a socio-critical model for understanding and predicting postgraduate student success in odl: a...
TRANSCRIPT
A socio-critical model for understanding and predicting postgraduate student success in ODL: A tentative exploration & glimpses of a critique
By Paul PrinslooResearch Professor, Department of Business Management,
University of South Africa (Unisa)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I do not own the copyright of any of the images in this presentation. Ihereby acknowledge the original copyright and licensing regime of every image and reference used. All the images used in this presentation have been sourced from Google labeled for non-commercial reuse
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Disclaimer and context (1)I share these tentative exploratory thoughts and glimpses of a critique from the specific context of the University of South Africa (Unisa), a mega open university with close to 400,000 students with about 2,000Masters (1883) and 282 doctoral students in 2013. Some of the current trends include (but are not limited to)…
• Although the dropout rate has decreased slightly in recent times, it has not resulted in a higher graduation rate
• About 20% of Masters’ students complete their qualifications within 5 years and about 14% of PhD students complete their degrees in 4 years *
• One out of three students drop out after their first year of registration for Masters/doctorate degrees
* Varies according to college/discipline
Disclaimer 2: A socio-critical model in context
1. Geopolitical models: International (North-Atlantic) versus national, developed versus developing
2. Philosophical: eg sociological (Spady 1970, Berger 2000), psychological (Bean and Eaton 2000), comprehensive/ecological (Baird 2000), cultural (Kuh & Love 2000); social-critical (Tierney 2000), anthropological (Bernal 2001; Hurtado 1997), critical-cultural (Bernstein 1977), etc.
3. Higher education type: Residential (face-to-face), distance education and open and distance learning (ODL), traditional versus non-traditional (eg Kember 1989; Kember, Lee & Li 2001; Metzner & Bean 1987)
4. Methodological basis: quantitative (eg regression analysis)/qualitative research
5. Subject specific: eg student success in Microeconomics, Accounting, etc.6. Intervention specific: eg the impact of raising the awareness of risk, the
impact of tutoring, etc.7. Factor specific: eg finances, motivation, etc.
My personal definition of ‘socio-critical’…
It is an approach to consider the inter-relationships and inter-dependencies of social, economic, political, cultural, gender, technological, racial, and environmental factors in a specific context. If these relationships and inter-dependencies are not foregrounded, and confronted/disrupted – they are maintained and perpetuated.
Presentation overview
Introducing student success as wicked problem
What we know or don’t know about postgraduate student success
What we know or don’t know about undergraduate student success: a socio-critical lens
Postgraduate student success through a Boudieuan lens
“A wicked problem is a social or cultural problem that is difficult or impossible to solve for as many as four reasons: incomplete or contradictory knowledge, the number of people and opinions involved, the large economic burden, and the interconnected nature of these problems with other problems”
Kolko, 2012 http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/wicked_problems_problems_wort
h_solving
Also see the Cynefin framework by Dave Snowden
Understanding and predicting (postgraduate) student success
Image credit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maze_solving_algorithm
You are here
Student success and retention “is one of the most widely studied issues in higher education over the past twenty-five years”
(Tinto, 2002, p. 2)
“Leaving is not the mirror image of staying. Knowing why students leave does not tell us, at least not directly, why students persist”
(Tinto, 2006, pp 5-6)
Not only are we (possibly) not closer to understanding student retention and success (particularly in open distance learning, [ODL]) contexts, many (most?) of our institutional efforts to stem the bleeding or to stop the door from revolving does not seem to work…
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Revolving_door-base.jpg
Although this research resulted in “an ever more sophisticated understanding of the complex web of events that shape student leaving and persistence”, … “most institutions have not yet been able to translate what we know about student retention into forms of action that have led to substantial gains in student persistence and graduation”
(Tinto 2006, p.1, p. 5)
Are we looking at the wrong things, in the wrong places?
Are our assumptions about student success and retention, and particularly
the role of the supervisor in this process, wrong or misleading?
Why do postgraduate students fail or fail to complete?
There is no lack of studies focusing on different variables such as, but not limited to• The quality of supervision• The competence ecology of supervisors• (Research) preparedness of students• Different expectations regarding roles and
responsibilities• The isolation experienced by postgraduate students• The cultural & cognitive style of disciplinary tribes
In the South African context …
• Relative lack of research and conceptual modeling
• Koen (2007), [in the context of the University of the Western Cape (UWC)] observes that most institutional strategies to enhance success are not based on research, but on anecdotal evidence
Koen (2007) proposes the following spheres of influence/impact:
• institutional context (social climate, physical setting, social and academic
spheres)
• household spheres (socio-economic group, educational past, domestic
obligations, work responsibility, and financial circumstances)
• personal factors (academic ability, motivation, commitment, desire to finish, and
other attributes)
• organisational factors (appointment policies, financial allocations,
departmental structures, intellectual environment, and institutional resources)
• socio-political influences (allocation of state resources and scholarships,
higher education legislation and regulation)
• academic performance factors (progress with a thesis, full-time vs. part-time
study, faculty affiliation)
• research factors (teaching and supervision, problems inherent in research,
language, and student attributes)
What we (currently) know of student success
on undergraduatelevel…
We know that the following impact on student success…
• Socioeconomic circumstances• Primary and secondary school
background• Educational background of parents and
immediate family• Geographical distance between family
home and institution• Subjects and subject marks on school
level• Proficiency in the language of tuition• Support networks or lack of• Peer pressure• Family and community pressure
• Access to resources• Mathematics on school level• Role models or lack of • Locus of control• Attribution• Self awareness • Self-discipline• Habits and behaviours• Parental status• Health status• Employment status • Probability of employment or
career progress
We know the following institutional factors impact on student success and retention…
• Institutional efficiencies or inefficiencies• Complexity of curricula• Curriculum coherence• Epistemologies and ways of seeing the world• Assessment strategies• Tuition periods• Examination schedules• Server reliability• Faculty understanding of ODL • Faculty expertise• Institutional culture• Whether the institution is the choice of last resort for students• Integration of student support, curriculum, pedagogy and technology
We also know that the follwing macro contextual factors impact on student success and retention do know…
StudentsUnisa
What we don’t know (yet), and possibly
never will…
What is the impact when these different sets of impact combine?
Student success is therefore the result of mostly non-linear, multidimensional, interdependent interactions at different phases
in the nexus between student, institution and broader societal factors
There is no ‘grand’ theory (Merton, 1957)…
• An abundance of different models explaining residential, undergraduate student success
• International models are only partially applicable to the specific African, developing-country, post-apartheid, and ODL context of Unisa
• In distance education contexts non-academic factors may impact more than academic factors
• The combined effects of different combinations of variables at a specific moment in the learning journey are not known
(Subotzky & Prinsloo, 2011)
If we accept thatstudent success is the result of mostly non-linear, multidimensional, interdependent
interactions at different phases in the nexus between student, institution and broader
societal factors…, where does this leave us?
On undergraduate level, it may look as follows…
ProcessesInter & intra-
personaldomains
Modalities:• Attribution• Locus of control• Self-efficacy
ProcessesModalities:
• Attribution• Locus of control• Self-efficacy
DomainsAcademic OperationalSocial
TRANSFORMED INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES
THE STUDENT AS AGENTIDENTITY, ATTRIBUTES, HABITUS
Success
THE INSTITUTION AS AGENTIDENTITY, ATTRIBUTES, HABITUS
SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as uncertain)
SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as uncertain)
Choice, Admission
Learning activities
Coursesuccess
Gradua-tion
THE STUDENT WALK Multiple, mutually constitutive interactions between student,
institution & networks
FIT
FIT
FIT
FIT
Employ-ment/
citizenship
TRANSFORMED STUDENT IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES
FIT
FIT
FIT
FIT
FIT
FIT
FIT
FIT
Retention/Progression/Positive experience
(Subotzky & Prinsloo, 2011)
And on postgraduate level?
Understanding supervision through
a Bourdieuan lens…
Image retrieved from http://www.allstaractivities.com/images/soccer-
positions.gif
• Boundaried site• Players have set/
predetermined positions• Rules are predetermined
and taken for granted (doxa)• Players have different skills• What players can do is inter
alia determined by their position on the field/rules
• The physical condition of the field impacts play
The “field” is not a benign, pastoral space, but rather le
champ – a battle field, where players have set positions,
predetermined paces, specific rules which novice players
must learn together with basic skills (Thompson, 2012)
“What players can do, and where they can go during the
game, depends on their field position. The actual physical
condition of the field (whether it is wet, dry, well grassed
or full of potholes), also has an effect on what players can
do and this how the game is played” (Thompson, 2012, p.
66)
The ‘field’ of supervision
Mapping the field of supervision
1. What is the state of the field?
2. Who are the players on the field? Where do
they come from?
3. What are the rules (written and unwritten)?
4. What is the reward?
5. What does one need in order to play this field
successfully?
6. Who are the referees?
7. Who is the audience? What role do they play?
[(habitus)(capital)] + field = practice/agency
(Maton, 2012, p. 50)
[(habitus)(capital)] + field =
practice/agency
Students’ habitus - how their past and present (and their understanding thereof) shaped and still shape them
The capital that they have acquired in the process (or not)
The field – the context in which they find themself in. This is not a neutral space, but is, itself, shaped by various structures, and agencies of individuals and collectives
Their practice/agency and their understanding thereof…
Supervisor [(habitus)(capital)] + field = agency
Student [(habitus)(capital)] + field = agency
Image retrieved from http://www.allstaractivities.com/images/soccer-positions.gif
Dis
cip
line
Met
anar
rati
ves
in
dis
cip
lines
/hie
rarc
hie
s o
f p
ow
er…
Institu
tion
Co
llege/scho
ol/d
epartm
ents –
hie
rarchie
s of
po
wer
SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as uncertain)
SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as uncertain)
We asked…
Are we looking at the wrong things, in the wrong places?
Are our assumptions about student success and retention, and particularly the role of the
supervisor in this process, wrong or misleading?
Paul Prinsloo
Research Professor in Open Distance Learning (ODL)
Department of Business Management
College of Economic and Management Sciences
Office number 3-15, Club 1, Hazelwood
P O Box 392
Unisa, 0003, Republic of South Africa
+27 (0) 12 433 4719 (office)
+27 (0) 82 3954 113 (mobile)
Skype: paul.prinsloo59
Personal blog: http://opendistanceteachingandlearning.wordpress.com
Twitter profile: @14prinsp
THANK YOU