Student Retention and Progression By Chris Shepherd and Risham Chohan HEA what works Student Retention and Progression By Chris Shepherd and Risham Chohan

Two linked projects: RETENTION PROJECT: What is the impact of our intervention under the Law Division’s retention and progression project INTERRUPTIONS & WITHDRAWALS: Why do law students withdraw or interrupt from the course The law division implemented a Retention Project in 2012 to address student engagement and progression. As a result of this project we then progressed onto address the reason why students interrupt/withdraw. Focus today is retention and will speak about I&W at the HEA annual conference. When the retention project was introduced in 12/13 our progression rate was 56% against the University benchmark of 70%, for 15/16 it was 68%!!!

Existing Support Arrangements in Law Student mentors Personal tutors and 3LS PDP Directors of Studies Retention Project interviews Office hours - Online booking system for tutor appointments Exit/Interim interviews (Interruptions & Withdrawals) Realised how important it is to ‘touch base’ with students that have interrupted iPad OUP Trove

Retention Project: methodology Identification process: registers/swipe data – minimum 50% attendance in semester 1 and 3LS PDP Contacting the students: resource intensive Intervention strategy - what did we do? 1-2-1 face to face interview & specialist support referral Interpreting the data – results Contacting students – initial contact is via email, and where students did not reply we then contact them via telephone and if still unsuccessful we will send another email to both their university email and personal email. In many cases several attempts are made before successful. We are now going to move onto your findings

Gender Vertical numbers: actual (raw) numbers out of the 30 (cohort) who we deemed to be at risk applying our criteria Females more at risk than males

Age Age: 1 = 18-20 2= 21-24 3 = 25-29 4= 30-39 5 = 40-49 6 = 50+ Horizontal: age brackets 1-6 Vertical: Actual numbers (raw) column 6 is 1/30 students who is 50+ Assumption – older ones would be more at risk, but what this suggests is that those in age categories 1&2 i.e. 18-24 are most at risk Our anecdotal experience suggests that older and younger students don’t necessarily mix

Ethnicity White British students are most at risk, reflects national trends in schools (?)

RYA & Progression RYA students less likely to progress Over 70% of RYA’s fail to progress, compared with the non RYA students at 35% (double) RYA’s two times more likely not to progress. Blue = progression Green = non progression

Induction and progression Our assumption was that attendance at induction is linked to progression – more likely to progress if attended induction. But our initial findings suggest that attendance is neutral – it makes only a marginal difference. Of those who attended the induction, 50% progressed compared to 56% for those that didn’t attend.

Attendance and progression Horizontal figure are the attendance brackets Vertical figures are the attendance rates Progression = only one failed module in each semester Assumption was attendance and progression would be VERY strongly linked Again, this has not been established – attendance, in itself, is not it seems a decisive factor For those students who attended less than 50%, there was a noticeable difference in progression – fewer progressed. For those students who attended more than 50% - this does not increase their chances of progression – it was exactly the same in our sample. Blue = progression Green = non progression

Retention Project: Student comments I enrolled late, this put me back, especially with the foundation programme At the start, I thought the library sessions were pointless because I already know this The timetable is a real kick in the teeth, but cant change I didn’t realise the effect that non-attendance would have, now I realise the work load that I have The gap between 1-3pm means that I don’t attend X lecture I cannot afford to pay to come in This is a wake up call for me, this is good, this has helped We have put some of the comments on the slide, overall impression was that students embraced the intervention and were often relieved to have the conversation with us I prefer more interaction with the tutor rather than just taking notes The course is more difficult than college

Impact: Lessons Learnt Legitimate reasons – student honesty Transitions and expectations Funding Focus on year 1 Be proactive – ‘Self student referral does not work as a mode of promoting persistence. Students who need services the most refer themselves the least. Effective retention services take the initiative in outreach and timely interventions’ Anderson (2003) Legitimate reasons – usually non academic but personal Transition and expectations – students often fail to appreciate the step up from school to university, their expectation did not always match our own because they did not understand the expectation of working independently and managing their time accordingly. Funding – an obvious impact of students not progressing is on funding and at a recent conference in February a University VC estimated that each non progressing student costs his university £7,500. Proactive approach – Anderson has pointed out those students at risk are less likely to refer themselves.

Impact: Lessons Learnt Striking the right balance – firm but fair Students responded well to our personal intervention – second retention project meeting had 100% take up Students respond better to personal academic contact both initially and in interview Creating academic and social community Retention in HE, like access to HE, is complex Thomas (2002) Striking the right balance – we felt we did this! Students responded well - reiterate – they appreciated our intervention and felt relieved having the opportunity to explain and for us to signpost for support services academic and social community – meeting with the students confirmed our view supported by the academic literature that students need to feel part of an academic and social community No silver bullet

Comments & suggestions Please send to: risham.chohan@lsbu.ac.uk shephecp@lsbu.ac.uk