Perceptions of student engagement at a research-led university Martin Broadley, School of Biosciences Matthew Charlton, School of Geography Gill Langmack, School of Nursing Jon Peirce, School of Psychology Tracey Sach, School of Community Health Sciences Sean May, Web Designer (Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Centre) Kate Exley, Learning Set Advisor
44
Embed
Perceptions of student engagement at a research-led university Martin Broadley, School of Biosciences Matthew Charlton, School of Geography Gill Langmack,
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Perceptions of student engagement at a research-led university
Martin Broadley, School of BiosciencesMatthew Charlton, School of GeographyGill Langmack, School of NursingJon Peirce, School of PsychologyTracey Sach, School of Community Health Sciences
Sean May, Web Designer (Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Centre)
Kate Exley, Learning Set Advisor
Outline
Outline
Importance of student engagement Project evolution Literature review Web survey Results
Quantitative Qualitative
Conclusions Implications
Importance of student engagement
Importance of student engagement Students learn better when they are
interested
Less attrition (Staff or student)
Staff morale – nicer to teach pleasant/interested students
"Ask me my three main priorities for government, and I tell you: education, education, education."
Importance of student engagement
Increasing student numbers
Importance of student engagement
Other pressures, such as research
Importance of student engagement
Students aren’t going to University for the same reasons
Importance of student engagement
Project evolution
Project evolution - background How do we engage people in ‘boring’
Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient = 0.88, t Approximation = 7.96, P < 0.001, d.f. = 19
Optional comments (staff) . . . Definitions of engagement
No idea
Teacher driven
Need purpose, relevance and persistence
Optional comments (students) . . . Definition of Engagement
Need attachment or interest in the subject
Personal factors e.g. level of concentration
Type and quality of teaching
Results – what teaching methods are engaging ?
What teaching methods are engaging?Academic
StaffUnder- grad
Diploma Post-grad (FT)
Post-grad (PT)
$KW
e-learning 1.65 1.63 1.62 1.62 1.75 ns
fieldwork 2.35 2.10 2.29 2.39 2.50 **
groupwork 2.52 1.89 2.04 2.15 2.26 ***
ind.-learning 2.20 2.13 2.32 2.44 2.48 ***
lectures 2.01 2.08 2.37 2.08 2.08 **
pract. / lab. 2.48 2.26 2.67 2.24 2.64 ***
projects 2.55 2.02 2.08 2.33 2.63 ***
seminars 2.65 2.28 2.48 2.22 2.44 ***
workshops 2.44 2.15 2.30 2.11 2.29 *
$KW = Kruskal-Wallace One-Way Analysis of Variance, performed to determine the effect of "Role" on response (ns, P > 0.05; * P < 0.05; * P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001). The effects of "School", and "School nested within Role" accounted for less than 14 % of the total variation in response within each of the categories (estimated using residual maximum likelihood analyses).
Categories: 0 = not at all, 1 = weakly, 2 = moderately, 3 = strongly
Results – factors affecting engagement
Factors affecting engagement
Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient = 0.69, t Approximation = 3.57, P < 0.01, d.f. = 14
Facilities
Staff:student ratio / size of teaching groups
Amount of administration and bureaucracy - recruit more secretaries!
Lack of time
Lack of student motivation and ability
Lecturers need to learn how to apply teaching theory rather than have knowledge of teaching theories
Staff enthusiasm or lack of it for teaching (won’t lead to promotion)
Factors affecting engagement
Staff/university as the problem: Poor quality teaching Staff not interested in teaching Poor attitude of staff towards students Lack of contact time and seminars/tutorials Need more handouts and model answers Research and visiting staff unseen Poor building construction and layout
Students as the problem: No-one speaks in tutorials Poor morale Poor knowledge of content Envy between home and international students
Factors affecting engagement
Factors affecting engagement - feedback
Frequency of feedback:
Academic staff
Under- grad
Diploma Post-grad (FT)
Post-grad (PT)
$KW
EXAMS 1.92 1.40 1.56 1.26 1.64 ***
COURSEWORK 2.34 1.59 1.77 1.80 1.94 ***
ONGOING 1.98 1.23 1.35 1.59 1.82 ***
$KW = Kruskal-Wallace One-Way Analysis of Variance, performed to determine the effect of "Role" on response (ns, P > 0.05; * P < 0.05; * P < 0.01; *** P < 0.001). The effect of "School", and "School nested within Role" accounted for less than 12.6 % of the total variation in response within each of the categories (estimated using residual maximum likelihood analyses).
Recommendations Longer office hours, see marked exam papers, automatic on-line
personal feedback, more contact time
Factors affecting engagement - feedback
Factors affecting engagement - research / teaching links
Categories: 0 = not at all, 1 = weakly, 2 = moderately, 3 = strongly
Academic staff
Under- grad
Diploma Post-grad (FT)
Post-grad (PT)
$KW
Research familiarity1
2.06 0.73 0.87 1.52 1.73 ***
136.9 % of the variation in response attributed to Role, 7.6 % to (School + Role/School)*
Research link2 1.75 1.31 1.19 1.76 1.73 ***
26.4 % of the variation in response attributed to Role, 4.5 % to (School + Role/School)*
*Variation was assigned using a residual maximum likelihood analyses (linear mixed model)
Strength of link Strong Weak
Threats to link Teaching doesn’t get you promoted Research is not aimed at improving the learning
environment Teaching delegated to “Helots”
Belief
Factors affecting engagement - research /teaching links
Belief Students were not aware of the research but believed they must be linked Some students thought the best lectures were those linked to research Others thought teaching and research should be separate
Level: Enough
Research projects in final year linked closely to research Research posters up on departments walls Cutting edge links with industry Postgraduates know more than undergraduates But still problems e.g. deadlines break the chain of research, or becomes too
specialised Not enough
Researchers forced to teach Don’t know what lecturers officially research Taught like nursery children Not enough sharing or practical examples
Factors affecting engagement - research /teaching links
Discussion
Summary Definitions of engagement
Interesting, enjoyment, interactive, involvement (students) Interactive, involvement, motivation, enthusiasm (staff) NB: More passive for students, more active for staff
Methods of teaching: All engaging (but e-learning less popular) More passive for students, more active for staff
Feedback: Staff believe they give plenty – students don’t!
Research and teaching: Believe that these are linked – but the links aren’t always obvious
Implications
Methods of Teaching Use a variety of teaching methods
Feedback Provide more (timely) feedback, preferably typed
Research Include explicit links to research
Future development
Questions remaining: How do we bridge the ‘perception gap’ between staff and
students? How do you recognise when you are successfully engaging
the students? What are the implications for e-learning?
Aim to get into the pedagogical literature by publishing our rather large n (not that size matters)