ADP Position Paper
Factors that affect throughput
August 2012
Introduction
Improving throughput and graduation rates, particularly in the student groups that are
performing least well, has been a goal at UCT for many years. However, its importance has
been highlighted by UCT’s recently adopted Size and Shape policy, which depends on
significantly increasing graduate output without significant growth in the undergraduate
intake. The persistence of unsatisfactory throughput – not only at UCT but across the higher
education sector – indicates that the challenge is substantial, and that attention will have to
be given to minimising unnecessary obstacles in all aspects of the teaching and learning
process, and to further developing student support systems.
This position paper provides a summary of ADP perspectives on what it will take to
substantially improve throughput and graduation rates at UCT, with particular reference to
dealing effectively with the diversity of educational, social and linguistic backgrounds that
characterises the undergraduate intake. The perspectives are derived from various
theoretical frameworks as well as ADP experience. The paper was written by the ADP
Implementation Committee1 as a response to the ADP Review (2009) and has involved
consultation within ADP and beyond2.
Points of departure
‘Improving throughput’ means different things to different people. For example, there is a
view that improving throughput can be adequately achieved by measures that do not
require changes in current teaching-and-learning practices, such as reformulating
admissions policy to exclude disadvantaged students, or various manipulations of
performance data. The cynical view is sometimes expressed that higher throughput targets
can be met simply by lowering academic standards.
The ADP therefore believes that UCT’s renewed commitment to improving throughput
needs to be based on clearly agreed points of departure. We propose the following:

Improving throughput without compromising standards depends on improving student
learning. This depends in turn on improving the effectiveness of the teaching and
learning process for the full range of the diverse student body.
1
Membership of the Implementation Committee: Associate Professors S. Allie, R.Kapp, M. Paxton, J.
Pym, S. Shay, Professor I. Scott (chair).
2
It should be emphasized that the document is presented from an ADP vantage point, as a
department of CHED, and that there are other units and projects within CHED that offer essential
complementary perspectives to the issues at hand.
1

Improving throughput must not take precedence over equity of access and outcomes, as
determined by UCT’s mission and by national need, nor over the academic standards of
UCT’s qualifications.

Our academic planning must focus on graduate output not only in terms of graduation
rates and numbers but also in terms of the quality of our graduates. It follows from this
that effective teaching and curriculum design are crucial for this process.

Success in this initiative should not be measured only by the pass-fail binary but also by
the quality of pass. The phenomenon of significant numbers of students obtaining only
marginal passes in the majority of their courses is damaging to the students and the
university in general, and to the prospects of postgraduate growth in particular.
Problem Identification
The Size and Shape task team’s vision for 2020 is that UCT should maintain first year
enrolments largely at current levels but that there should be a substantial increase in the
numbers of graduates as well as improvements in time to completion. The target for cohort
completion rates has been set at a minimum of 75% for undergraduate programmes,
particularly the BSc (Eng), BSc, BSc (Construction and Property Management), BA, BSocSc,
BSocial Work and LLB that are not currently reaching that benchmark.
In its analysis of the longitudinal progress of first time entering (FEN) students in the 20022006 entry cohorts, the Teaching and Learning Report (2010) showed that 69% of the 2006
FEN cohort had completed a degree or diploma by the end of 2010 (in comparison with 71%
of the 2005 cohort). Completion rates vary considerably from one programme to another:
while some already exceed the 75% benchmark, those listed above currently vary between
37% and 65%. There is also a considerable gap between the completion rates of white and
black students. For instance, 82% of the 2006 white FEN cohort, in comparison with 48% of
the equivalent black FEN cohort, completed an undergraduate degree in five years.
Improving black completion rates is thus a key to overall improvement.
The student performance patterns have proved to be difficult to change substantially
despite various improvement initiatives in recent years. It is evident from this that achieving
the throughput rates that are central to UCT’s strategic planning calls for willingness to
review traditional practices in the mainstream teaching and learning process, and for
concerted action. In the section that follows we provide brief descriptions and illustrations
of some strategies that Academic Development has found to have an impact on throughput
particularly if they are applied in a co-ordinated manner.
2
Key elements that have an impact on improving teaching and learning
Curriculum structure
Given the wide diversity in educational background of UCT’s student intake, a differentiated
curriculum framework is a key strategy for improving throughput. ADP experience has
shown that we can work on improving teaching and encourage student engagement with
learning, but unless the curriculum structure and its underlying assumptions (particularly at
entry level) suit the realities of the students’ prior learning, student success is severely
impeded and the problems with throughput continue.
Alternative curriculum structures, in the form of foundation courses and extended
curriculum programmes, have historically been in the ADP domain. However, the challenge
of diversity is no longer just an ADP issue; underpreparedness is evidently increasing and is
manifested across the student spectrum. Curriculum responses to diversity are needed
across the first year curriculum and beyond, in virtually all programmes, as a necessary
condition for improving mainstream performance.
ADP experience at UCT and nationally has shown that no single form of structural
intervention suits all situations. Neither can it be claimed that one model is more
pedagogically sound than another, but rather, what is important is that the curriculum
structures cater to students’ needs.
In addressing the needs of talented but underprepared students, what can be identified as
central to all interventions is the need for extra time to be allocated over and above that
assigned to mainstream offerings. The amount of extra time, as well as the way in which it is
formally distributed within a particular course and across the curriculum as a whole,
depends on several factors such as:



the absolute and relative levels of preparedness of the students
the nature of the discipline (e.g. cumulative knowledge structures are more
dominant in many disciplines in the sciences, engineering, and commerce than in
many humanities disciplines)
the role that the course in question plays within the degree.
The need to cater for differential preparedness is not new and over the past three decades a
spectrum of alternative structural models has emerged that covers a range of circumstances
both at the course level and at the programme level. The programme-level models used at
UCT fit the definition of an ‘extended curriculum programme’, an intervention that is
recognised by the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) and funded through
DHET’s Foundation Provision Grant. The same policy identifies a range of foundation course
models that meet the criteria for state funding. Appendix A provides an outline of the
nature and uses of extended curriculum programmes, as well as a link to the current DHET
policy document on this topic.
3
An extended curriculum programme is designed to facilitate success among talented but
underprepared students by lengthening the duration of a programme in order to
incorporate substantial foundational provision that forms a sound basis for advanced
studies. Faculty-ADP collaboration over a long period has resulted in the development of
extended curricula in all the major undergraduate programmes, in different forms to suit the
nature of the programme and the profile of the target student intake. The extended
programmes have commonly served as the central strategy for equity of access, and most
have played a valuable role in significantly increasing the number of black graduates.
However, there are certain inherent limitations in the effectiveness of the extended
programmes in their current form. In particular, their design is constrained by the need to
graft foundational provision on to a rigid mainstream curriculum, which commonly results in
discontinuities or step changes in difficulty and volume of work. Moreover, the current
extended programmes have the capacity to accommodate only a small proportion of the
student intake, typically about 15%, whereas student performance figures show that many
mainstream admissions are failing and would be likely to benefit from foundational
provision. Most analyses point to slender prospects of substantial improvement in the
preparedness of school-leavers and the predictive validity of the NSC.
These circumstances highlight three inter-related challenges in the area of differential
curriculum structures, viz. the need for effective placement of students in extended or
mainstream programmes, the need to improve the alignment between foundational and
mainstream provision, and the need to review, and possibly re-think, key aspects of current
mainstream curriculum structure in the light of the changing student profile and
contemporary societal conditions.

Placement
To improve learning and throughput, students need to be placed on an extended or a
mainstream programme on the basis of which route will be more likely to facilitate their
success. This is generally not the case at present, since mainstream places are filled to
capacity before extended programme places are offered, despite the historical
probability that a significant number of mainstream admissions will fail. Making
placement decisions on a sounder educational basis has implications for admissions and
placement policy.
DHET has recently confirmed the Ministry’s long-term commitment to extended
programmes as a key means of improving student success, rather than access per se. In
the latest policy document (DHET 2012 – hyperlink), DHET has also confirmed that the
primary target group for extended programmes is at-risk students who formally qualify
for mainstream admission:
… in considering what categories of student should be placed in an extended programme, universities
are advised to focus first on students who meet institutional admission criteria but, because of
4
educational disadvantage, would have a low probability of succeeding if admitted directly to
mainstream provision. This category of student stands to benefit substantially from foundation
provision. It is advised that institutions should have in place a process of identifying students at risk.
(DHET 2012: 2)
Aligning UCT’s admissions and placement policy with DHET’s intention could be
expected to have a strongly beneficial effect on the success and throughput of talented
but underprepared students, though it would clearly involve adjustment to current
practice. Given the need to improve throughput, it is recommended that UCT consider
this matter and plan possible ways of increasing the proportion of the intake that can
benefit from extended provision.

Improving the alignment between foundational and mainstream provision
The design constraints on extended programmes noted earlier commonly result in
problems in articulation between foundation provision and mainstream courses – such
as gaps of a semester or more between consecutive courses in a discipline, and step
changes in difficulty between extended courses and regular 200-level courses – that
create unnecessary obstacles to learning and progression. It should be possible to
mitigate these structural problems by means of adjustments on both sides. It is likely
that the necessary adjustments to mainstream provision would benefit regular students
as well, since problems such as articulation between 100- and 200-level courses affect
many.

Improving mainstream curriculum and course design
Improving throughput in a context of significant changes in the student intake – arising
from generational changes in approaches to learning as well as diversity in educational
and linguistic backgrounds – is increasingly calling for review and adaptation of our
traditional mainstream curricula and individual courses. Recent approaches to
curriculum analysis are helping with understanding why appropriate placement at entry
level is an important but not sufficient structural intervention. For example, analysis of
various programmes has identified key transitions that require different kinds of
knowledge and skills, such as the transition between the sciences and design in
Engineering or between pre-clinical and clinical study in Medicine. Students from
different educational backgrounds have very different levels of preparedness for
succeeding in these transitions, but the disparities can be countered by effective course
and curriculum design, such as the provision of specific foundational material at
appropriate points of the programme in integrated or stand-alone form. Similarly,
purposeful development of academic language competencies, particularly for students
for whom English is an additional language, is a key element of facilitating student
learning that needs to be addressed through curriculum and course design.
Sound curriculum design – based on principles such as valid assumptions about students’
prior learning, appropriate pacing (with steady increase in complexity and volume rather
5
than step changes), effective sequencing, and reinforcement through coherence or ‘spiral’
design – is recognised as a fundamental element of facilitating student learning. In the South
African and especially the UCT context, however, inequalities and diversity in students’
backgrounds constitute a central challenge for curriculum design at course and programme
level. Structural interventions of the kind outlined here are consequently important for
facilitating success among talented but underprepared students, which in turn is key to
improving UCT’s throughput overall.
Pedagogy and Assessment
Alongside establishing appropriate curriculum structures, promoting student engagement
with learning is a key strategy for improving throughput. There are multiple approaches to
achieving active and engaged student learning.
Most higher education institutions rely considerably on the lecture model as the primary
structure to promote learning. While increasing class sizes have contributed to this, there is
an assumption with this learning format that all students are orientated toward auditory
learning, learn at the same pace, do not need to dialogue about the material, have good
note-taking skills, and possess the prerequisite knowledge to benefit from the lecture. Too
often this model is not very effective as there is very little time on task. While the lecture
format may remain prominent, a range of alternative learning opportunities need to be
closely linked to, or embedded in, the lecture format, so as to accommodate a variety of
learning styles, languages and contexts. Appropriate technology is one area that can allow
greater flexibility in the learning environment but this requires adequate infrastructure as
well as on-going training of teaching staff.
Worldwide research and our experiences have shown that students become more effective
in meaningful learning and thinking when they are not passively receiving information but
are engaged in active learning and thinking. This means creating varied learning structures,
and a range of pedagogies such as creating different opportunities for students to be
challenged, regular reviews of prior learning, and a range of opportunities for guided
practice (moving to unguided practice) with on-going feedback. Prompt and descriptive
feedback has also been identified as an important stimulus of powerful teaching and
learning ( Chickering & Gamson 1987). Overall this means developing communities of
learners who discuss, debate, synthesise and critique (Vygotsky 1978, , Pascarella &
Terenzini 1991,).
In ADP there has been a focus on creating a variety of fora that will facilitate student
connections, as well as engagement. These include workshops and a variety of pedagogies
that facilitate group or pair activities where students solve problems, apply what they have
just learned, and receive appropriate and timeous feedback.
We have aimed to promote frequency of student to student, student to staff and staff to
staff interactions by encouraging group work and one-on-one consultation with staff as we
feel these are important ways of ensuring positive student outcomes. A sense of belonging is
one of the most important conditions that can be created in a college classroom (Astin 1993,
6
Seymour and Hewitt 1997, Tinto 1993). Being a part of a group not only promotes academic
development but also enhances personal development and increases satisfaction. In small
groups students have opportunities to learn from other students who may be able to explain
new information using more understandable language, or may be multilingual and able to
code switch to a shared language to clarify meaning. Identifying and challenging
assumptions and exploring alternatives can involve elements of threat and risk taking;
however, the peer support provided by a group of others also trying to do this is a powerful
psychological boost to critical thinking efforts. This means development and management of
small group facilitation skills with tutors.
International research has shown that assessment also has a powerful impact on the quality
of learning and, because the ADP focus has traditionally been on supporting and improving
student learning, we have recognised the key role that assessment plays in shaping learning
(Paxton 2000). Because student learning is often driven by what the students see being
assessed rather than the curriculum per se, assessment has been described as defining the
curriculum (Biggs 1996, Biggs and Tang 2009, Ramsden 2003).
This means that in order for assessment to promote learning, the curriculum must be
‘aligned’. Curriculum alignment means ensuring that the course learning objectives
(outcomes), the teaching activities (pedagogy and materials) and the assessment practices
(methods of assessment, criteria and feedback) are effectively aligned (UCT Assessment
Policy 2004). Lecturers are then responsible for clearly articulating the learning objectives to
their students in advance. In courses where there are a variety of learning objectives, a
variety of assessment methods are probably going to be needed. The more closely these
objectives are aligned with the teaching and the assessment, the more likely students are to
achieve the objectives. Carefully designed course work (or formative) assessments are
important because in these types of assessments the focus is not just on the results; instead,
students are encouraged to reflect on the learning process and to consider how they could
improve. These opportunities to reflect on and understand feedback on coursework
assignments promote a more active approach to learning. (See illustration of curriculum
alignment in Appendix B.)
Academic literacies
A key element of quality teaching is ensuring that the academic literacy practices of the
particular disciplines are purposefully and explicitly taught and that this teaching happens
concurrently with the teaching of what counts as knowledge in the discipline. This principle
has led to the embedding of the teaching of academic and quantitative literacies in many
ADP courses and has been a key strategy for enhancing graduate attributes and improving
throughput.
Students new to the university have to acquire a range of new academic literacy practices.
These are the socially acceptable and culturally constructed ways in which we use a range of
different literacies in the university and they are fundamentally connected with how
students develop their knowledge about new areas of study. These practices have to be
7
learned because they are new and very different from the literacy practices that students
have brought with them from their home and schooling backgrounds. They are referred to
as academic literacies in the plural form, to signal a range of different social practices around
texts which include reading and writing, quantitative literacy practices, multimodal
practices, etc. For example, Law and Humanities students learn to critically interpret data in
tables and graphs, Science students learn to write reports and students in architecture learn
to construct multimodal texts in order to make sense of the disciplinary knowledge in those
disciplines.
Increasingly, experience is showing that most students, not only ADP students, struggle to
acquire appropriate academic literacy practices. It is commonly said that students “cannot
read” or that they are not able to put together a strong written argument and this hampers
or curtails their progress through the degree. The implication therefore is that more time
and resources will have to be devoted to ensuring that the academic literacy practices
associated with each discipline are carefully and explicitly taught and practised, in
appropriate forms and at appropriate stages in all programmes.
Psycho-social Factors
The transition from school to university is academic and linguistic, but also social and
psychological. A significant body of educational research has shown that motivation,
investment, effort and affirmation are central to successful learning. UCT students have
generally excelled in their schooling contexts (around 70% of the FEN intake achieved
notional A or B aggregates in 2010). They arrive at the university fairly confident, with an
identity that has been developed around being an achiever and confirmed by the offer of a
place at UCT. While students often struggle to cope academically, resulting in loss of
confidence and demoralisation, many leave university or perform poorly for affective,
adjustment, social or health reasons. Many students have to learn to negotiate norms,
values, attitudes and beliefs different from their home discourses, both within the institution
and within their disciplines, and this process often produces anxiety and ambivalence
(Luckett and Luckett 2009; Mann 2008; Pym and Kapp 2011, Thesen and Van Pletzen eds.
2006).
Experience and research indicate that development of social connectedness and sense of
purpose strongly assists academic success. We need to create institutional, classroom and
living environments that affirm students’ sense of belonging, rather than construct them as
different and deficient. While students need to be challenged to ‘unlearn’ many of the
problematic ways of engaging with texts and numbers that were learnt at school and to
explore new ways of knowing, analysing and using language, they also need to believe that
they have the potential achieve. ADP classes attempt to provide explicit, scaffolded guidance
about the norms and values of the students’ new environments. This entails cultivating
classroom environments where it is safe to speak and engage critically, where learning tasks
encourage students to engage with their peers, where it is acceptable to ask for individual
8
help from lecturers outside of the classroom, and where that help is accessible and
constructive.
In addition, students often struggle to see the value of courses that are a compulsory part of
their programme. The result is often that they disengage and act instrumentally, rather than
understand how and why the discipline will contribute to their conceptual development.
They need explicit mediation which helps them understand why a particular course is
compulsory so that they become motivated to invest in the discipline as part of their futures
(Appendix C has an example which illustrates the above).
Nevertheless, one has to be wary of rendering students passive. They need to be challenged
to harness the agency which enabled them to be successful at school, to take personal
responsibility for their learning and well-being, and to be socially responsive. It is crucial that
these values and attitudes are an integral part of students’ classroom and ‘virtual’
experience. It is also important, however, to create spaces outside of conventional class time
where students can receive explicit, concrete advice and develop meta-awareness about
how best to make use of resources and time, how to plan their curriculum and future
careers, and how to manage stress. Activities such as mentorship, contact with successful
people in their field of study, engagement in organised social projects and social activity on
campus and in residence are all key means of cultivating a sense of direction and belonging.
It has become increasingly clear that more opportunities need to be created for individual
psychological counselling and for supporting students through the readmissions’ processes.
(Appendices C, D, E have further examples which illustrate the above.)
Staff and Tutor Development
Developing academic staff in their roles as teachers is a crucial element in improving the
quality of teaching and learning. There are a range of examples at UCT of the extent to
which skilled teaching can improve learning and success rates. ADP has emphasised the
importance of placing the best teachers at the first year level.
Critical reflection and research on teaching and learning has been recognised as desirable for
all academic staff. There is a tendency to assume that experienced teachers are good
teachers. However, while conventional experience in teaching is no doubt valuable in
traditional teaching and learning settings, it has limitations in non-traditional settings where
a systematic understanding of teaching and learning processes is needed in order to analyse
problems and explore alternative approaches (Kreber 2001). This reflection and research can
be encouraged through staff development initiatives such as teaching and learning
discussion groups and research groups, team teaching and peer review. A central focus of
ADP reflection and research has been on ways to successfully accommodate talented
students from diverse educational backgrounds.
Higher education is the only sector of education which does not require any professional
qualification in teaching. Thus the majority of academics are qualified in their area of
specialisation but have had few opportunities to professionalise themselves as educators. At
9
UCT there are now a wide range of professional development opportunities available to
academic staff. These range from informal staff development initiatives to credit bearing
courses at master’s level. Voluntary informal seminar groups such as the Commerce
Education Group, ‘Talking about Teaching’ in Humanities and CREE in Engineering have
encouraged the development of professional learning communities in some faculties. Then
there are a variety of more formal opportunities for staff development offered by HAESDU
such as the New Academic Practitioners’ Programme and the Learning and Teaching in
Higher Education course, which is a credit-bearing Masters level course. In addition, the
Education Development Units in Commerce and Health Sciences are playing a key role in
staff and tutor development in those faculties and in 2012 the Postgraduate Diploma in
Health Professional Education was offered for the first time by the EDU in Health Sciences.
The ADP Improvement Plan recommends that EDUs or equivalent bodies be established in
all the faculties, to play a role in mainstream educational development and thereby respond
to the goal of facilitating equity of access and outcomes.
In these circumstances, the challenge at UCT is not the availability of opportunities but
rather the motivation for academic staff to engage positively in professional development. In
UCT’s research-led environment, most staff are unlikely to invest any significant time and
effort in developing their educational expertise unless there are more substantial incentives
than exist at present. As international experience indicates, this involves raising the status of
teaching (in all its facets) as well as ensuring the availability of adequate academic and
material rewards for educational expertise. There are two particular considerations here.

At UCT, the key underlying question is how best to balance the university’s research and
teaching functions, in the public as well as institutional interest. Since both functions
clearly have major developmental significance nationally, and both contribute (albeit not
equally) to international rankings, there should be no intractable conflict, but there are
clearly tensions in practice that need to be more effectively addressed systemically. In
the shorter term, the way ahead may well lie in continuing to strengthen the teachingrelated performance and promotion criteria and targeting young or new academic staff,
as well as postgraduate teaching assistants, for involvement in professional
development programmes.

Another consideration is the extent to which UCT will accept specialisation within the
academic staff, particularly in allowing for career tracks for staff with special interest and
expertise in the educational process. Policy provision has already been made for the
appointment or promotion of ‘academic teaching’ staff up to senior lecturer level, but
further consideration should be given to facilitating the development of mainstream
staff who specialise in education in their research as well as teaching. The formal
performance criteria already go some way towards enabling this, so the challenge lies
mainly in how it may be productively implemented in practice. Some form of
specialisation, provided that it is soundly grounded in scholarship, may be a key element
of balancing UCT’s research and teaching missions.
Tutor development can be seen as another important investment not only in the quality of
teaching but in the growth of postgraduate students. The ADP recognises the need for
10
careful selection and training of tutors so that they are equipped with both the content
knowledge and the pedagogic knowledge needed to cater to the needs of diverse student
groups. Tutors can play a crucial role as they are often closer to and more in tune with the
students than the lecturers are. They have the potential to impact on throughput rates in
large classes. However, a one-off training session at the beginning of the year is not
sufficient to equip them for all the responsibilities they carry as tutors. It is therefore
recommended that, as is the practice in some ADP units, there should be on-going support
and training for tutors through the year, as well as a system of tutor review.
Tutors are seen a transient group and this kind of ongoing tutor development and review is
resource intensive. Yet developing tutors is a way of growing our own timber because some
tutors will go on to become lecturers. (See Appendix F for an illustration of a tutor
development initiative.)
Infrastructure
In addition, the size and shape plan presents a unique opportunity to address the infrastructural limitations that militate against fostering a teaching and learning environment
which encourages interactive learning. An ad hoc working group has recently been
established to look at classroom infrastructure. UCT needs more medium-sized, flat
classrooms and to ensure that classrooms are equipped with appropriate technology and
maintained at an appropriate level. At present, there are also considerable pressures on the
undergraduate computer laboratories. There are no spaces other than the library knowledge
commons for students to obtain dedicated help with computer problems. Many learning
support services and resources are tucked away in corners and do not necessarily present as
user friendly. Informal undergraduate social learning spaces are also in very short supply, an
issue that is currently being addressed by a reference group. Although the numbers of places
in residences have increased substantially in recent years, many students cannot be
accommodated. Many day students spend hours commuting, have limited quiet places to
study, and often do not have connectivity at home.
In conclusion
Research and experience in educational development indicate that the strategies briefly
described above – flexible curriculum structures, encouraging student engagement through
varied learning opportunities and a range of teaching styles, curriculum alignment, the
embedding of academic literacies in curricula, enhanced affective support and social
connectedness, as well as staff and tutor development – are amongst the most important
factors that can improve student success rates. Illustrations of positive initiatives are
provided in the appendices.
11
As this paper has attempted to indicate, there is evidence internationally and locally that
student learning, and hence throughput, can be improved through concerted action. For
substantial improvement to take place, this action needs to be undertaken in all the main
aspects of the teaching and learning process.
References
Astin, A. 1993. What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey
Bass.
Biggs, J. 1996. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education. 32:
347-364.
Biggs, J. and Tang, C. 2009. Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student
does. 3rd edn. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Society for Research into Higher Education
and Open University Press.
Chickering, A. & Gamson, A.F. (1987. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate
Education. AAHE Bulletin 39:3-7 Retrieved from
http://uwf.edu/atc/Guide/PDFs/sevenprinciples.pdf
Kreber, C. 2001. Learning experientially through case studies? A conceptual analysis. 6 (2):
217-228.
Lubben, F., Davidowitz, B., Buffler, A., Allie, S and Scott, I. 2010. Factors influencing access
students’ persistence in an undergraduate science programme: A South African case
study. International Journal of Educational Development, 30: 351–358.
Luckett, K. and Luckett, T. (2009) The development of agency in first generation learners in
higher education: a social realist analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 14 (5): 469481.
Mann, S. (2008) Study, Power and the University, Maidenhead, Society for Research into
Higher Education: Open University Press.
Pascarella, E. and Terenzini, P. 1991. How college affects students: a decade of research. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Paxton, M. 2000. A linguistic perspective on Multiple Choice Questioning. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education. Vol. 25 (2) pp. 109-119.
Pym, J. and Kapp, R. 2011 Harnessing agency: towards a learning model for undergraduate
students. Studies in Higher Education. Publication accepted for 2013 (and currently
available online) (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.582096).
Seymour, E. and Hewitt, N. 1997. Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the
sciences. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press.
12
Thesen, L. and van Pletzen, E. (eds). 2006. Academic Literacy and the Languages of Change.
London: Continuum Press.
Tinto, V. 1993. Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. 2nd ed.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Ramsden, P. 2003. Learning to teach in higher education. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
UCT Assessment Policy 2004.
www.uct.ac.za/downloads/uct.ac.za/about/policies/assessment_policy.pdf
Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
APPENDICES
A. Nature and uses of extended curriculum programmes
B. Description of assessment in Organisational Psychology
C. Description of Step Up: Personal Management in the Higher Education Context
(Commerce EDU)
D. Engineering Faculty Video
E. Description of the Physics and Me course in Science Faculty
F. Description of the “Beyond Tutor Training” initiative
13