School of Life Sciences What works? Evaluating two different approaches to supporting first year students Susan K Robbins BSc PGCE MPhil PhD FHEA Principal Lecturer in Student Experience University Teaching Fellow ASKe Fellow

School of Life Sciences Background to HEFCE/PHF projects  What works in student retention and success? What interventions are effective?  2008 HEFCE and PHF set aside £1m (~1.2m euros) and asked universities to bid for funding to evaluate initiatives already thought to be effective in their institutions  Priority was given to collaborative bids  Reading and Oxford Brookes were one of 7 successful bids, out of 68 applicants

School of Life Sciences Reading’s project work Evaluation of Reading’s One-Stop Shop:  Student Services and learning support housed in a single building  Students self refer or drop in for help and advice  One-Stop Shop for all enquiries  Easy onward referral to appropriate departments

School of Life Sciences Oxford Brookes’ project work Evaluating PASS, our Personal and Academic Support System:  Project located in one academic School, Life Sciences  PASS provides pro-active student support, particularly for first year students  Intervention with students who perform badly  Pastoral support for any student in need

School of Life Sciences Context: School of Life Sciences  650 Undergraduate Students on 16 degree fields in Biomed/Molecular Biology, Human Biosciences, Sports Science, Environment  First year intake of approx. 230 students  100 Post-graduate Students of whom:  60 studying 9 taught Masters programmes  40 Research Students studying for PhDs

School of Life Sciences Under the PASS Umbrella 3 types of support: Target: Delivered by: Underpinning these - PASS Referral: Support for students needing pastoral care for personal issues

School of Life Sciences Role of PASS tutorials  Establish good staff/student interactions through face-to-face meetings  Discipline-based groups for academic advice  Provide study skills training  Build peer support  Nurture students

School of Life Sciences Scope of PASS tutorials Programme of structured tutorials:  Academic Support: Study Skills, generic support, assessed work promotes engagement  Expectations: Why am I here? What are my aims? How can I achieve them? PDP  Feedback: How am I doing? How can I improve?  Proactive, building relationships: Staff – Student; Student – Student; developing cohort identity  Referring on: Students with pastoral issues referred to Head of Student Support, Life Sciences (that’s me!)

School of Life Sciences PASS referral: pastoral matters  Receiving referrals: from personal tutors, students self referring or bringing their friends  Pastoral Care: I have a problem… Non- academic issues: personal, money, family, housing, illness, bereavement, etc.  Listening to students: using active listening skills to help students find their way forward  Referring on to specialist help: Student Services, Students’ Union Advice Centre

School of Life Sciences PASS Intervention  Identify students with poor performance in semester 1 assessments (~10% of cohort)  Appointments for individual interviews to discuss their results and offer extra support  Mentored through semester 2 of year 1  Holding students accountable: close questioning re: performance on modules  Aim: To try and turn their performance round, reverse the downward spiral

School of Life Sciences Encouraging student outcomes  56 students mentored, 3 cohorts:  27 progressed into 2nd year with their cohort  22 continued, repeating 1st year  2006/7 & 2007/8: 22 out of 23 progressing students continued through 2 nd year  2006/7: 8 students graduated with their entry cohort; 7 extended their study and should graduate this year  All were at risk of exclusion in year 1

School of Life Sciences 101 reasons why 56 students failed Lack of effort = 32 Poor time management = 29 Illness = 10 Personal Issues = 21 Academically weak = 9 Reasons / Student: Pass = 1.56; Repeat = 1.83; Fail = 2.5

School of Life Sciences Risk factors that affected student performance

School of Life Sciences Retention from PASS Intervention 1 year2 years3 years Max. no. PASS Intervention students Retained students each year Retained each year (%)

School of Life Sciences Discussion Students responded to personal contact:  Put in place individual study plan  Students held accountable  Good study habits being learnt  Preventing repetition of poor performance  Prevented total despair and drop-out And the business case…  94 student years of registration saved (to June 2009)  Each year = £10,000 saved funding… £940,000!

School of Life Sciences Back to the HEFCE/PHF project…  PASS tutorials were introduced in 2005/6  PASS Intervention was introduced in 2006/7  Life Sciences retention stats for first year students have improved by 10% since 2004/5  Asking the question: ‘Why does PASS work?’  What is it about the PASS methodology that makes it successful in retaining students?  What is essential? What is non-essential?

School of Life Sciences Future plans  Comparing students’ science entry qualifications with (a) first year results, (b) exit qualifications (do they graduate?)  Comparing students’ self-reported maths competencies with their performance in maths module tests  Interviewing individual students about PASS tutorials and PASS Intervention  On-line questionnaire interrogating students’ perceptions of PASS and student support

School of Life Sciences Acknowledgements  Kirsten Hall, researcher on HEFCE/PHF project  Rachael Edgar, statistician on HEFCE/PHF project  Peter Grebenik: Assistant Dean: for providing excel spreadsheets and unearthing student data  Keith Cooper, Director of Student Services: Support on the pastoral side of PASS; acting promptly with student referrals  Bryony France for entering student data  PASS evaluation is funded by HEFCE and the Paul Hamlyn Foundation