Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Student engagement in teaching, learning and assessment. @ mikehamlyn. Image: world.edu. Outline. Individual engagement retention and success a sense of belonging Benefits of engagement for the individual and society Engagement Outcomes Module and award level Public informatiion - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Student engagement in teaching, learning and assessment
@mikehamlyn
Image: world.edu
OutlineIndividual engagement
retention and successa sense of belonging
Benefits of engagementfor the individualand society
Engagement OutcomesModule and award levelPublic informatiionLeague Tables
What can we do with the dataportfolio performancehow to get “smart”how to improve outcomes from better engagement
The futureHow will we carry on?
Is this engagement?How do you know?
Does this reflect reality?
What will engaged students look like in the future?
Individual Engagement
• Student Retention and Success Project• 1. At the heart of student retention and success is a strong sense
of belonging in HE for students. This is most effectively nurtured through mainstream activities that all students participate in.
• 2. The academic sphere is the most important site for nurturing belonging.
• 3. Specific interventions cannot be recommended over and above each other. Rather the institution, department and programme should all nurture a culture of belonging.
• 4. Student belonging is an outcome of: supportive peer relations; meaningful interaction between staff and students; developing knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners; and an HE experience which is relevant to interests and future goals.
Benefits of engagement
Engaged students get better outcomes
Celebrating individual successMaximising individual rewardsMaximising contribution to societyMarket and non-market benefits
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254101/bis-13-1268-benefits-of-higher-education-participation-the-quadrants.pdf
How do we do this in a region of low aspiration?
Engagement Outcomes
employability
Student surveysaward level
outcomesModule outcomes
Engagement Outcomes
• Students act increasingly as engaged consumers– Access price
comparisons– Access to performance
comparisons– Demand better
outcomes
• University needs to optimise– Module and award level
outcomes– Student survey results– Public information– League Tables
Outcomes
Number of “good” degreesNational Student Survey resultsRetention ratesEmployability
Inputs
Spend per studentStaff student ratiosEntry standardsResearch ratingsCost of livingSpend on servicesFaculty spend
An engaged student reads….. An engaged student contributes to…
• National Student Survey– Measure of final year students– Questions on satisfaction with course– Satisfaction with teaching and learning– Satisfaction with assessment and feedback
• Degree results• Retention• Employability
Used in 3 areas:– League tables/KIS (external)– Portfolio performance review (internal)– Award annual monitoring (internal)
Student Input to Information
League Tables – a mirror.
League Tables2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Overall Position in Guardian Guide
Ovw
eral
l Pos
ition
2010 2011 2012 2013 201477.0
78.0
79.0
80.0
81.0
82.0
83.0
84.0
85.0
86.0
87.0
NSS Teaching (%)
67/119
year 2010 2011 2012 2013 201474.0
76.0
78.0
80.0
82.0
84.0
86.0
NSS Overall (%)
62/119
2010 2011 2012 2013 201458.0
60.0
62.0
64.0
66.0
68.0
70.0
72.0
74.0
NSS Feedback (%)
38/119
2010 2011 2012 2013 201417.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
Student: staff ratio
83/119
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014225.0
230.0
235.0
240.0
245.0
250.0
255.0
260.0
Entry Tariff
107/119
2010 2011 2012 2013 20140.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Career prospects (%)
113/119
2010 2011 2012 2013 20140.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Value added score/10
108/119
Are we trying to improving position or performance?• Clearly, we can try to play the game of moving
our league table position• What we really want to do is improve our
performance in each of the key areas to make sure there is a sustainable and genuine change
Guardian criteria Suggested Action
Entry standards Review all current standard offers to pitch ourselves properly against competitors
Student/staff ratio Reviewed more thoroughly the data we submit to HESADeveloping better models of SSR to identify where investment is most needed
Spend per student Reviewed more thoroughly the data we submit to HESAReviewed classification of spendIncreased recent spend on libraries and IT will have an impact
Guardian criteria Action
Value added Increased number of “good” degrees awarded. Reviewing all level 6 modules with low pass rates and average marks. Identifying through portfolio review awards with consistently poor progression and attainmentL&T conference on attainmentBME student performance
NSS teaching, assessment and feedback and overall satisfaction
Faculty action plans, and award level plansIncreased student engagement with surveySeven principles of feedbackOnline assessment and feedback projectReview through portfolio performance tool
employment Staffordshire Graduate – improving our students’ chances of successOn-campus graduate internships
Used in 3 areas:– League tables/KIS (external)– Portfolio performance review (internal)– Award annual monitoring (internal)
Student Input to Information
Portfolio performance review
• Measures:– Market– Academic outcomes inc
good degrees– Student satisfaction– Employability
• Uses– Comparison against
targets– Comparison between
awards– Annual monitoring– Portfolio decisions
SNC/ABB 2nd
stage enrol per
offer
total apps/2
nd stage enrol
retention 2011
retention 2012
progress 2011
progress 2012
% good degrees 2011
% good degrees 2012
total all levels enrol 2010
total all levels enrol 2011
total all levels enrol 2012
total all levels enrol 2013
dlhe 2010-11
dlhe 2011-12
NSS 2012 teaching
NSS 2012 assess and feedback
NSS 2012 overall
NSS 2013 teaching
NSS 2013 assess and feedback
NSS 2013 overall
score 1 market led (enter target below)
score 2 - quality led
0.5 5 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 56.0 60.0 80 85 86 70 85 86 72 85 80.00
0.22 9.50 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 66.7 50.0 10 10 8 9 100.0 80.0 78.0 65.0 75.0 89.0 74.0 90.0 80.87 100.690.12 16.00 93.3 86.4 80.0 72.7 25.0 66.7 27 28 21 14 50.0 0.0 97.0 94.0 100.0 83.0 85.0 87.0 60.71 81.830.42 3.40 100.0 77.8 100.0 77.8 50.0 25.0 9 7 9 9 0.0 50.0 78.0 65.0 75.0 89.0 74.0 90.0 94.68 79.92
Used in 3 areas:– League tables/KIS (external)– Portfolio performance review (internal)– Award annual monitoring (internal)
Student Input to Information
Annual Monitoring• Key part of quality process
– Reflection on award performance– Reflection on student engagement and outcomes
• Statistics – progression, achievement, retention• Response to external examiner comments• Reflection on employer input• Staffordshire Graduate• Reports are made available to students, to demonstrate our
engagement
• Critically important for partner input, and to recognise joint responsibility for improvements
How it fits together
Student satisfaction
Student engagement and outcomes
Student surveys League tables
reputation
Market demand
Course improvements
Action Plans Annual Monitoring
Improved engagement leads to improved outcomes
• improved outcomes for individual students– Grades and classifications– Employability –getting into the right jobs– Satisfaction– Satisfying aspirations
• improved overall outcomes– Institutional success and reputation– Changing the aspirations of our communities
How institutional data and analysis can help?• Identifying performance metrics at module
level• Identifying performance metrics for awards• Developing a culture where this analysis
becomes embedded– Being prepared to deal with the issue!
TLA practiceRelevant TL and assessment practiceResponsive curricula – employer and technology ledIncreased student engagement in course design and monitoringStaff engaged in reflective practice
Management InterventionQuestioning low average marks, poor attainment ratesManaging the performance of the portfolioIncreased emphasis on EEE (staff and students)Continuous staff developmentImproving quality of teaching
Uses of technologyElectronic assessment and feedbackOnline communitiesStudent portalMobile technologies
The future…..How we teach in 2013?How to learn in 2020?
How could we improve
engagement and outcomes for
institution?
Learning Analytics –
can work if all systems joined upA way to encourage or check on student engagement?
Every log inEvery use of VLE – pages read, scores on formative testsUse of library – frequency, downloads, loansAttendance at class or online
A way to audit teaching as well…….
Or is this another example of technological solutionism?
Improving individual engagement Using “big data”?
LEADERSHIP AND LEARNING ANALYTICS, http://www.educause.edu/library/resources/leadership-and-learning-analytics“To Save Everything, Click Here: Technology, Solutionism, and the Urge to Fix Problems that Don’t Exist” Evgeney Morozov, pb Allen Lane 2103, ISBN-10: 1846145481”
How will we engage students in learning when:
Half of what they learn in first year is out of date by the time they graduate?They will have maybe 10 different jobs in their career?The jobs they will do don’t even exist yet using technology that isn't invented yet,to solve problems we don’t know are problems yet.100 Billion queries a month on Google – who did we ask before?90% of the data in the world was created in the last 2 yearsThere are more students in the top 5% in China than all the students in the UK
@mikehamlyn blogs.staffs.ac.uk/mgh1/
http://vimeo.com/58839986
