A tripartite approach to tackling the Sophomore Slump in the School of Law: enhanced induction, enhanced support and student involvement in curriculum redesign Simon Brooman & Sue Darwent
Overview
Student voice Lack of specific evidence Local context Influences
Hearing the student voice Considerations:- Impartiality Engaging participants Focus groups in curriculum re-design study Digital voice recordings in Critical Incident Technique study of induction experience
Curriculum re-design Carried out over three years 11 focus groups of 3-7 participants (n=44) Underperforming 2 nd year core module, with low mean marks and pass rate 1. Teacher-centred re-design Focus groups 3. Student-informed re-design
Curriculum re-design Three year project 11 focus groups of 3-7 participants (n=44) Underperforming 2 nd year core module, with low mean marks and pass rate 1. Teacher-centred re-design Focus groups 3. Student-informed re-design Failure of some basic structural elements of the curriculum:- Timing of lectures and seminars Module assessment Workload Resources Failure of the interactive learning process:- o Rule re: attendance/preparation o Language/vocabulary o Relationship with lecturer and tutor o Not relating to content o Failure to engage had behavioural and emotional outcomes
Curriculum re-design Three year project 11 focus groups of 3-7 participants (n=44) Underperforming 2 nd year core module, with low mean marks and pass rate 1. Teacher-centred re-design Focus groups 3. Student-informed re-design
Induction Critical Incident Technique study
Transition?
Over to you…. 1. Find a good way of listening to the second year voice that one of you uses now. 2. Good practice:- what is the best thing that someone in your group does to support second year transition? 3. Your burning issue – what do you need to know or what is your key question that you are left with?