Collaborative research into the student experience

A methodological argument with examples

Mantz Yorke, Lancaster University&

Nick Hooper, Yorkshire & Humber East Lifelong Learning Network

EAN Conference, York St John University23 June 2009

The basic argument

1. Practice-focused research is burgeoning

2. It’s often conducted in isolation

3. Hence cross-linking and cumulation tend not to happen, save after the event

4. So the full potential value of the work isn’t reached

The basic argument, ctd

5. If colleagues work together from the start, greater benefit can accrue:

(a) the evidence-base is widened

(b) there is benchmarking potential

(c) research capacity can be built

6. If those responsible for funding studies were to be more strategic in their approach, they might well obtain greater value for the money that they invest

Developing capacity

• Researching into the student experience is challenging

• There is a range of possible research methods(quantitative and qualitative)

• There are ethical considerations

• There’s a need to appreciate the limitations of the different methodologies

• Working collegially aids the development of expertise (particularly important where there is little or no tradition of undertaking research)

Example 1: Part-time students’ experience Access report via www.heacademy.ac.uk > research & evaluation > surveys

• Hardly any empirical data

• PT HE is an important policy area

• Yet not even modest funding available

• 11 Post-92 universities agreed to contribute (staff time & expenses) in exchange for data with benchmarking potential

• Ethics: BERA Guidelines used

• Postgraduate and undergraduate students surveyed via the web: 2871 responses

Example 1: PT students’ experience, ctd

• Weak response rate: better than nothing, hence need for caution in drawing conclusions

• Responses from 1130 PG; 1170 BA/BSc; 530 Other

• Generally positive reactions, but …

• 2 areas of particular concern:(a) ‘infilling’ on FT courses(b) organisation & management for PT students

• Some institutions used the data for enhancement

Example 1: Some access-related findings

• Little difference on rating items (SES; gender)

• Tendency to be more positive with increasing age

• Differences here & there between ethnic groups, e.g. - Asian students had more difficulty with home study and were most likely to say academic work was hard - Black and Asian students were more positive about friendship - White British were least worried about financing

• ‘Disability declared’ were less positive about - programme organisation - assessment scheduling - computing and library resources - financing, but numbers are small, so caution needed

Example 2: PT FD students’ experience

• FDF funding

• Mixture of HE and FE, hence approach via 6 LLNs

• Web-based survey (for speed, cost); hard-copy Plan B

• 27 institutions/organisations participated

• Responses from 372 students (a few more to be added); dominated by Education

Example 2: PT FD students’ experience, ctd

Respondents’ demographics

Gender Male 59; Female 302

Age 21-30: 104; 31-40: 114; 41-50: 111

SES Managerial 162; Intermediate 66; Supervisory etc 55

Ethnicity Almost all ‘White British’

Disability declared? 23

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

FD quality

Personal gain

Coping

Employer engagement

Social engagement

Preparation for FD

Financial worry

Scale mean (high = positive)

Female N=302Male N=59

Example 2: Gender

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

FD quality

Personal gain

Coping

Employerengagement

Social engagement

Preparation for FD

Financial worry

Scale mean (high = positive)

Previous HE N=185No previous HE N=173

Example 2: Previous HE

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

FD quality

Personal gain

Coping

Employerengagement

Social engagement

Preparation for FD

Financial worry

Scale mean (high = positive)

Supervisory etc N=55Managerial etc N=162

Example 2: Socio-economic group

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

FD quality

Personal gain

Coping

Employerengagement

Social engagement

Preparation for FD

Financial worry

Scale mean (high = positive)

Dependants N=191No dependants N=167

Example 2: Dependants

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

FD quality

Personal gain

Coping

Employerengagement

Social engagement

Preparation for FD

Financial worry

Scale mean (high = positive)

Disability declared N=23No disability N=335

Example 2: Disability

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00

FD quality

Personal gain

Coping

Employer engagement

Social engagement

Preparation for FD

Financial worry

Scale mean (high = positive)

41-50 N=11131-40 N=11421-30 N=104

Example 2: Age

Example 3: FD & HNC students’ experience

YHELLN is a partnership initiative

• Increasing opportunities for vocational learners in HE

4 Research themes:

• Employer engagement

• Widening participation & student diversity

• Learner constituency

• Progression

Within these, a study set up of the usefulness of FD, HNC experience

Example 3: FD & HNC students’ experience

• Not much known about how useful FD and HNC have been to individuals in the world of work

• YHELLN funding

• 3 institutions involved to date

• Web-based survey (for speed, cost)

• Responses from 35 FD and 19 HNC students to date

Example 3: FD & HNC students’ experience, ctd

Respondents’ demographics

Gender Male 24; Female 30

Age Up to 30: 24; 31-50: 24; Over 50: 6

SES Managerial 24; Intermediate 11; Supervisory etc 10

Ethnicity All ‘White British’

Disability declared? 1

Example 3: FD & HNC students’ experience, ctd

• HNC students generally more positive about their experience. However, the data were collected from

some of the very first FD students

• FD students more positive about- Balancing academic and other commitments- Discussing academic work with fellow students- Making friends via the course- The benefit accruing to them from the course

• 16 FD and 8 HNC students went on to higher study(roughly equivalent proportions)

Example 3: FD & HNC students’ experience, ctd

Who paid? (More than one response possible)

FD (N=35) HNC (N=19)Fees Ancillary Fees Ancillary

Self 20 31 6 18Employer 7 1 8 2Local Authority 12 6 5 3

Example 3: FD & HNC students’ experience, ctd

Usefulness of the qualification

FD

Yes 20; No 5; Equivocal 4; No comment 6

HNC

Yes 10; No 4; No comment 5

Some concluding points

These three examples are primarily quantitative surveys, but collaboration isn’t limited to quantitative work

Their findings will be of value not only to those whose focus is access matters, but also to a variety of interested parties

Collaboration • enhances ownership• accentuates the chances of benchmarking• can open up questions spanning institutions and sectors• can help to build research capacity• potentially improves value for money

However, collaboration takes time and effort to set up!