Professor Liz Thomas, July 2012. Available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/what_works_final_report_0.pdf
A note for reflection on all of this – it was published 10 years ago, and I would argue that if we take the covid19 social study into account, one can reasonably expect that there has been a change in how students engage with others and build a sense of belonging. If the majority of these findings are based on students aged between 18-21, as the study suggests, then the majority of findings suggest that are based on the responses of millennial students. I believe there’s reason to consider how these responses have changed for gen z.
‘We are confident that the range of issues examined using mixed methods provides powerful evidence of the importance of student engagement and belonging to improve student retention and success. There are of course challenges associated with identifying cause and effect…’ (p. 10, referring to data set on p. 9)
‘The findings of this programme [the What Works? Student Retention and Success programme] present a compelling case that in higher education, belonging is critical to student retention and success. Although other studies have pointed to this and many staff in universities would readily accept this contention, we argue that the implications are very often not addressed in institutional priorities, policies, processes and practices.’ (p. 10)
‘[As of 2012, in the UK] only 1 in 12 students, or just over 8% leave HE during their first year of study, surveys undertaken by What Works? (WW) project teams found that between 37% and 42% of students think about withdrawing from HE […] this means that […] a significant minority of students considering withdrawing, and thus improving student belonging should be a priority for all programmes, departments and institutions.’ (p. 12)
On reasons for thinking about leaving: ‘Survey data (Projects 1, 5 and 7) and qualitative research (Project 4) identify academic issues, feelings of isolation and/or not fitting in and concern about achieving future aspirations as the primary reasons why students think about leaving. Project 5 finds that students who think about leaving are less satisfied with their university experience and appear to be less engaged with their peers and their institution; students who did not think about leaving appeared to have a better understanding of the university processes and were more likely to report a positive relationship with staff and students. Students are particularly likely to consider leaving a) after Christmas and b) during the first semester (project 5) which supports the wider evidence that the majority of students who leave do so during their first year.’ (p. 12)
On belonging: ‘we draw on both psychological and sociological traditions to inform our understanding of these issues: the psychological literature is used to define belonging at the individual level, while the sociological literature is used to explain how the potential mismatch between a students’ background and that of the institution may result in students not feeling like they belong, and leaving early.’ (p. 12)
Definitions of belonging:
- Individual level: belonging = subjective feelings of relatedness or connectedness to their institution: ‘Feeling connected (or feeling that one belongs in a social millieu)’ (Vallerand, 1997, p. 300)
- ‘the extent to which students feel personally accepted, respected, included, and supported by others in the [school] social environment’ (Goodenow, 1993a, p.80)
- ‘regular contact and the perception that interpersonal relationships have stability, affective concern, and are ongoing (Baumeister and Leary, 1995)
- In education environments:
Students’ sense of being accepted, valued, included and encouraged by others (teacher and peers) in the academic classroom setting and of feeling oneself to be an important part of the life and activity of the class. More than simple perceived liking or warmth, it also involves support and respect for personal autonomy and for the student as an individual.
Goodenow, 1993b, p. 25
- The sociologists view: (all p. 13)
- Bourdieu and Passeron’s 1977) theories of cultural capital and habitus view the problem structurally, as being embedded in the way that higher education institutions function.
- ‘Cultural capital’ incorporates ways of speaking, behaving and interacting, which are learned through interactions with family and social institutions such as homes and schools (McLaren, 1989; Meadmore, 1999) and is, therefore, class-related.
- ‘Habitus’ is the disposition to act in certain ways determined by cultural capital and is the embodiment of cultural capital. Educational institutions have an identifiable habitus (Reay, David and Ball, 2001). Students whose habitus is at odds with that of their institution may feel that they do not fit in, that their social and cultural practices are inappropriate and that their tacit knowledge is undervalue, and they may be more included to withdraw early (Thomas 2002).
- The relationship with engagement (all p. 14)
- Social engagement can create a sense of belonging and offer informal support through interaction with friends and peers.
- Participation in academic, pastoral and professional development services […] often contribute to developing students’ capacities to engage and belong in higher education.
- Astin’s theory of student involvement (1984) found that student persistence is often related to levels of student activity and contact with the institution and peers (this one is p. 17)
- Tinto’s 1993 student integration model, which identified academic and social integration and institution and goal commitment as key variables contributing to students’ decisions about withdrawing (p. 17)
The report proposes that student belonging is achieved through:
- supportive peer relationships
- meaningful interactions between staff and students
- developing knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners
- an HE experience that is relevant to interests and future goals (pp. 15-16)
‘Effective interventions start pre-entry, and have an emphasis on engagement and on overt aademic purpose. The develop peer networks and friendships, shape realistic expectations, improve academic skills, develop students’ confidence, demonstrate future relevance and nurture belonging.’
The What Works? model:
The figure unpacked:
- Early engagement: engagement to promote belonging must begin early and continue across the student life cycle (p.16).
- Early engagement should begin early with institutional outreach interventions and (…) extends throughout the process of preparing for and entering HE. Pre-entry and induction activities should (…) facilitate students to build social relationships with current and new students and members of staff, and engagement students with information that will enable them to assess whether the course is relevant to their current interests and future aspirations (p. 17)
- Implication for me and my research? That this ideally needs to start pre-arrival, but that belonging is something that should be assessed early on in the student journey (i.e. incoming cohorts) and corrective action taken immediately. How could this be done? How could it integrate into Get Ready?
- Engagement in the academic sphere: engagement and belonging can be nurtured through the institution (academic, social and professional services), but the academic sphere is of primary importance to ensure all students benefit (p.17).
- (…) the What Works? programme identifies the importance of engagement in activities with an overt academic purpose, through high quality student-centred learning and teaching strategies. Such approaches facilitate staff and student interaction (and also promote) peer interaction and the development of long-lasting friendships. (p. 17)
- Vincent Tinto’s influential work points to the importance not just of academic interaction, but also of social engagement (Tinto, 1993). This is strongly supported by the findings from the What Works? projects, and from other institutional research in the uK (Thomas, 2002; Wilcox et al., 2005). The What Works? evidence reinforces the vital role of friendship to many students, especially when they face difficulties. It is clear, however, that the academic sphere can play a central role in developing these friendships (p. 18).
- (On ‘professional services’, including academic support): Many students (…) are not aware of the services and/or do not use them. professional services can be particularly effective when they are delivered via the academic sphere, rather than relying on students accessing these services autonomously (p. 18)
- So, perhaps the focus on things like ‘Big Welcome’ miss the mark? We simply need to be investing in an effort to cultivate belonging at a course level.
- In terms of being embedded onto the courses, this is something I believe AS do effectively. Do we have data sets on how familiar students are with our services? The evidence from the What works? programme suggests that professional services make an important contribution to the development of some students’ knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners, both pre- and post-entry (p. 18).
- Developing the capacity of staff and students to engage: the capacity of students to engage and staff to offer an engaging experience must be developed, thus a partnership approach in which everyone is responsible for improving student belonging, retention and success is required. (p. 17)
- What Works? project research with part-time, mature and local student found a highly instrumental approach to HE, which corresponds with a devaluing of social aspects of an HE experience, reflected in comments about ‘not needing more friends’ (this suggests) students need to be educated about the value of widespread engagement in their HE experience, and encouraged and facilitated to engage in appropriate opportunities, and given the necessary skills (p. 18).
- It would be interesting to reflect on how we are able to quantify that to both staff and students? Is there a shared understanding of what we mean by ‘engagement’? How can it be measured or assessed in a meaningful way to encourage belonging? Do we communicate the importance of ‘engagement’ with students? Is it culturally located? Is it ableist? Otherwise exclusive? How do we overcome barriers to this?: ‘A uniform approach to encouraging engagement may create pressure for conformity and result in alienation and disengagement (Mann, 2005)’ (p. 19).
- Institutional management and co-ordination: at the senior level the institution must take responsibility for nurturing a culture of belonging and creating the necessary infrastructure to promote student engagement, retention and success. This includes the use of data to underpin student retention and success (p.17)
- Again, necessitates a need to be able to define and quantify belonging? It sounds like it is important to develop a shared understanding of what belonging means (co-designed with the students) in order to ensure this is what is being delivered.
Practical implications (p. 20):
- ‘Our analysis finds that the exact type of intervention (…) is less important than the way it is delivered and its intended outcomes. (…) should aim to nurture a culture of belonging through supportive peer relations, meaningful interaction between staff and students, developing students’ knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners and an HE experience that is relevant to interests and future goals.’ (p. 20)
- In terms of locating this work within my field of Academic Support, meaningful interaction between staff and students seems tangible. I would be interested to know about the patterns between student retention and time spent in elective Academic Support sessions i.e. drop-ins and tutorials. Anecdotally, these often offer both sides opportunity to build a meaningful relationship which can anchor students. Could this be measured?
- ‘An opt-out’ rather than ‘opt-in’ approach should be the norm, and particular attention should be paid to students who opt out, with additional support provided if necessary’ (p. 20)
- This is dependent on resource. It would be ideal to have all students opt-in to regular tutorials in that critical early stage, but there isn’t the resource. Could there be something resource-lite that could be trialled on this principle i.e. an email sent to a year group on one course, with the option to opt-out. These emails would be written by me and offer a regular point of contact and asynchronous resources? Is that feasible?
- ‘Activities should proactively seek to engage students, rather than waiting for a crisis to occur, or the more motivated students to take up opportunities. Students who most need support are the least likely to come forward voluntarily (Baumgat and Johnstone, 1977; Bentley and Allen, 2006; Chickering and Hannah, 1969; Eaton and Bean, 1995). If students have to opt in it is important to make it transparent how students can and should engage, and why’ (p.20).
- For attrition, does the university reach out to students to ask why they left? If so, can I access this data?
- ‘Collaborative: activities should encourage collaboration and engagement with fellow students and members of staff’ (p.22).
- What instances of this are there? Could this be something that is integrated into the email campaign/community? Is there are well documented instances of staff-student collaboration and then there has been pipeline analysis into how this has affected students retention, that would be interesting?
- ‘Monitored: the extend and quality of students’ engagement should be monitored, and where there is evidence of low levels of engagement follow-up action should be taken’ (p. 21).
- What methods do we current use to measure engagement? Is it effective? Are they repeatedly reconsidered to ensure they are fit for purpose and epistemologically sound?
NOTE: to summarise p. 23, many students leave university because they didn’t have enough info before they arrive and/or due to poor course/institution choice. As such, there’s an emphasis on pre-entry. I think this has to realistically fall outside of the purview of AS, but interventions such as Get Ready do foster ‘early engagement to promote integration and social capital’ (p. 23).
Induction (p. 25)
- ‘Induction activities have an impact on retention and success through:
- socialisation and formation of friendship groups, which provide a support network and promote social integration
- informing expectations of HE and helping students to be effective learners by developing their confidence and their academic skills
- developing relationships with members of staff, allowing students to approach them subsequently when they need to’ (p. 27)
- The What Works? project found that effective induction programmes have the following elements:
- take place in the academic sphere with other students from the same programme;
- take place over an extended time period
- use icebreakers to help students get to know each other
- involve small group work;
- provide students with informal opportunities to get to know their teaching staff or tutors;
- provide information online and readily accessible to students;
- engage students in the process of understanding the academic expectations and procedures. (p.27)
- Reflections for LCC – I think we actually do really well with most of these things but we don’t provide students with ‘informal’ opportunities to get to know their teaching staff or tutors. Struggling to think of a way of doing this which wouldn’t be totally contrived.
- In the Nottingham Trent case study (p.28) they emphasised opportunities for students not living in halls of residence and on the needs of mature, international and local students. I often got the sense that we programmed these groups as afterthoughts in the broader programme, and this was reflected in the survey feedback. However, as this aspect doesn’t specifically tie into the scope of Academic Support, I won’t be investigating it further.
Learning and Teaching:
- ‘The What Works? project found the following factors contribute to a sense of belonging in the academic sphere:
- staff/student relationships: knowing staff and being able to ask for help;
- curricular contents and related opportunities: providing real-world learning opportunities that are interesting and relevant to future aspirations;
- learning and teaching: group-based learning and teaching that allows students to interact with each other, share their own experiences and learn by doing. A variety of learning experiences, including work placements, and delivery by enthusiastic lecturers were found to be important to;
- assessment and feedback: clear guidances about process and transparency about criteria;
- personal tutoring: as a means of developing a close relationship with a member of staff who oversees individual progress and takes action if necessary, including directing students to appropriate services;
- peer relationships and cohort identity: having friends to discuss academic and non-academic issues with
- a sense of belonging to a particular place within university i.e. a department building or a small campus (p.31)
Reflections on the above for my purposes: group-based learning and teaching that allows students to interact with each other and share their experiences is something that is done regularly in Get Ready, probably have to get some more face to face time now that I’m returning to teaching onsite. Thinking about personal tutoring, and how i’m often told it makes a big difference meeting with me regularly and building up a relationship/familiarity. Also, I’m left to consider what the consequence has been for being away from campus for so long, and how that literally ‘space’ of belonging was missing for many. Has that impacted their sense of belonging? Could it be something we think about in the new building i.e. around the academic support office, we can have a student wall.
Staff/student relationships:
- ‘Many students find it difficult to approach academic members of staff, but they value being able to ask staff for clarification, guidance and feedback. Students who feel that they have a less good relationship with academic members of staff are more likely to think about leaving. Good relationships are based on the informal relationships that recognise students as individuals and value their contributions (…) What Works? survey evidence found that students who are thinking about leaving feel more distant from their teaching staff than those who have not considered withdrawal (Project 5) (…) the evidence suggests that a good relationship with staff motivates students and encourages them to work hard and achieve more, and vice versa (…) (p.32).
- ‘Students value relationships that have the following characteristics:
- Staff know students, including their names, and view them as individuals (projects 4 and 5);
- staff appear interested in students and their progress, not just their problems (projects 4 and 6);
- staff are available and respond to students contact in an appropriate and timely way (project 4);
- staff value the input of students and respect them, irrespective of diversity and difference (projects 4 and 5);
- students are able to approach staff for support (projects 3, 4 and 5);
- students want relationships with staff that are ‘less formal, like a mentor’ rather than ‘formal, like a teacher’. (pp. 33-34)
- For my preliminary questionnaire, these could form the basis of my questions to students i.e. thinking of teaching staff you engage with, do you feel like they know you, your name, and view you as an individual? I can look at the project questionnaire for examples.
Curriculum contents and pedagogy (p.36)
‘Strategies to make learning and teaching more engaging include:
a) Active learning: engaging students in problem- or practice-based learning drawing on the real world (Projects 4, 5 and 7)
b) Collaborative learning and small group teaching, allowing students to share their own experiences, both in the classroom and beyond (Projects 3, 4, 5 and 7)
c) Enthusiastic and knowledgeable lecturers (Projects 4 and 5) […] Yorke and Longden (2008, o, 48) says that ‘those teaching first-year students should have a strong commitment to teaching and learning’.
d) offering a range of learning experiences (Projects 4 and 5)
e) having work placements and field trips (Projects 3, 4 and 7)
[…] much of the good practice […] identified in relation to learning and teaching reflects Chickering and Gamon’s (1987) seven effective educational practices that impact on student learning and educational experiences. This can. now be understood as a learner-centred paradigm (Huba and Freed, 2000) which allows students to construct knowledge through a more active and authentic learning process facilitated by the academic member of staff’ (pp.37-38).
Assessment and feedback (pp.38-39)
‘Students who have a clear understanding about the assessment process and expectations have higher confidence levels and are less likely to think about leaving early. What Works? evidence suggests that an understanding of assessment should be developed early, and students need to have positive relationships with staff so that they can ask for clarification.’ (p.38)
ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT (p.44)
- ‘Two projects demonstrated that developing academic confidence facilitates student retention and success (projects 5 and 6). A survey of leavers (project 3) found that 43% felt that not being given ‘helpful academic support by my department’ was at least some influence on their decision to leave (a major influence for 16%), and 25% of respondents regarded the fact that they did not know where to go to seek academic help or advice was of some influence (a major influence for 6%). The findings suggest that some students (at least about 1 in 6 or 7 students) at some stage seek either academic or personal support from their department and, for whatever reason, do not receive this, and this may contribute to early withdrawal‘ (p.44)
- ‘[…] What Works? evidence suggests the following effective approaches to providing academic development and support:
- a) students prefer to receive their academic development and support within their academic department
- b) sharing concerns allows students to realise that many of their worries about studying are normal and/or shared by others
- c) investing time to enable students to understand academic development, to reflect on their learning and to undertake follow-up work
- d) personal tutors emerged as a popular and effective way of receiving academic development and support. In an institutional survey on sources of support personal tutors scored more highly as the preferred source of help and advice for study concerns
- e) peer mentoring can also provide students with access to useful academic development and support, especially as a mentor can appear more accessible to students than members of staff.’ (p.44)
- Reflecting on what the consequences of this would be for my study – it is a means of locating my research within my area of practice. This study is old now, but the suggestion that Academic Support can mitigate against student withdrawal is promising. It sounds like the way we are going abut it locally follows best practice from these recommendations.
- [On the subject of personal tutors, which by this study’s definition, closely resembles the role of an AS lecturer – see p.45] ‘evidence has shown that personal tutors can improve student retention and success in the following ways:
- a) enabling students to develop a relationship with an academic member of staff in their discipline or programme area, and feeling more ‘connected’
- b) helping staff get to know students
- c) providing students with reassurance, guidance and feedback about their academic studies in particular
[Successful personal tutoring is:
- a) proactive rather than relying on students finding and accessing tutors
- b) early meetings with students (Tomas et al., 2010)
- c) students have a relationship with the tutor and the tutor gets to know the students
- d) structured support with an explicit purpose
- e) embedded into the academic experience and based at school or faculty level
- f) strong academic focus
- g) identifying students at risk and providing support and development (Thomas et al., 2010)
- linked to student services, students’ union and peer mentoring or similar peer scheme to provide pastoral and social support and referring students for further support where appropriate.’ (p. 46)
Interesting case study of academic development and support:
PASS: Personal and Academic Support System: proactive support for students, Department of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University (p. 47)
- In summary, these case study had all students enrolled onto a personal and academic support system ‘PASS’. This involved group tutorials with personal tutors which taught academic skills but mostly developed good working relationships between students and staff. A more natural way of creating those bonds. Max.8 students in each tutorial group. The outcomes were assessed and contributed 30% of the module assessment. The result of the intervention was: ‘student progression and retention statistics […] have risen from 83% in 2004-05 to 92% in 2007-08, an improvement that has sustained to date (2012) (p.48).
The importance of family and friends
- ‘Friends are one of the most important reasons students who are thinking about withdrawing decide to stay in HE (Project 5) […] What Works? evidence shows that friendships and peer relations have the following benefits […]:
- a) promote academic intergration and belonging;
- b) develop students’ confidence as learners in HE;
- c) improve students’ motivation to study and succeed;
- d) offer a source of academic help and enable students to copy with their academic study;
- e) share tacit knowledge, such as module choice and how to prepare for assessments;
- f) provide emotional support;
- g) offer practical support;
- h) allow students to compare themselves against others and gain reassurance’ (p. 52).
- ‘Evidence from the two What Works? projects suggested that the following groups of students find it harder to make friends:
- students with family commitments;
- students who live at home and commute to participate in HE;
- mature students;
- Nursing students;
- part-time students;
- international students. ‘ (pp.52-53)
- ‘Two projects identified the importance of social spaces for students to meet and spend time with each otherl these were particularly valued by students who live at home. Project 3 found that virtual social spaces could also fulfil a useful function in facilitateing students to get to know each other, again especially for students who do not live in student accommodations.’ (p. 53) Interesting to think how this can be incorporated into my ‘come study with me’ sessions.
- ‘The What Works? studies identified a number of methods by which staff could nurture cohort identity and belonging:
- a) icebreakers and team building activities in class;
- b) assessed and non-assessed group work in the class and outside of formal teaching time;
- c) field strips, residential activities and course-related events (the example given here is that the lecturer came to the pub with them…)
- d) pre-entry and induction activities;
- e) a space within the academic milieu where students spend time together;
- f) staff organised social activities;
- g) peer mentoring’ (pp.54-55).
- Just thinking about how we can not only foster friendships in a meaningful way in the classroom, but how we can also offer students solutions to this through our own contact with them. Not all students will find it easy to make friends with their peers, how can that gap be filled?
- ‘The Sandbox Studio: a course-specific social space, Department of Psychology, University of Sunderland’ (p.59)
- ‘The Sandbox Studio integrates social interactions with an academically focused environment. It is a dedicated space within the Psychology Department where Psychology students are encouraged to spend time both socialising and exploring psychological concepts together. It was designed on the initiative of a Principle Lecturer in the Department and has a rationale of focusing students’ attention on the campus, encouraging them to use time between structured sessions effectively. It is equipped with sofas and cushions, a whiteboard, a DVD player, films, novels, design and architecture magazines, video games and an Xbox plus other psychology-related materials […] feedback from students indicates that they value the Sandbox for providing a social space within the University […] following the introduction of the Sandbox Studio (and ongoing problem-based learning activities) in 2008-09, progression of Psychology students from L1 to L2 increased from 77% in 2007-08 to 82% in 2008-09 to 85% in 2009-10′ (p.59)
- Interesting to reflect on whether this come be something we offer in the new building? Could it be integrated with the Academic Support/Student Services space more readily? Also, how could these Sandbox environments be created in a meaningful way online?
Professional services (p. 62)
- ‘The majority of students who think about leaving do not make use of institutional support and professional services, but rather they seek advice from friends and family, at least initially. Knowing professional services exist is reassuring, but many do not know what is available […] professional services could consider how they an provide information to friends and family.’
- This is an interesting thing to consider along the lines of belonging – would building a relationship with family/friends be helpful to improve sense of belonging? Integrate more effectively and holistically into students’ lives? What would this look like? Website isn’t very proactive… something to think on.
Student capacity for participation and belonging (p. 66)
- ‘As discussed above in relation to friendship and peer support, some students do not recognise the value of engagement, particularly in activities that do not have an over academic purpose’ (p. 66)
- ‘[Instead of induction focusing on giving students info, it should] develop their capacity to engage and belong […] perhaps focusing on the capacity to develop: supportive peer relations; meaningful interaction with staff; knowledge/skills; confidence and identity as a successful HE learner; and an HE experience that is relevant to interests and future goals’ (pp. 66-67)
- Makes me think that there is real value in ‘showing your working’ to students. In Get Ready, it’s OK to say that this is what we are going to do and this is how it is going to help you. Same for embedded and elective and introductions to academic support… need to update intros!
Institutional reflective checklist (p. 72)
- ‘To what extend does the institution actively nurture a culture of belonging to maximise the retention and success of all students? More specifically:
- a) How would you define a culture of belonging in your institution? What are the strengths and weaknesses of your organisation?
- b) Do senior institutional leaders and managers believe in and promote an organisation that all students and staff are likely to feel like they belong to?
- c) To what extent do institutional policies, documents and publications promote the idea that all students belong?
- To what extend do all staff feel responsible for student belonging, retention and success through accountability, recognition, support and development and reward structures?
- a) How would you describe the attitudes of the majority of staff towards the issues of (i) improving student retention and (ii) maximising the success of all students?
- b) do human resource policies identify student retention and success, or student-centred learning, teaching and support as a priority at your institution?
- c) do institutional policies and procedures hold staff accountable, and provide recognition, support, development and reward for enhancing the student experience?
- To what extend are student belonging, retention and success mainstreamed into pre-entry interventions, transition and induction, learning, teaching and assessment and professional services?
- a) does a commitment to student engagement, retention and success – and belonging – inform work in these key areas?
- b) is there a coordinated approach to improving student retention and success (e.g. through a strategy and a high level committee?
- c) to what extent is the access agreement used to promote the access and success of students from targeted groups?
- To what extent is high quality, student-centred learning and teaching seen as integral to student belonging, retention and success?
- a) what is the relationship between student engagement, retention and success and the learning and teaching strategy?
- b) does academic staff development and training focus on promoting student engagement and belonging to maximise the success of all students?
- c) are all staff teams from programmes with lower rates of non-continuation and completion held accountable?
- To what extent does the institution develop the capacity – understanding, skills and opportunities – for all students to engage, belong and be successful?
- a) how is the induction process organised? Does it go beyond transmitting information to developing the capacity of students to engage?
- b) to what extend is the expertise of the professional services embedded into the mainstream curriculum to develop all students?
- c) is student engagement encouraged and facilitated by staff?
- To what extent does institutional data and monitoring support student belonging, retention and success through identifying poorly performing departments, programmes and modules, and student behaviour that increases withdrawal?
- a) is there an accepted data source and process that is used to monitor withdrawal across departments, programmes and modules?
- b) what follow-up is taken when areas are identified as having a poor continuation or completion rate, and does it involve a wide range of staff and further resource?
- c) which indicators are used to monitor student behaviour and performance, and how are students at risk dealt with?
- To what extent do all students feel like they belong at the university or college, and that they are supported to maximise their success?
- a) How would you know if students feel like they belong?
- b) Which groups of students may have the most difficulty in engaging in your institution?
- c) In what ways could you make it easier for all students to feel like they belong?
I think this could be a really nice checklist to run by senior management and student-facing staff to a) map the landscape and b) see if there really is a shared understanding of, and investment in, student belonging institution-wide.
When this study was done in 2012, the researchers said they were ‘stood on the precipice of radical change’ (p.74) because higher student fees were about to come in. The covid-era has introduced another era of radical change, so now is the right time to be exploring and redefining belonging for this brave new world.