Student Lifecycle Strategy:
Applied to the First Year
Experience
Professor Keithia Wilson
Program Lead for the FYE in Health
GIHE Senior Fellow for the FYE
ALTC National Fellow for the FYE
The Four Pillars of the student
lifecycle strategy
Evidencebased
Practice
Next
Generation
Partnerships
Academic
Leadership
Lifecycle
Design
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5. Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5. Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
Convening Partnership Roles:
Within a School who contributes ….and how?
School
Leaders
as
Sponsors
School
Admin
Officer as
Partner
FY Course
Convenors
as
Leaders &
Managers
FYA
as
Systems
Convenor
FY Tutors
as
Learning
Facilitators
First Years
as
Community
Members
Senior
Students
as
Mentors and
Leaders
Convening Partnership Roles:
External to the School..... who contributes….and how?
Library
Services
Student
Support
Services
Disability
Services
Indigenous
Student
Support
Services
FYA as
Systems
Convenor
International
Student
Support
Services
Learning
Support
Services
English
Language
Support
Services
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5. Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
Student Transition Process
(Lizzio, 2006)
The ‘Five-Senses’ of Student Success
Sense of
Connectedness
Sense of
Capability
Sense of
Student
Identity
Sense of
Resourcefulness
Sense of
Purpose
Student Lifecycle Process
(Higher Education Academy, 2001)
Insight : Students’ needs and developmental priorities vary over their degree
Response : Providing enabling just-in-time (JIT) interventions at key points
Early Contact
Pre-Semester (Enrolment & Orientation)
First 7 Weeks of Semesters 1
End of semester 1
First 7 Weeks of Semesters 2
End of Year One
Years 2 & 3
Alumni and Postgraduate
Systems Intervention Process
(Caplan, 1964)
Levels of Intervention framework
Tertiary Prevention
What do we do for failing
students?
Secondary Prevention
What do we do for at risk students?
Targeted/Selective Primary Prevention
What do we do for specific groups of students?
General/ Primary Prevention
What do we do for all students?
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5. Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Databased
Planning
Systematic Data Collection
Multiple Sources and Stages
Inputs
Who are our
students?
Throughputs
What is the
quality of their
learning?
Outcomes
What results are
achieved?
3. Data-based planning
Needs to occur at a range of levels & to be informed by multiple data
sources :
Who are our students?
• Presage or input data e.g., info on Institutional student populations
& the typical demographic profile in particular Schools (including
risk factors from Griffith research)
What is the quality of their learning experience?
• Process evaluation data e.g., evaluation of enabling processes or
orientation activities & early learning environment e.g., our yearly
Starting@Griffith data, FYA evaluation data, How’s it Going Survey
(week 3) results, SEC data
What are the student outcomes?
* Soft performance outcomes e.g., student satisfaction
* Hard performance outcomes e.g., student retention, academic
achievement (GPA), non-submission & failure rates on
assessment tasks, especially in threshold courses
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5.
Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4. Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
4. Suite of Evidence Based Strategies
Co-Curricular 2005
• Designing supplemental strategies which are
outside of the classroom (e.g., orientation, peer
mentoring, common time/transition program)
Curricular 2010
• Enhancing FY curriculum design, pedagogy &
assessment practices for all first & second
semester courses, and the FY Program overall
Whole-of-School/Program 2010
• Focusing on the strategic combination of cocurricular & curricular strategies for a particular
disciplinary context & student cohort/profile
Co-curricular strategies across the First
Year Student Lifecycle
Early Contact
School Mail-out in January
Pre-Semester
Enrolment Day & Orientation Day
First 7 Weeks of Sem. 1 Ongoing weekly Transition Program + Peer Mentoring
Program + Early identification of & intervention with at-risk
students via non-attendance, non-submission & failure on first
assessment tasks
End of Sem. 1
Follow-up & academic recovery with failing students
First 7 Weeks of Sem. 2 Ongoing weekly Transition Program + Early identification of &
intervention with at-risk students via non-attendance, nonsubmission & failure on first assessment tasks
End of Year One
Follow-up & academic recovery with students who are failing &
build explicit transition into Year 2
Years 2 & 3
Programmatic links from Year 1
FY Curricular strategies across the
Student Lifecycle
Developing a Transition-In Practice
Student Diversity
Student Transition
* FY Program & Course Design
* FY Program & Course Delivery
* FY Program & Course Assessment
Macro Level Curricular Strategies
Using evidence-based strategies
Developing a FY Transition Practice
 Using an understanding of student diversity and student transition to inform curriculum
design and assessment practices
 Using the evidence based Griffith 5 Senses of Success model to guide the systematic
enhancement of co-curricular & curricular strategies across the FY
Using Predictors of student success to inform FY curriculum
 Using Griffith data & research on predictors of student academic success & year 2 retention
to identify more strategic, targeted interventions for our predominantly non-traditional
student base:
* building early sense of purpose,
* enhancing student’s capacity to realistically appraise the conditions required for success, &
* assisting students to develop skills in time-on-task & self-regulation across the FY year
Macro Level Curricular Strategies
Using evidence-based strategies
Assessment Design & Practice
• Enhancing FY assessment across the lifecycle – design, student
preparation, marking & feedback/academic recovery/feed-forward x
individual courses & the FY Program
Programmatic Design
• Focusing on a programmatic approach to FY curriculum development
progressively across each semester (horizontal curriculum integration) as
well as across the FY (vertical curriculum integration)
Consistency mechanisms
• Ensuring a range of mechanisms for greater predictability for students e.g.,
consistent storage of info on L@G; single referencing style; assessment
task terminology between courses in the same program etc.
Assessment Review Strategy
• Dual Focus on individual courses and programmatic
approach to first year assessment
• Macro level review of first year assessment (viz. types
of tasks, range of word counts, weightings, weightings
x word counts, profile of semester submission dates) &
discussing findings as a FYT team
• Micro level review of first year assessment items from
a student perspective in collaboration with convenors
and teaching teams (viz. Levels of difficulty, clarity,
alignment with course objectives, etc, and including
suggestions & resources for scaffolding student
engagement with assessment items)
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5.
Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
5. Continuous improvement cycles based
on Monitoring and Feedback
Using data to inform ongoing strategy around the Triple Bottom Line:
•
•
•
What is effective?
What can we sustain?
What is satisfying?
Multiple sources of feedback
- students (feedback, reviews, evaluations)
- mentors (feedback, review, evaluation)
- staff (convenors, tutors, FYA, SAO)
- surveys (University: Starting@Griffith; School: first
semester & first year experience, individual courses, FYE activity evaluations)
- course results (submission & pass rates for individual assessment items & courses
overall)
- retention data
Initial success: outcomes for students
• Improved early student experience in the first
semester, as indicated by: higher ratings for
Starting@Griffith data in 2011 for involved
Schools/Campuses compared to other Schools
in Health & the wider university
• Reduction in student anxiety in relation to
assessment tasks (staff perceptions)
• Decrease in failure rates for threshold courses
Initial success: outcomes for staff
Workload
Substantive drop in number of student questions &
emails to clarify assessment tasks
Effectiveness
Substantive improvements in perceptions of S@G
data for Good Teaching (11% -14%) – the highest
in the university
Promotion
Staff engagement & success, collectively as well as
individually provides data for APR & promotion
The Four Lifecycle Pillars as an Action Process
5. Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
Leadership of FY Enhancement Process
Capacity building and distributed approach to leadership:
First Year School Leadership Teams
Membership: Staff in strategic roles e.g., HoS/DHoS, PCs , FYAs, DL&T, PLFYE
Role: Identify broad goals & strategies for enhancement of the FYE and oversee QA and QI
First Year Enhancement Teaching Teams
Membership: FYAs, FY Course Convenors (in 1st & then 2nd semesters),BLA, AC, PLFYE
Role: Develop & implement a FY Transition Practice for enhancing first year curriculum design,
delivery & assessment practice
First Year Advisor
Leaders of co-curricular strategies (& in some cases curriculum strategies)
Minimum Standards
Leadership through agreed FY co-curricular practice standards across the Group (since 2008)
Evolving to include FY curriculum and assessment standards (from 2012 onwards)
Specific Quality Mechanisms
Emergence of School level quality assurance mechanisms (e.g., SoNM Assessment Sub-committee of
School L&T Committee, led by the BNUR Program Convenor)
Maintaining the gains
Ongoing mechanisms for FY Enhancement
School level
• FYA support via continual review & monitoring of
workload & buy-out
• FY Enhancement/Development Teaching Teams
established as an ongoing mechanism for continued
enhancement of FY curriculum
• Minimum co-curricular standards for implementation
of strategies by FYAs in partnership with other staff
• Minimum curriculum standards for FY assessment,
including a process for both quality assuring & quality
improving the standard of FY assessment design &
practices in each School
Maintaining the gains
Ongoing mechanisms for FY Enhancement
Group Level Resources
• Program Lead for the FYE (2010-2013) role to work iteratively with
Schools over 2-3 years to improve the quality of their FYE &
establish ongoing QA & QI mechanisms
• Health Group Assessment Consultant role provided as a dedicated
resource over 3 years (2010-2013) to assist FY teaching staff with
assessment design & resource development to support scaffolding
of student learning (Margaret Macleod)
• Blended Learning Advisor role provided to assist FY teaching staff
(Ganeshan Rao)
• FYA Forums facilitated 4 times per year to support & develop FYAs
in their School role to enhance student engagement, success &
retention (2006-2011 +)
• FYE Budget provided to Schools & FYAs to support FY enhancement
We have briefly covered the full circle......
5. Continuous
Monitoring
& Feedback
1. Convening
Partnership
Roles
Leadership
4.
Complementary
Suite
of Strategies
2. Coherent
Practice
Models
3. Data-based
Planning
Each year the view gets better....
Margaret Macleod
Health Group Assessment
Consultant
m.macleod@griffith.edu.au
My Role
• Working with Professor Keithia Wilson on a project to
enhance students’ learning experiences. Whole of
school, educative and capacity building approach
• My focus: Assessment
– Evaluating assessment tasks
– Assisting academics with developing curriculum and
assessment tasks
– Assisting academics with writing assessment tasks
– Assisting academics with the development of resources to
scaffold and support student learning and assist with
understanding of assessment tasks
Background
• Prior to October 2010, a Learning Adviser at Logan campus for 10 years
– Worked with wide range of students on their assessment tasks
– Worked with academics from several schools to deliver task specific
workshops
– Developed resources for academics and students to assist students
with assessment tasks i.e. scaffold learning
• I also teach in 2 Humanities courses, delivered through OUA (I have been
teaching since 1992)
• Particular interest: Using assessment to progressively build both content
knowledge and skills in critical thinking (within course and across courses)
Progress to date …
1. Evaluation/ critique of FY assessment tasks in School of
Nursing and Midwifery, and School of Human Services and
Social Work; School of Humanities.
 Written Reports which identified strengths of current written FY assessment
and areas needing improvement.
Reports evaluated tasks against following (self-developed) criteria:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Clarity of assessment task design and description
Marking criteria – the extent to which they assist students in understanding the task
Weighting (appropriateness of weighting for task)
Size of task (appropriateness of word length for task)
Level of difficulty of task (appropriateness of task for students’ level of skill development)
Relationship to course learning outcomes
Provision of resources to assist students with the task
Reports made recommendations, and suggestions for resources to assist with tasks
Progress to date …
2. Production of Student Writing and Referencing
Guide
– Initially for School of Human Services, later
modified for Health Group (located on HERBIE)
– Step by step guide to complete pre-writing and
writing process, with accompanying exemplar
essay to model process
Progress to date …
3. I have worked with several teaching teams/course conveners to improve
existing assessment/develop new assessment
4. I have worked with Health academics to ensure clarity of task description
5. I have developed resources for academics to use with students to help
scaffold student learning
– Resources to assist with specific essay tasks (case studies, critical
evaluation, reflective writing, report writing etc)
– Resources on note taking, time management, editing etc
6. I have developed resources to assist academics with assessment
design/description
So ….how I can help
• Evaluate existing assessment tasks
• Assist in the development of new
assessment tasks
• Assist with writing clear assessment tasks
• Assist with editing for coherence between
marking criteria, task description etc
• Assist with developing resources to support
assessment tasks
So what are the messages for action?
1. Co-curricular & curricular strategies for increasing
academic readiness
• Building foundational academic skills
• Building academic capital
• Developing student skills in time on task & selfregulation/independent learner (realistic role & task
appraisal for success as a uni student)
• Developing student efficacy, expectations of success
& hope for a new & challenging future
Prof Keithia Wilson ALTC National Fellow