Semester 2 2004 Semester 1 2005 Semester 2 2005 Semester 1 2006 Semester 2 2006

RETENTION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand Enrolled Students by Semester - 2004 Cohort

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

Percent

All FTEU with Uniguide 100.0% 97.0% 91.1% 88.7% 85.6% 84.4% FT FTEU with Uniguide 100.0% 97.4% 91.6% 89.3% 86.3% 85.2% All FTEU Control Group 100.0% 92.2% 78.1% 74.7% 69.2% 66.4% FT FTEU Control Group 100.0% 92.7% 79.2% 75.8% 69.9% 67.2% FT NUoA Residential 100.0% 97.1% 88.5% 85.6% 82.7% 82.7% FTEU Residential 100.0% 97.8% 87.9% 85.3% 83.2% 83.5% Semester 1 2004 Semester 2 2004 Semester 1 2005 Semester 2 2005 Semester 1 2006 Semester 2 2006

RETENTION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Semester 1 2004 Semester 2 2004 Semester 1 2005 Semester 2 2005 Semester 1 2006 Semester 2 2006 All FTEU with UniGuide 0.00% 3.00% 6.08% 2.63% 3.50% 1.40% FT FTEU with UniGuide 0.00% 2.60% 5.95% 2.51% 3.36% 1.27% All FTUE Control Group 0.00% 7.80% 15.29% 4.35% 7.36% 4.05% FT FTEU Control Group 0.00% 7.30% 14.56% 4.29% 7.78% 3.86% FT NUoA Residential 0.00% 2.90% 8.86% 3.28% 3.39% 0.00% FTEU Residential 0.00% 2.20% 10.12% 2.96% 2.46%

• 0.36%

ATTRITION BY SEMESTER

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Attrition Rates by Semester 6.08% 15.29% 4.35% 7.36% 1.40% 3.50% 2.63% 3.00% 0.00% 4.05% 7.80% 0.00% 0.00% 3.39% 3.28% 8.86% 2.90%

• 2.00%

0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 16.00% 18.00% Semester 1 2004 Semester 2 2004 Semester 1 2005 Semester 2 2005 Semester 1 2006 Semester 2 2006

Semester Percent

All FTEU with Uniguide FT FTEU with Uniguide All FTUE Control Group FT FTEU Control Group FT NUoA Residential FTEU Residential

ATTRITION BY SEMESTER

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Mean Cumulative Points Passed Progress: Semester 1, 2004 - Semester 2, 2006 307.31 245.80 250.42 298.75 300.68 302.63

0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 All FTEU with Uniguide FT FTEU with Uniguide All FTEU Control Group FT FTEU Control Group FT NUoA Residential FTEU Residential Academic Points

PROGRESSION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Completion Progress: 2004 cohort (2004 - 2006)

30.37% 30.85% 25.20% 25.33% 27.56% 23.81%

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% Completed initial programme Group of students Percent completed programme

All FTEU with Uniguide FT FTEU with Uniguide All FTEU Control Group FT FTEU Control Group FT NUoA Residential FTEU Residential

COMPLETION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Completion Progress: 2004 Cohort (2004-2006)

35.70% 36.17% 26.30% 26.47% 30.45% 27.11%

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% Completed any programme Group of students Percent completed programme

All FTEU with Uniguide FT FTEU with Uniguide All FTEU Control Group FT FTEU Control Group FT NUoA Residential FTEU Residential

COMPLETION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

% Points Passed by Students by Semester - 2004 Cohort

90.82% 88.70% 90.20% 90.06% 92.37% 92.02% 90.77% 88.85% 90.30% 90.20% 92.45% 92.11% 81.31% 79.95% 84.20% 87.64% 89.90% 89.52% 81.68% 80.24% 84.37% 87.72% 89.94% 89.60% 88.44% 87.99% 91.49% 91.58% 94.27% 92.41% 89.18% 88.47% 90.87% 91.70% 93.94% 92.11% 70.00% 75.00% 80.00% 85.00% 90.00% 95.00% 100.00% Semester 1 2004 Semester 2 2004 Semester 1 2005 Semester 2 2005 Semester 1 2006 Semester 2 2006

Group of Students Percent

All FTEU with Uniguide FT FTEU With Uniguide All FTEU Control Group FT FTEU Control Group FT NUoA Residential FTEU Residential

PERSISTENCE

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Sorting Supporting Connecting Transforming the Student Transforming the Institution

RETURN TO THOERY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Sorting Supporting Connecting Transforming the Student Transforming the Institution

RETURN TO THEORY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Sorting Supporting Connecting Transforming the Student Transforming the Institution

RETURN TO THEORY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

• Learning Communities create a social ecosystem in which

relationships are formed, developed and maintained.

• Ultimately these groups are instrumental in the creation of social

equity, engagement infrastructure and academic collateral.

• A key difference is based on the establishment, composition and

numbers making up the groups:

• The UniGuide Learning Communities introduce new

students to a small number of ‘similar’ students and a limited social equity

• Residential Learning Communities introduce pre selected

students to an exponentially extended cohort and therefore to a greater opportunity to build social equity in a more structured and more controlled environment

VALUE PROPOSITION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

It is social equity that allows for engagement, persistence and progression.

• When a UniGuide group breaks down, paucity of social

equity reduces persistence and engagement effectiveness increases the risk of disengagement.

• When a residential group is formed, its exponentially

higher membership mitigates disengagement, offsets paucity of social equity, and sustains academic engagement.

VALUE PROPOSITION

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

“Students living in a Residential Learning Community have the opportunity to share their talents and pursue their interests with like-minded people. Residents can expect academic and peer support from their advisors, the residential life staff and their fellow residents.”

(Uni San Diego)

INNOVATION, RESEARCH AND STRATEGY

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

“Through this interaction, students can share their understanding of course content and university enculturation, thus hastening the transition process and increasing the likelihood of retention. Learning communities are their preferred option for interaction with peers … the assistance, guidance, encouragement and emotional support group members

• ffer one another increases their persistence through the

camaraderie established; these informal networks assist students to not only engage with, but also remain at, the university.” (Kantanis)

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

“ …not only engage with, but also remain at, the university” Transition–Retention-Persistence-Completion

 Achieved

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

The theory of homophily - people with similar traits, attributes and demographic characteristics are more likely to associate with one another. Status homophily:individuals with similar social status characteristics are more likely to associate. Value homophily associate with others who think in similar ways, regardless of differences in status. Systematic evidence of homophily in informal network ties is evident among “school children, college students and small urban neighborhoods." Demographic characteristics like age, sex, race/ethnicity and education, and psychological characteristics such as intelligence, attitudes, and aspirations are also easily identified

Self selection and Association

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Homophily and Social Darwinism

A homophilous concentration of students increases the odds that communities will exhibit the kinds of behaviour that characterize particular social groups such as adolescents. More gregarious and outgoing students more likely to affiliate International/foreign students will be less engaging Introvert students are less likely to identify with social interaction. Astin: “the single most powerful source of influence on the undergraduate student’s academic and personal development is the peer groups” Homophily risk was seen as minimal because socialisation and engagement with student life as a platform for retention and persistence, was the key driver.

Dublin, 2008 The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Thank you for choosing to be at this presentation

Thanks also to Michelle Clark, Kathleen Kramlinger and Michelle Staff for their technical and statistical expertise in preparing this presentation