1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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)

6. 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

7. 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
Jan- June 2015
1 Oct 2015
Oct – dec 2015
Feb – Mar 2016
May- June 2016
JuNE 2016

8. 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.

9. 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

10. 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)

11. 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