Cathi Fredricks and Dr Ken Powell Canterbury Christ Church University The Academic Journey Project: Deploying a whole-system lens on student retention and success Cathi Fredricks and Dr Ken Powell Canterbury Christ Church University

What is the Academic Journey Project? A modernisation project to ensure curriculum frameworks, policies, procedures and regulations deliver improved student experience, outcomes and retention Positioning learning & teaching at the heart of regulatory decision making Reducing the workload associated with assessment and reassessment for both students and staff

Issues   STUDENTS Late reassessment period (Sept) --> late outcomes for next steps Assessment bunching Imbalanced workloads because of mixed module modes (short/fat, long/thin) Lack of clarity about the regulations and procedures

Issues Staff Multiplicity of special regulations   Staff Complexity in Boards of Examiners decision making - -> potential for inconsistent outcomes High volume of reassessment Pressures on student retention Diverse academic calendar --> dispersed & pressured services Process rather than learning & teaching driven Limited comparative data on assessment because of how stored Lack of clarity about the regulations and procedures Multiplicity of special regulations Inconsistency of learning and teaching practice

Principles and Models What works? (Thomas, 2012) Mainstream Academic belonging Management Model for Improving Student Retention Performance (James, 2010) CCCU Learning and Teaching Strategy (2015)

Data Informed Solutions Several years historic data Clear evidence that the reassessment pass rate dropped significantly with an increase in the number of failed modules 3 failed modules (60 credits) was considered the tipping point Same historic data Clear increase in percent students passing and progressing with increasing reassessment attempts Insignificant increase with 4+ attempts

Consultations Discourse analysis of early consultation played a key role – helping Academic Board consider where they wanted to position policy Consultations were a development activity in themselves – helping staff to reflect on the issues Scheme Review Reassessment Working Group Academic Board approves broad consultation on student reassessment Consultation with staff & students Detailed data review Academic Board approves changes to regulations and further consultation on Academic Year Detailed impact analysis Academic Board approves Academic Year and implementation timeline Prepare for changes   2013-2014 Jan- June 2015 1 Oct 2015 Oct – dec 2015 Feb – Mar 2016 May- June 2016 JuNE 2016 2016-2017

Implementation Starting points for change– Delivery in September 2017 Introduction of semesters bringing reassessment forward and creating a structure for a more consistent modular experience and more balanced assessment load. Realignment of assessment and reassessment regulations to support learning, better outcomes and retention.

Success Criteria How will we know what we are doing is working? Surveys (NSS & UKES) Replicate discourse analysis Improved progression and retention data Data regarding operation of Boards of Examiners Appeals Data

Tough Knots How to ensure changes result in genuine learning and teaching developments and more consistent improvement. Introducing significant change at a rapid pace and at a time of increasing external pressure and uncertainty when other institutional structural changes not fully embedded (enhanced structure of schools, shift in data focus, preparation for new student record system)  

Cross- institutional Implementation Group Lessons Learnt Workshops Newsletter Webpages Communication – building in structures from the outset to ensure information and engagement events have sufficient reach and are pitched correctly to each group Being fleet of foot, using project speed as a strength Cross-institutional working Full engagement of professional services areas - using as opportunity for cross-institutional engagement. Cross- institutional Implementation Group