INTERNATIONALISATION PROJECT REPORTING TEMPLATE Part 1: Project Summary

Title of Project Common Purpose Global Leader Experience (GLE) 2018 Hanoi: June 9th – 16th

Contact person Aliya SorgenExt. 8745Aliya.sorgen@city.ac.uk

Description of Project SummaryCommon Purpose (CP) is a registered charity, headquartered in London, but operates in 70 countries (some of which have dedicated offices) and has been in existence for 28 years. CP uses an experiential model of learning in their programmes, to create the most interactive forum possible for student engagement. CP programmes focus on 3 key areas: 1) Leadership 2) Cultural Intelligence 3) The ‘Challenge’. A challenge is set on a yearly basis, and is used in all countries where CP delivers programmes, with adjustments to make it relevant to the particular country/culture of delivery. The challenge for this year (as it was last year) was: “How to ensure smart cities are inclusive?” Following on from the 3 key areas targeted by the CP programme listed above, the points below further illustrate the types of themes that are investigated during the week:

1. What do smart and inclusive mean from a Hanoi perspective? Where are the gaps?2. How do you (student) work individually, in a group, and in a new country? Investigate personal skills regarding

cultural intelligence. 3. How do you react when you are taken outside of your comfort zone? 4. Process of self-discovery

This trip was fully funded by City, through 3 funding streams: 1. Internationalisation budget, 2. WP Access Agreement, 3. Santander Mobility Funding. The drive behind fully funding this trip for WP students (all 25 students who took part were affected by at least one WP-criteria1), was to increase the international opportunities for students, regardless of

1 City’s internal criteria to identify underrepresented/disadvantaged student groups are as follows: First In Generation (First Gen): Student who are the 1st in family to enter HE, 2. Low-Income Background (Lib): Students whose house hold income is/falls below the maximum eligibility for the statutory Maintenance Loans (in 2017/8, this is 25,000 or under), 3. Low Socio-Economic Background (LSEC) Students for which the declared occupation of their household’s chief breadwinner falls into NS-SEC categories 4-7. (Semi-regular to low-intermediate occupations), 4. Disability (DIS): Students who self-declare any disability/ies, Mature (Mat): Students who are aged 21 and over on 30 September in the academic year in which they start their studies, 5. Care-Experienced (BIC): Students who self-declare to have been looked after for at least 13 weeks since the age of 14, and were in care on their 16th birthday. Postcode: Using ACORN this identifies students with home postcodes in deprived neighbourhoods.

1

background or financial barriers. Analysing previous patterns in engagement with outwards-mobility schemes via internal HESA data, the most underrepresented student groups in international mobility schemes at City, i.e. care leavers and those who were first in family to attend HE were prioritised in the application/selection process. These WP characteristics were chosen based on outward mobility data at City. Given the discrete needs of these student groups, we understand that a traditional semester/FY study exchange is not possible for all students and therefore this type of activity is an effort to start broadening our global experiences and offer an inclusive international mobility portfolio to all our students independent of their needs and backgrounds.

Background of ParticipantsIn addition to the above mentioned information regarding the student cohort, greater detail has been provided in the below graphs:

2

Evaluation Plan

A key facet to the 2018 GLE was the addition of a robust evaluation plan that we set up, in order to better capture and report on the benefits, outcomes, impact, and successes of the trip. The evaluation plan was agreed with Miriam Styrnol, City’s Data and Policy Analyst:

1. Repeated survey design using Bristol Online Survey to capture self-declared attitudinal changes of participants in regards to key outcomes such as networking skills, intercultural awareness, leadership, and future prospects.

3

2. Daily reflections completed at the end of each session during the programme, to capture on-the-spot reactions to the activities and learning outcomes of the day;

3. Student-driven, self-reflective evaluation reports in formats chosen by participants (These took the forms of online blogs, written reports, Vlogs, etc.). Participants were encouraged to think outside the box/disrupt the traditional narrative on how to use their chosen format and creativity in a way to reflect on their own experience. The method and vehicle of those reports was consciously set up to be driven by participants in order to empower the student voice in the future improvement and service design of the programme.

4. Semi-structured focus group three months upon return to City to measure intermediate outcomes on the core set of skills investigated in the survey and to capture further in-depth information on some of the patterns and trends identified within the quantitative research;

5. Returner’s focus group in the following year (June 2019) to reflect and establish long-term impact of the experience according to the key outcomes;

6. Linking of student survey data in Your Voice 2 (where applicable with first-year participants) in order to establish any correlation with increased sense of belongingness, students engagement and success.

7. Common Purpose also incorporates their own daily reflection in an overall final written report after the programme has finished.

Improvements from 2017 GLE (Bangalore)

After the 2017 GLE, which was City’s first, we incorporated lessons-learned into our service provision and were able to improve on the pre-departure support and application process (in addition to the evaluation plan detailed above) as follows:

1. Dedicated Common Purpose Webpage: https://www.city.ac.uk/international/exchange-and-study-abroad/study-abroad-experience-2018/_recache. This page was used for promotion and to ensure that the eligibility criteria was clearly defined and transparent. To remove friction and increase uptake, the application form was made accessible directly via this page. This increased visibility of the scheme both internally and externally, and will be replicated for the 2019 programme in HK.

2. Dedicated Common Purpose 2018 email: This allowed for more streamlined communication with students and will be done again in 2019.

3. Interviews with shortlisted candidates: Out of just over 200 applications, we shortlisted and interviewed 40 and from there chose the 25 to attend the trip. The interviews offered a useful way to learn more about the student than can be gleaned from an application, particularly those students who are better able to express themselves in person than in writing. This allowed the panel to robustly identify students with the highest potential and need and thus ensured the best fit for the outgoing cohort and the objectives of the CP programme in general. The added value has been identified as crucial so this process will be continued for the 2019 programme.

4. Pre-departure sessions, including language: This year we had 4 dedicated pre-departure sessions for students, one of which was conducted by an RMIT Vietnam student who was on exchange at City. He provided a unique perspective on Vietnam in general and Hanoi specifically, including key linguistic, cultural, and food knowledge.

4

Part 2 - Project evaluation

Overall feedback The 2018 GLE was immensely beneficial for the students on a number of levels including: greater perceived employability skills/knowledge, increased leadership skills, improved confidence and self-esteem, and ability to reflect on their own cultural stereotypes, biases, and perspective of the world. Students were able to mix with others from a range of schools, degrees, and years of study, which is not something that is normally available within the course of their daily studies at City, and which students themselves noted was a benefit of the experience. All of these benefits will be demonstrated below in the form of student testimonials and quantitative data from their pre/post surveys.

During the evenings students were free to explore Hanoi, and learned how to interact and engage with a culture and country that they had no prior experience of. This time was equally vital to the programme objectives, as their personal observations outside of the university setting were crucial to giving them a better understanding of the context within which they were required to find a solution to the challenge. During the sessions, students were routinely asked about their observations around the city, which forced them to engage with culture in a way that they may not have previously, if this had been simply a cultural visit. It was the combination of the programme and the students’ personal exploration of a new country that led to the outcomes detailed below.

Direct outcomes/ outputs Employability: As is shown clearly in the quantitative report, students’ perceived sense of employability and consequently their confidence on considering feasible career prospects and how to position themselves within those was significantly improved. To add context to the data:

After a visit to a local employer one student started to consider a career path in real estate and development that she would never have otherwise considered;

Another student realised that the type of law he had always thought he would practice was not actually aligned with his personal beliefs and desire to help those in need, and is therefore changing his direction of his LLM focus as a result of this programme;

As can be seen as a thread throughout all of the attached creative evaluations, students were able to identify key soft skills that they gained from the trip and link their utility in terms of their employability. This ranged from leaderships skills to confidence, being able to speak in front of a large group, understanding team work, etc.

‘City Community’: As with the 2017 trip, a key objective was to link students from a variety of years and degrees, who would not have otherwise met each other. The students commented that this is something that does not happen enough at City and they really enjoyed getting to know people from a wide range of backgrounds, who they never would have met had it not been for this experience. Several students comments this is a weak point of City in general – the lack of opportunity to come together as a community, to feel a sense of belonging to a wider City community. Particularly considering the struggle to build an institutional community within the constraint of a London campus, it is therefore a significant institutional benefit that this trip, though only impacted 25 students, helped create a better sense of belonging.

Post-Hanoi Project (‘Creative Evaluation’): One student had such a powerful experience visiting an NGO that she is now planning to start a charity in the UK and once back in September, aims to create a version of what she

5

experienced in Hanoi, at City, with the help of students and staff. This is someone we need to think about more in the 2019 GLE – how to support students in bringing a vision to life once they return to the UK.

Student Voice*: I have attached to this report several ‘creative evaluations’ from students, who have given permission for their work to be shared. This provides the best ‘first-hand’ account of what the students’ experienced and the impact it had on them in their own voices. Some of these are written reports (attached), whilst others are blogs/vlogs (links listed below).

Amelia Durkin – Law: https://ameliadurkin.wordpress.com/2018/06/27/hanoi-2018/Zack Sardar – SASS:https://venturinginvietnamtours.wordpress.com/evaluation/Carolina Oliveira de Freitas – SHS: https://wp.me/p2Mx0e-4BAdam Harris-Batt – SMCSE: https://adamvietnamblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/the-journey-begins/

*Please do not distribute/publish on City or any other external website any of the above material (or that which is attached in the zip drive accompanying this report), without first speaking with Aliya Sorgen (aliya.sorgen@city.ac.uk)

Quantitative Results of Pre/Post Survey

The students own voices (as evidenced above) clearly shows considerable outcomes and future impact. The below breakdown of students’ personal and professional growth and development during the week’s programme provides an more granular layer on the perceived development of participant over the schemes – highlighting clear added-value across all components but also identifies aspects that could be improved/are of particular use for participants. Scores are based on a scale of 0-3, where 0 = ‘None’ and 3 = ‘Great’.

6

7

8

The above graphs combine all years, Schools, and backgrounds. Greater detail behind the above averages (i.e. differences across ethnicity and schools) can be provided upon request.

To empower participants to take ownership over their own development and drive future development in those areas a personalised dashboard with each participants’ survey results is also forwarded to students after their return.

9

Qualitative Outcomes from Pre/Post Survey

PRE POST

Piloting a customised evaluation that allowed students to track their own development throughout the scheme in regards to building confidence, intercultural awareness, leadership and – of course- employability skills allowed us to directly seek information from students about their experience and making them part of the conversation around solutions and, including quantitative analysis, allowed us to understand what works, what doesn’t for whom and why. A response rate of 100%, proved that participants appreciated the opportunity to reflect on their experiences and offer feedback, which simultaneously provided us with valuable insight on how they were feeling during the scheme. There is clearly value in engaging students in a strategic way, which benefits them and the institution mutually. Consequently, our approach to capturing CP data has developed to engage students in shaping their experiences, through design thinking and participatory research. This revised approach moves away from the archetypal and tokenistic involvement of students towards a more meaningful engagement, allowing them to shape and improve their own experiences. By positioning students as active partners in service design and evaluation, they become advocates for themselves and their peers, leading to increased meaningful engagement and actionable outputs. As a result, the shown CP evaluation acts as catalysts of students’ and programme’s potential. The start of a journey that is more data-focused without losing the innate personal nature of leveraging human connection with being cutting-edge and leading in sector.

As part of the Bristol Online Survey, students also provided qualitative information for the post-trip survey. A few examples 10

highlight the impact of the experience from the students themselves

Name one professional outcomes you gained through participating in this scheme: I've improved my public speaking skills, even though I still get nervous I believe that now I am able to put myself out

there even more. I definitely spoke up more, prior to the trip i would be reluctant to raise my hand in small crowds, let alone in a

crowd of that side. I've come to realise that when i speak, people do listen, they want to listen and i should never be afraid of making a fool of myself. Even a bad suggestion is a useful contribution as it demonstrates where not to progress, eliminating further errors.

I also truly feel my ability to articulate has increased dramatically as I had to discuss ideas with those who were less literate with English. In terms of lawyering skills this was fantastic experience. Being able to translate a complex area of litigation or legal statute into readily understandable conversation for a lay client is perhaps the quintessential skill every lawyer should possess. This course most definitely developed that, and then some.

Massively improved confidence and leadership skills. Able to effectively lead and motivate a group of diverse individuals, and pitch our ideas to a panel of experts.

I have learnt the power of self-reflection as well as become more culturally aware. The programme has enabled me to dive deep into my Core and Flex.

I have learned how to be effective as an individual working in a group

Name one social leaning outcome you gained through participating in this scheme: I've made new friends from many different countries, which I think it is amazing! I also learnt to communicate better

with people, for example speaking slower as some people may not understand me. Broadening my networks - I have been able to successfully talk to and build working relationships and friendships

with people from a range of countries, cultures, beliefs and opinions. I understand the struggles some people may face due to their culture, and how their life choices stem from this. I'm way more confident now. I have been able to improve my social interaction skills - by being able to make friends and connect through

common ground as well as through cultural differences!

Indirect outcomes/ benefits (e.g. profile raising, relationships)

One of the most beneficial parts of this particular GLE for City on a university-wide level was the partnership strengthening with RMIT. Given that RMIT are now a WC2 partner and there are discussions about a number of joint activities outside of ‘standard’ exchanges, this experience provided a unique opportunity to build upon our existing relationship and solidify the trust between institutions, which will no doubt help for future collaboration.

Some students, by their own admission, had been somewhat disengaged with the university before the trip, but after participating, stated that they wanted to become more engaged particularly in international activities at City. This increased student engagement will hopefully also have a positive effect on the student’s retention.

Supporting other City Professional Services areas in linking students that they have been trying to connect for quite some time. (eg. Care leavers)

On a sector-level, City is behind in terms of offering short-term mobility options. This trip was a first step in broadening our provision in this area, and was promoted both internally and externally;

11

Given that Vietnam is not a priority country in terms of outbound student mobility (though we do have the option for students to study at the Ho Chi Minh or Hanoi campuses of RMIT), this trip provided a unique opportunity for City students to experience a country that they would not otherwise have had the chance to visit;

Additional Insights/ lessons learnt

The model used by Common Purpose for their programme was integrative, linking concepts and themes from one day to the next in such a way that students’ knowledge of cultural intelligence, leadership skills, and personal reflection grew each day in a subtle but powerful way.

In terms of further changes/additions to how City manages this programme (separate from the above noted improvements from 2017, which will continue in 2019):

Consider ways in which there is some consequence for not completing the ‘creative evaluation’ at the end of the programme. Students on the 2018 programme were told it was mandatory, however City had no recourse if a student did not complete this;

Call this a ‘scholarship’, rather than saying ‘fully funded’, as will imply there is additional work that students must complete to be selected and makes the process more competitive;

Utilise 2018 participants as ‘Common Purpose Ambassadors, but in such a way that they will not divulge the ‘secrets’ of the programme, which would be a spoiler for future participants;

Part 3 – Further actions

Recommendations Funding has already been secured for the June 2019 GLE to HK. We will again be partnering with RMIT, given the significant benefits to this type of partnership working.

Based on the clear ‘wins’ of this type of short term mobility, I recommend that we investigate other (and not requiring full funding) international opportunities to students. Often these can also act as a catalyst for students to consider a longer semester/full-year exchange (where financially feasible of course).

Discuss with CP and RMIT about how we can support students to bring something back to their home country and start a project that was inspired whilst they were on the GLE.

Next steps (including project dissemination)

Dissemination: An article published in CityWire (completed) Article published on WC2 website: http://wc2network.org/students-from-wc2-partners-head-to-vietnam-for-

leadership-programme/ Article published in all-student newsletter (done) Article published in City News: https://www.city.ac.uk/news/2018/august/from-london-to-hanoi This report will be circulated to the Internationalisation Committee and Sub-Committees, as well as to the Exchange

Coordinator Group. It is expected that ADIs will cascade this within their respective schools. Promotion event at City on September 5th, run jointly by City, Common Purpose, and RMIT AS to get in touch with Student and Academic Services to see how this can be promoted to students (i.e. Student

12

Experiences website). Case study on Student Experience website (City) Promote via Common Purpose’s dissemination channels Create glossy brochure RMIT created a professional video of the week, which included a variety of student testimonials, one of which was

from City: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6jftm9jf18

13