Transition In, Through and Out of Higher Education

International Case Studies and Best Practice

Ruth Matheson, Sue Tangney, Mark Sutcliffe, Ruth Matheson, Sue Tangney, Mark Sutcliffe

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN:
  9781138682184
• eBook ISBN:
  9781134817627
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Transition In, Through and Out of Higher Education: International Case Studies and Best Practice recognises that the initial steps into undergraduate education mark only the beginning of the journey for students, and that the journey involves other significant transition points that students need to negotiate. By providing theoretical knowledge alongside practical guidance and resources, this book helps those involved in university teaching guide students through their experiences and develop into autonomous, reflective learners.

Putting student engagement at the centre of teaching, Transition In, Through and Out of Higher Education: International Case Studies and Best Practice includes case studies to illuminate best practice, with resources and activities that can be used and adapted to address the individual needs of students. Addressing a wide range of themes, it considers:

• active learning
• promoting engagement
• encouraging independence and autonomy
• coping with change and increasing complexity
• the need for belonging and identity
• social and academic integration
• developing partnership working
• evaluation of effectiveness of developments to teaching practice.

From exploring the underlying pedagogy related to the theme to identifying the major challenges for students at key transitional points, Transition offers a comprehensive grounding to generate and inspire creative teaching that in turn enables students to better engage in the transition process. A highly practical and accessible resource, this book is suitable for all higher education staff involved in supporting students' transition in, through and out of university.

p.3

Part I

p.5

Chapter 1

Transition through the student lifecycle

Ruth Matheson

Introduction to the chapter

There has been a dramatic increase in the number of students entering higher education over the past 50 years. In 2000, 99.5 million students entered tertiary education across the globe. Fourteen years later, in 2014, the number of students entering this sector had more than doubled to 207.2 million (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2016). Predictions estimate that by 2030, the number of students entering higher education will rise to 414.2 million (Calderon, 2012). This rise has been driven by government policies across the globe that have recognised and sought to address the need for a knowledge-based society to meet the changing demands of a globalised economy. Universities are seen as key agents in enhancing knowledge, ideas and abilities, leading to an increase in global competitiveness. Many of these government policies have focused on widening participation to increase both numbers and diversity of a previously demographically narrow student population (Gale & Parker, 2013). Two main factors have dominated the widening participation agenda: first, the need for a highly educated workforce that can compete in globalised economies; and second, a recognition of the importance of social justice and the provision of opportunity for all.

The need for a highly educated workforce that can compete in a globalised economy

Within the UK, higher education has long been recognised as having connections with the economy. As long ago as 1963, The Robbins Report (Committee on Higher Education, 1963) recognised that one of the aims of higher education was to provide skills for the labour market. Highlighted again in The Dearing Report (National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, 1997), higher education was seen as having a vital role in the modern economy. Dearing stated that “Education and training [should] enable people in an advanced society to compete with the best in the world” (National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, 1997: 7).

p.6

In recent years, this focus on employability has come to the forefront of higher education, with an emphasis on the development of graduates with relevant attributes, skills and knowledge. Australia and the US are also currently looking at how best to support the development of graduate attributes in the curricula, and the subsequent transition to the world of work (Bennett, Richardson & MacKinnon, 2016). However, research demonstrates that the UK is leading the way due to central support provided by funding bodies, highly advanced employability initiatives, extracurricular practice and the sharing of embedded careers practices (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2011).

If students are to develop graduate attributes, they need to have opportunities to engage with employers, experience authentic assessment, and participate in pedagogies that promote active engagement and the development of team-working skills. These opportunities need to be developed throughout the student lifecycle and embedded in both curricular and extracurricular activities if students are to be enabled to transition through and out of university into the world of work. This requires academics to actively engage with future employers or service users when designing curricula, and to give greater consideration to how entrepreneurship and enterprise are fostered within higher education.

The importance of social justice and providing opportunity for all

Traditionally, universities had a narrow demographic, with students entering higher education from similar socio-economic groups and having had similar educational experiences. The early 1990s saw existing colleges and polytechnics in Australia and the UK being transformed into ‘new universities’, widening both the student population and the nature of the programmes of study being provided (King, 2004). This widening of population within the higher education sector demanded that often small, elite universities had to expand rapidly to meet this increased demand. No longer did one size fit all, but by the very nature of an increasingly diverse student population there was an impetus to consider the different needs of students and ask the question: “Who are my students and how can we work together to maximise student learning outcomes?” (Hunt & Chalmers, 2013: 180).

Today, students coming from wider sociocultural and academic contexts bring with them different expectations. These expectations need to be recognised and reflected in a curriculum design that allows for flexibility in learning opportunities, values inclusive assessment and provides appropriate support (Barnett, 2014). This also demands an awareness of the different transitional pathways that students may take through their student lifecycle and the relationship between successful transition and student retention.

The importance of retention

With an increase in the student population and the diverse nature of the student group comes the increased risk of withdrawal from university. Early studies on attrition, pre-1970, largely focused on the “students’ characteristics, personal attributes and shortcomings” (Aljohani, 2016: 2) drawing on the field of psychology. It was in the early 1970s that the first sociologically framed student retention model was developed, which recognised that both academic and social factors contribute to students’ decisions to withdraw.

p.7

Tinto’s Model of Institutional Departure (1993), as cited by Aljohani (2016), has held a prominent place in the literature on retention since first developed, recognising the need for students to be integrated both academically and socially, and placing responsibility on institutions to provide opportunities to enable this. According to Tinto, students enter higher education with pre-entry attributes (family background, skills and abilities, and prior schooling) and these shape their initial goals and commitments. Their experience of the academic system and the social system, both formal and informal, impact on their ability to integrate academically and socially, and this in turn leads to a re-evaluation of their goals and commitments. If lacking social or academic integration, or both, students are at risk of making the decision to drop out. Understandably, this danger is most prevalent in the first year.

“Roughly two thirds of premature departures take place in, or, at the end of, the first year of full-time study in the UK” (Yorke, 1999: 37), with students struggling to make the transition into university. This withdrawal rate is significantly higher in students from low socio-economic backgrounds, mature students and disabled students (Yorke & Longden, 2004). Students withdraw for multiple reasons that are often complex and diverse. Some of these reasons have been highlighted by Morgan (2012):

• poor subject choice;

• course structure;

• student demographics;

• previous educational experiences;

• an inadequate student experience; and

• personal reasons.

(pp. 9–10)

The complexity surrounding retention and withdrawal requires us to be mindful of being inclusive in all aspects of curriculum design, assessment and feedback in order to support the differing needs of our students. This book seeks to provide ideas that can be adapted for different levels, and which help to integrate all students, whether they are home-based, international, direct-entry, returning, or students learning at a distance, through all stages of the student lifecycle.

The student lifecycle

To understand the complexity of student transition, it is important to appreciate the different stages of the student lifecycle. While there are numerous frameworks and models of student transition into and through higher education (Lizzio, 2011; Morgan, 2012; Bridges & Bridges, 2017; Burnett, 2007), they all recognise that transition is complex, placing different demands at different times, with students experiencing frequent disruption as expectations and their environment change.

p.8

Understanding the student lifecycle is vital in designing curricula that meet student needs and enable successful transition. To guide this development of curricula and to integrate co-curricular design, Lizzio (2011) developed an ‘integrative framework’ of the student lifecycle. This framework is useful in helping to illuminate the different stages of transition and the nature of student thinking and actions at each stage. He describes the student lifecycle as “the constellation of evolving identities, needs and purposes” (Lizzio, 2011: 1). These identities, needs and purposes help us to have a better understanding of the concerns and motivations of our students.

The student lifecycle, according to Lizzio’s framework, can be viewed as a series of transitions that will be summarised here and expanded on later in the chapter. Beginning with ‘transition towards’ university, the main thoughts and actions of future students during this period focus on the process that leads to the choice of course and university, defined as aspiring and exploring, clarifying and choosing. At this stage, institutions need to provide opportunities that enable potential students to make informed choices, and to begin to explore and orientate themselves towards their chosen subject and future aspirations. ‘Transition in’ (focusing on commencing students) recognises students’ priorities as committing and preparing, joining and engaging. The need for active engagement, opportunities for social integration, and early formative assessment and feedback underpin the success of integration into this new student world while also promoting retention. Lizzio (2011) defines ‘transition through’ as continuing students. These students are working for early success and building on that success. Often neglected in the literature, this stage is vital in ensuring the continued engagement of students through the creation of authentic curricula and assessment that challenges students, develops graduate attributes, and ultimately leads to high student satisfaction.

Finally, Lizzio (2011) identifies ‘transition up, out and back’. This includes those students who are graduating or returning for postgraduate study. Their focus is on future success, partnering and continuing. Here, our responsibility as educators is to provide opportunities for students to develop skills for their future employability, inspire higher study, and support transition into the workplace or back into higher education. Through our own research into postgraduate transition (Matheson & Sutcliffe, 2017), and echoing the findings of Tobbell, O’Donnell and Zammit (2008), we have found that students returning to university at a postgraduate level often re-enter the student lifecycle from the beginning, bringing with them new academic and social concerns. These concerns can be further accentuated if coming with English as a second language or having previously experienced a different, less participatory educational culture.

p.9

Figure 1.1 Student Lifecycle Framework

Source: Lizzio (2011), reproduced with permission from the author

Students are constantly adjusting to not only a changing academic identity, but also a changing social identity, which requires them to negotiate their way through a maze of new expectations, partnerships in learning, and new academic competencies, while integrating socially and dealing with a changing sense of self. Is there any wonder that students often find this transition challenging and sometimes troublesome? As those teaching and supporting learning, it is our role to help students find their way through this maze.

Transition stages

There are many models outlining student transition in higher education. Most of these models outline the stages of transition through the student lifecycle. We have taken the decision not to structure this book through the stages, although we will make reference to them. We will instead focus on themes that impact on transition and that serve to inform teaching practice and course design. However, at this stage, and to provide a backdrop to the subsequent chapters, especially those within Part II, we feel that it is important to draw attention to the identified stages of transition and a number of the existing models and theories. Although often presented as a linear process, there is common agreement that students often leave and re-enter the stages at different times throughout their transition into, through and out of university.

p.10

Pre-entry

With a growing expectation that the majority of young people will enter the university sector, there is a clear need to enable future students to develop a sense of purpose, and have the necessary resources to feel that they will be able to succeed and make social connections. Initially, it is helpful if students view themselves as valued members of their future learning community and feel secure in their choice. This is a new world they are entering, which Menzies and Baron (2014) describe as pre-departure, where they consider students as being in neutral mood. Lizzio (2011) challenges educators to develop curricula that begin prior to arrival, with activities that promote a sense of inclusion, inspire a belief in the ability to achieve, give a clear idea of what it will take to achieve, and develop a sense of aspiration.

Burnett (2007) and Morgan (2012) identify an even earlier transition stage, pre-transition, which requires engagement with students from the age of 14 to 18 to enable them to make informed decisions regarding their future direction. This first contact is important in getting students to shape their aspirations and expectations, with questions such as: ‘Is university my only option?’ ‘What will be expected of me as a university student?’ ‘Which course and university are right for me?’ (Morgan, 2012).

On entry (induction)

Research on transition illuminates the importance of induction in promoting retention and student achievement (Sheader & Richardson, 2006), with poor retention linked to students who encounter poor-quality learning experiences, have little opportunity for in-class interaction, and lack opportunities to make friends (Yorke & ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Transition In, Through and Out of Higher Education
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Case Studies
• Foreword
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part I
• Part II
• Part III
• Contributor Biographies
• Index