1. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Overview Background Implementation of support initiative Methodology Evaluation Conclusions

2. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 A proactive intervention to support first year engineering students with non-typical mathematics backgrounds Dr Ria Symonds – University of Nottingham

3. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Background Engineering mathematics intake (~600 students) is dominated by students entering with a recent good pass at GCE A-level Previously a parallel provision for about 20-40 students has also been available for students with more non-typical backgrounds Nomination via engineering tutors Availability of bi-weekly drop in sessions Mathematical confidence, engagement and attainment of this cohort has been disappointing Support initiative  Dual module approach

4. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Revised provision – outline objectives Change to a single provision Provide targeted support to enhance student learning / transition in tandem to main Engineering Mathematics module Incorporate a ‘group tutorial’ based support Incorporate ‘ guided learning’ to provide enhancement to student personal study time ( pre-requisites and underpinning )

5. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Implementation Liaison with engineering departments Selection of Postgraduate Student Teachers (PST’s) Previous experience crucial Training session Development of Tutorial support Diagnostic Test VLE Tutorial Sheets Delivery and monitoring

6. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Methodology - barriers Engineering departments were asked to nominate a small group of students to benefit from the support  39 students Limited data for intake qualifications Late arrival of nominations from engineering Late registration of some students – e-mail problems ‘Missed’ induction week / diagnostic test Tutorials reduced to fortnightly in Spring Semester Approx half the nominated students attended sessions

7. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation Engaged motivated students? Comparison of marks from three groups: Proactive intervention students – received support Proactive intervention students – did not receive support Main cohort

8. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation – quantitative AUTUMN SEMESTER No ExamHard Fail (<30%) Soft Fail (>=30%, <40%) Pass (>40%) Nominated PI attendees (17) 22112 Nominated PI non- attendees (17) 00314 Other Engineering Students (593) 17 (2.9%) 28 (4.7%) 45 (7.6%) 503 (84.8%) SPRING SEMESTER No ExamHard Fail (<30%) Soft Fail (>=30%, <40%) Pass (>40%) Nominated PI attendees (15) 2328 Nominated PI non- attendees (14) 01310 Other Engineering Students (561) 7 (1.2%) 36 (6.4%) 39 (7.0%) 479 (85.4%)

9. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation – quantitative AUTUMN SEMESTER No ExamHard Fail (<30%) Soft Fail (>=30%, <40%) Pass (>40%) Nominated PI attendees (17) 22112 Nominated PI non- attendees (17) 00314 Other Engineering Students (593) 17 (2.9%) 28 (4.7%) 45 (7.6%) 503 (84.8%) SPRING SEMESTER No ExamHard Fail (<30%) Soft Fail (>=30%, <40%) Pass (>40%) Nominated PI attendees (15) 2328 Nominated PI non- attendees (14) 01310 Other Engineering Students (561) 7 (1.2%) 36 (6.4%) 39 (7.0%) 479 (85.4%)

10. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation – quantitative Autumn: Group (Number of students) Coursework (%)Exam (%)Overall (%) PI attendees (15) 66.74952.8 PI non-attendees (17) 80.84654.2 Others (530) 7952.357.7 Spring: Group (Number of students) Coursework (%)Exam (%)Overall (%) PI attendees (13) 68.742.147.8 PI non-attendees (17) 64.947.951.4 Others (500) 66.35758.9

11. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation - qualitative Questionnaire handed out during the 1 st and 10 th teaching week of term. – How do the tutorials compare to your normal maths lecture/problem classes? “I get more attention and develop my maths.” “[The tutorials] tend to focus on the basics more before moving onto the advanced topics.” “They offer more explanation and time spent on a one to one basis.”

12. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation - qualitative Questionnaire handed out during the 1 st and 10 th teaching week of term. – What aspects of the tutorials did you find particularly useful? “Exercises and explanation of each topic.” “The ability to ask questions too uncomfortable to ask the lecturer. Slower pace and firmer grounding of the points. Help available!” “Recapping in detail bits that have seemed vague in class.” “Being able to discuss the problem.”

13. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Evaluation - qualitative Tutor feedback: “Experience in teaching and guiding students. Satisfaction of teaching someone something new and them understanding it and seeing them enjoy what they are doing.” “I had a good rapport with my working group and an opportunity to really help students that needed it” “I feel more confident about leading tutorials in the future. It was also good getting to know the students… I really enjoyed being able to tailor the sessions to their needs.”

14. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Conclusions Provision established Operational elements identified for enhancement Increased engagement for PSTs in managing and delivering support to Engineering students Effective transition to undergraduate learning in mathematics Feedback from students encouraging Acknowledgement: Development work was supported by the Collaborative Practice Transfer Fund, HE STEM Programme.

15. STEM Seminar – 23 rd November 2011 Conclusions However…… – ENGAGEMENT with the support could be improved. – Several factors that could have contributed to this. – Further activity needed to help motivate such students? Acknowledgement: Development work was supported by the Collaborative Practice Transfer Fund, HE STEM Programme.