1. Transition and the student experience: measuring what matters
Dr Wendy Mayne

2. Student satisfaction
Theories of student satisfaction have traditionally focused mainly on students' perceptions of the educational environment rather than their perceptions of learning.
It is clear that students who experience a valued learning journey are satisfied with their learning.
Student satisfaction with learning is unique to the individual, changes over time and maybe transient or sustained, mild or intense (Smith et al 2016)
Student satisfaction is a major policy driver in higher education in many Western countries including the United Kingdom, United States of America and Australia.

3. Measuring student satisfaction
Satisfaction with higher education has focused on students' perceptions of the educational environment rather than their perceived learning.
Svanum and Aigner (2011) suggest that it is well established that course grades influence student satisfaction
Debate exists whether module evaluations, in any format, are useful in measuring student satisfaction. Marsh and Roche (2000) argue that eliciting student opinions about university teaching is useful and valid in relation to teaching quality.
Huybers (2015) states that these evaluations measure teaching quality, or ‘good teaching’, but it is not clear what actually constitutes teaching effectiveness, and whether these elements can be assessed by
students

4. Measuring student satisfaction
Leetcher and Neves (2010) found that the quality of subject specific teaching had little or no effect on student satisfaction.
Other factors such as self-confidence, extra-curricular activities, careers and general teaching quality had greater impact
Students experiencing academic success respond more positively to questionnaires etc

5. The NSS
The annual National Student Survey (NSS), introduced in the UK in 2005, was intended to be a method by which universities could assess their own teaching quality and seek to improve student satisfaction with their courses.
The NSS has become one of the major instruments by which universities seek to compete in the market for student recruitment by sending a signal of teaching quality.
Furthermore, these scores are used to rank student satisfaction across universities, and feed into the major university league tables.
Universities are interested in possible strategies by which they may maximise their NSS scores and attract more able students.

6. The NSS
Lenton shows that the traditional universities receive a more favourable score in the NSS than the modern universities, possibly due to better quality teaching, more research-led teaching or because the students are aware of the importance of protecting the university reputation
The NSS is often used as a policy tool to enhance the student experience, and as a tool to rank HEIs
It is criticised both philosophically and operationally (Bell and Brooks, 2017)- mostly for not addressing 2 questions: whether students themselves are in the best position to evaluate the quality of their education, and secondly whether this evaluation should be done while students are still studying

7. Predictors of attrition-what makes students stay?
While predictors of attrition may be linked to student satisfaction there may be more to be discovered looking at indicators of student persistence, and subsequent completion (Holder, 2007).
Economic, organisational, psychological and societal influences have been identified in the research literature as key factors in student withdrawal from their undergraduate programme of study (Nora et al., 1996; Ramos et al., 2015).
Mature students add complexity to student satisfaction. Failure to integrate into the university system, and adult learning theories are two areas that have received attention in the literature in an attempt to explain high levels of attrition among this cohort (Kenner and Weinerman, 2011; Park and Choi, 2009).
The growth of online education in universities has resulted in an increase in enrolment but little attention has been placed on retaining students studying online (Gazza and Hunker, 2014).

8. Predictors of attrition-what makes students leave?
Personal commitment and good support networks are critical elements of positive student experiences and retention (Cameron et al., 2011; Braine and Parnell, 2011);
Peer support is particularly identified as influential (Gerrard and Billington, 2014; Crombie et al., 2013; Fontaine, 2014) together with personal emotional resilience (Beauvais et al., 2014; Jones-Schenk and Harper, 2014; Williamson et al., 2013; Thomas et al., 2012).
Strategies that aim to improve student nurses' experiences need to consider the student lifecycle from recruitment to graduation, to set reasonable student expectations and ensure that a career within nursing is both desired and valued (Fontaine, 2014).
In Hamshire’s study, (2013), of the students asked, the question ‘have you ever wanted to leave?’ 47% answered

9. Why do students stay… and are they satisfied?
A review of the literature related to the retention of nursing students in undergraduate bachelor programmes, was conducted by United Kingdom researchers Cameron et al. (2011).
These researchers found that nursing students stayed in bachelor programmes due to programme and personal issues including professional issues, support, student characteristics and family
Although this study adds to what is known about the retention of nursing students no similar systematic review or integrated review could be found on the indicators of undergraduate nursing students' satisfaction with their learning journey.

10. Why do students stay… and are they satisfied?
Emanuel and Pryce-Miller, 2013 explain that nursing students are expected to grasp all components of the programme curriculum, and also complete the minimum number of placement hours specified by the NMC.
Ambiguous or unrealistic expectations can contribute to attrition (Cameron et al., 2011; O'Donnell, 2011; Hamshire et al., 2013) and dissatisfaction with clinical placement learning can accelerate students' decisions to leave;
A supportive relationship with mentors whilst undertaking clinical placements is vital (Crombie et al., 2013; Hamshire et al., 2011).

11. Indicators of nursing student satisfaction
Satisfaction with learning journey
Authentic learning
Motivation
Resilience
Support
Collaborative learning
This integrative review led by a focused research question has been able to ameliorate this situation identifying the indicators of nursing students' satisfaction with their learning journey. Using a structured research approach to address the research question five key indicators and associated sub themes that contribute to nursing students' satisfaction with their learning journey were uncovered (See Table 4 – Themes and sub-themes). This integrative review found authentic learning to be a key factor in students' satisfaction with their learning journey. The authentic learning theme related to students being active participants in their learning and included the duration of and engagement with the learning event as well as learning undertaken during the clinical placement experience. Rounding off this group is the need to meet student expectations including relationships with staff and other students, comfort and student community as well as the use of contemporary teaching technologies.
Previous research studies on the topic of authentic learning for nursing have primarily focused on clinical skills (Haraldseid et al., 2015) or the placement experience (Broadbent et al., 2014; Gilbert and Brown, 2015; Smedley and Morey, 2009; Walker et al., 2013) and the use of simulation (Oh et al., 2015). This integrative review builds on this knowledge by clearly showing that for authentic learning to be achieved students require a sense of community and to feel comfortable as well as have good relationships with faculty staff and peers.
Motivation was identified by this integrative review as being the student's personal commitment to study and their ability to be selfmotivated. Further to this was the student's ability to set realistic goals, faculty support and sense of personal accomplishment. Previous research has focused on several of these aspects (Gale et al., 2015; Robertson et al., 2010). Unique to this integrative review is the identifi- cation of these factors as indicators of nursing students' satisfaction with their learning journey. Resilience is defined as the ability to return quickly or bounce back to a previous good state following an adverse event or stressor (Cambridge Dictionary Online, 2015).
Resilience has been the topic of a number of previous studies (Stephens, 2013) and an indicator of nursing students' satisfaction with their learning journey. However this integrative review found that for nursing students to succeed they required critical thinking capabilities, aptitude and academic preparedness. These factors, combined with student well-being and the ability to reach within themselves, are important contributors to nursing students' abilities to develop resilience and therefore achieve within their programme of study. Support from nursing faculty staff, clinical agency staff and family has been identified in this integrative review and many other studies as being important to nursing student success (Borch et al., 2013; Browning and Pront, 2015).
This integrative review found supportive action by faculty staff and learning institutions such as the availability of pathways for credit for previous studies, social presence in online learning communities along with flexible learning models, contributed to increasing students' satisfaction with their learning journey. Completing the cycle and linking back to authentic learning is the collaborative learning theme.
Collaborative learning highlights students' willingness and need to engage with faculty, clinical placement staff and other students as well as teaching technologies. Previous studies on these topic areas have shown that the collaborative learning environment facilitated student learning (Brewer and Stewart-Wynne, 2013) and this in-turn increased students' satisfaction with their learning journey.

12. Background and context
Putting Learners at the Centre 2011
Efficient, flexible learner journeys from FE to HE
Articulation without repetition of learning
Currency of curricula across both sectors
Removing barriers to transition
Widening access to post-16 learning
Collaboration, partnerships and interconnectedness- changes within provision of FE and HE

13. Strategic Goal: To increase opportunities for widening access and enhance curriculum flexibility, building on partnerships with schools and colleges
18% of students articulate from
Scotland’s Colleges
Applications with advanced standing > 35.5%
48.9% of total university applications

14. 2013-14 age bands of articulating students
16-24 (71%) (24%) 40+ (5%)
The above chart provides a breakdown by age band for all articulating students in Scotland in The largest proportion of those – at 2,748 students - are in the age band, which is equivalent to 71% of all articulating students. This is both the highest percentage and number of students in this age band since The smallest proportion is for the 40+ age band, with only 175 students (5% of all articulating students). This is lower than in and is the lowest percentage and number of students in this age band since , when there were 234 students aged 40 and over articulating, making them 8% of the overall articulation activity.
The middle age band of is just under 1,000 students and sits at 24% of the overall articulation activity. This is the same as in but lower than , when they accounted for 27% of activity.
However, it is not surprising that it is the age band who are most prevalent as articulating students, as this age band also makes up the largest number of HN leavers from colleges. For learners over the age of 25, whilst they made up 35% of overall articulation activity in universities in , they were only 31% of HN qualifiers from colleges in the preceding academic year ( ). This means that articulation enabled a higher percentage of adult learners through to degree than actually qualified in the previous year, which suggests some were returning to HE after a gap in their studies. This is just one demonstration of how articulation journeys are not linear paths from college to university but are also used by learners to hook back into higher education.

15. Background to the study

16. Early perceptions and challenges of transition
Transition & acclimatisation
Transitioning into an existing cohort
Professional identity & feelings of belonging
Clinical Readiness for advanced entry coupled with Learner shock in the clinical context
Fear over teaching & learning strategies
Anxiety, confidence and feelings of “am I good enough to be here?” and “sneaking in the back door to nursing”

17. Transition from college to university
Lack of self confidence of self confidence
h High levels of
motivation

18. The Study

19. Objectives Investigate students’ views of transition
Evaluate efficacy of support
Measure student success
Provide data and feedback
Evaluate online community
Explore student preparedness for practice learning

20. Student cohorts Cohort Year Progress 1 (A) 2012
9/12 students graduated
2 (A, MH, LD)
2013
26/28 students graduated
3 (A, MH, LD)
2014
31/32 students graduated
4 (A, MH, LD)
2015
27/30 students graduated
5 (A,MH, LD)
2016
30/33 students currently in year 3
6 (A,MH, LD)
2017
33/35 students currently in year 2

21. Development of a SMOCTS approach
Stage 1: Post Offer support (Jan-May) Study day 1 + Collaborative Support in placement/college
Stage 2: Pre-entry support (May-Aug)Study Day 2 and two transitional support sessions from College Connect + commencement of TSM
Stage 3: Year 2 entry support :Induction, orientation , Preparing for year 2 Boot-camp and mock teaching scenario (August)
Stage 4: Year 2 Tri A : Individualised and tailored support : Assignment and PLE Preparation (Oct-Jan)
Stage 5: Individualised & tailored support for year 2 trimester B & C preparation and entry to year 3 (Jan-Sept)
Stage 6: Tailored support for year 3 & preparation for registration and entry to register
The need to develop a model of support to meet the needs of our learners highlighted in previous slide and through our research
Pilot study indicated not enough support in pre-entry stage – interventions in subsequent stages of the model aimed at improving post offer and pre-entry support strategies

22. Methodology: Measuring the Efficiency and Effectiveness of the SMOCTS approach
Action research to evaluate the effectiveness of the support provided to articulating students through our SMOCTS approach
Mixed method approach
Qualitative data collection-semi-structured focus group interviews
Quantitative-examination of students’ academic performance, assessment data, practice learning assessment documents, PLE evaluation questionnaires
3 Methodology
The principles and theory of action research underpin the project and inform the research design. As distinct from more positivist methods of enquiry, action research is cyclical and reflective. Participants examine their own practice within context with the aim of improving its effectiveness and justice (Cohen et al., 2007). As a method it has been usefully applied to both the research and subsequent improvement of higher education learning and teaching. It is appropriate for this project because the emphasis is on action, both within the present, and also within the future. (Parahoo,2006). A mixed method approach, though primarily qualitative in nature, allows for the widest possible collection of relevant data and the greatest scope to iteratively develop further cycles of research. A quantitative approach will be used to measure student success, examining student results and practice assessment documents.
3.1 Project Objectives
To use an action research approach to investigate students’ views of the transition journey from college to university when entering at advanced standing.
To evaluate the efficacy of support provided to articulating students by the School before, during and after transition.
To measure student success within the theory and practice components of the programme
To provide data and feedback for college partners to support and improve articulation pathways.
To measure the success of the online learning community
To explore student preparedness for practice learning

23. Findings

24. What evaluated positively?
Teaching, Learning & Support Strategies
Virtual Learning Community (VLC)
Year 2 boot-camp: Mock scenario (patient case study with accompanying lecture PBL tutorials, CSL and directed study materials)
Student preparatory/professional workshops
Articulation specific induction & orientation program
Field Specific Academic Advisor
Collaborative/partnership working

25. Teaching, learning and support strategies

26. Virtual learning community

27. Year 2 boot camp and induction
“valuable opportunity to flavour teaching and learning at university before starting the programme”
“an essential ingredient for learning and transition”
“Once I completed the boot-camp, I thought to myself I can do this!”
“The boot camp was fantastic. It really boosted my confidence!”
“The induction and orientation was very specific to our needs as articulation students”
“Following our induction I felt very prepared to start my course at university. I felt I knew exactly what would be expected of me and who to go to for support”

28. Field Specific Academic Advisor (AA)
“AA was really helpful in my transitional journey”
“The AA role was vital in my transition. She seemed to make everything more joined up and relevant ”
“Their knowledge and clinical expertise in my particular nursing field helped me realise they variety of patients I will be caring for”
“The AA was very supportive of me as a student in my learning journey. She was always on hand to provide advice and further support to my college tutor and clinical mentor ”

29. Collaborative working
Collaborative Partnership Working
“College & University worked as a team to delivery the articulation pathway”
“Common purpose”
“Same Purpose”
“Shared goals”
“Clear aims”
“Good communication links between HE-FE
“Common ground”
“Shared Values”

30. Summary
Interventions have been consolidated into a well developed and evidenced-based model of collaborative student support” (Bannerman & Mayne 2015)
Do happy students do well…OR are students doing well, more happy?

31. Thank you
Dr Wendy Mayne