What works? Student Retention and Success Team Summit meeting 20 January 2010

Objectives of the session  To meet with other participating institutions to share emergent findings and research tools.  To situate your project in the broader context of the research literature and initial programme findings.  To further promote peer support and the development of relationships between projects.  To identify mechanisms to engage others within the institution to widen impact.  To discuss and shape the outcomes of the programme to maximise impact.

Robert Dufton, PHF Jean Arnold, HEFCE Session 1: Programme Reflections

Feedback Groups TableProject lead institutionOther representatives 1Aston Northumbria Anglia Ruskin Jean Arnold 2Reading Nottingham Trent Andrew Rawson 3Leicester Sunderland Robert Dufton

Meta-analysis Update Session 2:

Key issues addressed Two key approaches discernable: 1. Evaluation of the impact and/or effectiveness of particular interventions (peer mentoring, personal tutoring, ELLI, study advisers, integrating interventions into the curriculum). ►Focus on evidencing their impact and identifying particular characteristics that make them effective. ►Compares differences in implementation & context 2. Evaluation of the relative importance of a students’ sense of integration (Sunderland/Leicester). ►Focus on evidencing impact of integration. ►Investigating factors that contribute to integration.

Target groups NAARNTSLR Total Ethnicity XXXX 4 Disability XX 2 Mature (age) XXXXX 5 Gender X 1 Non-traditional XX 2 Social class X 1 Those ‘at risk’ XXXX 4 Those who stay XX 2 Those who leave X 1 First year XXXXX 4 Second year XX 2 Part time XXX 3 Local X 1 International X 1 Subject area XX 2

Subject NAARNTSLR Total Business studies XX2 Computing X1 Psychology X1 Journalism X1 Education X1 Information science X1 Life science X1 Bioscience XX2 Science XX2 Technology X1 Engineering XXX3 Mathematics X1 Nursing X1 Social science X1

Student engagement and belonging Preparation and Transition Student capacity development Academic experience Social experience Professional service provision Organisation and management

Student engagement  Who do students engage with? (Peers, mentors, teaching staff, personal tutors, student services, others)  When do they engage? (Pre or post entry, in the classroom, in own time, one-off/ongoing opportunities)  Where do they engage? (Locally or centrally, in the classroom or in additional offerings, university or students’ union)  What do they engage with and why?  How do they engage and what facilitates or hampers this?  Why do they engage / what do they gain from it / impacts?

Preparation and transition IAG, realistic expectations and academic skills and capacity. Pre-entry decision making (IAG?): HERE Student expectations: Anglia Preparation for study: Anglia, Aston, Sunderland Staff knowledge about students: Northumbria Student capacity/skills: Aston, Northumbria Induction processes: Leicester, Reading Pre- and post-entry peer mentoring: Aston Impact of student background: Leicester

Capacity Building  Common to 6 of 7 projects  Includes development of skill, knowledge or resilience.  Evaluating impact across different stages of lifecycle:  Pre-entry – perceptions of preparedness (AR, S, A)  Post-entry – Induction (L, R); Diagnosis (N); interventions (AR, R, A)  Contribution of evidence around promoting early/ongoing engagement; building effective relationships; effect of enhancing knowledge of students; effect of capacity building on sense of belonging.  Overlaps with pre-entry preparation/transition, academic and social experience.

Academic Experience  Central aspect in all 7 projects  Includes L & T practices; assessment/feedback; curriculum content, development and organisation.  Projects focus on 3 aspects of academic experience:  Integration of particular student groups (N, S, L).  Contribution of specific interventions (A, AR, R, N).  Effective academic practices (NT).  Contributing of evidence around effective L&T practices; building relationships as part of the learning process; impact of personalised learning approaches.  Overlaps with capacity building and social experience.

Social Experience  Common to 5 of 7 projects (A, S, AR, L, NT).  Includes provision of formal and informal activities, outside of the curriculum.  Projects focus on 3 aspects of social experience:  Role of social integration in retention (S, AR, L)  Role of institution in promoting social integration (NT)  Impact of intervention on social integration (A)  Contribution of evidence around importance of the provision of social activity; effective practice; impact of building peer relationships and of specific interventions.  Overlaps with academic experience & capacity building

Professional service provision Student services, library and learning services, WP, disability, careers, admissions etc. Local or central provision: Reading Integrated, targeted or open access: Reading Student use of academic and non-academic services: Anglia

Organisation and management National system and institutional management, systems and cultures. Comparing notions of student retention and student success: Northumbria Understanding where and from whom students want to access support from: Anglia and Reading Staff knowledge, development and engagement: Leicester and Northumbria Use of institutional data: Leicester and Reading

In summary  Projects are looking across lifecycle  Addressing different perspectives  Addressing multiple aspects of student experience  Centrality of student engagement

CRITICAL FRIENDSHIP GROUPS

Feedback Groups TableProject lead institutionOther representatives 1Aston Northumbria Anglia Ruskin Jean Arnold 2Reading Nottingham Trent Andrew Rawson 3Leicester Sunderland Robert Dufton

Cross team group discussion Reflection questions  What particularly engaged you about this project?  What further information or clarification would you like?  What similarities are there with your project and are there any opportunities for collaboration?

LUNCHTIME Swap Shop  Select one person to stand by your project poster to answer questions/network.  Rest of the team: Identify any links with others or any research tools, expertise, project outputs, venues etc. that may be useful for your own project.

Key Evaluation Outcomes Session 3:

Key Evaluation Outcomes  Read the outcomes provided.  Select all of those relevant to your project.  Use 2 to indicate those which are central and 1 to indicate marginal or peripheral outcomes.  Use the other box to add additional outcomes if necessary.  Use the comment box to provide an explanation as to its relevance and any evidence available to date.

Outputs and Implications Session 4:

Outputs and implications Table 1: Yellow Table 2: Green Table 3:Blue Table 4: Red Table 5: Orange Table 6:Purple

Outputs and implications of the programme  Drawing on your preparation, consider how can we ensure that institutions across the sector engage with the practical learning that emerges from our projects and the programme as whole? What types of ‘information’ do we want to share? What formats will be most effective for engaging policy makers, different institutions and staff groups?

Any other business….  Retention convention  Named project representatives  Booking filling up fast  Posters  Support needs?  Presentations?  Briefing  Events  Questions and issues?