Presentation on theme: "The VALUE of Guided Revision Janet Carter University of Kent."— Presentation transcript:
The VALUE of Guided Revision Janet Carter University of Kent
What is VALUE? Value Added Learning in University Education –Retention stage 1 to stage 2 –For students at risk of failure or under- performance –Study skills, Key skills, Subject discipline skills –HEFCE funded
Involvement Owned by Unit for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching (UELT) Partnership between –UELT –Academic departments –Students
Figures % success rate 4 departments, 39 students % success rate 6 departments, 90 students % success rate 10 departments, 120 students 2004 ???% success rate 10 departments, 300+ students
Activities Revision and exam techniques Early recognition of study struggles Transition to stage 2 Group and social networks Individual guidance Catching students when they fall Fostering independent learning
Three phases interviews for eligibility Phase A:support before exams; subject- specific revision Phase B:support in exam results week and prior to exam re-sits; mostly 1:1 Phase C:preparation and support for entry to Stage 2
What is Value-LITE? CS department joined VALUE in 2002 –Students made aware of success rate in 2001 CS allocated 20 places Received 50+ applications Value-LITE is a departmental response to student demand for VALUE scheme –Uses VALUE ethos and principles –Uses some UELT derived teaching materials
What we do…
Details Value-LITE owned by CS department Phases A and C only –Exam/study skills –Preparation for stage 2 Based upon what CS students need The emphasis is NOT essay writing in exams
Application Students apply by –Each participant counts as FTE Not interview based Numbers not restricted Sessions not compulsory
Phase A Takes place after Easter and before exams Sessions include: –Subject-specific revision –Exam techniques –Revision techniques Students DO attend sessions they need INCLUDING non-subject-specific ones
Phase C – 2002 Just for Value-LITE students Took place during Intro week Sessions included: –How stage 2 differs from stage 1 –Staff expectations –Experiences of past students
Phase C – 2003 onwards For all stage 2 CS students Takes place during week 1 One session which includes: –How stage 2 differs from stage 1 –Staff expectations –Experiences of past students
Stages 1 and 3 Talks take place during week 1 –Staff expectations –Time management Stage 1 –Note taking Stage 3 –How stage 3 differs from stage 2
Participation rates (%) NoneVALUEValue-LITE >40% participation both years
Pass rates – first attempt 2001 typical of previous years Fewer fails and more distinctions –Were the students just brighter? –Did something else change? –Has the intervention worked?
Changes 8 units per year –Some modules = 2 units Up to and including 2002 –40% average to pass 2003 onwards –40% in each module to pass Should make 2003 results seem worse but they aren’t!
VALUE vs Value-LITE VALUE –Students at risk of failure or under- performance –Acceptance is means tested –Maximum number of participants Value-LITE –Students wishing to participate –Those that fail to obtain VALUE place –No means testing –No maximum number of participants
VALUE vs Value-LITE? Would expect Value-LITE students to achieve higher marks Schemes complement each other Between them appear to reduce first attempt failure rates Effects appear to continue into stage 2
What next? A good idea that appears to have produced desired outcocme Currently a what I did in my department story Proper analysis required –Figures statistically significant –Is there a causal relationship?