final report a project funded by the higher education ... · study and with the quality of teaching...

THE FIRST YEAR EXPERIENCE IN AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES:

FINDINGS FROM A DECADE OF NATIONAL STUDIES

Kerri-Lee Krause, Robyn Hartley, Richard James and Craig McInnis

Centre for the Study of Higher Education University of Melbourne

Final Report January 2005

A PROJECT FUNDED BY THE HIGHER EDUCATION INNOVATION PROGRAMME

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TRAINING

ii

© Commonwealth of Australia 2005

ISBN: 0 642 77531 1

This work is copyright. It may be reproduced in whole or in part for study or training purposes subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and no commercial usage or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those indicated above, requires the prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca

The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Education, Science and Training.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The first year experience research relies on the goodwill and contribution of many people throughout the Australian higher education system. We are especially grateful for the early support given to this project by Bill Burmester and the Higher Education Innovation Programme (DEST), and for the invaluable input and support of the DEST project advisory group. We also wish to thank the academics and administrators from the participating universities who gave of their time to provide the data so fundamental to the success of the survey process. We appreciate the level of interest they have shown in this project. Special thanks go to our Project Manager, Ms Anna-Maritza Martin and to Dr Malcolm Anderson for sharing his statistical expertise. Other members of the CSHE who provided helpful advice include Hamish Coates. Finally, we pay tribute to the first year students who participated in the 2004 survey. We are grateful for the time they took to provide helpful and detailed information through the survey process and we say a special thank you to them for taking part in the third of this landmark series of studies on the first year experience.

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides information for the first time on the changes over a ten year period in the attitudes and experiences of first year students in Australian universities. The national survey of first year students on which the report is based is the third in a series conducted at five year intervals: 1994, 1999 and 2004. The 2004 study provides a snapshot of the students who commenced higher education this year and allows valuable comparison with the findings of the earlier studies. The 2004 study’s findings are based on 2,344 individual responses to a mailed questionnaire. A 25 per cent sample of commencing first year students in nine universities, stratified by Broad Field of Education (BFOE), was surveyed. Following a second mailout to non-respondents to the initial mailout, the study achieved an effective response rate of 28 per cent. The 2004 response rate is considerably lower than the 57 per cent and 37 per cent achieved respectively in 1994 and 1999 using comparable methodologies, reflecting a pattern of lower response that is now common for survey research. While the majority of items from the 1994 First Year Experience Questionnaire were retained, some important changes were made including: a set of questions on student identity and sense of belonging, a new series of items designed to monitor first year engagement patterns; a more comprehensive suite of items of students’ use of information and communication technologies (ICTs); and a new ‘managing your commitments’ section designed to record more fully first year students’ experiences beyond the classroom and in paid employment. Following are the broad snapshot findings and ten-year trends identified in this study: • First year students continue to rate both interest-related and job-related reasons as

important in their decisions to enrol in university study. Reasons for enrolling have remained largely unchanged since 1994, though there has been an increase in the percentage of students acknowledging the role of family and parental expectations.

• In 2004, first year students have an increased sense of purpose and greater clarity about occupational aspirations. One in nine respondents had deferred university enrolment in 2003. There are no comparable data for 1994. The proportion of students withdrawing from at least one subject has doubled since 1994 to 18 per cent in 2004. However, the proportion of students considering deferring study or discontinuing their study has dropped to just over one quarter of respondents in 2004.

• Since 1994 there has been a significant decline in the proportion of students feeling that university has not met their expectations, though there are some subgroup differences in this regard. Notably, international students are less satisfied that expectations have been met than are their domestic counterparts.

• Enhanced efforts to bridge the gap between school and university may account for the increasingly positive views of the role of school in preparing students for university study. However, despite the increased proportion of students feeling positive in this regard, these views continue to be shared by a minority (around 40

v

per cent), while just under one-third feel ill-prepared to choose a university course on leaving school.

• For the first time in 2004, the transition experiences of mature age students in the first year are reported in some depth. These students emerge as a highly satisfied group on the whole. They typically receive higher marks than their younger peers, and are slightly more positive about the way university has met their expectations. They tend to have strong clarity of purpose and are more likely to seek assistance from staff. However they typically keep to themselves at university and are less interested in extracurricular activities than are school-leavers.

• The nature of engagement with learning and the learning community was an important focus of the 2004 FYEQ. An important indicator of engagement is time devoted to academic endeavours, including class attendance and time spent on campus. The last decade has seen full-time students progressively spending fewer days on average on campus and reduced hours in class each week (17.6 hours per week in 1994 compared with 15.9 hours per week a decade later). This trend is accompanied by a significant rise in the proportion of full-time students committed to paid employment (47 per cent in 1994 compared with 55 per cent in 2004).

• In 2004, first year students are significantly more satisfied with their course of study and with the quality of teaching they are experiencing. Nevertheless, only half of respondents agree that staff are usually available to discuss their work and there remain a substantial number who do not perceive staff to be accessible. A little fewer than one-third of students feel that teaching staff take an interest in their students’ progress and give helpful feedback.

• ICTs have played a significant role in changing the face of teaching, learning and interaction in the first year. The majority of students in 2004 accessed online course resources, used email to contact peers and lecturers and used computer software designed for their course. The proportion of students using online discussion opportunities remains in the minority.

• A feature of the 2004 study is a close analysis of the unique first year experiences of demographic subgroups, including students from equity groups. While there are several similarities between the experiences of these students and the broader sample, sufficient subgroup differences emerge to warrant consideration of institutional support strategies designed to meet the specific needs of various groups of students.

Overall, first year students continue to see university study as an important means of preparing them for a career as well as an opportunity to pursue study in areas that interest them. These motivations for study have remained largely unchanged over the past decade. First year students in 2004 have a clearer sense of how university study will help them achieve career goals. They are typically more satisfied with their university experience as a whole than were first year students ten years ago. However, there is strong evidence of demographic subgroup differences that warrants close monitoring and further investigation. The challenge for Australian higher education lies in determining how best to capitalise on a decade’s worth of first year research and trend data to shape ongoing research and policy-making at the national and institutional levels. To guide these efforts, the report concludes with a discussion of strategic directions and areas for

vi

future research based on the findings of the 2004 study and the documented ten-year trends. This report represents an historic moment in the study of the first year experience in Australian higher education. It is now ten years since the first national survey of students in their first year of university, conducted by the Centre for the Study of Higher Education, and fifty years since the earliest recorded Australian university survey of first year students. To commemorate this anniversary, the Afterword to this report records the fifty year journey of first year research in Australia.

vii

THE FIRST YEAR EXPERIENCE IN AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITIES:

FINDINGS FROM A DECADE OF NATIONAL STUDIES

_____________________________________________________________ CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary..................................................................................................... iv 1. CSHE National Studies of the First Year Experience, 1994 to 2004........................1 1.1 Overview ...........................................................................................................1 1.2 Key findings of the 1994 and 1999 studies .........................................................2 1.3 The 2004 context: aims and method of the present study ....................................4 1.4 The samples compared .......................................................................................7 1.5 The institutions.................................................................................................10 2. Aspirations, Change and Uncertainty in the First Year.........................................12 2.1 Reasons for enrolling .......................................................................................12 2.2 Sense of purpose ..............................................................................................14 2.3 Prior to enrolment in 2004................................................................................15 2.4 Change and uncertainty ....................................................................................17 2.5 Summary..........................................................................................................20 3. Student Expectations and Adjustments to University Study .................................21 3.1 Student expectations of first year university .....................................................21 3.2 Adjusting to university assessment and standards .............................................22 3.3 Making adjustments from school to university..................................................24 3.4 Non-traditional and mature age students’ expectations of university................26 3.5 Adjusting to study in first year .........................................................................27 3.6 Summary..........................................................................................................30 4. Engaging with Learners and Learning at University.............................................31 4.1 How students spend their time..........................................................................31 4.2 Measures of student engagement in the first year..............................................34 4.3 Patterns of subgroup engagement .....................................................................47 4.4 Summary..........................................................................................................48 5. Managing Commitments in the First Year .............................................................49 5.1 Introduction......................................................................................................49 5.2 Financing of study............................................................................................49 5.3 Full-time students and paid work......................................................................52 5.4 Coping with study, employment and other commitments..................................55 5.5 Summary..........................................................................................................60 6. Perceptions of Teaching and Satisfaction with Courses.........................................61 6.1 Changes in perceptions of teaching in the first year ..........................................61 6.2 Perceptions of the course overall ......................................................................64 6.3 Summary..........................................................................................................66 7. The First Year Experience of Significant Student Groups ....................................67 7.1 Introduction......................................................................................................67 7.2 Indigenous students..........................................................................................67 7.3 The effects of socioeconomic background ........................................................68

viii

7.4 Students from urban and rural backgrounds......................................................69 7.5 Females and males ...........................................................................................70 7.6 The influence of age.........................................................................................71 7.7 Full-time and part-time enrolment ....................................................................72 7.8 Students who deferred study the previous year .................................................73 7.9 ‘First-timers’ in higher education .....................................................................74 7.10 Students from non-English speaking backgrounds............................................74 7.11 International students .......................................................................................76 7.12 Full fee-paying domestic students.....................................................................77 7.13 Summary..........................................................................................................78 8. Ten Years On: Trends, Transformations and Conclusions ..................................79 8.1 Introduction......................................................................................................79 8.2 Trends and changes in enrolment and student demographics ............................81 8.3 Developments in course enrolment patterns......................................................81 8.4 Changing expectations, goals and study habits .................................................82 8.5 Learning and teaching in the first year..............................................................82 8.6 Managing commitments ...................................................................................84 8.7 University transitions .......................................................................................85 8.8 Strategic directions and future research ............................................................86 8.9 Concluding remarks .........................................................................................90 Afterword: The First Year Experience Fifty Years Ago............................................91 References ....................................................................................................................95 Appendix 1 ...................................................................................................................97 A1.1 Survey method and data analysis......................................................................97 A1.2 Survey respondents across institutions, 1994-2004 ...........................................99 A1.3 Statistical analyses .........................................................................................100 A1.4 Reliability of previous scales..........................................................................100 A1.5 Reliability of new scales in 2004....................................................................102 Appendix 2: Glossary of Terms.................................................................................104

ix

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Proportionate comparisons between 2004 study sample and the 2003 commencing undergraduate population................................... 8

Table 2.1 Reasons for enrolling 1994-2004......................................................... 13 Table 2.2 Sense of purpose 1994-2004................................................................. 14 Table 2.3 Previous commenced or completed courses .......................................... 15 Table 3.1 ‘University just hasn’t lived up to my expectations’.............................. 22 Table 3.2 Self-assessments of average overall mark for semester one, 2004 ......... 23 Table 3.3 School and university compared, 1994-2004......................................... 25 Table 3.4 Academic Orientation, 1994-2004 ........................................................ 28 Table 3.5 Academic Application, 1994-2004 ....................................................... 29 Table 4.1 Number of days per week usually spent on campus, 1994-2004............ 32 Table 4.2 Course contact hours per week, 1994-2004 (% of students) .................. 33 Table 4.3 Indicators of student engagement at the institutional level, 1994-2004.. 36 Table 4.4 Indicators of student engagement with academic staff........................... 37 Table 4.5 Frequency of classroom engagement/disengagement behaviours ......... 37 Table 4.6 Peer engagement scale.......................................................................... 40 Table 4.7 Peer collaboration trends, 1999-2004.................................................... 40 Table 4.8 Online engagement scale ...................................................................... 42 Table 4.9 Frequency of ICT use by broad field of education, 2004....................... 44 Table 4.10 Percentages of students who had used ICTs .......................................... 46 Table 4.11 Student subgroups showing above average engagement........................ 48 Table 5.1 Students’ fee status, 2004 ..................................................................... 49 Table 5.2 Percentage of full-time and part-time enrolled students saying that source

of income was their main or only source, 2004 ..................................... 50 Table 5.3 Paid work as a source of income, 1994-2004 ........................................ 51 Table 5.4 Reasons why different age groups undertake paid work........................ 52 Table 5.5 Hours spent in paid work in a typical university week, 1994-2004........ 53 Table 5.6 Proportion of full-time students in paid work........................................ 55 Table 5.7 Student subgroups showing above average mean on comprehending

and coping scale ................................................................................... 58 Table 6.1 Perceptions of teaching, 1994-2004 ...................................................... 62 Table 6.2 Satisfaction with course of study, 1994-2004........................................ 65 Table 8.1 Comparative first year undergraduate commencing student statistics .... 79 Table 8.2 Indicative first year undergraduate commencing student enrolments..... 80 Table 8.3 How students spend their weekday time, 1994-2004............................. 85 Table A.1 Response rates by institution, 1994-2004.............................................. 98 Table A.2 Proportion of respondents by BFOE and institution, 2004..................... 99 Table A.3 Selected respondent demographic characteristics by institution........... 100 Table A.4 Reliability of existing and amended FYEQ scales, 2004 ..................... 101 Table A.5 Reliability of new FYEQ scales, 2004 ................................................ 103

The First Year Experience in Australian Universities

1

1

____________________________________________________________________ CSHE NATIONAL STUDIES OF THE

FIRST YEAR EXPERIENCE, 1994 TO 2004 1.1 Overview The Centre for the Study of Higher Education of the University of Melbourne has conducted three national studies of the first year experience in Australian universities at five-year intervals. The first study was commissioned in 1994 by the Committee for the Advancement of University Teaching (CAUT). The second study was conducted in 1999 for the Evaluations and Investigations Programme of the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. The present study was funded through the Higher Education Innovation Programme of the Department of Education, Science and Training. These three national studies, spanning a decade, have assembled a unique database on the changing character of first year students’ attitudes, expectations, study patterns and overall experiences on campus. The 1994 study was commissioned as awareness grew of the impact of student diversity in a ‘mass’ higher education system and the formative role of the first year experience in shaping student attitudes and approaches to learning was first being recognised. At the time of the 1994 study, there were 37 universities in the Australian Unified National System. Seven were selected as representative of the system and invited to participate in the project. The 1999 study was an opportunity to repeat the 1994 research, using a slightly modified questionnaire but with a student sample selected from the original seven universities. This study established new benchmarks to monitor changes in patterns of teaching and student study habits. The 2004 study followed the tradition set by the early studies. The questionnaire was modified and updated to incorporate new questions on the use of information and communication technology and to explore more fully the issue of student engagement identified in 1999. Otherwise, continuity with the 1994 and 1999 instruments was retained. For the 2004 research, we invited two additional universities to join the original sample of seven. This decision was made for three reasons: first, to improve the geographic representation within the student sample; second, to raise the proportion of school-leavers in the sample to mirror more closely their national profile; and, third, to boost the number of responses from Indigenous students with the goal of reporting specifically on their attitudes and experiences. The Australian higher education system has yet to develop a tradition of large-scale, longitudinal research such as is common in the USA for example. The first year experience studies are an exception. The ongoing federal support for the first year research has provided the opportunity to establish a national database that directly assists in the monitoring and enhancement of the quality of education provided by Australian universities. The continuity of the first year experience surveys conducted

2 The First Year Experience in Australian Universities

by the CSHE complements the valuable but limited ‘one-off’ studies that are conducted in Australian higher education each year. The institutions participating in the first year survey benefit from the specific feedback they receive on the attitudes of their students and the quality of their early experiences on campus. This information can be compared with the findings for other institutions in the system. Such comparisons provide the basis for program review and enhancement. As the system as a whole moves towards greater use of evidence of outcomes in policy and planning, benchmark data of this kind will be of increasing value. 1.2 Key findings of the 1994 and 1999 studies 1.2.1 The 1994 study A number of questions were posed for the original first year study in 1994. What do first year students these days expect of university when they commence their undergraduate studies? How do their initial experiences vary? How well do students adjust to the teaching styles and academic demands of university? How have universities responded to the needs of greater numbers of students from diverse backgrounds? The findings of the 1994 study were reported in First Year on Campus (McInnis and James, 1995). The students surveyed at the time were generally positive in outlook. Most expected and enjoyed the opportunity for intellectual challenge. They were generally sure of their reasons for attending university, and had a strong desire to do well. Most had clear aims, a strong sense of purpose and were not narrowly vocational. The overwhelming majority attached considerable importance to studying in fields in which they had an intrinsic interest. However, the survey also found that many students had negative views of teaching and their courses. In particular, it was notable that:

• barely half the students surveyed found their subjects interesting; • only 53 per cent of students thought academic staff were enthusiastic about the

subjects they were teaching; • less than half thought that teaching staff were good at explaining things; • only 41 per cent of students thought there was a positive attitude towards

learning amongst their fellow students; and • over a quarter of the students worked in isolation from their peers and were

not interested in extra-curricular activities. The females in the sample tended to have stronger academic orientation and application towards their studies, a stronger sense of purpose, and were more likely to be satisfied with their courses. The mature-age students in the sample generally reported more positive attitudes and experiences than school-leavers. School-leavers appeared to be a problematic group. As the report noted,

[t]hey were relatively less certain of their roles than older students, less diligent in their study habits, and less academically oriented. Just over a third said they were not ready to


3

choose a university course, two-thirds thought university was more demanding than school, and 45 per cent believed that the standard at university was higher than they had expected. (McInnis and James, 1995: xi)

We concluded in 1994 that greater attention should be given to the specific needs of first year students, both in the classroom and beyond. The findings documented in First Year on Campus provided this impetus for renewed attention to the quality of the transition to university and the quality of teaching and learning in the first year. 1.2.2 The 1999 study The aim of the 1999 study was to replicate the original study in the seven institutions that had participated five years previously with a view to examining trends during this period. Major questions that guided the study included:

• Had the problems of transition and adjustment experienced by students changed during the five years?

• Had the goals, study habits and level of commitment of students changed? • Were there any notable changes with respect to the quality of experience for

the diverse groups identified in the 1994 study? • Was there evidence of the impact of changes in institutional policies and

practices on the quality of the first year experience? The report of the 1999 study, Trends in the First Year Experience (McInnis, James and Hartley, 2000), highlighted the following patterns in the responses of first year students.

• Students’ reasons for coming to university remained quite stable. Intrinsic interest in a field of study was high on the agenda of most first year students.

• There had been little change in the number of students who have an uncertain start at university. One in five of the 1999 first year students hoped to change to a different course after first year, and, as in 1994, approximately one-third seriously considered deferring during first semester.

• One-third of the students who had gone direct from school to university did not feel they were ready to choose a course, and two-thirds were of the view that they were not well-prepared for university study.

• However, compared with 1994, a larger proportion of students in 1999 found university study more fulfilling than school (61 per cent) and a smaller proportion believed it was more demanding than school (57 per cent).

• On the whole, there was little change in the level of students’ academic orientation or their academic application between 1994 and 1999. However, the proportion of students who reported they got a lot of satisfaction from study decreased from 43 per cent to 40 per cent; and the proportion who found it difficult to motivate themselves to study had increased significantly, from 42 per cent to 48 per cent.

• There was a striking difference between the 1994 and 1999 responses in the increased proportion of students who were enrolled full-time and engaged in part-time work and the increase in the average number of hours students were employed. There was a nine per cent increase in the proportion of full-time students who were working part-time, and a 14 per cent increase in the mean number of hours they worked. Fewer students were spending five days per


week at university and average course contact hours dropped slightly from 1994 to 1999.

• Despite some of the negative perceptions of specific aspects of the first year experience reported in the 1999 study, there were small but significant increases in the proportions of students who were enjoying their course overall and in those who were very satisfied with their initial university experience.

Trends in the First Year Experience concluded that ‘the findings suggest a trend of less attachment and commitment to a range of aspects of university life and academic work on the part of those [students] who work longer hours in paid employment’ (McInnis, James and Hartley, 2000: xii). The report foreshadowed the likely impact on teaching, learning and the curriculum that might arise from a significantly new orientation of first year students towards the place of university in their lives:

It appears that university study occupies a smaller proportion of a growing number of students’ lives. The slight but noteworthy decline in motivation to study, the increase in the hours of paid work, and the trend towards less engagement with the university have implications for policy and practice ... (McInnis, James and Hartley, 2000: xii).

1.3 The 2004 context: aims and method of the present study Since the original first year study in 1994, the Australian higher education system has changed significantly. The policy environment has established the conditions for greater competition between universities for undergraduate students. As a result, university marketing activities have intensified and there is greater student choice in courses and subjects, more flexibility in modes of delivery and more pressure on staff to be innovative in teaching and learning. Australian universities have continued vigorously to recruit international students from South-East Asia and beyond. The internationalisation of Australian higher education has had a significant impact on student diversity and has caused reflection and adjustment in approaches to teaching and learning, the curriculum and modes of delivery. Over the past decade, universities have become more responsive to the needs of first year students during their transition to university and their first year on campus, in part as a result of the findings of the 1994 CSHE study. The number and range of transition programs and support services designed principally or primarily for first year students appear to have risen dramatically. The quality of teaching overall has also been the subject of scrutiny and enhancement as part of the wider trend towards evaluation, accountability and quality assurance for all university activities. Perhaps the most dramatic change in the last few years has been in the use of information and communication technologies in teaching and learning and other aspects of university activities. The on-campus first year student in 2004 now has online teaching and services which, while varying in intensity from institution to institution and from course to course, are an integral part of the overall university experience. Australian universities are in various stages in the adoption of university-wide learning management systems that provide academic staff and students with teaching and learning opportunities on a scale not possible in 1994.


5

The present study surveyed the final cohort of students to enter undergraduate higher education prior to major changes in the financing of undergraduate education that will commence in 2005 as a result of the review of higher education that began during 2003. The changing patterns of student finance and student debt are perhaps a salient factor in the decision-making of prospective students. Once enrolled at university, many students now undertake significant amounts of part-time paid employment. The role of part-time work in the daily lives of full-time students and the potential impact on their studies and tertiary outcomes are issues that were identified in 1999 as requiring close monitoring. 1.3.1 The survey method The First Year Experience questionnaire was mailed to a 25 per cent random sample of first year commencing undergraduate students, stratified by eleven Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) Broad Field of Education (BFOE) categories, chosen from each of the nine participating universities. The project asked institutions to select students who were on-campus students and first time entrants to higher education enrolled in bachelor, associate degree or undergraduate award programs. Both domestic and international students and both full-time and part-time students were surveyed. We asked for students in non-award and enabling programs to be excluded. Each participating institution carried out its own selection of students using detailed guidelines supplied by the project manager. One institution posted the questionnaires themselves, the others supplied the CSHE with student names and addresses. The project sought to ensure that a sufficient number of responses were collected from Indigenous students. In recognition of the relatively small proportion of Indigenous students in higher education overall, the project team decided that a population survey of the participating universities was preferable to a sample. This sample included students enrolled in non-award and enabling programs. With the three surveys of the past decade, while we have made an effort to include only ‘first-timers’ at university we have received responses from a sizeable proportion of first year students who have either commenced and not completed previous courses or are graduates from a previous course. In the analyses we have explored whether or not there are differences in the experiences and attitudes of first-time higher education students compared with the others. These findings are reported in chapter 7. The first mailout of questionnaires took place in mid July 2004. A second mailout to non- respondents occurred one month later in mid August. A small incentive of five $50 gift vouchers was offered to students who wrote an email address on a separate front cover of the survey for inclusion in a prize draw. The students were assured that the address would remain confidential and would in no way connect them to their responses. A total of 2,786 surveys (33 per cent) were returned. Of these, 2344 were useable returns, resulting in an effective response rate of 28 per cent. The response rates varied across institutions from 23 per cent in one institution to the low 30s in two others. In 1994 the response rate was considerably higher, with an overall rate of 57 per cent and rates of over 60 per cent in several institutions. The response rate dropped to 37


per cent in 1999. Declining response rates are of obvious concern in terms of representativeness and generalisability of the findings, but they are consistent with similar mailed surveys conducted by the Centre for the Study of Higher Education and other national research organizations. The project team considered using an online survey as a supplement to the mailed surveys, but this method was rejected in favour of maintaining the consistent approach to methodology so critical to maintaining the integrity of trend studies of this kind. Nevertheless, having completed this seminal 10 year analysis of the first year experience, in the future an online surveying method might be considered as part of a suite of approaches aimed at gathering the most effectively representative student data. Further details of the design of the study, the selection of samples from the nine institutions and the characteristics of the present sample of first year students are contained in Appendix 1. The questionnaire used as the basis for the previous two studies (in 1994 and 1999) was largely retained, with some important changes. A small number of items were discarded as they had failed to provide useful information in the previous survey; several questions were slightly re-worded for greater clarity and to best reflect the range of terminology used across the sector. The most significant amendments were as follows: • Inclusion of a set of questions on student identity and sense of belonging to a

learning community, including items on the role of orientation programs in fostering a sense of connectedness to the university. These items were added in recognition of the widespread introduction of orientation programs designed to enhance student affiliation and involvement from the early stages of their experience.

• A new series of items designed to monitor first year engagement with learning, peers and academic staff. Since 1994 there has been growing concern that students are becoming disengaged by virtue of increased involvement in off-campus activities, including paid work. This added dimension of the first year questionnaire allows analysis of the nature of this phenomenon and its various dimensions.

• A more comprehensive set of items on a range of information and communication technologies (ICTs) aimed at examining with greater clarity how, when and where first year students are using ICTs and how useful they deem these technologies to be for enhancing their learning.

• A new ‘managing your commitments’ section in the questionnaire recognising the well-documented rise in full-time students’ commitment to part-time paid work (see McInnis and Hartley, 2003). In addition to recording hours spent in employment, students were asked whether they believed paid work interfered with their academic performance in first year, along with their primary reasons for choosing to work. To facilitate a ten-year trend analysis of how students are spending their time, we also included in this section the ‘your most recent day on campus’ item, used in 1994, in which students record approximate hours spent on a range of activities during their most recent 24 hours on campus.

1.3.2 Interpreting the findings Appendix 2 contains a glossary of terms used for demographic student groups in this report. There is potential for some confusion when classifying students for example, according to age group. For the most part, we have adopted DEST and Australian


7

Bureau of Statistics (ABS) classifications for the purposes of analysing and interpreting the data, but in some cases it has been necessary to adapt nomenclature according to our demographic subgroup analyses. The glossary supplements definitions provided in the text. Throughout the report we note statistically significant relationships between and among subgroups and across the ten-year period under investigation. In all cases, these relationships are significant at p<0.05 or higher, unless otherwise stated. Specific data on the respective significance levels are provided in the tables. 1.4 The samples compared 1.4.1 The 2004 sample compared with the first year population The demographic subgroups in the student sample reflect the national population in several important ways. Since 2004 university census data are not yet published, comparisons between the study sample and the population are based on 2003 census data (DEST, 2004). The total number of commencing undergraduate students in Australian universities in 2003 was 216,559. This represents an increase of approximately 11 per cent since the last survey in 1999 and 36 per cent since the first study in 1994. Table 1.1 presents a summary of the proportionate comparisons between the 2004 sample and the equivalent national population. Students aged 19 and younger, the majority of whom are school-leavers (i.e. those who completed some form of secondary certificate in the year prior to the survey), comprise half of the commencing undergraduate population. This demographic subgroup is over-represented at two-thirds of the 2004 sample. Females, too, are over-represented (66 per cent) but their response rate is consistent with comparable surveys studies both in Australia and in several other developed countries. In 2004 we made a concerted effort, as noted earlier, to increase the number of responses from Indigenous students. We are pleased to note that their representation is comparable to that at the national level, even though the number of Indigenous students in the sample is small. Other equity groups are equally well represented proportionate to indicative national statistics. These include students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds and those from rural and isolated areas who are slightly over-represented in the sample. Students from non-English speaking backgrounds are over-represented in our sample. Every effort was made to ensure that the BFOE categories were appropriately represented using a stratified sampling process across institutions. As Table 1.1 shows, the proportion of the 2004 sample by fields of study is generally comparable to that of the 2003 commencing undergraduate student population. Under-represented fields include Society/Culture, Information Technology and Management/Commerce. No comparable data are available for cross-disciplinary and combined degree enrolments for undergraduate commencers.


Table 1.1 Proportionate comparisons between 2004 study sample and the 2003 commencing undergraduate population (% of total number of students)

Demographic subgroups Proportion of 2004

study sample (%) Proportion of 2003

commencing undergrad

populationa (%)

Age 19 years and younger 20-24 years 25 years and older

67 20 13

50 27 23

Gender Female Male

66 34

57 43

Enrolment Full-time Part-time

91 9

92 b 8 b

Equity groups c ATSI NESB Low SES Rural/isolated

3 d 16 d 16 d 27 d

2e

4 15 20

Fee arrangements International full-fee HECS upfront HECS deferred Domestic full-fee

8 25 63 2

23 24 73 3

Broad Field of Education Society/Culture Management/Commerce Education Health Sciences Creative Arts Engineering Information Technology Agriculture Architecture/Building Food/Hospitality Cross-disciplinary/combined degree

14 11 9 13 8 5 6 3 3 3 1 24

23 26 9 11 9 8 7 8 2 2 -- f -- g

a Figures are for Bachelors (including Graduate entry), associate degree, diploma and other award

courses unless otherwise specified. b Expressed as a proportion of internal domestic students new to higher education. c DEST equity group data (except ATSI) are reported for all commencing (including undergraduate and

postgraduate) domestic students. These data are not reported by course level, thus comparative proportions are indicative only.

d Expressed as a proportion of domestic students only in sample, using ABS postcode classifications. e Includes all commencing undergraduate students enrolled in enabling and non-award courses as they

were included in the study sample. f Only one enrolment is recorded in DEST statistics for this BFOE in the relevant course levels. g Not recorded in DEST statistics.


9

1.4.2 The 1994, 1999 and 2004 samples compared As in the previous two studies, the majority of our sample comprised school-leavers. However, there has been a small decline in the size of this group over the past five years. In 2004, 68 per cent of respondents were school-leavers compared with 73 per cent in 1999 and 72 per cent in 1994. The primary reason for this downward trend is evident in the changing age distribution of the sample over a ten-year period. The proportion of respondents aged 19 years and younger has declined since 1994, though it rose slightly in the 1999 study (1994: 71 per cent; 1999: 74 per cent; 2004: 67 per cent); while the proportion of 20-24 year old respondents reflects the most obvious increase over time (1994: 17 per cent; 1999: 13 per cent; 2004: 20 per cent). The gender distribution of the samples across the years has remained stable, with approximately two-thirds female and one-third male. The core indicators of language background and ethnicity of the students and their parents provide an opportunity to draw broad comparisons of the samples over the ten year period. The proportion of students whose parents were overseas born remains in the minority. A more detailed analysis of parents’ demographics reveals that the number of commencing undergraduates with mothers born overseas has remained unchanged at around 40 per cent, while there has been a significant decline in the proportion of students whose fathers were born outside Australia (from 44 per cent in 1994 to 41 per cent in 2004). A significantly smaller proportion of students in 2004, as compared with 1994, speak a language other than English at home (1994: 28 per cent; 1999: 23 per cent; 2004: 25 per cent). Of those 2004 respondents who reported migrating to Australia, 24 per cent did so within two years prior to the survey, while a further 38 per cent migrated within the last ten years. This compares with a significantly smaller figure of 23 per cent who reported doing so in the ten years prior to the 1999 survey. To inform our understanding of parental educational background, we asked students to report their parents’ highest level of education. There has been a significant upsurge in the proportion of students whose mothers have a degree (7 per cent in 1994 compared with 10 per cent in 2004). Comparable figures for fathers have remained substantially the same at approximately 13 per cent. Vietnam-born students were the largest single ethnic group in 1994 (3 per cent); in 1999, their numbers had fallen proportionately to two per cent and to less than half a per cent in 2004. Students from China and Malaysia (3 per cent respectively) and other Asian countries (4 per cent) represent the largest proportion of overseas-born students in first year undergraduate study in Australia. The number of students born in India (1 per cent) and China showed the most significant increases in numbers over the past ten years. Students attending government schools represent the greatest proportion in 2004 (53 per cent), as was the case in the previous two studies. The relative proportions from Catholic and Independent schools have changed somewhat, particularly in the past five years. Catholic school representatives account for 20 per cent of the sample, down from 22 per cent in 1999; while Independent school students comprise 23 per


cent of the total sample – a significant increase from 1999 (21 per cent), but comparable to 1994 figures. In 2004 for the first time we asked students to provide the postcode of their home address in order to determine SES categories (using the ABS postcode classification). Students categorised as low SES comprise 14 per cent of the study sample in 2004, in line with the national proportion. There are no comparative data from the previous studies against which to compare this. 1.5 The institutions The seven institutions that participated in the 1994 and 1999 studies and the two additional institutions that participated in the 2004 study are briefly described below. As with the earlier studies, it is not our intention to provide comparisons of performance or to rank institutions but to emphasise system-wide issues concerning the first year experience. 1.5.1 Universities included in the 1994, 1999 and 2004 studies Established University is a large and old university offering a wide range of professional programs. Most programs have high entry scores for admissions. International fee-paying students form a significant proportion of the student body. The student population is younger than other institutions in the study because of the high intake of school-leavers. New University was created to service a large industrial suburban region of a capital city. It has a number of campuses in the area, and a significant city campus. New University has made a point of developing courses to serve the local area and has a policy of open access. Suburban University had its origins in the expansion of higher education in the 1960s. It is a mid-sized university offering a wide range of courses. It includes a main campus some 30-40 minutes travel from the city and a number of smaller campuses, including several in rural areas. International University is also a well-established university. It has a large student population and is well-known for the sizeable numbers of students from Asia that is attracts. Regional University is a medium sized university in a rural location. A distinctive feature of this university is the high proportion of first year students who live in residential colleges in or near the campus, and the high proportion of distance education students in the overall student population. The University of Applied Studies has a reputation for practical courses and applied courses, partly the result of its origins as an institute of technology. It is medium to large in size, has strong industry-education links and offers courses in many professional areas. The student population profile is close to the national average.


11

Consolidated University was established in the early 1990s, however, its combined campuses have a much longer history. It is a large university, well known for its vocationally oriented programs. It offers a wide range of courses. Consolidated University has a larger than average proportion of mature aged students in first year courses and has adopted policies to encourage alternative entry pathways. 1.5.2 Universities included only in the 2004 study Evolving University was established as a university in the 1980s. It is a relatively small institution, but it serves a large constituency that includes both an urban region and a dispersed rural region. It has a large proportion of part-time students in its undergraduate population. Traditional University is a long-established institution with a wide range of degree programs. It is known for its highly competitive entry and the relatively high proportion of school-leavers in its first year intake.


2

____________________________________________________________________ ASPIRATIONS, CHANGE AND UNCERTAINTY

IN THE FIRST YEAR 2.1 Reasons for enrolling First year university students continue to consider both interest-related reasons and job-related reasons to be important in their decisions to enrol in higher education. Over the decade, there has been little change in the general pattern of responses. Table 2.1 shows the consistency of ratings on these items. (Two items included in the previous surveys–‘fewer opportunities because of the poor job market’ and ‘being with my friends’–were excluded in 2004 as they had proved to be of minor importance.) Three quarters or more of students rate ‘studying in a field that really interests me’, ‘improving my job prospects’, ‘developing my talents and abilities’ and ‘getting training for a specific job’ as important (ratings of 4 or 5 on a scale of 1-5). The most prominent item is perhaps ‘studying in a field that really interest me’; 78 per cent of first years rate it as ‘very important’ in their decision-making. The other three items did not attract such a strong response. ‘To improve my job prospects’ is very important for 54 per cent of respondents and the other two items are very important for 40-45 per cent of respondents. The two directly job-related motives, ‘improving my job prospects’ and ‘getting training for a specific job’ are more likely to be important for students who are the first in their immediate family to attend university, for students from a ‘middle’ socio-economic status (SES) background compared with a high SES, and for those from rural areas compared to urban areas. First years whose average overall first semester mark is 60 per cent or below (students we refer to in the study as ‘low achievers’), are more likely than high achievers to say ‘improving my job prospects’ is important. Females are more likely than males to agree that ‘training for a specific job’ is important.


13

Table 2.1 Reasons for enrolling 1994-2004 (%)

(1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344) Reason Not

important Important

Studying in a field that really interests me

1994 1999 2004

0 1 1

6 3 4

94 96**1 95

Improving my job prospects

1994 1999 2004

5 4 6

11 10 11

84 86*1 83*2

Developing my talents and creative abilities

1994 1999 2004

6 6 6

20 21 19

74 73 75

To get training for a specific job

1994 1999 2004

9 9 9

18 17 17

73 74 74*3

The expectations of my parents or family

1994 1999 2004

52 51 44

23 26 26

25 23 30** 2 3

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999. 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004. 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004. The two intrinsic motives (‘studying in a field that really interests me’ and ‘developing my talents and creative abilities’) are more likely to be important for mature-aged students (those aged 25 years and over) than younger students, and for high achieving students (defined as those who had an overall average mark of 70 per cent or higher in first semester). The first of the items, ‘studying in a field that really interests me’, is also related to gender, with females more likely than males to agree that it was important in their decision to enrol. The only notable change in 2004 compared to earlier surveys is an increase in the percentage of students who say that ‘expectations of my parents or family’ is an important reason. Not surprisingly, respondents agreeing with this item are more likely to be younger and enrolled full-time rather than part-time. They are also more likely to come from an urban than a rural background, to have received low Semester One marks, and to speak a language other than English at home. The proportion of 19 year-olds who speak a language other than English at home is higher in the 2004 sample than the 1999 sample. This may partly explain the increase in importance of parental expectations.


2.2 Sense of purpose Our own research and other studies on the first year experience indicate that adjustment to university is linked to having a clear direction and sense of purpose. Three items are included in the ‘sense of purpose’ scale (Table 2.2, see also Appendix 1 section A1.4). Table 2.2 suggests that at least two-thirds of first year students have an overall sense of purpose, and we assume that their sense of purpose relates to both following their interests and to occupation and employment aspirations. Table 2.2 Sense of purpose 1994-2004 (% of students)

(1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344)

Disagree Agree

I am clear about the reasons I came to university

1994 1999 2004

10 12 4

16 17 11

74 72*1 85**2 3

I know the type of occupation I want 1994

1999 2004

21 24 17

18 17 16

62 59 67**2 3

University is just marking time while I

decide my future

1994 1999 2004

72 69 69

17 18 18

11 13*1 13*3

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999. 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004. 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004. A notable feature of Table 2.2 is the dramatic increase in the percentage of respondents agreeing that they are clear about the reasons they come to university (from 72 per cent in 1999 to 85 per cent in 2004) and that they know the type of occupation they want (from 59 per cent to 67 per cent). Responses to the third item, ‘university is just marking time while I decide my future’ have remained relatively consistent over the ten year period, with 13 per cent of respondents agreeing with the statement and around 70 per cent disagreeing. The consistency of this finding is noteworthy given changes in the first year student population over the past ten years. In essence, the 2004 first year student sample reflects an increased sense of purpose and greater clarity about occupation as compared with their peers from the previous two studies. This phenomenon may be partly explained by broad cultural changes over the past five years that are likely to have influenced how commencing students view their university experience. Tertiary education has in many ways become more focused on career and job outcomes and on preparing students for employment, as is evident in university marketing activities. The overall increased level of what we call ‘sense of purpose’ may partly reflect a changing view of what university education is about.


15

The increase in the two ‘sense of purpose’ items above may also be partly accounted for by the significantly higher percentage of over 25 year old respondents in 2004 (12.6 per cent compared with 10.4 per cent in 1999). Mature aged students are more likely than younger students to be clear about the reasons they come to university (97 per cent compared with 84 per cent) and to know the type of occupation they want (81 per cent compared with 64 per cent). Other demographic factors associated with first years being more certain about their career direction were a rural rather than an urban background (75 per cent compared with 64 per cent) and mid socioeconomic rather than high socioeconomic background (71 per cent compared with 61 per cent). Perhaps not surprisingly, younger students (19 and under) are less certain about the type of occupation they want. Although a relatively small proportion of respondents agree that they are only marking time at university, it is worth noting that they tend to be those who are younger, enrolled full-time, have not achieved high marks in the first semester, come from an urban background, and who speak a language other than English at home. 2.3 Prior to enrolment in 2004 2.3.1 Previous study One third of the respondents said they had commenced or completed a university course (including enabling courses) or a VET course before 2004. Table 2.3 shows the percentage of all students who had commenced or completed a previous course. The relatively common pattern of two-way movement between the VET (vocational education and training) sector and higher eduction is reflected in the fact that one in four of those who had previously studied had completed a VET course.

Table 2.3 Previous commenced or completed courses (% of 2004 respondents) (N=2344)

Type of course commenced or completed before 2004

% of all respondents

Completed a university degree/ diploma course

3

Completed a university enabling course

4

Completed a VET course

8

Commenced a university course

11

Commenced a VET course

2

Other

5

Total

33


Predictably those who have previously commenced or completed courses are older students and likely to be currently enrolled part-time. There are some relatively easy to explain differences across the type of courses and whether they were completed or not. Those who have previously completed university courses or enabling courses are more likely to be from an overseas background. Those who have completed a VET course are more likely to be from a rural than an urban area, and from a mid rather than a high SES background. The respondents who have previously commenced but not completed a university course are more likely to be from an urban than a rural area, to be the first in their immediate family to attend university, to speak a language other than English and to have achieved low marks (60 per cent or lower) in Semester One 2004. 2.3.2 Course preference The chances of students gaining admission to their course of first preference might appear to be becoming more complex as choices increase and institutions respond to changing government priorities. However, the percentage of respondents to the three surveys receiving their first choice has not varied substantially, remaining consistently around 68-69 per cent. In 2004, 17 per cent received their second choice, seven per cent their third, three per cent their fourth and four per cent some other choice. Respondents are more likely to have enrolled in their course of first preference if they came from a rural rather than an urban background, were enrolled part-time, were aged 25 or older, were high achievers (as defined by their first semester average mark) and came from an English-language background. Institutional factors, such as the availability of courses in particular states and areas, and individual factors, such as the level and accuracy of information which students have on which to base a choice, are among the factors contributing to these differences. 2.3.3 Deferring first enrolment Students choose to defer their entry to university for a range of personal reasons. In our sample, one in nine respondents (11 per cent) had deferred their university enrolment in 2003. Deferring was associated with coming from a rural background and speaking only English at home. 2.3.4 Other current enrolments In addition to their internal enrolment at the particular institution, six per cent of respondents were enrolled in external or distance units, two per cent in external subjects or units delivered totally online, less than one per cent in OLA Open Learning units and two per cent in subjects or units in another institution. Enrolment in an external or distance course was associated with being from a rural background; being a part-time enrolled student, being female and being aged 25 years and over. Mature aged students were also more likely than younger students to be enrolled in an external subject or unit delivered wholly online, and those from a high


17

SES background are more likely than students from a mid SES background to be enrolled in subjects at another institution. 2.4 Change and uncertainty Each survey has included questions aimed at exploring the degree to which first year students are uncertain about their direction or their future involvement in tertiary study and the factors contributing to uncertainty. 2.4.1 Course and enrolment change in 2004 Students who do not receive their first course preference are likely to experience some frustration and dissatisfaction. It seems that, at least for the first years, the majority of students decide to stick with the course and institution they have been admitted to and make the most of it while they wait for further opportunities. Only seven per cent of respondents changed their course after their first enrolment and three per cent changed institution. The proportions are unchanged from the 1999 survey. However, in the longer term, there is likely to be more swapping of courses (see section 2.4.4 below). Unsurprisingly, compared with low achievers, high achievers are less likely to have changed course or institution after commencing in 2004. 2.4.2 Withdrawing from subjects or units Nearly one in every five students (18 per cent) in the sample had withdrawn from some subjects or units by July-August 2004. Of this group, just over half (53 per cent) had withdrawn from one, 29 per cent had withdrawn from two and the remainder from three or more subjects or units. In the report of the 1999 survey, we noted that the proportion of students who withdrew from a subject (18 per cent) was much higher than in 1994 (8.8 per cent) and that this apparent trend needed monitoring. The 2004 survey shows no increase from 1999; this rate may have stabilised, at least temporarily. Respondents enrolled part-time are almost twice as likely as full-timers to have withdrawn from a subject or unit (31 per cent compared with 16 per cent). Students aged 25 and over are also much more likely than under 25 year olds to have withdrawn from a subject or unit (29 per cent compared with 16 per cent). However, very young students (19 years and under) do not tend to withdraw from subjects or units. There are likely to be a number of factors contributing to this pattern. Numerous studies have identified a range of pressures which older students face as they try to juggle work and family commitments as well as study commitments. A greater sense of purpose may also contribute to making more realistic decisions about what is useful and/ or achievable. It was beyond the scope of this project to investigate further the possible causal relationships between these factors. Low achievement is related to withdrawing from a subject or unit; 26 per cent of low achievers report withdrawing from at least one subject or unit whereas 15 per cent of high achievers had done so. Low achievers also withdraw from a larger number of units, on average, than do high achievers.


2.4.3 Thinking about deferring There is continuing concern about the number of first year students who discontinue either during the year or at the end of first year. Our survey respondents were all currently enrolled, however, in each of the three surveys, we asked whether they had thought seriously about discontinuing/ deferring at any stage in first semester. In 1994 and 1999, 33 per cent of respondents said they had; in 2004, the figure was 27.6 per cent. This is a significant difference overall, and there are corresponding decreases in the percentage of females (but not males) saying they seriously considered deferring and decreases for respondents aged 19 years and 25 years and over. The decreases are perhaps another indication of the difference between the 2004 respondents and those in the previous two studies. The general finding reported in Trends in the first year experience in Australian universities (McInnis, James and Hartley 2000) was confirmed in the 2004 survey. Uncertainty about continuing with an enrolment is generally the result of a number of inter-related factors. There is no single factor that stands out as the most important (Table 2.4). Only one, ‘emotional health’, was rated as important by more than 50 per cent of respondents. We are aware that the term ‘emotional health’ could encompass a wide range of situations and is likely to be variously interpreted, but it is apparently a term which students, and especially female students (see below), can identify with and respond to. Forty-two per cent rated ‘I wanted to change courses’ as important; 39 per cent ‘financial reasons’ and 36 per cent said that ‘I thought I might fail’ was an important consideration. The long list of reasons noted in the ‘other’ category in this question also reflects the variety of individual situations and circumstances which lead students to consider deferring. The most notable changes from the 1999 survey are an increase in the proportion of respondents saying that emotional health and financial reasons are important considerations in thinking about deferring and fewer saying that disliking study, university not being what they expected and paid work commitments are important. Fewer students cited dislike of study and feeling that university was not what they expected, suggesting that this cohort is somewhat better prepared for tertiary education and has a clearer appreciation of what university requires. The complex interactions between paid work and commitment to study will be explored more fully in Chapter 5. The substantial drop in those citing paid work commitments as important in their considering deferral (from 21 per cent to 12 per cent), even though financial reasons played a part in the thinking of about 40 per cent of respondents, suggests either that actual conflicts about paid work commitments were being managed by most or that some conflicts about paid work are subsumed in the category of ‘emotional health’ reasons. As might be expected, low achieving first year students are more likely than high achieving students to have seriously considered deferring during 2004; 44 per cent had done so compared with 21 per cent of high achieving students. There appear to be a number of linked factors that contribute to their uncertainty about continuing.


19

Compared with high achieving students, the lower achievers are more likely to identify a wide range of factors contributing to their uncertainty about continued study. These included financial difficulties, paid work commitments, problems with daily travel, family commitments, wanting to change courses, disliking study and fear of failure. Table 2.4 Reasons for considering deferring, 1999-2004 (% of students)

(1999, n=840; 2004, n=638)

not relevant

neutral important/ very imp.

Emotional health 1999 2004

42 36

12 12

46 52

I wanted to change courses 1999

2004 47 45

11 13

42 42

Financial reasons 1999

2004

55 46

11 15

34 39

I thought I might fail

1999 2004

48 51

15 13

37 36

University wasn’t what I expected

1999 2004

45 48

19 24

36 28

I disliked studying

1999 2004

43 46

19 27

37 27

Physical health

1999 2004

64 62

10 11

26 27

Problems with daily travel

1999 2004

71 70

10 11

19 19

Paid work commitments

1999 2004

71 78

8 10

21 12

Family commitments

1999 2004

75 73

9 10

16 17

I found employment

1999 2004

82 83

8 7

11 10

Females are more likely than males to say that emotional health and physical health are important reasons for considering deferring, and males are more likely to cite disliking study and thinking they might fail. Part-time students are more likely than full-time students to cite family commitments and paid work commitments as important factors.


2.4.4 Hoping to make changes next year At the time of the survey, seven per cent of respondents had already changed their course since the beginning of the year, 3 per cent had changed the institution at which they were studying and 18 per cent had withdrawn from a subject or unit. Almost one in five (19 per cent) wanted to change their course or institution the following year, a figure unchanged from 1999. In contrast to the tendency for older students rather than younger ones to withdraw from units or subjects in their first year, it is the younger students who tend to stay with their original enrolment and plan later changes. 2.5 Summary As noted in the report of the 1999 survey, a proportion of first year students begin their university study in a ‘somewhat conditional and uncertain way’. Our 2004 findings indicate that there has been little change in this proportion for the past five years, despite an apparent increase in sense of purpose. It seems that most younger students who do not receive their first preference or who are unsettled for some other reason decide to persevere and make the most of their first year. A minority of students make changes during the year and others are planning changes in the following year. The drop in the proportion of commencing students who have considered deferring is statistically significant.


21

3 ____________________________________________________________________

STUDENT EXPECTATIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS TO UNIVERSITY STUDY

3.1 Student expectations of first year university First year students’ expectations of what it will be like to be a university student play a determining role in their attitudes towards study and in the quality of their experience. Since 1994 there has been a small but significant decline in the proportion of students feeling that university has not lived up to their expectations (18 per cent in 1994 to 16 per cent in 2004). It would seem that students are increasingly well informed about what to expect at university. However, there are a number of noteworthy subgroup differences which have not been noted in previous reports (see Table 3.1). In 2004 females were significantly more in agreement than males with respect to university realities matching their expectations. Age differences did not emerge in this regard. By contrast, significantly more international students’ expectations were not met in their first year as compared with their domestic Australian peers. Unmet expectations seem to feature in students’ thoughts about deferring or changing courses or institutions with students in each of these groups expressing notably higher levels of agreement that university has not met their expectations. Expectations in the first year are also connected to achievement levels. Lower achievers tend to feel more strongly about unmet expectations than their higher achieving counterparts. The experience of students in combined degree programs also differs from those in single degree programs in this respect, with higher proportions of combined degree enrolees agreeing that university has not lived up to their expectations. Cross-institutional comparisons reveal relatively homogeneous responses, with two exceptions. Students at Regional University, with its proportionately high numbers of residential college students, are significantly more in agreement that university has lived up to their expectations than are their peers in other institutions sampled. By contrast, International University with its sizeable numbers of students from South-East Asia comprises a greater proportion of students who feel that university has not met their expectations.


Table 3.1 ‘University just hasn’t lived up to my expectations’:

Comparative mean scores by selected student group, 2004 (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree)

Mean

Males Females

2.45 2.32*

Age 19 or younger Age 20 or older

2.38 2.34

Full fee-paying international students Domestic Australian students

2.70 2.33**

Combined degree program enrolees Single degree program enrolees

2.39 2.25*

Low achievers High achievers

2.66 2.22**

Students hoping to change course next year Students not planning to change course next year

2.61 2.30**

Students hoping to change institution next year Students not planning to change institution next year

2.78 2.30**

Students considering deferral of study Students not considering deferral

2.85 2.18**

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 3.2 Adjusting to university assessment and standards One of the watershed experiences in the first year is receiving feedback on the first major piece of assessment. For many students, the most pressing assessment questions include ‘how do I know what is expected of me?’ and ‘what does a good assignment in this subject look like?’. These questions begin to be addressed once graded assessment tasks are returned. In a two-part survey question students were asked to estimate their average overall mark for first semester. They were then asked whether this mark was higher, lower or the same as they expected when they started their first year. Table 3.2 gives the percentage of students placing themselves in each grade category. In 2004, the mean self-reported overall mark for first semester is slightly higher than among the sample who responded in 1999.


23

Table 3.2 Self-assessments of average overall mark for semester one, 2004

(N=2 344)

% of students

Less than 50% 2

50-60% 17

61-70% 35

71-80% 34

81-100% 12

While the limitations of self-reported grades are evident, there was no obvious gain in over- or under-estimating achievement for the purposes of this exercise since responses were anonymous. The grade distribution also gives us some confidence that they are realistic assessments. Our interest lies in how the achievements relate to students’ expectations about their performance at the beginning of the first year. Almost half (48 per cent) said their average mark for the semester was about the same as they expected; 18 per cent said it was higher and 34 per cent said that it was lower than expected. More than one-third of students, therefore, are likely to have confronted the reality that they are not performing as well as expected. These findings are a salient reminder of the sometimes traumatic adjustments required of first year students faced with revising their achievement expectations or reassessing their efforts. A ten year trend analysis of these patterns shows that significantly more students in first year are having their grade expectations confirmed, as compared with the 1994 sample. Conversely, those receiving marks lower than expected comprise a steadily decreasing proportion of the sample over the past ten years. There may be several explanations for this trend including enhanced efforts on the part of universities to educate students regarding assessment expectations and provide support structures in the first year. Schools may also play a part in preparing students; however the respective contributions of these factors is not clear at this stage. To supplement these findings, we asked first year school-leavers (i.e. those students who had completed secondary school in the year previous to the survey) whether the standard of work at university was much higher than they expected. Over the past decade the proportion of students agreeing that this is the case has declined significantly from 45 per cent (in 1994) to 41 per cent (in 2004). The most notable of these changes is among female school-leavers. There may be several explanations for these trends. One is that the Year 12 curriculum across states has undergone well documented change which may have resulted in more effective preparation of students for university. Another explanation may be found in the increasingly widespread collaboration between universities and the school sector in matters pertaining to curriculum assessment so as to enhance the school to university transition process. Low achieving school-leavers in the first year at university are more likely than high achievers to feel that the standard of work is higher than they expected. Similarly,


international school-leavers typically find the standard of work exceeds their expectations more so than do local students in the first year. Across disciplines, the two fields with the greatest proportion of students finding the work standard higher than expected were Management/Commerce and Engineering. The Education BFOE (Broad Field of Education) comprised the lowest proportion of students in this category. 3.3 Making adjustments from school to university Concern about the ‘gulf’ between students’ experience of school and their university experience was expressed in the First year on campus (1995) report. We now have ten year trend data to assist in monitoring changes in that perceived gulf and whether there are differences in the ways different subgroups of school-leavers adjust to university study. The adjustment experiences of mature age students are documented in the next section and at relevant points throughout this chapter. The series of questions addressed to school-leavers has remained substantially the same over the decade, though three items were added in 2004 reflecting interest in the apparent increase in pressure on Year 12 students to go to university and the perceived quality of course-related advice provided by school teachers (see Table 3.3). The proportion of school-leavers in our sample has declined from 72 per cent of the sample in 1994 to 68 per cent in 2004. This pattern mirrors the national figures where school-leaver (that is, students aged 19 years and younger) representation in the first year has dropped from 54 per cent (1994) to 50 per cent (2004) nationally. The gap between school and university identified in 1994 continued to exist in 1999 with student beliefs about the relatively unclear links between school and university remaining static over that five year period. In 1999, there remained around two-thirds of school-leavers who believed that their final school year was not a very good preparation for the study they were doing and who did not believe their subjects at university clearly built on their study at school. Around one-third of school-leavers considered themselves unprepared to choose a university course on leaving secondary school. By contrast, the ten-year trend data show a significant increase from 34 to 42 per cent in the proportion of students agreeing that their university courses build on school subjects. A significant rise of the same proportions is evident in response to the question of whether the final school year was a good preparation for university study. Admittedly, students agreeing to these closer school-university connections remain in the minority. Nevertheless, the trends are promising and warrant continued monitoring in the future. In 2004, a somewhat greater proportion of students believes their parents have little understanding of what they do at university. Significantly more males and low achievers in the sample express this view. A comparatively smaller group of school-leavers feels pressured by the financial commitment their parents made in sending them to university. Notably, the low achievers say they feel this pressure much more than high achievers. Not surprisingly, the pressure experienced by full fee-paying


25

international students is significantly greater in this regard than it is for domestic HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme) students. It seems that along with the good course advice that over half the students believe they received from school teachers, significantly fewer students than in 1994 would opt for starting university with a general first year. The decline in the proportion of students advocating a general first year course may be partly attributed to the increased societal and economic pressures students feel to go to university, earn a degree and be as employable as possible. In this context, a general first year course may be interpreted as a waste of valuable time. It may also be deemed unnecessary by virtue of the fact that students perceive themselves to be increasingly well informed through such avenues as web-based course guides and greater attention on the part of many universities to provide key information at early points of contact with potential students. It should be noted, however, that achievement plays a role in this regard. Significantly greater proportions of low achievers felt ill-prepared to choose a university course and say they would have preferred a general first year of study at university. International students, too, agree to the need for a general first year significantly more than their locally based peers.

Table 3.3 School and university compared, 1994-2004 (% of students agreeing that a statement is important)

Item 1994 (n=2897)

1999 (n=1910)

2004 (n=1602)

I feel pressured by the financial commitment made by my parents to send me to university

25 25 23

I would have preferred starting with a general first year at university before choosing a specific course

28 23**1 25*3

The standard of work expected at university is much higher than I expected

45 43 41*3

I was not really ready to choose a university course on leaving secondary school

34 34 30*2 **3

My final school year was a very good preparation for the study I am now doing

36 34 43**2 3

My parents have little understanding of what I do at university

31

31

32

The subjects at university clearly build on my study at school

34

33

42**2 3

At my school there was a lot of pressure to go to university

-- -- 49

During Year 12 I really wanted to go to university

-- -- 76

I received good advice from teachers at my school about choosing my course

-- -- 52

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999. 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004. 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004.


Close to three quarters of school-leavers in the sample had strong aspirations to go to university when they were in Year 12. The gender difference on this item was significant in favour of females. Similarly, larger proportions of high achievers as compared with low achievers indicated they really aspired to go to university during their final year of schooling. Some subgroup differences pertaining to transition from school to university emerged from the data based on students’ BFOE. These include: • Society/Culture and Management/Commerce students experienced most pressure

to go to university. • Education students were most likely to perceive that they received good course

advice from school teachers. • Engineering and Food/Hospitality students say they feel most pressured by their

parents’ financial commitment to send them to university. • Students who would prefer a general first year at university more than others are

those in: Management/Commerce and Engineering. • Education and Health students are least in favour of a general first year. • Students in Science feel most strongly that parents have little understanding of

what they do at university. • Science and Engineering students most commonly agree that university subjects

clearly build on their school study, while the opposite is true for students in Society/Culture, Creative Arts and Architecture.

• Students in the Society and Culture field are the ones most strongly in agreement about their aspirations to go to university during Year 12.

3.4 Non-traditional and mature age students’ expectations

of university For the purposes of comparing the experience of school-leavers (aged 19 years and younger) with older students in the cohort, we define students aged 20 to 24 years as non-traditional age and those 25 years and older as belonging to the mature age category for first year undergraduate study. In most cases we group these students together under the heading of non-traditional age students, but in Chapter 7, specific mention is made of mature age students, in harmony with the DEST classifications. There has been an increase over the past decade in the proportion of respondents in the non-traditional and mature age categories for first year undergraduate study. In terms of student expectations regarding grades in the first year, age plays a key role. Significantly more non-traditional age students received marks higher than they expected during the first semester of study. This may reflect the general lack of confidence experienced by older students who often feel daunted at the thought of sharing classes with younger students after returning to study after years of being involved in home or work settings. Non-traditional age students are also known for their diligence and it is thus perhaps not surprising that their marks are higher than they expected. A slightly greater proportion of students aged 20 and above appear in the top average mark bracket (81-100 per cent), though this difference is not statistically significant.


27

On the item ‘university just hasn’t lived up to my expectations’, mature age students are slightly more positive about the way university has met their expectations than are school-leavers (item mean: 2.08 for mature age students as compared with 2.38 for school leavers, with 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). This may be attributed to a range of factors including level of maturity, life experience and attitude to study of non-traditional age students. Further age differences are evident in the way first year students apply themselves and adjust to the academic demands of first year. These are highlighted in the sections to follow. 3.5 Adjusting to study in first year 3.5.1 Academic orientation Over the past decade the national study of the first year experience has monitored students’ adjustment to academic life through a series of items known as the ‘academic orientation scale’ (see Appendix 1 section A1.4). Items comprising this scale in 2004 are shown in Table 3.4. There has been a slight upward shift in students’ attitude toward the intellectual challenge of their study, with closer to two-thirds enjoying this aspect of their study. A particularly interesting ten-year trend is evident in students’ views on lectures and their role in stimulating academic interest. While the change from 1994 to 1999 was of little consequence, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of students responding positively to this item. The shift is a result of fewer students expressing neutral or uncertain views on this subject. The positive interpretation of these findings is that lecturers are becoming increasingly adept at engaging students through a range of techniques including the use of multimedia and information technologies. Institutions have expended considerable energy in the past decade to enhance the quality of large class teaching and this result may reflect some of the fruits of these efforts. On the other hand, the findings must be treated with some caution in light of the close to 30 per cent response rate to this survey. The findings do not necessarily reflect the experiences of those students who did not respond to the survey through lack of engagement with university in general. The improvement in the overall level of student satisfaction with study is a finding that should be gratifying for the higher education sector. Concern was expressed about this in the 1999 report, but since that time the pattern has been reversed showing a significant increase over ten years in the proportion of students agreeing that they find their study satisfying. Once again, more detailed qualitative study of the reasons for this positive change is warranted.


Table 3.4 Academic Orientation, 1994-2004 (% of students)

(1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344) Disagree Agree

I enjoy the intellectual challenge of subjects I am studying Lectures often stimulate my interest in the subjects I get a lot of satisfaction from studying

1994 1999 2004 1994 1999 2004 1994 1999 2004

12 12 12

20 19 19

22 25 18

27 27 25

35 35 31

35 35 33

61 61 63 44 46 50*2 **3 43 40*1 49**2 3


3.5.2 Academic Application While the academic orientation items gauge students’ satisfaction with and enjoyment of academic endeavours early in their university experience, it is also important to monitor their behaviours and attitudes towards study during the adjustment process. Table 3.5 shows two indicative items depicting significant shifts in students’ approaches to their study over the past ten years (see also Appendix 1 section A1.4). The statistically significant swing in 1999 to 48 per cent of students who found it difficult to motivate themselves has been reversed to a figure of just over one-third of students. This is a reassuring trend if indeed it is representative of the experience of the majority of first year students in the country. However, some of the subgroup differences on this item suggest otherwise. Males are significantly more likely to report having difficulty motivating themselves to study in first year. An age differential is also evident, with school-leavers 19 years and younger expressing most difficulty in terms of their motivation. International students are somewhat more inclined than their local peers to be motivated, as are low achieving students. Involvement in paid work does not appear to have a significant impact on students’ motivation in the first year, nor is there any apparent relationship between time spent on campus and first year students’ motivation. The 2004 findings indicate a significant increase in the proportion of students - to almost 30 per cent - who regularly seek the advice and help of teaching staff at their universities. It may be that there is greater encouragement for students to engage in such interactions with academic staff through orientation activities and as a result of concerted efforts to enhance the quality of teaching, including improving the


29

accessibility of teaching staff in the first year. Once more, however, various subgroup differences are worthy of note. As one might expect, high achievers are significantly more likely to seek such advice than are low achievers. International full fee-paying students report seeking help from teaching staff more than their domestic counterparts, as do non-traditional age students. There are few significant differences in this respect across fields of education.

Table 3.5 Academic Application, 1994-2004 (% of students) (1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344)

Disagree Agree

I find it difficult to get myself motivated to study I regularly seek the advice and assistance of the teaching staff

1994 1999 2004 1994 1999 2004

28 23 36

49 50 36

31 29 28

30 31 36

42 48**1 36**2 3 20 19 29**2 3

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004 Other indicators of students’ application to their academic work include several new items on the 2004 survey designed to provide a snapshot of student views, behaviours and experiences in a range of areas related to their academic experience at university. As in previous years, we asked whether students have a quiet place to do their university study. In 2004, the vast majority (70 per cent) say they do have such a place, though 11 per cent do not. This figure is significantly down on 1994 when more than three-quarters of first year students (77 per cent) reported having an appropriately quiet place to do their study. We also asked students about the frequency of behaviours which do not necessarily constitute study, but which arguably relate to their academic involvement. The vast majority frequently or sometimes (92 per cent) buy books from the university bookstore. Only eight per cent have never done so. By contrast, a smaller proportion of students borrowed library books and one quarter have never borrowed a book. Just over one-third have respectively borrowed sometimes or frequently. Library borrowers tend to predominate in the social sciences (i.e. Education, Society/Culture and the Creative Arts), though students in the Health sciences come a close second. Females and non-traditional age students tend to borrow library books most frequently, as do international students and those in the higher achievement bands. Two-thirds of first year students agree that the library collection is adequate for their needs, but ten per cent disagree. Notably, those who frequented the library most tended to be least satisfied with the adequacy of the library collection. This group


included international and non-traditional age students. Across BFOEs, students in Information Technology courses were most likely to express dissatisfaction with the adequacy of the library collection at their university. Clearly, no item is of itself sufficiently indicative of students’ application to their studies, but taken together the items discussed in this section provide an informative picture of the range of activities in which students engage that may support their learning. 3.6 Summary Findings suggest that, on the whole, first year students are increasingly well informed about what to expect at university. For the majority, university is living up to these students’ expectations. However the pattern is not uniform across all subgroups. Notably, international students are less satisfied than domestic students regarding expectations being met and combined degree enrolees are less satisfied in this regard than those in single degree courses. With respect to grade expectations, the trend data indicate increasing numbers of first year students receiving grades consistent with what they expected. Some of these findings may be explained by enhanced collaborative efforts between universities and schools to better prepare students for university study. Other contributing factors may be the proliferation of web-based course information available to students prior to enrolment and increased efforts during orientation programs to prepare students for university life and study. On all items of the academic orientation scale, students report higher levels of satisfaction and intellectual stimulation from study compared with the previous two studies. These trends are reassuring signs of the effect of university efforts to better support first year students.


31

4

____________________________________________________________________ ENGAGING WITH LEARNERS AND

LEARNING AT UNIVERSITY Since the 1994 national study of the first year experience there has been a growing appreciation of the importance of student engagement in higher education. Students’ engagement with learning and the learning community is now internationally recognised as a prominent indicator of the nature and quality of the first year student experience. Engagement refers to the time, energy and resources students devote to activities designed to enhance their learning at university. These activities typically range from a simple measure of time spent on campus or studying, to in- and out-of-class learning experiences that connect students to their peers in educationally purposeful and meaningful ways. Equally important as a topic of study are factors contributing to potential disengagement during the first year. Attempts to draw causal connections in this regard must be treated cautiously, to say the least. Nevertheless, some research has identified a link between apparent disengagement and the increased numbers of hours students devote to paid work off campus, which in turn potentially draw students away from campus-based learning communities. This combination of factors was noted in the 1999 study which observed: ‘a trend of less attachment and commitment to a range of aspects of university life and academic work on the part of those who work longer hours in paid employment’. The 1999 first year data also suggested a ‘slight but noteworthy decline in motivation to study, the increase in the hours of paid work, and the trend towards less engagement with the university’ (McInnis et al., 2000, p.xii). In response to these findings, the 2004 survey included several new items to develop a deeper understanding of first year student engagement in the early part of the 21st century. This chapter opens by documenting the simplest quantifiable indicator of engagement - time spent on activities directly connected to student learning including course contact hours and time spent studying. The focus then moves to measures of engagement at the institutional level, with peers and academics and through online means of communication. 4.1 How students spend their time 4.1.1 Time on campus To contextualise the discussion of the extent of time students devote to classes and study, we begin with a sketch of students’ patterns of attendance on campus during the average university week. In 1994, 78 per cent of the sample usually spent four or five days per week on campus. When we asked the same question in 1999, the figure had declined by 11 percentage points. The apparent downward trend has not continued in 2004 however, with 73 per cent of first year students now spending four to five days on campus. Table 4.1 sets out the comparison over a decade. In 2004, students spend slightly more time on average on campus compared with their 1999


counterparts. The mean number of days per week spent on campus in 2004 is 4.18 compared with 4.38 days on average in 1994 and 4.07 in 1999.

Table 4.1 Number of days per week usually spent on campus, 1994-2004 (% of students) (1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344)

1 day 2 days 3 days 4 days 5 days 6 days 7 days

1994 1999 2004

1

3

3

4

6

4

12

21

16

31

31

34

47

36

39

2

1

2

4

3

2

There is considerable variation in time spent on campus across certain demographic subgroups. As expected, first year students in paid employment spend significantly fewer days on campus (4.0 days) than their non-employed peers (4.4 days). Males tend to spend slightly more time on campus (4.3 days) than females in the first year (4.1 days). Despite the introduction of various communications technologies, there remains a strong argument in favour of the link between students’ attendance on campus and their involvement with and integration into the learning community. Our findings support this argument, showing that students who spend fewer days on campus are also those least likely to ask questions in class and contribute to class discussions. Conversely, those who typically spend four to five days on campus are significantly more likely to study and discuss their course material with peers. First year students who spend more time on campus are also significantly more likely to report that they feel as if they belong and are part of the learning community than those who spend fewer days per week on campus. Not surprisingly, they are also more positive about their identity as a university student, are more likely to have made one or two close friends at university and are more involved in extra-curricular activities. It is important to note, however, that the direction of causality between these factors is entirely uncertain. Students who agree that it is possible to miss classes because the notes are on the web are less likely than their peers to spend time on campus. These signs of student engagement, taken together, support the contention that maintaining a campus presence is conducive to enhancing students’ engagement with the learning community. Of course, campus attendance is not always a practical option, particularly for those enrolled part-time or in distance mode. Nevertheless the evidence supports the many attempts made by academic and support staff to encourage some on-campus involvement by these students; for instance, by arranging blocks of time for occasional face-to-face interaction.


33

4.1.2 Course contact hours The mean number of course contact hours per week for full-time first year students has declined steadily over the past decade from 17.6 hours in 1994 to 17.1 in 1999 and an average of 16 contact hours per week in 2004. Table 4.2 illustrates this trend in more detail, showing the concomitant rise in the proportion of students with 15 or fewer mean course contact hours. This is accompanied by a notable fall over time in the proportion of students with course contact hours between 21 and 30 hours per week. Students committed to part-time paid employment have significantly fewer mean weekly contact hours (15.5 hours per week) than non-employed peers (16.8). Males in the sample reported significantly more course contact hours per week than females. This may be partly attributed to the course contact patterns of BFOEs which reveal that fields of Engineering and Agriculture in which males are over-represented (James et al., 2003) have higher than average course contact hours. The fields of Education and Society/Culture with female over-representation tend to have the lowest average number of contact hours. The number of hours students spend in class is inversely related to their self-reported academic achievement with lower achievers typically devoting more time in class than high achievers (16.5 compared with 15.5 hours per week).

Table 4.2 Course contact hours per week, 1994-2004 (% of students) (1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344)

1-5

hrs 6-10 hrs

11-15 hrs

16-20 hrs

21-25 hrs

26-30 hrs

31+ hrs

1994

2 10 30 24 21 9 2

1999 2 10 36 24 20 7 2

2004

4 11 39 25 16 4 1

Given that in 2004 students typically spend less time in formal class settings, yet on average slightly more time on campus than in 1999, there is some evidence to suggest that they are using time on campus to access email and other online facilities such as word processing and printing facilities which are now integral to students’ university study and life. The evidence comes in the form of data showing that those who spent four to five days per week on campus were significantly more satisfied with their access to computers at university than those who spent fewer days. This relationship is yet to be fully explored but we raise it here to accentuate the complex and changing nature of student engagement with the university experience. 4.1.3 Time spent on private study In 2004 we asked students to estimate the number of hours devoted to private study and use of the web for study and research related to their course. There are no direct comparison items in either of the previous two studies.


First year students in 2004 devote an average of 11 hours per week to study. In view of the fact that they spend on average 16 hours per week in class it is clear that the typical expectation that students devote at least two hours of private study for every one hour of class time is not in operation among the students in this sample. The minimum “two for one” rule of thumb is acknowledged in the literature as a factor contributing to students’ engagement (Kuh, 2003) with their study. Some important relationships emerging from the data include: • Non-traditional age students devote significantly more time on average to private

study (13.3 hours per week compared with 9.9 hours for school-leavers); • International students devote significantly more hours to study (14.2) than

domestic students (10.7 per week); • High achievers study longer hours than lower achievers (12.4 compared with 8.9

hours per week); • As might be expected, those who spend more time on campus devote significantly

more time to study each week (11.4 compared with 10.6 hours per week); • Students in paid employment study on average significantly less (10.5 hours) than

their non-employed peers (11.8 hours per week). Students used the web for study and research approximately 4.2 hours per week on average. More than two-thirds of first year students frequently use the web for study purposes and only three per cent say they never use the web for this purpose. Key findings on this aspect of students’ study patterns include: • Somewhat unexpectedly, non-traditional age students (aged 20 and over) use the

web for study significantly more than school-leavers. The reverse is true in the case of using the web for recreational purposes such as internet chatrooms and the like.

• Students in paid work use the web significantly less per week than non-employed peers (4 hours compared with 4.4 hours per week);

• Females tend to use the web for study and research more than males (4.3 compared with 3.8 hours per week);

• There is little difference between high and low achievers’ use of the web for this purpose;

• International full fee-payers make a significantly greater use of the web for study than domestic students (5.9 compared with 4 hours);

• Students in the Health and Information Technology fields of education use the web for study more than those in other disciplines, and the Society/Culture students do so significantly less.

4.2 Measures of student engagement in the first year Recording the amount of time spent on various activities pertaining to student learning is a widely accepted measure of engagement. However it tells us little of the nature or quality of students’ engagement. This section reports on a range of factors known to be influential in facilitating student engagement, including institutional factors, the role of academic staff and classroom practices, and the role of peers and social involvement in the first year. A feature of the 2004 study is the inclusion of


35

several additional survey items aimed at exploring the role of ICTs in first year students’ engagement. 4.2.1 Institutional factors and student engagement The 1999 report provided descriptive data on a range of institutional efforts to address the issue of first year transition to university. In 2004 we sought student feedback on the perceived impact of orientation programs on their experience and sense of belonging within the university community. Almost half of the first years believed that the orientation programs they had attended provided them with a good introduction to the university. Somewhat fewer students (40 per cent) felt that these programs helped them to develop a sense of belonging in the university community. Perhaps more concerning is the view of a quarter of the students sampled that the orientation programs did not play a role in helping them to feel that they belonged at university. While we recognise the developmental nature of student identity and the associated sense of belonging, the initial orientation programs nevertheless play a key role in welcoming students into the learning community. These institution-level programs are most successful if accompanied by department or faculty-based initiatives designed to support students within their disciplinary subgroups, however it was beyond the scope of the present study to explore student responses to such initiatives. In addition to providing orientation programs, institutions can enhance students’ engagement with learning by ensuring that they receive adequate advice about subject choices, thereby working to ensure that students find themselves in courses about which they are well informed and prepared. The majority of students were satisfied with the subject choices they had made. However, one-third said they did not receive helpful advice in this respect and a quarter were dissatisfied with the range of subject choices they had at the start of their first year. If students perceive that they have been well advised academically and feel satisfied with their choices, they are more likely to be committed to their studies and academically engaged. Universities may not have a great deal of control over the range of subjects available to first year students but they can intervene early to ensure that support is in place to advise and guide students in their decision-making.


Table 4.3 Indicators of student engagement at the institutional level, 1994-

2004 (% of students) (1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344) Disagree Agree

I was given helpful advice when choosing

my subjects/units

2004 34 33 33

I am satisfied with the subject choices I made this year

2004 12 27 61

I was satisfied with the range of subjects/ units from which I could choose this year

2004 25 26 49

I feel like I belong to the university community

2004 16 33 51

I really like being on my university campus 2004

12 28 60

I really like being a university student 1994 1999 2004

8 7 8

18 19 17

74 74 75

I am not particularly interested in the extra-curricular activities or facilities provided

1994 1999 2004

44 43 37

28 31 31

28 27 32*2 3

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999. 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004. 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004. Students’ involvement in both social and academic activities contributes to their engagement. It is a little disturbing therefore to see the steady decrease in the number of students interested in participating in extra-curricular activities at university. A further factor contributing to engagement is students’ sense of belonging to the university community. In 2004 we asked students for their views on this and while half do feel that they belong, a disturbing 16 per cent do not feel as positive about their experience. A more positive finding is that the majority really like being identified as university students and like being on their respective campuses. School-leavers aged 19 years and under report a significantly greater sense of belonging than their older peers, while students from rural areas feel more connected than city-based students. This may be partly attributed to the large number of rural students in residential colleges, which have strong support networks and to the character of the particular institutions in which rural students are concentrated. 4.2.2 Engaging with academic staff Academic staff play a key role in contributing to students’ engagement with their study and the learning community as a whole. It is gratifying to note an increase over the past decade in the numbers of first year students who regularly approach academic


37

staff for advice. In 2004 we added a survey item intended to serve as a simple proxy for students’ sense of personal connectedness to those who teach them at university. Two-thirds of students were confident that at least one teacher knew their name. It is perhaps a concern that one-third do not share such confidence towards the end of their first year at university.

Table 4.4 Indicators of student engagement with academic staff (% of students) (1994, N=4 028; 1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344)

Disagree Agree

I feel confident that at least one of my

teachers knows my name

2004 23 11 66

I regularly seek advice or help from academic staff

1994 1999 2004

49 50 36

30 31 35

20 19 29**2 3

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999. 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004. 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004. 4.2.3 Engaging in the learning environment An important factor contributing to students’ engagement with learning and with peers and academics is the fostering of an environment in which students participate actively and develop a sense of belonging in both small and large group settings. Such opportunities manifest themselves in many ways, but opportunities to ask questions and contribute to group discussion are particularly conducive to engagement. Table 4.5 demonstrates that just over one-third of first year students say they frequently participate in class discussions or raise questions in class. The majority of students, however, do so infrequently or not at all. Similarly, making class presentations does not feature as a significant activity in the experience of the majority of first year students.

Table 4.5 Frequency of selected classroom engagement/disengagement behaviours in the first year, 2004 (% of students) (N=2344)

Selected classroom engagement/ disengagement behaviours

Never

Sometimes Frequently

Ask questions in class or contribute to class discussion

10 54 36

Make class presentations

31 55 14

Come to class without completing readings or assignments

27 60 13

Skip classes

41 51 8


Despite the fact that only a third of students say they frequently contribute to class discussions, there has been a steady increase over the past decade in students’ level of comfort in engaging in class in this manner. Close to 60 per cent of first year students now say they are comfortable engaging in this mode of interaction in class as compared to a steady 52 per cent in 1994 and 1999. Trends in the First Year Experience expressed concern at the lack of evidence that strategies for encouraging classroom discussion were having an impact on the student experience. It is encouraging therefore to note the positive trend in this figure and its reflection on enhanced teaching practices in part. Importantly, however, the confidence of the majority of first year students is not shared equally across student groups with significantly more international than domestic students expressing discomfort in group discussion settings in 2004. 4.2.4 The ‘prepared and present’ scale – signs of disengagement Indicators of disengagement are equally as instructive as are signs of engagement. In 2004 we asked students to provide information on some of the more typical behaviours which may signify disengagement. Two such indicators are presented in Table 4.5 above – skipping classes and coming to class without completing readings or assignments. Closer analysis revealed that these two items, along with a third (‘You can miss a lot of classes in this course because most notes and materials are on the web’), formed a new scale in 2004 (see Appendix 1 section A1.5). These items are potential signifiers of disengagement from study and learning experiences. We have called this the ‘prepared and present’ scale since it points to the extent to which first year students prepare for class and consider class attendance valuable. Subgroup differences on this scale are presented in Table 4.11. Close to ten per cent of students report frequently coming to class without preparing adequately or skipping classes altogether. There is a significant age difference in this regard, with school-leavers tending to skip classes and come to class unprepared more frequently than their older peers. Slightly more males than females come to class underprepared but the gender differences are minimal. Almost one quarter of respondents (23 per cent) express the view that you can miss a lot of classes in the first year because most notes are on the web. Just over half (54 per cent) of first year students sampled do not believe this to be the case. Clearly the predictive powers of this scale are restricted; yet it points to the importance of considering a range of possible indicators of engagement and disengagement in an effort to better understand the experiences, needs and expectations of first year students. 4.2.5 Engaging with peers in the learning community The research literature widely acknowledges that the more frequently students interact with peers in the learning community in educationally purposeful ways, the more likely they are to engage with their learning. In recognition of the importance of peers in student engagement, the 2004 questionnaire included several new items aimed at determining the forms and frequency of peer interaction in the first year. Four of these


39

items comprise the newly formed peer engagement scale enumerated in Table 4.6 (see also Appendix 1 section A1.5). Over the past decade the research literature on the role of peers in student engagement has developed considerably. In 1995, First Year on Campus reported on the potential contribution to students’ academic performance of social involvement with peers. While the 2000 report on the first year experience cautioned that excessive social involvement could interfere with academic success, the research continues to emphasise the value of peer interaction around academic activities both in- and out-of class (see for example, Krause, McInnis and Welle, 2003; Tinto, 1998), along with the important cognitive development that takes place when students spend time studying together. In 2004 we asked a few additional questions on the topic of peer interaction to enrich our understanding of this aspect of first year students’ experience. The majority (71 per cent) say they study with their peers in some form and engage with peers both in an out of class on projects or assignments. Of concern, however, is that between one-fifth and one-third of students never participate in such peer interactions. One interesting dimension of the peer engagement scale is an item on students’ borrowing of course notes and materials. There is a tendency in some quarters to perceive student borrowing of course materials as a sign of their failure to attend class and of potential disengagement. However, it is also possible to view borrowing in a positive light as a way of students’ comparing notes or perhaps clarifying their understanding of content. The peer engagement scale suggests that students who borrow course notes are also those more likely to study with their peers and work with classmates in- and out-of-class. This item was not included in the 1994 questionnaire, but the trend over the past five years suggests that students are now borrowing notes less frequently than in the past (see Table 4.6 below). The increasing use of web-based lecture notes may be one explanation for this trend. Borrowing practices are most evident among the school-leaver age group and among lower achieving students. International students borrow significantly more than their domestic counterparts. There is no evidence from the data that students in paid work rely more heavily on borrowing course notes than their non-employed peers as a replacement for attending classes. In fact, students in part-time paid work borrow notes from friends slightly less than those not employed and there is a positive relationship between frequency of borrowing notes and time spent on campus though the relationship is non-significant. These findings suggest that borrowing and comparing notes may in fact be a positive activity in terms of fostering peer engagement in a supportive environment, but closer qualitative study is needed to determine students’ motives for borrowing and the perceived benefits.


Table 4.6 Peer engagement scale (% of students) (2004, N=2344)

Never

Sometimes Frequently

Work with classmates outside of class on group assignments

29 50 21

Work with other students on projects during class

21 59 20

Study with other students

29 54 17

Borrow course notes and materials from friends in the same subjects/units#

42 51 7

# This item appeared in the 1999 questionnaire when the results were: Frequently: 19%; Sometimes: 38%; Never 43%.

We also asked students how often they interacted with peers in matters pertaining to their course of study. Approximately one-third work with peers on course areas in which they have problems on a daily or weekly basis and 40 per cent say they get together with peers to discuss their subjects at least weekly. A little fewer than twenty per cent of students never do either of the above. Of those who do study with other students, two-thirds rate it as a useful aspect of their experience, while a little over ten per cent feel that it is not useful to them. Another indicator of student engagement is connectedness with peers through friendship ties. Almost 80 per cent of first year students have made at least one or two close friends during their first year at university. Nevertheless it seems that consistently a little under a third typically keep to themselves at university and do not interact with peers. Trend data suggest that proportionately fewer students are engaging with peers on a regular basis in the first year. In 1994, we found that almost a third of students (30 per cent) hardly ever, or never, worked with other students on areas of study where they had problems and over a third (36 per cent) hardly ever or never got together with other students to discuss subjects. In 1999 and 2004 we altered these questions slightly so a direct comparison is not possible, but the changes over the past five years are illustrated in Table 4.7. Table 4.7 Peer collaboration trends, 1999-2004 (% of students)

(1999, N=2609; 2004, N=2344)

Daily/ Weekly

Irregularly/Never

Work with other students on course areas with which you had problems

1999 2004

44 31

56 69

Get together with other students to discuss subjects/units

1999 2004

48 40

52 60


41

There has clearly been a reduction in the proportions of students working with peers on course areas where they have problems either daily or weekly. Fewer than a third engaged in this form of collaboration in 2004. A similar downward trend is evident among students who meet with peers to discuss their subjects daily or weekly, though a slightly greater proportion (40 per cent) engage in this way. Summarising 2004 field of education findings about working with other students: • Architecture students typically work on projects with peers in and out of the

classroom more than students from any other BFOE. Much of this pattern can be attributed to the teaching and assessment methods used in Architecture, which emphasise group projects and assignments. By contrast, students in Science and Society and Culture BFOEs tend to engage less than the average in these forms of peer interaction.

• Students in Engineering fields of study work with peers on course problem areas and discuss their subjects with peers more on average than any other discipline group. However students in Health and Education BFOEs spend comparably above average time getting together with peers to discuss their work. Society and Culture students typically demonstrate a pattern of lower than average levels of engagement on these two indicators.

4.2.6 Engaging through online technologies In 2004 the research team recognised the need to expand our study of ways in which first year students engage with ICTs. As in 1999, questions explored the extent and frequency of use but we extended the categories to include reasons for email use in the learning community. We also asked about extent of web usage for study purposes and whether students regarded their use of ICTs in educational settings as useful or not. In contrast to the 1999 survey, we did not draw the distinction between home and university use of email and online material in recognition of the increasing number of students accessing the internet through mobile technologies. While we recognise that ICT use is by no means synonymous with engagement, the unique communicative capabilities of the technology as well as its increasingly ubiquitous ‘anywhere-anytime’ qualities offer much to those seeking ways to optimise student engagement in the 21st century (Krause, 2004a). Access to computers Over the past five years, first year students’ satisfaction with level of access to computers at university and at home has increased considerably. In 1999, 83 per cent of students said they had adequate access to computers at university (ranging from 71 per cent to 96 per cent across the nine institutions). This increased to 90 per cent in 2004. A similar increase from 80 per cent in 1999 to 90 per cent of students in 2004 said they had adequate access to computer equipment at home (ranging from 84 per cent to 94 per cent across the institutions). We did not ask these questions in 1994.


Using ICTs to engage with the learning community: frequency and range of use In 2004 we asked about frequency of students’ use of a range of ICTs to communicate, including: • use of email to contact academic staff and peers in the course; and • participation in online discussion groups. Items pertaining to frequency of ICT use designed to support students’ engagement with learning include use of: • online tutoring systems; • online course resources and computer software; and • online resources to facilitate self-paced learning. Table 4.8 presents the items forming the online engagement scale in 2004 (see also Appendix 1 section A1.5). Two of these items were new in 1999 but a more robust set of items in 2004 resulted in a scale which provides an instructive picture of first year students’ online engagement with learning resources and the learning community. Table 4.8 Online engagement scale (% of students)

(1999, N=2609; 2004, N=2344) Daily/

Weekly

Irregu-larly

Never

Use email to contact lecturers/tutors

2004 19 56 25

Use email to contact friends in the course

2004 22 39 39

Use online discussion groups

1999 2004

9 16

91 25

N/A 58

Use web-based resources and information designed specifically for the course

1999 2004

52 73

48 20

N/A 7

N/A: not asked In summary: • The most significant increase is evident in students’ use of course web-based

resources on a daily or weekly basis. The vast majority have used these support mechanisms at some stage during the first year, with over 70 per cent engaging in daily or weekly use.

• By comparison, the prevalence of email use is much lower with about one-fifth of students using email to contact peers or lecturers either daily or weekly. A minority report never using email for this purpose.

• The limited regular use of online discussion groups continues, with only 16 per cent of students using them daily or weekly and the majority never participating in this form of communication.


43

• There is a significant inverse relationship between student use of email to contact peers and staff and time spent on campus.

It is somewhat surprising to find that first year students make relatively limited use of email as a study tool and a key means of communicating with members of the learning community. This runs contrary to some of the more widely held views of students’ reliance on email in learning contexts. Group differences There is a significant inverse relationship between student use of email to contact peers and staff and time spent on campus. By contrast, those engaged in paid work email peers in their course significantly more often than do other students and access web-based course resources significantly more frequently. No notable gender differences emerge on this series of items, but there is an age effect with younger school-leavers typically using web-based course resources and information more frequently than do their older peers. International students email friends in their course significantly less than do domestic Australian students. An important achievement effect is evident in terms of the way first year students engage online, with low achievers emailing friends in their course significantly more often than higher achieving students. On the other hand, high achievers tend to be the ones who most frequently access web-based resources and course information. Field of education differences There are clear patterns of ICT use across the fields of education, a finding that is not unexpected given the varying nature of the disciplines.


Table 4.9 Frequency of ICT use by broad field of education, 2004 (% of students)

Email to contact

lecturers/tutors Email to contact peers in course

Online discussion with other students

Online course resources

daily/ weekly

irregu-larly/ never

daily/ weekly

irregu-larly/ never

daily/ weekly

irregu-larly/ never

daily/ weekly

irregu-larly/ never

Society and Culture

16

84

20

80

19*

81

77

23

Management and Commerce

17 83 25 75 18 82 78* 22

Education 26** 74 27* 73 20 80 69 31

Health 17 83 21 79 21* 79 77 23

Natural and Physical Sciences

15 85 16** 84 14 86 82** 18

Creative Arts 18 82 15* 85 11 89 51** 49

Engineering and Rel. Technologies

16 84 28 72 19 81 82** 18

Information Technology

26 74 33 67 19 81 81 19

Agriculture, Environment and Rel. Studies

21 89 17 83 6** 94 76 24

Architecture and Building

18 82 20 80 10 90 75 25

Food, Hospitality & Personal Services

17 83 29 71 17 83 67 33

Combined degrees

15 85 21 79 21 79 82 18

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 Note: The explanation for apparent disparities in significance levels lies in sample size differences across BFOEs. It is not possible to match the DEST Broad Field of Education (BFOE) categories directly with the Broad Field of Study categories used in the 1999 study, but general indications of ICT usage patterns and broad five-year changes across fields are outlined below. Email to lecturers and peers in the course The pattern of email use across BFOEs differs somewhat from that of 1999. This is partly attributable to the fact that item syntax differed slightly in the two surveys, as well as to the change in field of study categories. In this respect it is worth noting, for example, that the Information Technology BFOE did not exist in 1999. Five years ago, Education and Engineering students were the most regular users of university email. In 2004 more detailed information on the purpose of email use reveals that Education and IT students are by far the most frequent users of email to contact academic staff (25 per cent respectively use email daily or weekly for this purpose),


45

followed by students in the Agriculture and Environmental Studies BFOE (21 per cent). Similarly, IT students use email most frequently to contact peers in their course (33 per cent). Science students typically use this mode of online communication least frequently. Online discussion The most regular (daily and weekly) users of online discussion with other students are those in the Health BFOE and combined degree programs, while Agriculture and Environmental Studies students use this form of communication least often. In 1999 Architecture students used discussion boards most frequently of all fields of study but this pattern has almost been reversed in 2004. Online course resources The most regular users of online course materials are Science, Engineering and combined degree students – 82 per cent of students in each BFOE use online course materials daily or weekly. They are followed closely by IT and Management/Commerce students (78 per cent). Creative Arts students utilise online course resources least frequently. Student perceptions of usefulness of ICTs for learning If first year students are to engage with learning and the learning community through ICTs, they must see these resources as beneficial to their experience rather than an ‘add-on’ of limited use. As in 1999, students were asked how useful (on a five-point scale) they found a range of ICTS in their course. These included: • use of email to contact academic staff and peers in the course; • participation in online discussion groups; • use of online tutoring systems; • use of online course resources and computer software; and • use of online resources to facilitate self-paced learning. Table 4.10 shows the percentage of the total number of students who indicated they had used the ICT, and the percentage of ‘users’ who found the tool useful (a rating of 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale) and of little use (ratings of 1 and 2). The table also illustrates ways in which some items were amended and new items added in 2004 to reflect changes in the technologies. A brief summary of these findings follows. • There has been a notable increase over five years in the proportion of students

who access online course resources, whether at home, at university or elsewhere, to almost universal usage, with 95 per cent of first years saying they use these web-based materials and 80 per cent finding them useful.

• Computer software designed for the course continues to be used by a little more than half of the students (58 per cent) with the vast majority of users finding these very useful for their learning.

• Online discussion groups continue to involve a minority (44 per cent) of first year students, though the proportion has increased somewhat over time and a rapidly increasing proportion of users (46 per cent in 2004) are finding this a useful form of engagement. Nevertheless this does not yet represent a majority. The change may be attributed to a range of factors including increased expertise on the part of


academic staff developing and facilitating online discussion as well as the growing ease and skill with which students engage with this form of technology.

• Use of online tutoring has increased since 1999 with about one-third of students now engaging in this form of online support for learning. However, fewer than half of students using the resource believe it to be useful and a quarter find it to be of little benefit to their learning.

• The majority of students report having used email to contact peers or academic staff, though only one-fifth do so regularly (see Table 4.8). While two-thirds say this is a useful means of communicating with lecturers, somewhat fewer (56 per cent) perceive emailing peers in the course as useful.

• Fewer than 20 per cent of first years had experience with online subjects (i.e. no face-to-face classes) during 2004, and just one-third report positive learning experiences in such contexts. No further information was sought on this topic but it is an important issue for future exploration.

• Just over half of students report that they use and value online resources as a tool for assisting them to learn at their own pace.

Table 4.10 Percentages of students who had used ICTs and found them useful

or of little use (1999, N=2 609; 2004, N=2344) % of total

students who had used ICTs

% who found ICTs of

little use*

% who found ICTs

useful*

Online resources designed for the course, accessed from home

1999 60 16 64

Online resources designed for the course, accessed at university

1999 75 16 59

Online course resources (e.g., notes and materials on the web)

2004 95 6 80

Computer software# designed specifically for the course

1999 2004

58 58

23 18

46 53

Online discussion groups with other students

1999 2004

25 44

54 28

19 46

Online/virtual tutoring (electronic access to tutoring support)

1999 2004

20 31

46 24

27 47

Using email to contact lecturers/tutors

2004 78 11 69

Using email to contact other students

2004 67 16 56

Learning at my own pace using online resources

2004 54 16 51

Subjects offered online with no face-to-face classes

2004 18 37 31

* These are percentages for ‘users’ only. # In 1999 the phrase was ‘interactive multimedia software’.


47

As noted in 1999, and unsurprisingly, the more widely used ICTs (online course resources and course-specific software) are regarded as more useful than those less widely used (online discussion groups and virtual tutoring). While students’ lack of familiarity with web-based technologies such as the latter may be one explanation for the continued relatively low levels of usage over the past five years, other factors must be considered. These include the extent of ICT integration into the curriculum, academic staff expertise in developing and implementing a range of online resources for evaluating student engagement and availability of adequate resources to support effective ICT use by both staff and students. 4.3 Patterns of subgroup engagement Table 4.11 provides a summary of the patterns of engagement for the demographic subgroups in our sample. It illustrates that males and those aged 19 or younger typically engage with peers more than the average first year student. Similarly, overseas students, students from low SES backgrounds and those in the lower achievement bracket tend to interact with their peers more for study and assignment purposes as well as for borrowing course notes. Only two subgroups emerge above the average for online engagement, namely students from urban areas and those who are first in their family to attend university. It is not surprising that urban students register above average levels of online engagement, with their increased likelihood of accessing computers and appropriate bandwidth. However, it is somewhat unexpected that students who register as first in their family to participate in higher education should engage online with peers and staff more than other subgroups. The reasons for this are unclear but warrant further investigation. Finally, it is somewhat predictable that first year students who record above average scores on the ‘prepared and present’ scale (i.e. those who skip classes least and are best prepared for classes – see section 4.2.4) are typically mature age students and those in the higher achievement bands. Students at both extremes of the socioeconomic classification tend to score below the average on this scale, while those from rural areas seem to prepare better for classes and be more diligent about attendance. Females, students from government schools and part-timers also show above average engagement levels in this regard.


Table 4.11 Student subgroups showing above average engagement on three engagement scales

Subgroup category

Peer

engagement scale

Online

engagement scale

Prepared and present scale

Sex

Males -- Females

Age

Aged 19 -- Aged 25+

ATSI

-- -- --

Socioeconomic background

Low SES -- Medium SES

Urban/rural background

-- Urban Rural

LOTE

-- -- --

First in family

-- First in family --

School type

-- -- Government

Full-time/part-time

-- -- Part-time

Overseas /domestic student

Overseas student -- --

Average mark

50-60% -- 71-100%

Expectations of marks

-- -- Marks higher than expected

4.4 Summary This chapter consolidates a number of survey items pertaining to student engagement from the previous two reports on the first year experience. As well, it comments on findings based on several new items featured in the 2004 survey in an attempt to shed new light on first year students’ patterns of engagement and disengagement. Three new engagement scales emerged as a result of new and amended items included in the 2004 FYEQ. The first two scales focus on patterns of student engagement with their peers in the learning community and, in particular, how they engage online. The third scale – ‘prepared and present’ – is a signifier of student disengagement, including items on skipping classes, and lack of preparation. A number of noteworthy subgroup differences emerged from analysis of these scales. With no trend data available on these scales, it is impossible to make informed comment on how patterns of student engagement have changed over the past decade. However, in light of the changes and transformations taking place in the experience of first year students, it will be particularly important to monitor these trends across the sector over the next decade and to consider implications for policy and practice at both federal and institutional levels. Closely aligned with students’ engagement in activities which enhance the quality of their learning is the way in which they manage their commitments in a range of areas. This is the subject of the next chapter.


49

5 _____________________________________________

MANAGING COMMITMENTS IN THE FIRST YEAR

5.1 Introduction How students manage their commitments in the first year of university study depends on both individual and institutional factors. At the individual level, there are attitudinal factors such as academic orientation, academic application and sense of purpose (discussed in previous chapters); skills such as time management and study techniques; other commitments and pressures, including paid work, family responsibilities and how students are financing their study overall. At the institutional level, the nature of their course, course contact hours and other course demands also have a bearing on how commitments are managed. This chapter first outlines the ways in which respondents are financing their university courses, their sources of income and their engagement in paid work, and then discusses the extent to which different sub-groups of respondents are managing their academic and paid work commitments. 5.2 Financing of study Almost two-thirds of the respondents to the 2004 survey (63 per cent) were HECS students deferring their payments; 25 per cent were HECS students paying upfront fees; 8 per cent were international full fee-paying students and 2 per cent were Australian full fee-paying students (Table 5.1). The categories used in the previous studies reflected fee-paying arrangements at the time, so the only direct comparison we have from 1994 through to 2004 is the proportion of international full fee-paying students. There has been a steady increase from 2.4 per cent in 1994, to 6.7 per cent in 1999 and 8.7 per cent in the 2004 survey, reflecting the growth in international students; nevertheless, international students are underrepresented in the sample. Table 5.1 Students’ fee status, 2004 (% of all students)

Fee status Proportion of students sampled

HECS student paying upfront 25

HECS student deferring payments 63

International full fee-paying student 8

Australian full fee-paying student 2

Other 2


We know that parents often make substantial contributions to younger students’ university education. Twenty-eight per cent of students aged 19 years and younger were paying HECS fees upfront, significantly greater than the average of 25 per cent, suggesting the likelihood of parental payment of fees. Only 14 per cent of 20-24 year olds were doing so. There was also a significantly greater than average chance that HECS upfront fee payers had gone to an independent school. 5.2.1 Sources of income In each of the surveys we have included questions about students’ income sources. The main changes over the past ten years are a decrease in the proportion of students receiving Austudy or Youth Allowance as their main or only source of income; an overall increase in those who have income from part-time work (but a decrease over the past five years); and an overall decrease in students with income from full-time work, although there was no significant change between 1999 and 2004. It is noteworthy that while there has been little change over the ten years in the overall proportion of respondents with income from their parents or family, the proportion of 20-24 year-olds in this group has shown a steady increase from 30 to 35 to 38 per cent. This suggests a growing reliance of 20-24 year-olds on support from parents and/or other family members. As expected, full-time students are more likely than part-timers to be on Youth Allowance/Austudy/Abstudy and to rely on family or parents, and part-timers rely more on full-time work, a scholarship, or their spouse/partner. Part-time work is just as likely to be a main or only source of income for full-timers as it is for part-timers (Table 5.2).

Table 5.2 Percentage of full-time and part-time enrolled students saying that source of income was their main or only source, 2004 (N=2344)

Main or only source of income

Enrolled full-time (%)

Enrolled part-time (%)

Youth Allowance/Austudy/Abstudy

26** 15

Part-time/casual work

32 32

Full-time work

3 23**

Parents/family

43** 22

Savings

10 6

Scholarship/Cadetship

3 12**

Spouse/partner

3 12**

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05


51

5.2.2 Paid work as a source of income Overall, the part which paid work plays as a source of income for all respondents has changed little from 1999 (Table 5.3). Around 40 per cent of respondents do not have income from part-time work. There is a slight decrease in those saying that it is their only or main source of income (from 36 to 32 per cent) and a slight increase (from 23 to 28 per cent) in those saying it is a minor source of income. The situation regarding those for whom full-time work is a source of income has remained stable. Table 5.3 Paid work as a source of income, 1994-2004 (% of all students)

Only source Main source Minor source

Not a source

Full-time work 1994 1999 2004

3 2 2

2 2 3

0 1 2

94 95 94

Part-time/ Casual work

1994 1999 2004

4 9 7

22 27 25

22 23 28

52 40 40

5.2.3 Reasons for doing paid work As in past surveys, there is a strong relationship between age and socio-economic background and whether or not commencing students take on paid work. Three-quarters of 19-year olds work in order to be more financially independent of their family and 87 per cent to afford ‘extras’ (Table 5.4). Younger students are less likely than the average for all students to work to meet basic needs, nevertheless, more than half the 19 year old respondents did, indicating that they are supporting themselves to a substantial degree. About 40 per cent of younger students are in paid work to improve their employability after university. The majority of 20-24 years olds work to meet basic needs, to afford extras and to be more financially independent of their parents. This is consistent with their either still living with or being partially financially dependent on their parents. Older students, who are more likely to be part-timers, work to support themselves and their families. There is a significant relationship on the one hand between low SES background and taking on paid work to meet basic needs and to save for future HECS debts, and, on the other hand, between high SES background and working to be more financially independent of family and to improve employability after leaving university. Full fee-paying overseas students are less likely than domestic students to take on paid work (Table 5.6). The main reasons they do so are to afford extras (61 per cent of fee-paying overseas students) and to be more financially independent of parents (51


per cent). However, they are significantly less likely than their locally based peers to work for these reasons.

Table 5.4 Reasons why different age groups undertake paid work (% of different age groups responding to the question)

aged 19 aged 20-24 aged 25+

To be more financially independent of family

75++

65

18+

To meet basic needs (such as rent, food transport)

53+ 69++ 74++

To afford extras (such as travel and entertainment)

87++ 74+ 47+

To improve employability after university

39++ 29+ 20+

To save for paying off future HECS debts

23 23 19

To pay off current loans or debts

13+ 27++ 49++

To gain work experience relevant to the course

15 18 18

To support family

4+ 10 42++

++ significantly more than the average for all respondents + significantly less than the average for all respondents 5.3 Full-time students and paid work In Chapter 1 we noted that one of the major changes between 1994 and 1999 was the increase in the number of full-time first year students combining paid work with study. At the time, there was anecdotal evidence from academics that some students were working long hours and that a minority had little time for or attachment to their course. The report of the 1999 study contributed to a closer examination of undergraduate paid work and its impact on students’ university experience over the following years. By the beginning of the decade, Long and Hayden (2001) reported that it had become the norm for full-time undergraduate students to combine study and paid employment. This pattern is established in secondary school, to the extent that the focus in the early 1990s on ‘transition from school to work’ no longer reflects the reality for the majority of secondary students (Wyn, 2004). Our own research on the impact of undergraduate students combining full-time study and paid work (McInnis and Hartley, 2002) concluded that the overall picture of undergraduate paid work is mixed and often complex. A notable finding was the degree of fluidity and change for individual students. Students quite often decide to cut back or increase their hours of work as course demands change or other circumstances in their life alter; hours of casual work can fluctuate quite substantially


53

from week to week and season to season; jobs vary in the demands they make on levels of energy, concentration and commitment. In Trends in the first year experience in Australian universities (2000) we placed greater focus on the paid work of full-time students than part-time students. This was because of the emerging debate about full-time students and the fact that they represented the majority of the national survey respondents. In this section, we compare findings from 1999 and 2004 for full-time students engaged in paid work. As in the previous report, we acknowledge that part-time students also have substantial paid (and unpaid) work commitments, and that all first year students face problems of managing their various commitments and adjusting to university study. The paid work of part-time students is discussed at various points in this chapter. 5.3.1 Extent of full-time students’ paid work The overall proportion of full-time commencing students in paid employment has increased from 51.3 per cent to 54.9 per cent over the past five years. In 2004, the average number of hours of paid work in a week for all full-time students was 7.01 (up from 6.46 hours in 1999). The average for full-time students committed to paid work for at least one hour per week was 12.48 (compared with 12.59 in 1999). The comparable 2004 figures for part-time students were 14.96 and 22.05 hours respectively. Table 5.5 compares the findings across the period 1994-2004 in relation to the number of hours full-time students spent in paid work in a typical Semester One university week.

Table 5.5 Hours spent in paid work in a typical university week, 1994-2004 (% of full-time enrolled students in paid employment for at least one hour per week) (1994 n=1572; 1999 n=1253; 2004 n=1341)

1-5 hrs 6-10

hrs 11-15 hrs

16-20 hrs

21-25 hrs

26-30 hrs

31 hrs or more

1994 22 38 20 12 4 2 2

1999 16 32 25 17 5 2 3

2004 19 32 22 17 5 2 3 In 1999, we found that the proportion of employed students working 1-10 hours per week had dropped substantially from 1994 and the proportion working 11 hours or more had risen (from 40 per cent to just over half). Changes in the relative proportions working more or less than 10 hours per week have changed only marginally. The CSHE study of the impact of full-time study and paid work on the university experience (McInnis and Hartley 2002) suggested that academics regarded 10-15 hours of paid work as unlikely to have major consequences for the academic performance of most students. Therefore, in 2004, in addition to comparing the proportion of full-time respondents working more or less than 10 hours per week, we compared the proportion working more than 15 hours per week. We found no change from 1999 to 2004. In both surveys, 27 per cent of respondents were employed for


more than 15 hours per week (see Table 5.5). Nor have the proportions of students working long hours (more than 20 hours per week) changed; they remain at about 10 per cent. Overall, then, over the past five years the proportion of full-time enrolled commencing students in paid work has shown a significant increase from 51 to 55 per cent. However, the mean number and the distribution of hours worked has changed only marginally, with no evidence overall of more students working longer hours. Nevertheless, the pattern of engagement in paid work varies substantially across sub-groups (Table 5.6). Notable comparisons across sub-groups for 1999 and 2004 are:

• The proportion of full-time commencing female students in paid work has increased from 53 per cent to 57 per cent.

• Proportions of 19 year olds and over 30 years olds in paid work have risen. • There is an increase in the proportion of full-time HECS students in paid

employment. • The average paid hours of work for full fee-paying overseas students has

increased but not to a statistically significant level. A minority of full-time students work 30 or more hours per week. A recent comment from an academic reported in a major newspaper in 2004 suggested that these students, either through economic necessity or a misguided belief that they could manage full-time study and full-time work with ease, were putting themselves and their future at risk. The current research is not in a position to trace the outcomes for students who are trying to manage such extensive employment commitments. McInnis and Hartley (2002) found a close relationship between broad fields of study, days spent on campus, course contact hours and the average hours of students’ paid work beyond the commencing year. In fields of study which tend to have fewer course contact hours (e.g. Education, Business and Commerce and Society and Culture), students worked longer hours compared with Engineering and Health, where the course contact hours are considerably higher. In the 2004 survey, we are unable to make a direct comparison between discipline areas for the reasons outlined in Chapter 4. In 2004 the average hours worked by Education students have increased and the general pattern for higher course contact hours and lower average paid working hours, and vice versa, is apparent.


55

Table 5.6 Proportion of full-time students in paid work, and employed

students’ hours in paid work in a typical university week: Selected groups, 1999-2004

Proportion in paid employment Mean hours paid employment/week

1999 2004 Change 1999 2004 Change N=2449 N=2334 (%age pts.)a N=1253 (%) Whole sample 51.3 54.9 7.0* 12.59 12.48 -0.09 Gender Males 48.5 50.1 3.3 12.26 11.68 -4.7 Females 52.9 57.4 8.5* 12.78 12.86 0.6 Age Group 19 years or less 52.4 56.0 6.9* 11.99 11.57 -3.5 20-24 years 49.5 51.3 3.6 13.97 13.05 -6.6 25-29 years 48.5 45.6 -6.0 19.56 15.62 -20.1 30 years or over 42.4 60.7 43.2** 16.46 18.34 11.4 University Established 52.2 50.6 -3.1 10.06 9.70 -3.6 Suburban 50.6 57.1 12.8 12.92 11.63 -10.0 New 55.0 72.4 31.6** 13.19 13.32 1.0 International 57.9 59.8 3.3 12.39 11.06 -10.7 Regional 22.7 26.6 17.2 10.51 10.14 -3.5 Applied 55.1 70.0 27.0** 14.61 14.63 0.1 Consolidated 52.6 57.2 8.7 13.24 16.18 22.2** Evolving N/A N/A N/A N/A Traditional N/A N/A N/A N/A Fee Status HECS students 53.1 58.7 10.5** 12.61 12.45 -1.3 Fee-paying OS 28.8 23.3 -19.1 12.86 11.62 -9.6 Secondary

Schooling

Catholic 58.3 61.3 5.1 13.24 12.62 -4.7 Independent 56.1 61.1 8.9 11.36 12.06 6.2 Government 47.4 51.1 7.8 12.67 12.53 -1.1 School OS 33.8 39.4 16.6 17.60 14.54 -17.4

Language spoken at home

LOTE 37.5 45.9 22.4** 12.58 11.46 -8.9 Only English at home

54.9 58.1 5.8 12.64 12.79 1.2

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05; a Percentage changes rounded 5.4 Coping with study, employment and other commitments In Chapter 1 we noted that universities have put considerable efforts into providing a range of services for commencing students over the past ten years. Institutions now provide better orientation, improved information, mentoring, general support and specific learning support for students. There remain, however, concerns about the impact of paid work, especially that it appears to reduce levels of engagement with the university experience, an issue explored in Chapter 4. In this section we first


discuss further findings concerning how commencing students are coping with the demands of study and employment. Then we present findings for a ‘comprehending and coping’ scale, developed from items in the 2004 survey. 5.4.1 Paid work and academic work More than half (57 per cent) of employed students believe that paid work interferes at least moderately with their academic performance; 9 per cent say it interferes severely and 48 per cent moderately. Part-time students were significantly more likely than full-time students to acknowledge that it interfered, underlining the point that part-timers are frequently juggling competing demands on their time. It is worth noting that at least part of the ‘interference’ appears to be related to practical, logistic matters. Paid workers are more likely than those not committed to employment to have considered deferring simply because of problems with daily travel. They are also more likely to spend three or more hours per day commuting to and from university, although only a minority of respondents did so (15 per cent of students in paid work and 11 per cent of non-employed students). 5.4.2 Full-time students working 16 hours or more per week Respondents working longer hours (16 or more per week) have particular characteristics. They are more likely to be: • older; • from an English speaking background; • from a lower SES background (as measured by parental education); • enrolled in a course additional to their on-campus enrolment; and • living in rental accommodation (rather than with family or at college). Students working longer hours are working to meet basic needs, to support their families and to pay off loans. Their longer hours are therefore partly a result of economic necessity. It is noteworthy that for the majority, the pattern of paid work and studying was established in secondary school; 72 per cent of respondents working 16 hours or more undertook paid work in their final year of secondary school compared with 55 per cent of those working fewer hours. While we cannot say that there is a direct causal relationship between working longer hours and lower academic performance, students working more than 16 hours per week are more likely than those working shorter hours to have an average mark of 60 per cent or less. A number of findings indicate that working longer hours is associated with weaker engagement and attachment to university and having less time to devote to activities on campus. Compared with those working fewer hours, respondents working 16 hours or more are more likely to seriously consider deferring (34 per cent compared to 28 per cent) and to consider deferring because of paid work commitments. They are considerably more likely to say that paid work interferes at least moderately with their academic work (83 per cent compared with 47 per cent) and to agree that you can miss a lot of classes because notes are on the web. They are less likely to be interested in extra-curricular activities at university.


57

Conversely, respondents working fewer hours are more likely to feel they belong to the university community, to really like being on their university campus, and to be actively involved in extra-curricular activities. 5.4.3 Comprehending and coping The ‘comprehending and coping’ scale is a new scale developed as a result of several items introduced for the first time in the 2004 survey (see Appendix 1 section A1.5). It is concerned with the extent to which students are successfully coping with and managing their study. Five items were reversed in constructing the scale. They are: • ‘I find it quite difficult to comprehend a lot of the material I am supposed to

study’; • ‘I frequently feel overwhelmed by all I have to do’; • ‘I have had difficulty adjusting to the style of teaching at university’; • ‘My course workload is too heavy’, and • ‘I find it really hard to keep up with the volume of work in this course’. The scale is related to achievement. High achievers–those who had an average Semester One mark of more than 70 per cent – are significantly more likely to have scores in the top 50 per cent of comprehending and coping than the bottom 50 per cent. However, comprehending and coping captures more than achievement. It is about keeping up with academic work demands, coping with the workload, comprehending material and adjusting to a university style of teaching, all of which can be affected by a range of individual and teaching related factors and other commitments in one’s life. The mean for all respondents on comprehending and coping is around the neutral point (3.02) on a scale of 1-5. Overall, males are more likely to have above average comprehending and coping scores than females. This may be partly attributed to the multiple demands which many females tend to have on their time, as identified in this study. For example, females are more likely than males to be in paid employment, more likely to have dependants and less likely to be living with family. Students aged 19 are more likely to have above average scores and 20-24 year-olds below average scores. Respondents from a low SES background, recent migrants, and students born in South East Asia, Hong Kong or China, are more likely to have below average scores. The comprehending and coping scale suggests that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander respondents are having more difficulties managing than non-Indigenous students, and on average, full fee-paying overseas students are managing less well than are domestic students. Respondents in some BFOEs seem to be managing better than others. When compared with all other respondents, students in Society and Culture and in Creative Arts have a higher mean score on comprehending and coping, and respondents enrolled in Health and in Architecture have a lower mean score. Variations in course contact hours, and different academic and study requirements are likely to contribute to these differences.


Table 5.7 provides a summary of these findings depicting the various demographic subgroups who scored above the average mean on the comprehending and coping scale. Table 5.7 Student subgroups showing above average mean on

comprehending and coping scale

Subgroup category

Above average mean comprehending and coping scale

Sex

Males

Age

Aged 19

ATSI

Non-Indigenous

Socioeconomic background

Mid and high SES

Urban/rural background

Urban background

NESB

Non-NESB

First in family

N/S#

School type

Non-Catholic

Full-time/part-time

N/S#

Overseas /domestic student

Domestic

Average mark

71-100%

Expectations of marks

Same marks as expected

N/S#: No significant difference between groups. 5.4.4 Managing well and not so well High scorers on comprehending and coping are ‘managing well’. The business of managing well is quite complex, as we might expect. We have suggested that it is not necessarily related only to intellectual capacity. An analysis of those with above average and below average comprehending and coping scores suggests some relationships which need to be tested further in future research. One of the most notable findings was that respondents with above and below average scores tended to have different patterns of commitments and the break up of their time at university on the most recent day on campus was different. Average course contact hours were higher for respondents who were not managing so well (16.5 hours compared with 15.5). On the ‘most recent day’, they are more likely


59

to have spent three hours or more commuting to and from university. They also spent a higher proportion of their time on private study and using the library, and more hours on household and family duties. Although they were considerably more likely than respondents with above average scores to say that paid work interfered with their academic work (68 per cent compared with 45 per cent with above average scores), they were no more likely to be engaged in paid work and they spent about the same number of hours in paid work in a typical week Respondents with above average scores spent more time on recreation and social activities during the course of their most recent day on campus. This may be a function of the fact that they have more time to do so. Investigating the direction of possible causal relationships between these behaviours was beyond the scope of the present study, but one interpretation may be that social and recreational activities help students to manage their study and workload at university more effectively. Respondents with above average comprehending and coping scores are more likely to say that studying in a field that interested them and developing their talents were important reasons for coming to university. They also gave higher importance ratings to these items. Conversely, those with below average scores are more likely to cite ‘job-related’ reasons as important and to rate them as more important. In 2004, we included a specific item about managing the amount of academic work (‘I am strategic about managing my academic workload’). Not surprisingly, there was a positive relationship between comprehending and coping and this item. However, it is worth noting that only 38 per cent of all students agreed with the item and the mean score was just above the neutral point. Since the majority of students appear to manage their commitments reasonably well, this may merely indicate that most do not perceive their planning to be ‘strategic’. Students with below average comprehending and coping scores are more likely to have seriously thought of deferring (36 per cent compared with 18 per cent). They were also more likely to say that financial reasons, emotional health, thinking they might fail, problems with daily travel, disliking study, and university not being as they expected played a part in their considerations. There were some indications of different study patterns between respondents with above and below average scores on comprehending and coping. Those with below average scores more frequently borrow course notes from friends in the same subject, work with other students on projects during class, work with classmates outside of class on a group assignment, work with other students on course areas with which they had problems, and use email to contact friends in their course. However, it is those with above average comprehending and coping scores – those who are managing better to keep up with the work and not become overwhelmed by it – who find ‘studying with other students’ more useful. This offers some support for the argument that not all working with other students is necessarily useful, helpful or conducive to managing well. It also suggests that more research is needed to clarify the conditions under which working with other students is most effective.


5.5 Summary The major shift over the past ten years has been the key role of paid work in full-time students’ lives, providing substantial challenges for students to manage a range of commitments which include course demands, travel to and from work, meeting employer demands and making decisions about the type of work and the hours of work they can fit into their daily and weekly schedules. Part-time students also manage these varying commitments, and a small minority of students try to cope with both full-time study and full-time paid work. The largest increase in the proportion of full-time students in paid work occurred between 1994 and 1999 but the past five years has also seen an increase–from 51 to 55 per cent. The mean number and the distribution of hours worked has changed only marginally, with no evidence overall of more students working longer hours. However, the pattern of engagement in paid work varies substantially across sub-groups and there is evidence that students who work for more than 16 hours per week do have more difficulties in coping. They are more likely to acknowledge that paid work interferes at least moderately with their academic work and to agree that you can miss a lot of classes because notes are available on the web. Longer employment hours are associated with weaker engagement and attachment to university and having less time to devote to activities on campus. Students working longer hours are more likely to seriously consider deferring and to consider deferring because of paid work commitments.


61

6 ____________________________________________________________________

PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING AND SATISFACTION WITH COURSES

6.1 Changes in perceptions of teaching in the first year In the 1994 survey, a high proportion of students were quite negative about the teaching they experienced. Five years later, perceptions remained the same about some aspects of teaching and were even more negative about others. Student perceptions of the overall quality of teaching did not change between 1994 and 1999, with two thirds agreeing that it was generally good. Just over 60 per cent continued to see staff as approachable. However, there was a significant drop (from 45 per cent to 38 per cent) in their perceptions of staff availability to discuss their work and a reduction in the percentage of students who agreed that staff usually give helpful feedback on student progress and took an interest in their progress. Over the past ten years, there have been substantial efforts to enhance the quality of teaching in Australian universities. Commonwealth governments have funded a considerable amount of research into learning and teaching and provided teaching awards to support and encourage effective teaching. The Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) represents another national initiative aimed at quality enhancement in universities and dissemination of good practices in a range of areas, including learning and teaching. Moreover, the most recent Commonwealth government initiative in this regard, the establishment of the Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, aims to further increase focus on the importance of learning and teaching. Individual institutions have programs to support academic staff and assist them to keep them up with developments in curriculum planning, approaches to teaching and learning, assessment and learning technologies. Our 2004 survey suggests that some of the efforts to improve teaching and learning are bearing fruit. 6.1.1 More positive overall perceptions The students surveyed in 2004 are significantly more positive on all items relating to teaching. Table 6.1 sets out the comparisons for the years 1994, 1999 and 2004. The items are listed in order of the extent of overall agreement in 2004. Over three-quarters of respondents agree that the quality of teaching in their course is generally good, up from 67 per cent in 1999. There has been a substantial jump in perceptions of staff enthusiasm with regard to the subjects they teach (56 to 72 per cent) and staff approachability (62 to 72 per cent). The mean rating for agreement with each of these items has also risen significantly since 1999; all are close to 4 on a scale of 1-5. There have also been significant increases in student perceptions that ‘teaching staff are good at explaining things’ and that they ‘try to make subjects interesting’, with around 60 per cent of respondents agreeing to these items. Even if, as we have suggested, our 2004 sample is somewhat more selective, the increases are substantial,


suggesting a genuine shift in students’ attitudes towards the teaching they have experienced.

Table 6.1 Perceptions of teaching, 1994-2004, 5-point scale collapsed to 3

points, (% of students) (1994, N=4028; 1999, N=2609, N=2334) Disagree Agree

The quality of teaching in my course is generally good 1994 1999 2004

9 9 5

25 24 17

66 67 78**2 3

Staff are enthusiastic about the subjects they teach 1994 1999 2004

13 12

5

34 32 23

53 56*1 72**2 3

Most of the academic staff are approachable 1994 1999 2004

12 12

8

26 26 20

62 62 72**2 3

The teaching staff are good at explaining things 1994 1999 2004

16 17

9

38 35 28

47 48 63**2 3

Staff try hard to make the subjects interesting 1994 1999 2004

17 17 11

34 34 28

50 50 61**2 3

Staff are usually available to discuss my work 1994 1999 2004

21 25 15

34 37 36

45 38**1 49**2 *3

Staff make a real effort to understand difficulties students may be having with their work

1994 1999 2004

28 28 17

36 35 36

36 37 47**2 3

Teaching staff here usually give helpful feedback on my progress

1994 1999 2004

40 40 31

32 34 36

28 25*1 33**2 3

Most academic staff in my subjects take an interest in my progress

1994 1999 2004

44 47 34

32 32 36

24 21*1 30**2 3



63

6.1.2 Areas of continuing concern Despite the apparent improvement in the quality of teaching in the first year, some issues remain. Only 50 per cent of respondents agree that staff are usually available to discuss their work. Although perceptions of the availability of staff have increased over the past five years (from a low 38 per cent in 1999 to 49 per cent in 2004), and almost three out of every four respondents think staff are approachable, there is still a substantial body of students who do not consider staff to be ‘available’. Online contact with academic staff is not particularly high, as reported in Chapter 4; 56 per cent of respondents use email to contact lecturers and tutors irregularly; one in four never do so. Only one in five do so daily or weekly. We can speculate that pressures on both staff and student time, and possible mismatches between student expectations of academic staff availability and the realities of university life contribute to staff being seen as unavailable. It is only through detailed qualitative research that the issue of ‘availability’, or lack of it, is likely to be fully understood. It is worth noting that high achievers are significantly more likely than low achievers to consider staff to be usually available to discuss their work (52 per cent compared with 42 per cent) and more likely to agree that staff are approachable (75 per cent compared with 64 per cent). The links between achievement, perceptions of staff availability and perceptions of staff approachability need to be further explored. The findings indicate that, despite the more positive overall views of learning and teaching, only around 30 per cent of respondents agree that teaching staff usually give helpful feedback on their progress and take an interest in their progress. This is likely to reflect, in part, the pressures on academic staff dealing with increased numbers of students, and perhaps increased expectations of students who are themselves having to manage a range of commitments. 6.1.3 Summarising findings about teaching The nine items in Table 6.1 form the ‘Teaching’ scale, originally developed in the 1994 study. Reflecting the discussion above on responses to individual items, the overall mean on the Teaching scale and the means for males and females and each of the three age groups we use in our analysis (19 and under, 20-24 and 25+) remained relatively steady from 1994 to 1999, but increased significantly in 2004. There are however some subgroup differences in relation to perceptions of teaching in 2004. They are summarised below.

• Mature age students have more positive perceptions of teaching than do younger students.

• Respondents who speak only English at home have a higher mean score on the Teaching scale than do those who speak a language other than English at home; however the means for both groups are approaching 4 on a scale of 1-5.

• Students from rural backgrounds are more positive about teaching than are those from urban backgrounds.

• Full fee-paying overseas students are not as positive as ‘domestic’ students.


• Respondents who are not in paid work are more positive (at the 0.05 level of significance) than those who are employed but there is no significant difference between those who work longer and shorter hours.

• Students enrolled in Education, and Creative Arts have a higher than average mean on the Teaching scale; Management and Commerce, Engineering and Information Technology students have a lower than average mean. This reflects the well-established disciplinary differences in the responses of students to surveys on teaching quality.

Consistent with the observation about high achieving students in section 6.1.2, higher achieving students have a higher mean score on the Teaching scale. On the other hand, less positive perceptions of teaching are associated with several indications of dissatisfaction and/ or uncertainty in the first year. Respondents who have seriously considered deferring are less positive than others about the teaching they have experienced. So too are respondents who hope to change either their course or their institution in the following year. There is likely to be a complex inter-relationship between course dissatisfaction, course preference, limited engagement, and student perceptions of academic staff and of the quality of teaching. In summarising the project’s findings about student perceptions of teaching, there is evidence of more positive views overall, and quite widespread feelings that academic staff are interested in and enthusiastic about their subject areas. There are less positive views in areas such as staff availability to discuss students’ work, taking a personal interest in their work, giving helpful feedback on progress and understanding their difficulties. All of these areas might be said to involve more of a personal or personalised relationship between staff members and their students. In the first year, there are obvious barriers to being able to do this for all or the majority of students. They include pressures on staff time, the nature of their other commitments, the sheer number of students involved and their varying requirements and expectations. 6.2 Perceptions of the course overall In 2000 we reported that despite some dissatisfaction about teaching and other course areas, the general level of student satisfaction increased between 1994 and 1999. In the 2004 survey, there were more significant increases of general satisfaction. Table 6.2 compares responses from 1994, 1999 and 2004 on the three items which make up the satisfaction scale: ‘I am finding my course intellectually stimulating’; ‘Overall, I am really enjoying my course’ and ‘Overall, I am very satisfied with my university experience so far’. It shows that, in 2004, 70 per cent or more of respondents agree with each of the items. While we do not wish to over-emphasise the significance of the following observation, it is worth noting that the 2004 group of respondents is more certain of their views about satisfaction; both the ‘disagree’ and the ‘neutral’ responses have declined since 1999. Again, we suggest that while the size of the increase may be due partly to the particular sample of students in the 2004 survey, we are confident that the greater selectivity of the sample does not misrepresent the direction of the trend to an increase in students’ satisfaction with their course.


65

The increase in satisfaction between 1999 and 2004 is significant for males and females, and for respondents 19 years and under, but it is not significant for older age groups. It is noteworthy that in each of the surveys, mature aged students (aged 25 and over) have been the most satisfied age group overall.

Table 6.2 Satisfaction with course of study, 1994-2004 (% of students) (1994, N=4028; 1999, N=2609; 2004, N=2334)

Disagree Agree

I am finding my course intellectually stimulating 1994 1999 2004

12 10 6

25 26 19

63 63 75**2 3

Overall, I am really enjoying my course 1994 1999 2004

15 13 9

24 23 20

61 64*1 71**2 3

Overall, I am very satisfied with my university experience so far

1994 1999 2004

15 14 10

23 24 20

61 63 70**2 3

* significant at .01 ** significant at .05 1 Denotes significant change 1994 to 1999. 2 Denotes significant change 1999 to 2004. 3 Denotes significant change 1994 to 2004. There is little variation in satisfaction across different institutions. Only one institution in the sample - Regional University - has a mean that is significantly above the average. Consistent with this finding is the fact that rural students tend to be more satisfied than are urban students. Respondents enrolled in Society and Culture and Education have means above the average for satisfaction, and Management and Commerce, Engineering and related studies, Information Technology and Agriculture and Environment have below average means. Once again, this tends to reflect well-documented disciplinary differences. On average, females are more satisfied than males. In regard to full fee-paying overseas students, the pattern mirrors that for perceptions of teaching, for they are less satisfied than are domestic students. So too are respondents who speak a language other than English at home compared with those who speak only English at home. It is worth noting too that there are no significant differences in satisfaction between part-time and full-time students, and between those employed between 1-15 hours and 16 hours and over, or any of the possible comparisons between high, low and middle SES background groups.


6.3 Summary It is necessary to be cautious when reporting findings which indicate strong trends, as seems to be the case with overall improvements in perceptions of teaching and course satisfaction in the first year. All research needs to be replicated and tested before we can be thoroughly confident of such trends. Nevertheless, on the basis of our findings we are confident that there have been improvements in student attitudes and perceptions in the two areas over the ten years, most particularly over the past five years. Substantial positive changes are evident in students’ perceptions about staff enthusiasm and approachability, as well as their ability to explain concepts and make subjects interesting. Several concerns remain, including the fact that only one-third of respondents believe staff give helpful feedback and the majority of students are not satisfied that most academic staff show interest in their progress. Course satisfaction has risen significantly over the past ten decades.


67

7 ____________________________________________________________________

THE FIRST YEAR EXPERIENCE OF SIGNIFICANT STUDENT GROUPS

7.1 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to explore in some detail the similarities and differences in the experiences of subgroups of first year students. The focus in part is on students who are members of designated equity groups. We also explore the possible effects of gender and examine the experiences of international students and full fee-paying domestic students. 7.2 Indigenous students Nationally, the aggregrate statistical data on people from the designated equity groups shows that while higher education access and participation rates may be lower than those for other Australians, the success, retention and completion rates of students once admitted to university are usually similar to, albeit slightly below, those of students overall. This generalisation is least true for Indigenous students, whose retention and completion rates continue to be disappointingly lower than those of students overall – and is a major policy concern. The higher education sector has made system-wide efforts to raise the access, retention and completion rates of Indigenous Australians. Indigenous people continue to be significantly disadvantaged in the school sector, making access to higher education particularly problematic. In 1994 and 1999 the first year experience survey employed a random sampling strategy that did not generate a suitable sample of responses from Indigenous students due to the relatively small proportion of Indigenous students in the total first year student population. To overcome this problem for the 2004 survey, the project team sought a larger sample of Indigenous students by surveying all of the Indigenous students in the participating institutions. A total of 69 Indigenous students responded, a response rate estimated to be around 20 per cent. Close to half of these students were concentrated in two of the participating institutions. Well over half were ‘first generation’ higher education entrants. Relatively few differences emerged in the attitudes of Indigenous students and the other students in the sample. Certainly with regard to the core questionnaire items of the quality of teaching and learning, the Indigenous students emerge as highly positive and optimistic, slightly more so than other students. The Indigenous students are highly focused on developing their personal talents while at university. They find lectures more intellectually stimulating than other students and are more likely to seek the assistance of academic staff when they have concerns.


However, the Indigenous students did reveal some issues on our ‘comprehending and coping’ scale. They show some signs of initial problems in adjusting to university teaching styles and many indicate that the volume of work caused difficulties for them. Many gave serious thought to deferral at some stage (39 per cent) and they are more concerned about failure than other students. Their percentage grades during first semester, as self-reported, were far lower than those of the other students: thirteen per cent of the Indigenous students report that their average grades were below pass levels. Indigenous students are significantly more likely to indicate they keep to themselves while on campus (46 per cent compared with 27 per cent), even though a high proportion report a sense of belonging to the university community (57 per cent cf. 51 per cent for other students). Whether the apparent signs of ‘isolation’ are related to social exclusion or to the distinctive demographic characteristics of the Indigenous students — they are older, with a mean age of 24 years, and tend to report more pressure from family commitments — we cannot determine. Without doubt family commitments and responsibilities pre-occupy the attention of Indigenous students, in part because they are often older than other students, thus more likely to have dependents, but also because of the centrality of the family in the lives of many Indigenous people. Money may be another issue that causes particular concerns for Indigenous students. Well over half of the Indigenous students in the sample (54 per cent) report that money worries interfere with their study compared with 31 per cent of other students. Again, this difference might be symptomatic of the differing ages and levels of family responsibilities of the two cohorts of students. 7.3 The effects of socioeconomic background There are continuing social disparities in the access to and participation in Australian higher education. Australians from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are far less likely to participate in higher education than Australian from higher or medium socioeconomic backgrounds. These imbalances have persisted despite a national equity policy framework and the sustained efforts of universities in offering a variety of access programs. For the first year project we believed it to be important to explore whether or not there were any patterns of student response according to their socio-economic background, though we were aware that the available data on students from lower socio-economic backgrounds shows that while access rates are lower, students once enrolled have broadly comparable rates of success, retention and completion. The 2004 first year experience data were analysed using the postcode definition of socioeconomic status (SES) and three groups were analysed, lower, medium and higher SES. The analysis revealed relatively few differences in the experiences and attitudes of the students across the designated SES groups. There were many demographic differences, however, between the groups. The higher SES students are disproportionately male and the medium SES students are disproportionately female. As expected, parental education levels are higher for the higher SES group compared with the medium SES group. In turn, parental education levels are higher for the medium SES group compared with the lower SES group. The lower and medium SES students in the sample are more likely to be the first in the family to attend university.


69

The higher SES students are more likely to have attended an independent school, to be enrolled in combined degrees and to have paid their HECS contribution upfront. There are differences in the patterns of part-time work across the SES groups. The higher SES students are the most likely to report that part-time work is their main or only source of income (39 per cent, compared with 33 per cent of medium SES students and 24 per cent of lower SES students). Other sources of income for students in the medium and low SES groups, in particular, include Youth Allowance/Austudy/Abstudy and scholarships. Overall, 67 per cent of higher SES students are undertaking paid work of some kind, compared with 60 per cent and 43 per cent for the medium and lower SES students respectively. As noted earlier, a high proportion of the employed students report that the work allows them to afford extras. This is slightly more likely to be the principal motivation for higher SES students (84 per cent reported this) than the other subgroups, whereas the lower SES students are more likely to indicate that part-time work allows them to meet their basic needs (68 per cent). The lower SES students are more likely to indicate that money worries make it difficult for them to study. Overall, the attitudes towards the academic aspects of the transition to university study and the attitudes towards teaching and learning are very similar across the SES subgroups. The higher SES students are far more likely to indicate that there was pressure on them during the final year of secondary school to go to university (59 per cent for higher SES compared with 42 per cent and 38 per cent for medium and lower SES students). The higher SES students also express considerable concern about their workload in the final year of school. The SES subgroups report similar levels of satisfaction with the quality of teaching and express similar levels of enjoyment with their university experience. The lower SES students are more likely to say that they have difficulty comprehending the material and have difficulty adjusting to the style of university teaching. They are also more likely to report that their parents have little understanding of their university lives. Beyond these differences, however, there is very little variation in the attitudes of students towards their study and their perceptions of the characteristics and quality of the teaching overall. 7.4 Students from urban and rural backgrounds The project’s student sample was divided into two groups, urban and rural, according to the postcodes of students’ permanent home addresses. Students whose homes were in isolated or remote regions were classified as rural for the purposes of this analysis. Sizeable differences were found between the responses of students from urban and rural backgrounds. Demographically, the rural students are more likely to be female than the urban students, corresponding to the national enrolment patterns, and 93 per cent of the rural students were born in Australia (compared with 76 per cent of urban students). Parental education levels are higher for the urban students and fewer urban students are the first in their family to participate in higher education (34 per cent compared with 43 per cent).


There is a substantial difference in the proportion of urban and rural students who deferred their study the previous year (nine per cent of urban students deferred the previous year compared with 18 per cent of students from rural backgrounds). The reason for this difference is not clear from the data, but is likely to be the greater need for rural students to accumulate savings to meet their additional costs of attending university. Rural students are more likely to have attended government schools or reached higher education through a vocational education and training pathway, while the urban students are more likely to have attended independent schools. The personal motives for attending university are similar for both groups of students, though rural students on the whole appear more focussed in their objectives. They also appear more committed to academic study and tend to find the study more stimulating than their urban counterparts. The findings show that students from rural backgrounds tend to work more collaboratively and experience a stronger sense of belonging to a learning community (58 per cent of rural students compared with 49 per cent of urban students). The rural students also express more interest in the extracurricular activities on campus. Overall, the students from rural backgrounds are more positive about their experience of university than the urban students. They are less uncertain about their academic progress, reported less fear of failure and expressed less desire to change courses. On the core items on the first year experience questionnaire to do with teaching and learning there are a number of important, statistically significant differences between the two groups. The students from rural backgrounds are more positive about the teaching, express fewer concerns about their workload, and show greater signs of engagement and overall satisfaction. 7.5 Females and males The proportion of females in the first year cohort has been steadily rising, to the point that the female:male ratio is now close to 3:2. There remain large gender imbalances across the major fields of study, however, with female over-representation being more marked in Education, Creative Arts and the Health Sciences, while males are over-represented in Management and Commerce, Engineering and Information Technology. The project team analysed the survey data for potential differences in the demographic characteristics and the responses of males and females. Though the age profiles of the males and females are similar, a number of significant demographic differences emerged. The males tend to be from higher socioeconomic backgrounds and the females from medium socioeconomic backgrounds. A higher proportion of females are from rural areas, corresponding to the overall national enrolment patterns. The females are also more likely to be enrolled externally or by distance education. Important differences emerged in the attitudes of the sexes towards their university study. The female students in the sample demonstrate more academic orientation, more academic commitment and more satisfaction with their study than the males. The females are more likely to indicate that their intrinsic interest in the subject area


71

is an important motivating factor for them. At the same time, they are also more likely to indicate that receiving training for a specific job is an important objective for them. On the items on the first year experience questionnaire relating directly to the quality of teaching, the responses of males and females are broadly similar. The female students are slightly more satisfied on key items to do with quality of teaching. Overall, the females express greater interest in their study than the males. They are more likely to indicate that lectures stimulate their interest in the subject and that they find their study satisfying — 51 per cent of females report they received satisfaction from their study compared with 44 per cent of males. The females also indicate that they enjoy the intellectual challenge of university study and are less likely to find it difficult to get motivated to study. Notably, however, it is the females in the sample who are most likely to have indicated they felt overwhelmed by their studies at times. The females in the sample use the web for study purposes more often than the males. Males on the other hand are more likely to indicate that they use the web for recreational purposes. For the females who indicate they considered deferring or withdrawing during first year, emotional health is a prime factor. Significantly, females in the study are more likely to be doing part-time work than the males. The mean number of hours of part-time work for females is 8.3 hours per week compared with 6.2 hours for males. The proportion of females undertaking paid part-time work is 60 per cent compared with 52 per cent of males. For the females, undertaking part-time work is principally to meet their basic needs. The responses of the female students in the sample reveal that they appear well integrated into university life: they enjoy being on campus and are more likely to have made close friends than their male counterparts. 7.6 The influence of age The project team examined the differences in student background and attitudes according to their ages. The students were divided into three groups – those students aged 19 years or younger (school-leavers), those aged 20 to 24 years (non-traditional age) and those 25 years and over (mature age). The mean ages for the groups were 18.5 years, 20.9 years and 36.2 years respectively. The three-group division according to age allowed the project to examine the experiences of school-leavers entering higher education directly from school, those who ‘deferred’ entry for a year or two (strictly speaking not all are ‘deferred’ students — only 30 per cent of this group had actually deferred the year before) and genuine ‘mature-age’ students. There are noticeable demographic differences between the groups. The 19 year old students are more likely to be of higher socioeconomic background and are more likely to have attended independent schools. The 25 years and over students are more likely to be the first in their family to have attended university. Predictably, the older students are more likely to be enrolled part-time and more likely to be enrolled by distance education.


The attitudinal differences across the age groups are marked. The older students are very focused on their objectives. They indicate clear sets of goals and express fewer concerns about getting motivated to study. They also express high levels of satisfaction with their study and indicate they enjoy the intellectual challenge of their courses. Table 7.1 summarises some of the main areas of contrast in the attitudes of school-leavers and mature-age students (25 years and over). Table 7.1 Comparison of the attitudes of school-leavers and mature-age

students (25 years and over)

School-leavers (age 19 years) more likely to:

Mature-age students (age 25 years and over) more likely to:

Be marking time while they decide their future Find it difficult to get motivated to study Skip classes Wish to change courses Have made close friends at university Work collaboratively with other students and borrow notes from others Like being on campus and be active in extracurricular activities

Have a strong clarity of purpose Be motivated to develop talents and to be confident they know the occupation they want Find their course stimulating and get satisfaction from studying Find lectures stimulating Seek assistance from staff and believe they are receiving helpful feedback Be strategic about managing their workload Keep to themselves at university and be uninterested in extracurricular activities

The responses of the older students indicate they are strategic students who often work independently. They are far less likely to borrow course notes than their younger peers, and are less likely to engage in collaborative study. Mature-age students are less likely to report that they used web-based resources and are more likely to report that they keep to themselves at university (38.7 per cent compared with 26.0 per cent). Overall, the mature-age students aged 25 years and over emerge as a highly satisfied group. They express strong satisfaction with their courses and strongly believe they are receiving helpful feedback from their teachers. Mature age students are a highly engaged group. They have clear goals, they work consistently, they enjoy the teaching and learning process and the challenges associated with it. 7.7 Full-time and part-time enrolment The project team also analysed the dataset for patterns in the responses of part-time and full-time students. In doing so, we were aware that any differences that might emerge might not be associated with the mode of enrolment but might be related to factors such as the age, employment patterns and other characteristics of the students


73

who opt for part-time study. Nevertheless, any differences in the experiences of the two groups of students might provide important indicators for institutional policies and programs. Many of the differences in the survey responses of the part-time and full-time students are predictable. The part-time students have a distinctive demographic profile. They are older (43 per cent are aged 25 or above), are more likely to have attended government schools, are more likely to have dependents and are more likely to be of lower socioeconomic background than the full-time students. While the part-time students show a clearer sense of purpose than the full-time students, there are also signs of the pressure many are under. Close to one-third withdrew from one or more subjects during their first year (compared with only 16 per cent of full-time students). They are also more likely to report that work and family commitments interfere significantly with their study. Not unexpectedly, the part-time students do not report a sense of belonging on campus to the same extent as full-time students. Despite this, the two groups report very similar experiences of teaching and learning and express similar views on the quality of teaching. Overall, the part-time students are indeed significantly more satisfied with aspects of teaching and learning. They report greater intellectual challenge (68 per cent compared with 63 per cent) and are more likely to agree they receive satisfaction from studying (57 per cent compared with 48 per cent). One of the most significant differences, unsurprisingly perhaps, between full-time and part-time students is the extent to which they engage in collaborative learning activities. The part-time students are considerably less likely to indicate they study with other students and are more likely to report that they keep to themselves at university (38 per cent compared with 27 per cent). 7.8 Students who deferred study the previous year Students who receive the offer of a university place defer for many reasons, including the wish to take a break after the pressure of Year 12 studies, the need to work to save money to assist with the costs of attending university, the desire to the clarify personal goals, or simply the longing for travel. The first year experience survey sample included 255 students who commenced university after a year of deferral, 11 per cent of the sample. A relatively high proportion of these students are rural students: 43 per cent of the deferred students are from rural backgrounds compared with 26 per cent of the other students in the sample. They are also slightly more likely to have attended independent schools and to have deferred their HECS payment, both these differences being statistically significant. The study habits of the deferred students are very similar to those of the other students and they have similar views on the quality of the teaching they have experienced at university. However, there are differences in their income sources. The deferred students tend to be more financially independent and less likely to indicate their families are the main source of their income — overall, parental expectations appear


to be having a smaller influence on this group than on the students straight from school. The patterns of part-time work are broadly similar for the two groups however a very high proportion of the deferred students report that Austudy is the main or only source of income (41 per cent of deferred students compared with 25 per cent in the student sample overall). The deferred students are more likely to indicate that worrying about money interferes with their study (41 per cent compared 31 per cent), and that paid work interferes severely with their study (13 per cent compared with eight per cent). Despite the apparent concerns about money, the deferred students emerge as a group that is well focused and adjusted to life at university. They are less likely to report that university has not lived up to their expectations (11 per cent compared with 16 per cent) and their levels of enjoyment and satisfaction match those of other students. 7.9 ‘First-timers’ in higher education The project team conducted an analysis of the attitudes and experiences of the ‘first-time’ first year students compared with those who had previously commenced or completed a university course prior to 2004. While there are a number of significant differences between the two groups of students, in the main part these can be attributed to the difference in the mean ages of the groups. Students who have previously enrolled in higher education exhibit the typical patterns of older students, including part-time enrolment, and concerns about the pressures of family and work commitments. The previous enrolees also show some signs of being less confident about the likelihood of their academic success, perhaps a sign of a less than satisfactory previous experience of university education. For the purposes of this comparison we excluded international students, for a high proportion of the international students in the sample were previously enrolled in a higher education course. Since international students have distinctive experiences in many ways their inclusion in the analysis might have distorted the comparison we were seeking between 'first-timers' and previous enrolees. 7.10 Students from non-English speaking backgrounds In 2004, as in the previous two surveys, we asked respondents to indicate whether a language other than English was spoken in their family home most of the time. We refer to these students as being from a non-English speaking background (NESB), though we recognise that the DEST definition of this equity group is somewhat more specific. There are many statistically significant differences between the responses of students from NESB backgrounds and those of other students. In total, 565 students, one quarter of the sample, indicate they are from a home where a language other than English is spoken. Close to one quarter of these students are fee-paying international students. When the postcode of permanent home address is used to classify socioeconomic status there are no significant differences in the socioeconomic backgrounds of the two groups of students. The postcode measure has little relevance for overseas


75

students, however, and a more meaningful indicator of social class might be parental education levels. On average, the NESB students report higher overall levels of parental education than the non- NESB students. The students from NESB backgrounds are more likely to be male and tend to be overrepresented in management, commerce and engineering courses. They are considerably more likely to have previously commenced but not completed a university course. The responses of the students from NESB backgrounds reveal the considerable pressures experienced by many of them. The NESB students are significantly more likely to indicate that they: • received marks lower than expected during first year (43 per cent compared to 30

per cent); • are studying as a result of the expectations of their parents (51 per cent compared

with 24 per cent); • have difficulty comprehending the material, with 30 per cent agreeing that this is

the case; • have more difficulty adjusting to the style of university teaching; • are more uncomfortable in class discussions; and • are more likely to fear failing (55 per cent compared with 31 per cent). The students from NESB backgrounds are less likely to believe the teaching staff show an interest in their progress. Considerably more of them report finding the workload too heavy (42 per cent compared with 28 per cent). A possible contributing factor to these feelings of pressure is that the influence of paid work commitments on deferral considerations for NESB backgrounds is a good deal stronger than on other students. Fewer of the students from NESB backgrounds are enjoying the intellectual challenge of their courses or finding their courses stimulating. Twenty per cent of these students say that university currently has not lived up to their expectations compared with 14 per cent of all other students. The students of NESB background are less enthusiastic about the teaching they have experienced: • Fewer think that the ‘quality of teaching in my course is generally good’ (70 per

cent compared 80 per cent). • More seek greater use of online resources for helping them learn (53 per cent

compared with 43 per cent). • Fewer are satisfied overall with their university experience (65 per cent compared

72 per cent).

Overall, more than one-third (35 per cent) of the NESB students indicate they would have preferred to have commenced university with a general first year course. This compares with only 20 per cent of the other students. This figure alone highlights the uncertainty that many of the students from NESB backgrounds are experiencing.


7.11 International students The sample included 185 fee-paying overseas students, half of whom are from South-East Asia. The growth during the past decade in the proportion of fee-paying overseas students has been one of the most significant changes to occur within the Australian higher education system. The patterns of the responses of international students to the first year survey reflect numerous concerns that have been raised during recent years associated with student adjustment, academic progress and the overall quality of the university experience. The signs of the academic stress experienced by international students during their first year at an Australian campus are unambiguous:

• the international students are significantly less likely to indicate that orientation programs helped them make a good start to university (in part a possible sign of problems caused by arrival times near the start of the academic year);

• forty per cent of the international students report they had difficulty comprehending course material compared with 21 per cent of domestic students;

• close to half of the international students are receiving grades lower then they had expected;

• the international students report considerably more discomfort in participating in class discussions (31 per cent compared with 20 per cent — a finding related to differing pedagogical expectations and experiences that is hardly new); and

• 46 per cent of the international students find the workload too heavy, compared with 30 per cent of domestic students.

Overall, 56 per cent of international students find the academic standard higher than they expected compared with only 39 per cent of domestic students. Forty per cent (compared with 23 per cent) would have a preferred a general first year. The concerns of international students about their early academic experiences in Australia do not imply they are inactive learners. Significantly more international students than domestic students report they seek the advice and assistance of academic staff when they need it — even though they are less likely to believe the staff are approachable — and significantly more borrow notes from friends. One of the worrying signs in the 2004 dataset is the apparently lower level of social integration of international students. Fewer international students report they feel part of a group committed to learning (46 per cent compared with 56 per cent) and fewer are experiencing a sense of belonging (35 per cent compared with 52 per cent). Fewer are confident that a staff member knows their name and fewer believe staff take an interest in their progress. Generally, the international students are more critical of the teaching and, significantly from a policy perspective, 46 per cent of the international students report that university has not lived up to their expectation (compared with 27 per cent of domestic students).


77

Some of the responses of international students appear paradoxical and warrant further investigation. On the one hand, the international students appear focussed and goal oriented. Far fewer international students, for instance, express a desire to change their course than domestic students (nine per cent compared with 20 per cent). On the other hand, one quarter of the international students indicate they are merely ‘marking time while deciding their future’ compared with only 13 per cent of domestic students. (We note that this finding should be interpreted with caution for the questionnaire item contains a colloquialism that might be misunderstood by students from non-English speaking backgrounds.) The responses of the international students to questions on their financial arrangements returned unclear findings. A far larger proportion of the international students indicate that their families are their main source of income, fewer report that money worries make it difficult to study and fewer are working part-time. Alternatively, the international students are more likely to report they feel pressured by financial commitments (40 per cent compared with 23 per cent). This finding may indicate that international students are particularly concerned about the financial commitments their families have made on their behalf. Certainly, parental expectations figure more highly in the thinking of international students than they do for domestic students. 7.12 Full fee-paying domestic students Since the previous first year experiences surveys, federal policy changes have increasingly deregulated the higher education fee environment, allowing universities to charge fees for a proportion of the university places available to domestic students. The number of fee-paying domestic students remains small in comparison with that of HECS enrolled students and overseas fee-paying students, and fee-paying students are concentrated in particular institutions. The first year experience of the domestic students who are paying upfront fees for their higher education warrants monitoring, for these students are potentially a distinctive group in terms of their backgrounds, their expectations of university and the nature and potential impact on their study of their personal financial arrangements. The project survey received 49 returns from students who indicated they are fee-paying domestic students. Their responses are summarised below, however the small size of the group compared with the student sample overall limits the usefulness of tests of statistical significance for identifying patterns of difference and indicates that considerable caution should be used in the interpretation of the findings. Overall, the survey findings reveal few differences in the demographic characteristics, attitudes and experiences of full fee-paying domestic students compared with all other students. The fee-paying students tend to be from higher socioeconomic backgrounds, as measured on postcode of permanent home address (51 per cent of this group are higher SES compared with 38 per cent) but there are no statistically significant differences in the types of schools attended. The fee-paying students are on average 2.5 years older than the other students and a higher proportion of these students are aged over 25 years. The fee-paying students


are more likely to be doing paid work and on average are working longer hours. A significantly higher proportion of fee-paying students report that full-time work is their only or main source of income. Those who are working are more likely than other students to indicate that paying off loans and debts was a major motive behind the paid work they were undertaking. At the same time, however, the fee-paying students are less likely to say that worrying about money is making it difficult for them to study than the other students in the sample. As a group, the fee-paying students report less interest in changing courses and appear focused on their goals, suggesting they have gained access to a program that is of genuine interest to them and well matched to their career objectives. The levels of engagement of the two groups of students are the same, they report similar study habits, and have largely similar reactions to the quality of teaching. The fee-paying students are less likely, though, to report they enjoy being a university student, perhaps a sign of a slightly more instrumental outlook towards their studies. The demographic differences between fee-paying students and other students, and the distinctive patterns of paid work, suggest that fee-paying students might comprise two distinct groups. Some of these students are school-leavers who are being financially supported by their families. Others are older students who are more financially independent and who are working part-time or full-time to support the cost of their university study. Despite the apparent diversity of fee-paying domestic students, however, the evidence from this study, albeit based on a small sample, is that the university experience for these students is broadly comparable on the whole to that of all other students and their satisfaction levels are very similar. 7.13 Summary As federal policies continue to support initiatives aimed at ensuring widening access and participation of students from under-represented groups, it is imperative that findings such as the ones reported in this chapter be used to inform decision-making and program development at the institutional level. Universities are to be commended for supporting the implementation of orientation programs which support the transition of first year students to higher education, but the process cannot stop there. The next stage in the development of integrated and sustainable first year support initiatives is to monitor the needs and experiences of demographic subgroups, particularly those from equity groups. In this way, targeted initiatives can be put in place to enhance the quality of the first year experience for all students, including those most under-represented in higher education.


79

8 ____________________________________________________________________

TEN YEARS ON: TRENDS, TRANSFORMATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

8.1 Introduction This report records the many transformations that have taken place in the first year undergraduate experience in Australian higher education over the past ten years. Since 1994, the undergraduate commencing student population has risen by 36 per cent. This rise has been accompanied by further diversification of the student body first documented in First Year on Campus (1995). Most notably the overseas student population in the first year has more than tripled since 1994, with overseas students now comprising 23 per cent of commencing undergraduate student enrolments. The proportion of school-leavers entering higher education has declined slightly to 50 per cent, while there has been an increase in the proportion of non-traditional age students in the 20-24 year age bracket. A new category of students now exists in the demographic dataset, that of full fee-paying domestic students. These changes are summarised in Table 8.1.

Table 8.1 Comparative first year undergraduate commencing student statistics 1994-2003 a

1994

2003

Commencing students - total enrolment Equivalent full-time student load

159,076 130,422b

216,559 171,317b

New to higher education

Not available 100,982

Age 19 and under 20-24 years 25 years and older

85,158 (54%) 34,202 (21%) 39,716 (25%)

108,998 (50%) 57,695 (27%) 49,866 (23%)

International students 13,691 (9%) 50,060 (23%)c

ATSI – undergraduate courses ATSI – enabling and non-award courses

1,985

952

2,627

974 a 2003 data only were available at the time of writing but they are considered sufficiently indicative to be used here. b Excludes enabling, non-award courses and cross-institution programs. c Proportional data in parentheses are based on raw figures reported in DEST data; these may differ from other reported statistics depending on whether calculation is made based on EFTSU and accounting for combined degree status. Table 8.2 provides indicative statistics on the commencing undergraduate enrolments by BFOE. As a result of re-classification of these fields since 1994, it is not possible


to draw precise comparisons; nevertheless there is sufficient information to illustrate broad changes in enrolment patterns. These changes should, of course, be interpreted in light of the overall expansion of 36 per cent in the undergraduate commencing student population over the past decade. One striking ten year trend is the almost 70 per cent increase in the number of students enrolled in the Management and Commerce field. The 20 per cent decline in enrolments in the Sciences area is a trend of some concern. Since Creative Arts and Information Technology are newly categorised areas of study, no comparative data are available but it will be important to monitor these in the future, particularly the latter in light of current and projected changes in the IT industry and associated labour market forces.

Table 8.2 Indicative first year undergraduate commencing student enrolments by selected fields of education 1994-2003 a

1994

2003

Agriculture/Forestry/Animal Husbandry (1994) Agriculture, Environmental and Related Studies (2003)

3,744 4,843

Architecture

3,426 4,848

Arts/Humanities/Social Sciences Society and Culture (2003) b

39,460 49,626

Business/ Administration/Economics (1994) Management/Commerce (2003)

33,216 55,817

Education

17,344 20,113

Engineering/Surveying (1994) Engineering and Related Technologies (2003)

11,741 15,268

Health (including Vet Science)

19,545 24,715

Science

25,296 20,228

Law/Legal Studies

5304 --

New BFOEs in 2003/4

Creative Arts

-- 17,397

Information Technology

-- 18,083

Food, Hospitality and Personal Services

-- 1

a Field of study categorisations have changed since 1994 so only those fields which enable comparison are included here. Figures are indicative for even the narrow fields of education within some of the broader fields (eg Health) have changed – Health now includes Veterinary Studies whereas it was a separate category in 1994. b This Society and Culture BFOE presents significant difficulties for any comparative analysis. In 2003, Society and Culture includes the disciplines of Law, Economics, Literature and Behavioural Science thus the 2003 figure may be somewhat inflated in comparative terms. Note: The 2003 DEST data take into account the coding of Combined Courses to two fields of education. As a consequence, counting both fields of education for Combined Courses means that the totals may differ from the sum of all broad fields of education.


81

8.2 Trends and changes in enrolment and student demographics Compared with the 1994 first year student sample, in 2004 first year students are significantly older on average (from 20.5 years in 1994 to 21.2 in 2004). As mentioned, the main reason for this is the significant increase since 1994 in the proportion of students in the 20-24 year age bracket. This increase is partially explained by the notable rise in international undergraduate student enrolments over the past decade. Male representation in the first year sample has declined to just over one-third, while females now occupy a significantly greater proportion of the sample. These trends are mirrored in the national student population figures. Slightly more students in the 2004 sample group were born overseas (25 per cent in 2004 compared with 22 per cent in 1994), but a more telling figure is the significant rise in the proportion of students born in China and India, reflecting shifts in the overseas student markets in higher education. The proportion of overseas students in the sample has almost doubled over the decade (5 per cent in 1994 compared with 8 per cent in 2004), not quite reflecting the tripling of enrolments in the first year across the nation. The reasons for the apparently low response rates of international students are not clear. The proportion of students in our sample who fall into the higher achievement band has increased significantly since 1994, from eight to 12 per cent. However there is relatively little to be inferred from this other than that those who are most satisfied and achieving most successfully may be the ones more likely to complete surveys at a time when students are thought to be suffering ‘survey overload’. Our interest in the experience of students of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander origin and the role of students’ socioeconomic status reflects a sharper national focus over the past decade on the experience of students from equity target groups in higher education. There are no comparative national first year experience data on the experience of these students, nor that of students from rural areas since these groups were not investigated closely in the two previous first year studies. In shedding light on the experience of these demographic subgroups we draw attention to the critical importance of supporting and transforming understandings of their particular academic and support needs. 8.3 Developments in course enrolment patterns Course of study patterns represent another transformation in the sector over the last decade. The proportion of students enrolled in a single bachelor’s degree program has decreased appreciably since 1994, from nearly 90 per cent to just over 80 per cent in 2004. By contrast, combined degree enrolments now represent 24 per cent of the sample, up from eight per cent a decade ago. These shifts mirror the well documented rise in combined degree programs which have emerged in large part as a response to a combination of labour market and student demand. The proliferation of combined degree or double degree programs is widely recognised, but little is known of the impact of these changes on the curriculum nor on the first year student experience. It is a research area in need of attention in the Australian higher education sector.


Flexibility in course enrolment patterns is an associated feature of the higher education landscape in 2004. Compared to a decade ago, many more first year students are opting to enrol in external or distance mode courses which invariably include online components. 8.4 Changing expectations, goals and study habits The last decade has seen little change in first year students’ reasons for enrolling in a university course, though parental and family expectations have increased in prominence as motivators in this regard. Compared to the 1994 sample, students in 2004 demonstrated a much greater sense of purpose in stating their reasons for studying. The proportion of first year students withdrawing from subjects or units has risen considerably over the ten-year period in question, though the most notable change was between 1994 and 1999. Since that time, the figure has stabilised somewhat. There has been a significant decrease in the proportion of first year students considering deferring university study during or at the end of the first year. Explanations for this are speculative at this stage, but are worth pursuing in an effort to understand student motivations and implications for retention initiatives developed at the institutional level. On the whole, first year students are more positive than they were ten years ago with respect to university meeting their expectations. However, several noteworthy subgroup differences are noted in the report (see chapter 3), including the fact that international students are significantly less satisfied than their domestic peers. With regard to study habits, we have no trend data on the subject of number of hours devoted to private study. In 2004, students say they devote 11 hours per week to study. It will be important to monitor trends in this figure in years to come to better understand first year students’ changing study habits and the concomitant pedagogical implications. 8.5 Learning and teaching in the first year First year students in 2004 scored significantly higher on the academic orientation scale compared with their 1994 counterparts. Indicators of first year students’ academic application suggest that in 2004, as compared with a decade ago, students are more motivated to study and tend to contact academic staff more frequently to seek advice and help. They enjoy the intellectual challenge of study and perceive lectures to be one means of stimulating their intellectual interest. They also find academic staff more approachable, more interested in students’ academic progress, and more available to discuss their work than was the case ten years ago. These positive shifts arguably reflect the outcome of significant efforts over the past decade to enhance the orientation and support provided to first year students. Institutions have recognised the importance of integrating first year students into the


83

academic community and of orienting them to the various demands of studying in a new environment (Krause, 2003). Widespread efforts have been made to ensure that teaching staff in first year courses understand the unique needs of students new to university study. These efforts have included attempts to attach a ‘human face’ to learning in large classes by giving prominence to the accessibility of academic staff and support staff to advise and assist students. The importance of peer involvement has also been a feature of these initiatives. We do not have ten-year trend data on this feature of students’ experiences, but the increasing number of items on this area in the two surveys since 1994 yield data which confirm that a majority of students in 2004 study with peers and engage with them both in and out of class on academically purposeful activities. On every item of the effective teaching scale developed in 1994 there has been a significant positive shift in students’ perceptions. This transformation in first year students’ views on teaching is mirrored by the upward trend over the past decade in satisfaction with their course of study. The multidimensional nature of possible explanations for these trends has been argued in earlier chapters; suffice to say that more extensive analysis of the reasons for these findings is warranted with a view to better understanding pedagogical and student-related shifts which may have contributed to the results. It will be particularly important to monitor subgroup differences in these patterns in the future as there is sufficient indication from the data of differential student experiences which must be acknowledged. Despite the many positive trends in relation to student perceptions of teaching, we note some continuing concerns. Only a minority of students feel that teaching staff give helpful feedback on a regular basis and take an interest in student progress. Further, despite the positive shift in student perceptions, of staff availability, attention should be given to ongoing efforts to address the needs of those who continue to see teaching staff as ‘unavailable’ or inaccessible. 8.5.1 Transforming learning and teaching ICTs are transforming the way first year students engage with each other, with their teachers and with learning. The report documents several dimensions of this transformation (see Chapters 4 and 5) which has been so rapid that we have very limited comparative data for the period 1994 to 2004. In 1994 we asked students how often they used tapes of lectures. Eighty-one per cent never used this form of technology. By contrast more than two-thirds of first year students frequently use the web for study purposes in 2004. The ubiquity of the worldwide web and the rapid uptake of this form of technology for teaching, research purposes and publication of course materials has meant that new technologies in the form of ICTs are much more widely and frequently used than were audiotape technologies and the like a decade ago. In 1994 students were asked how useful they found computer-based learning. Forty two per cent had not used this form of technology, but of note is that more than one-third of students had used the technology and found it useful. The 2004 FYEQ comprised several more items in this regard, reflecting the widening use and application of ICTs in the form of email, online discussion and web-based resources (see Table 4.10). The majority of students


in 2004 accessed online course resources, used email to contact peers and lecturers, and used computer software designed for their course. The proportion of students using online discussion opportunities remains in the minority. Such patterns of usage are evident in similar studies of undergraduate student ICT use (see for example, Krause, 2004b). These represent a selection of the key findings of the 2004 study and they highlight the need for ongoing and more sophisticated analyses of students’ use of a wider range of ICTs including mobile and wireless technologies, with a focus on implications for quality of learning and teaching as well as broader policy implications. 8.6 Managing commitments The exploration of how first year students manage their time and financial commitments at university has advanced over the past decade. We now recognise the increasingly complex sets of commitments students are juggling in addition to their study, as well as the more diverse range of fee-paying options available to domestic students. Based on our surveys, the last decade has seen students progressively spending fewer days on average on campus during the course of full-time study in the first year. This trend is accompanied by a significant increase in the proportion of full-time commencing students committed to paid employment (47 per cent in 1994 compared with 55 per cent in 2004), and a rise in the proportion of students relying on paid part-time work as their main or only source of income (26 per cent in 1994 compared with 31 per cent in 2004). A further transformation in the first year student experience has come in the form of a reduction in the average course contact hours from 17.6 hours per week to 15.9 hours per week over a decade. There has also been a notable rise in the proportion of students who rely on savings as their primary source of income while studying. This may be attributed to the growing proportion of students in the non-traditional age category who may have been employed prior to entering university, as well as to the substantial proportion of school-leavers who were employed part-time in their final year of school. As in 1994, we asked students how they spent the 24 hours of their most recent day on campus, using a series of major activities (excluding course contact hours) as a guide. In 2004 we added commuting and paid work to this list to reflect what we know of the changing activity patterns of first year students. While this form of data collection does not necessarily yield representative data, it does provide snapshot impressions which allow for some comparisons. Time devoted to private study on a typical university day has remained substantially the same over the ten year period in question. However, there has been a notable decline in the proportion of students using the library for between one and five hours per day, accompanied by a significant increase in the proportion of students not using the library at all. There is well documented discussion of the ways in which the role of university libraries has been transformed in recent years as a result on online technologies. These data provide additional evidence that is worthy of closer investigation from the perspective of the student experience.


85

Students in 2004 typically spent less time than their 1994 counterparts on household and family duties, sport, recreation and social interaction, with substantially more of the 2004 sample spending no time at all on these activities during the time period in question. The majority of 2004 first year students spend up to two hours travelling to university on a typical day and one-fifth spent up to eight hours in paid employment.

Table 8.3 How students spend their weekday time, 1994-2004 (% of total sample)

None <1hr 1-2hrs 3-4hrs 5-6hrs 7-8hrs 9-10hrs >10hrs

Private study

1994 2004

16 15

19 21

34 36

23 20

6 6

2 1

1 1

1 1

Using the library 1994 2004

37 47

28 31

25 18

8 4

2 1

0 0

0 0

0 0

Household/family duties 1994 2004

13 25

37 41

35 23

11 7

3 2

1 1

0 0

1 1

Sport 1994 2004

48 62

23 18

23 16

5 3

1 1

0 0

0 0

0 0

Recreation 1994 2004

21 26

20 22

32 29

19 15

5 5

1 1

0 0

1 1

Social activities 1994 2004

23 30

18 24

30 25

20 15

7 4

2 1

1 0

1 1

Other significant activity (e.g. volunteer work)

1994 2004

77 90

4 4

5 3

7 1

3 1

3 0

1 0

1 0

New in 2004

Commuting to and from university

2004

7

42

37

12

1

0

0

0 Paid work

2004

74

1 4

10

6

2

1

2

8.7 University transitions The proportion of school-leavers, aged 19 years and younger, in our sample dropped from 71 per cent in 1994 to 67 per cent in 2004. This reflects a similar trend at the national level, with non-traditional and mature age students increasing in their representation among commencing first year students. This means that we must now


concern ourselves with multiple transitions to university, taking into account several factors including age and the various responsibilities it potentially represents – particularly family and employment commitments. The ten-year trend data suggest that school-leavers are more satisfied in 2004 with how their school study prepared them for university, though students expressing this view continue to be in the minority. Even fewer school-leavers now believe that a general first year at university is necessary and the majority felt ready and sufficiently informed to choose their university course. Some of these trends point to the success of initiatives aimed at bridging the gap between school and university, as outlined in the report. However, they may also reflect a generally better informed first year population who has access to much more course and university information than did their 1994 counterparts, particularly via the web. The respective influence of these factors is impossible to determine without a more detailed investigation. Another form of transition to first year is that of mature age students who are more likely than younger counterparts to feel that university has not lived up to expectations. On the other hand they are more likely to be motivated and strategic in managing their workload, and to seek assistance from staff. On the whole, mature age students in the sample are a highly satisfied group, but these aggregated data may mask some of the finer details. For instance, mature age students are more likely to be part-time enrolees who tend to report higher instances of feeling under pressure. This pressure may come from a range of sources including work and family commitments. As a result of these pressures, there continues to be a need for transition support tailored to the needs of mature age students. 8.8 Strategic directions and future research First Year on Campus (1995) laid the foundation for subsequent studies by identifying key dimensions of the first year undergraduate experience in Australian universities. Trends in the First Year Experience (2000) identified changes that had taken place over five years and documented what universities were doing to support first year students within institutions. In 2004 we built on the two previous studies by investigating student responses to these initiatives and evidence of their impact. We expanded the focus in 2004 by examining the experience of a range of demographic subgroups in the student sample. The challenge now lies in determining the best approach to shaping ongoing research and informed policy-making that is sensitive to the changing first year experience and at the same time maintains the rigour demanded of a high quality university experience in a globalised higher education context. In order to provide strategic direction for ongoing research, policy and practice in relation to the first year, we propose the following key areas of investigation. 8.8.1 The transforming first year experience The broad intent of this study was to promote an understanding of ways in which the undergraduate first year experience is being transformed by virtue of the students who make up the first year population and by external economic and sociopolitical forces.


87

The findings of this study point to several trends in the first year experience including part-time employment commitments and student use of ICTs. At the same time, increasing proportions of first year students are enrolling in combined degree programs, opting to enhance their employability and demanding global portability of credentials. While this study identifies several trends, it was beyond the scope of the project to investigate how these trends are influencing learning and teaching, for example. There would be merit in conducting a complementary study of the views and experiences of academics and support staff to determine their perceptions of implications for pedagogy and student support. It is also imperative to investigate the impact on the student experience of the rapidly rising enrolments in double degree programs. In many cases, these programs are offered across academic departments and disciplines – or even institutions, meaning that first year students are expected to adjust to more varied academic contexts than is the case in single degree programs. There is good reason to believe that in some instances, first year students studying in these settings do not benefit from adequate transition and orientation support since respective academic units assume the other is catering for the needs of the student in respect to orientation. The ‘falling through the cracks’ syndrome is a particular risk for these students who, as a result, feel little sense of belonging within an academic department or the university as a whole. There is also the question of the quality and coherence of the overall educational experience of these students. Further, there is a need to investigate the effect on student expectations of these transformations in the first year student experience. There is growing concern within universities that as universities become more client-centred in a market-driven economy, students’ demands and expectations are becoming increasingly difficult to meet. Institutional policy-makers need to consider carefully the delicate balance between shaping and being shaped by student demands and expectations (James, 2002). This has implications at all levels of operation within universities. 8.8.2 Dimensions of student engagement in the first year One of the new focus areas of the 2004 FYEQ was that of student engagement and its various dimensions. An important indicator of engagement is time devoted to academic endeavours including class attendance. In this study we have noted that 2004 first year internal enrolees are spending on average less time in formal class settings than was the case in 1999, but slightly more time on campus. We have speculated on possible reasons for this in the report, but it is an area worthy of further investigation. In addition to spending time in class and on campus, engagement is fostered through time spent with other students, with academics and with student support staff in the learning community. An increasingly important means of fostering this engagement is through ICTs and mobile technologies. In 2004 we extended our investigation of students’ use of ICTs in the context of learning and studying in the first year. The pattern of student engagement with learning through ICTs is a most fruitful area for future research. A deeper understanding of this area has significant implications for enhancing the quality of student learning and connectedness with the learning


community in the first year, along with implications for curriculum design and teaching practices. 8.8.3 Experiences of diverse student groups in the first year Another new dimension of the 2004 study was the commitment to investigating more closely the experiences of students from designated groups, particularly equity groups such as students from low SES backgrounds, those from non-English speaking backgrounds and Indigenous students. The focus on demographic subgroup differences reflects a recognition that policy and practice with respect to supporting the first year experience must reflect a responsiveness to the possibly unique experiences and needs of students from respective subgroups. This demands a process of information gathering and informed analysis in the first instance, as we have initiated here. However, ongoing monitoring of the experiences of students from equity groups is essential if policy-makers at the national and institutional levels are serious about increasing participation and completion rates of these students. In an internationally competitive higher education market it is essential, too, that universities monitor the changing needs and experiences of international students so as to provide them with a high standard of education and support. The complexity of these diverse student experiences demands appropriately targeted and sophisticated monitoring, analysis and interpretation of the data. There would also be merit in documenting and disseminating best practice in responding to the needs of first year students from demographic subgroups – particularly equity groups. 8.8.4 Financing undergraduate study and the first year experience With major changes to the federal government policy regarding the financing of undergraduate education in 2005, the findings of this study represent an important source of information on the relationships between first year students’ attitudes to financial matters, their sources of income, fee-paying commitments and various behaviours and attitudes in the context of their university study. It will be important to use these data to compare the experiences and attitudes of this cohort of students with future first year enrolees under new higher education funding schemes. Clearly there will be value in a rigorous research program to monitor such factors as decision-making and debt aversion of prospective undergraduate students, relationships between students’ fee-paying commitments and the quality of their experience, using the range of indicators developed in the FYEQ. 8.8.5 Enhancing first year teaching and curriculum Over the past ten years, first year student perceptions of teaching have become progressively more positive overall. However a few key areas for improvement remain. Specifically, students would like teaching staff to take more interest in their progress and would like more helpful feedback on academic progress. We have also


89

noted the less positive views of some students on areas such as staff availability to discuss students’ work. Strategies for addressing these issues will vary across institutions. In some cases, it may mean providing professional development for teachers of first year courses, including sessional staff, on types of feedback and creative approaches to continuous assessment and feedback processes. In other instances, it may mean that additional staff resources are allocated to first year courses. However, there are times when perceptions of staff availability may be shaped by academics and sessional staff being more explicit about consultation policies and perhaps more visible during those consultation times. Innovative methods of connecting with students and providing feedback, including use of ICTs may also help to redress some of these concerns. It is important for institutions to monitor and be responsive to these learning and teaching issues in the first year. This may have staffing implications, but it also means supporting those most closely connected with teaching first year students – often sessional staff – through ongoing professional development. Regular review of curriculum and assessment practices may be another avenue for addressing the issue of how best to provide meaningful and regular feedback to first year students within and across disciplines and institutions. 8.8.6 Sustainable and responsive first year initiatives in universities Trends in the First Year Experience (2000) identified a number of developments and initiatives aimed at enhancing the transition of first year students. In 2004 we gathered student views on the success of these initiatives in helping them to adapt to university life and learning. The student feedback was positive on the whole, but restricted to the broad category of ‘university orientation program’. While first year transition programs are now widely implemented across Australian universities, there is limited evidence of institutions evaluating these initiatives with a view to sustaining and embedding them within institutional policy frameworks and strategic operations. Up to now, first year support efforts have tended to be piecemeal in the main, developed and sustained by individuals or small groups who champion the cause of first year transition. We have now reached the stage where universities must recognise the need for institution-wide approaches to enhancing the first year experience. Responsiveness to the needs of demographic and cultural subgroups demands that student support staff, academics and administrators work together to integrate their efforts and initiatives for the benefit of all students. Research and evaluation play a key role in assuring the quality, effectiveness, and adaptability of these efforts. 8.8.7 First year experience research methodologies Two key methodological aspects worthy of close consideration in the planning of future national first year research studies are those pertaining to the scale and the depth of approaches to data collection. There has been a significant decline in response rates to the FYEQ since 1994. This trend appears widespread with print-based surveys. Some possibilities for the future include contacting non-responders by phone or email, though privacy issues render this prohibitive in many cases. Online survey options should also be considered, particularly among commencing ‘NetGen’


undergraduates who are typically familiar and comfortable with electronic forms of communication. Research on the success and validity of online surveying techniques is equivocal so we would advocate it as a complementary method of data collection rather than a viable replacement for paper-based surveying at this stage. The second methodological issue is that of the depth of information afforded by quantitative survey methodologies. On numerous occasions throughout the report we identify the need for in-depth qualitative data on various dimensions of the first year student experience with a view to understanding the reasons for and motives behind students’ responses. The merits of collecting qualitative data to complement statistical information are clear, particularly in the context of the increasing imperative to understand the experiences, needs and expectations of diverse demographic and cultural subgroups. 8.9 Concluding remarks This report represents a watershed in the study of the first year experience in Australian universities. It is now ten years since the first national survey of students in their first year of higher education, and fifty years since the earliest recorded Australian university survey of first year students (as outlined in the Afterword to follow). The challenge for national higher education policy makers, university leaders and policy researchers alike is to ensure that this strong history of Australian studies on the first year experience is fostered and continues to inform best practice in learning, teaching and student support in Australian universities.


91

AFTERWORD

____________________________________________________________________ THE FIRST YEAR EXPERIENCE

FIFTY YEARS AGO

by Carole Hooper

During the 1950s, university departments and faculties around Australia were increasingly taking steps to improve the overall experience of students, especially those in the first year of their course. Concerns about a decline in a sense of community and the need to foster better relations between students and staff assumed greater importance as universities grew in size during and after the Second World War. After a small decline in the early 1950s, student numbers rapidly increased: in 1957 the nine Australian universities had an enrolment of 36,500 students, compared to 14,600 in 1939 – a rise of 155 per cent. Campuses had become so severely overcrowded that they were ‘inadequately staffed and equipped to discharge their heavy responsibilities to the community’. i John Neill Greenwood, the Dean of Science at the University of Melbourne, outlined in his annual report for 1958 various measures adopted by the faculty in an attempt to help students overcome the feeling of loneliness they experienced ‘in the freedom and apparent lack of disciplinary compulsion’ in their first year at university. Early that year the faculty had held a symposium to discuss student staff relationships, and sixty volunteers among the academic staff had each met with five or six ‘freshers’ to talk about university life and make sure feelings of isolation were ‘dissipated’. The Dean reflected on his own ‘satisfaction in being able to resolve some of the emotional tangles and doubts of the young people and to advise others in the extraordinary simple matters of life which to them seemed complex.’ ii The pressure of student numbers and the consequent difficulties experienced by Australian universities may have been somewhat less controversial, and certainly attracted far less public attention, had it not become apparent that a high percentage of students were failing to complete their course. This level of failure, or ‘wastage’, was described by a committee established under the chairmanship of Sir Keith Murray in late 1956 as ‘a national extravagance which can ill be afforded’. iii A survey conducted by the Commonwealth Office of Education of full-time students who began their studies in 1951 and sat for the annual examinations the same year, found that only 35 per cent had graduated in minimum time and only 58 per cent had graduated or were expected to graduate. Particularly worryingly, only sixty-one per cent passed their first year examinations. iv The Murray Committee observed, ‘It is difficult to exaggerate the cost in time, effort and money to students, universities and the nation of this low rate of graduation’.v Universities sought to find reasons for the high level of failure and to determine how they could ensure that the ‘casualty rate’, from whatever cause, was kept to a minimum. Early investigations, including those conducted in Australia by Hohne vi and Sanders vii, examined whether more rigid selection criteria might have a positive


effect on pass rates. But soon it was generally agreed that academic success could not be predicted with sufficient accuracy from the existing selection criteria and thus the raising of admission standards would be unlikely to result in any substantial improvement in student performance at university. viii ix Having rejected the implementation of more restrictive selection processes, researchers began to look at the social context and the sociological and psychological factors that might impinge upon student progress. By the mid 1950s, Australian universities had followed overseas trends in introducing a range of student services designed to look after students’ general well-being.x The university staff associated with these health, counselling, and housing services were ideally placed to learn about students and their personal circumstances. At first they simply gathered information on why students used the services but eventually more formal investigations were conducted. The earliest survey of first year students that attempted to collect data on the environmental and personal factors that affected academic progress was conducted by the Student Counselling Service at the University of Melbourne in 1955 and 1956. Other surveys designed to investigate student attitudes and circumstances were subsequently conducted by the University of Queensland and the University of Western Australia.xi That this interest in understanding the student experience was a new phenomenon is reflected in the comment made in 1957 by Stephen Roberts, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Sydney, that the ‘university has never had any evidence, apart from casual comment, about the opinions its graduates hold of it as an institution’.xii The University of Melbourne’s First Year Student Survey (FYSS) was designed by the Student Counsellor, Robert (Bob) Priestley, and Assistant Counsellor, Don Anderson. xiii Questionnaires were distributed to 1140 full-time, first year students — in November 1955 to students in science-based faculties and in November 1956 to those studying law and arts. The 82-item questionnaire adopted as its organising theme ‘the life of the student’ and sought to gather information on four main aspects: ‘background’, ‘choice of career and faculty’, ‘university life’, and ‘teaching and examinations’. Responses were correlated to seven major variables – school background, family background, scholarship type, faculty, accommodation type, living conditions, problems, and examinations. The analysis of the data was conducted by the Department of Psychology, under the direction of Dr Sam Hammond. The sample size for the First Year Student Survey in 1955/56 was small and confined to one institution, but the findings allow interesting comparisons with the student experience fifty years later. The 1955/56 survey achieved a ‘highly satisfactory’ response rate of 85 per cent. Only a third of the respondents were female and only seven per cent were ‘non-Australian’ students (classified as four per cent European and three per cent Asian). Fifty per cent of the students held a Commonwealth Scholarship and 20 per cent a Secondary Teachers’ College Scholarship. Secondary Teachers’ College Scholarship holders accounted for half of the students from rural backgrounds. In 1955-6, only 11 per cent of students had undertaken paid work during term. Fifty-one per cent reported they working during the vacation only. It should be borne in mind that Commonwealth Scholarship holders were permitted to engage in paid


93

employment during vacations only and Secondary Teachers’ College Scholarship holders were not permitted to work at all. xiv The first year students in 1955/56 were asked to nominate one reason for their choice of their present course. ‘Interest in the course’ was rated as the highest factor (49 per cent), followed by job prospects (16 per cent). Eight per cent of students gave reasons classified as ‘altruistic’. Students were also asked whether they considered they had been adequately prepared academically for university. A little over one-third of the respondents believed they had been adequately prepared in all subjects. A wide variation in response was evident according to the type of school attended, with the most satisfied having attended city high schools (42 per cent) or major public schools (44 per cent), and least satisfied were from rural high schools (27 per cent) and associated grammar schools (19 per cent). The report cautioned that the results were biased by the fact that some university subjects were not taught at school. When asked whether they considered that they had been well-prepared for university life, 53 per cent of the students agreed. The most satisfied students were those from the major public schools (69 per cent) and the least satisfied were from rural high schools (29 per cent). The respondents reported various problems that were interfering with their study, among them difficulties with people where they lived (12 per cent), personal problems (26 per cent), and health problems (21 per cent). Twenty-three per cent reported that they had inadequate heating and eight per cent inadequate lighting. Those who lived in lodgings were the most hindered personally and physically. Relatively few students regularly studied or discussed work with other students – only 28 per cent reported they did so, plus a further 12 per cent who indicated they did so only when they were experiencing problems. Students were also asked to indicated the number of nights they studied each week. In terms one and three, 15 per cent studied one or two nights a week, 21 per cent three nights a week, 28 per cent four nights a week, and 35 per cent five or more nights a week. The students in 1955/6 appeared disinclined to become involved in extracurricular activities. Fifty-two per cent had not ‘regularly’ taken part in activities of a university club or society, and 36 per cent had not taken part on a ‘casual’ basis. The First Year Student Survey also probed students about their personal relationships, the report noting that sixty-seven per cent did not have ‘a steady friend of the opposite sex’. The 1955/6 survey disclosed ‘a fair amount of dissatisfaction on the part of students about our present standard of lecturing’. xv The questionnaire asked students ‘Have you any comments which may help the university or its departments … to be of greater assistance to students?’ Among the responses were the following criticisms:

Lecturers do not, or perhaps don’t have time to get to know their students and not enough cognisance is given to the fact that 1st year’s are entering a totally new world and would welcome a more humane attitude from lecturers who now take the place of the understanding school teacher. We would appreciate being treated more like human beings instead of machines with minds.


When appointing tutors their teaching ability should be considered. They should not be chosen merely on their academic brilliance. Many students have little idea of mode of study at University and are hopelessly lost … perhaps a few lectures could be given on the way to study particular subjects.

Overall, however, only eight per cent of students in 1955/6 indicated they had not enjoyed their time at university. Nevertheless, 53 per cent, although satisfied intellectually, expressed some reservations about other aspects of their experience. The report of the first major Australian study concluded that when a number of personal problems were encountered by students a pattern of failure resulted. Students who did well were those who were favourably endowed in terms of finance, family occupation, and family tradition of university study. xvi Endnotes i Commonwealth of Australia, Report of the Committee on Australian Universities, September 1957, p. 29. Letter to Menzies 19 September 1957, p. 4. Sir Keith Murray was Chairman of the University Grants Commission in Great Britain. ii J Neill Greenwood, ‘Annual Report of the Dean of Science’, University of Melbourne Council Minutes, No. 45, 6 October 1958, p. 453. iii Murray, p.7. iv Based on evidence from six universities. v Murray, p. 35. vi H. Hohne, The Prediction of Academic Success; An investigation into the academic careers of students entering the University of Melbourne in 1943 and 1944, ACER, 1951; H. Hohne, Success and Failure in Scientific Faculties of the University of Melbourne, ACER, 1955. vii C. Sanders, Student Selection and Academic Success in Australian Universities, Commonwealth Office of Education, 1948. viii R. Priestley, ‘The mental health of university students’ in E. French (ed.), Melbourne Studies in Education 1957-58, MUP, 1958, p. 37. ix S. Cohen, ‘Teaching and Learning in Australian Universities’ in Australian Journal of Higher Education, Vol..1, No.1, 1963(check), p. 85. x Uni New England, p. 17. The University of Edinburgh was the first to establish a student health service in 1930. N. Malleson, ‘The changing concept of student health’ in The Student Health association University College London: The First Decade 1945-1955, University College London, 1957, p. 17. By 1958 four Australian universities had four qualified psychologists employed full time as student counsellors, most of which had been made since 1953. The four universities were Western Australia, Melbourne, Sydney, and New South Wales. Flecker in Report of a conference of student advisers held at the University of New England, 12-13 August 1958, p. 24, University of Melbourne Archives. Research conducted in the UK had found that psychological problems often impaired students’ capacity for sustained work. Malleson [1], p. 19. xi A bibliography of Australian research into student failure published in 1964, claimed that up to that time, most of the information on student attitudes and circumstances had been drawn from five surveys. These were Hammond (1957, University of Melbourne), Theobald (1959,University of Melbourne), Gray (1958, University of NSW), Flecker (1958, University of Western Australia), and Schonnell, Roe, and Middleton (1962, University of Queensland). N. Caiden, ‘Student failure in Australian universities’ in Vestes, Vol. 7, No. 1, March 1964, p. 47. xii The Gazette of the University of Sydney, Vol. 1, No. 13, April 1957, p. 175. xiii Priestley had been appointed as Student Counsellor in 1954 and Anderson in 1956. xiv FirstYear Student Survey, p. 53. xv Minutes Professorial Board, No. 32, 16 July 1957, p. 252, SEC 18 October 1957. xvi Anderson, ‘Report of Conference of Student Advisers’, University of New England, 12-13 August 1958, p. 2, University of Melbourne Archives.


95

REFERENCES DEET. (1994). Selected higher education student statistics, 1994. Canberra: AGPS. DETYA. (1999). Transition from secondary to tertiary: a performance study. Higher Education Series, Report No. 36, September. DETYA. (2000). Students 1999: Selected Higher Education Statistics. Canberra: Department of Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra, February. James, R. (2002). Students’ changing expectations of higher education and the consequences of mismatches with reality. In P. Coaldrake (Ed.), Responding to Student Expectations. Paris: OECD. James, R., Baldwin, G., Coates, H., Krause, K., & McInnis, C. (2003). Analysis of equity groups in higher education, 1991-2002. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training. James, R., Baldwin, G. & McInnis, C. (1999). Which university? The factors influencing the choices of prospective undergraduates. Canberra: AGPS. Krause, K. (2003). Which way from here? Passion, policy and practice in first year higher education. Keynote address presented at the Seventh Pacific Rim Conference: First Year in Higher Education – Enhancing the transition to higher education: Strategies and policies that work, 9-11 July, Brisbane, Australia. Krause, K. (2004a). Online learning experiences: Implications for quality learning and teaching in higher education. Association for the Study of Higher Education Conference, 2-7 November, Kansas City, USA. Krause, K. (2004b). e-Education and the changing student experience: Policy implications. Paper accepted for the International Conference on Computers in Education, Nov 30-Dec 3, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia. Krause, K., McInnis, C., & Welle, C. (2003). Out-of-class engagement in undergraduate learning communities: The role and nature of peer interactions. Paper presented at the Association for the Study of Higher Education Conference, 13-16 November, Portland, Oregon, USA. Kuh, G. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change, March/April, 24-32. Long, M. & Hayden, M. (2001). Paying their way: A survey of Australian undergraduate university student finances. Canberra: AVCC. McInnis, C. & James, R. (1995). First year on campus: Diversity in the initial experiences of Australian undergraduates. Canberra: AGPS.


McInnis, C. & Hartley, R. (2002). Managing study and work: The impact of full-time study and paid work on the undergraduate experience in Australian universities. Canberra: DEST. McInnis, C., Hartley, R., Polesel J. & Teese, R. (2000). Non-completion in vocational education and training and higher education. Canberra: AGPS. McInnis, C., James, R., & Hartley, R. (2000). Trends in the first year experience in Australian universities. Canberra: AGPS. Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177. Wyn, J. (2004). Becoming adult in the 2000s: New transitions and new careers. Family Matters, No 68, Winter.


97

APPENDIX 1 A1.1 Survey method and data analysis

In May 2004, letters were sent to the Vice Chancellors of the seven Australian universities that had participated in the previous two national First Year Experience studies. An additional two institutions were approached in this way, for reasons outlined in Chapter 1. All agreed to participate in the study. To facilitate the ten year trend analysis it was important to follow the same sampling procedure as that used in the studies of 1994 and 1999. In order to select a representative sample of first year students, we asked institutions to provide the names of students who were: internal, first year, first time students at bachelor and ‘other undergraduate’ level, stratified by the DEST Broad Fields of Education (BFOE). We provided institutions with detailed guidelines on the sampling process, in recognition of the fact that institutions would adapt these according to their databases and management systems. In 1994, we sought a 20 per cent sample from the population of first year students. In 2004, as in 1999, we requested a 25 per cent sample in order to ensure a sample of reasonable size. Where the sample selected for a BFOE was less than 50 students, institutions were asked to increase the sample to 50, and if total enrolments for the BFOE were less than 50, to include all first year students within scope in that field. Chapter 1 notes that in our efforts to maximise participation rates of Indigenous students in this study, we asked institutions to include the names of Indigenous students enrolled in non-award and enabling courses. These procedures were taken into account during the data analysis phase. As in past years, sampling at Regional University was slightly different owing to the relatively small numbers of first time, first year students at this institution. In 1999 we sampled 50 per cent of relevant students from this institution. In 2004 we increased this to 100 per cent to ensure a reasonable response rate. The same procedure was adopted for Evolving University. Institutions had the choice of mailing out the surveys themselves or providing the CSHE with an electronic list of the sample to be mailed out by a Melbourne-based mailing-house. All but one institution chose the latter procedure. The initial mailout of surveys was to 8,486 students. Three to four weeks later, a second mailout went to students who had not responded by that time. A proportion of surveys (5 per cent) were not able to be used for various reasons. These included returns from students not enrolled in first year, surveys returned due to changed addresses, and returns received after the cut-off date for data entry. Overall, the potential number of ‘useable’ surveys, excluding those discarded for all reasons, was 2344. This represents a response rate of 28 per cent. Response rates varied across the institutions, from a low of 23 per cent at New and Evolving University to a high of 31 per cent at Established University (see Table A.1). We understand that several of the universities sampled had, in the twelve


months previous to this study, conducted some form of institution-based survey related to student experience in the first year. There is a strong argument in light of this for a more coordinated approach to balancing institution and sector-wide surveys of this kind so as to capitalise on the complementary benefits of local and national efforts aimed at supporting the quality of the first year experience. Table A.1 Response rates by institution, 1994-2004

1994 Effective response

rate (%)


rate (%)


rate (%) Established 65

42

31

Suburban 57

39

27

New 54

32

23

International 57

23

27

Regional 57

43

28

Applied 63

44

30

Consolidated

39 40 27

Evolving

N/A N/A 23

Traditional

N/A N/A 29

Total

57

(n=4028)

37

(n=2609)

28

(n=2344) Table A.2 provides an overview of the proportion of students by Broad Field of Education classification across institutions. It also enumerates the relative proportion of students enrolled in combined degrees, illustrating that these students account for between ten per cent and a quarter of the sample of respondents from institutions in this study.


99

Table A.2 Proportion of respondents by Broad Field of Education and institution, 2004

Agri-

cult Archi-

tect Soc/ Cult

Man/ Com

Educ Engi-neer

Health Science Creat. Arts

IT Food/Hosp

Comb Degree

Established

3 6 17 13 4 8 16 17 4 1 1 22

Suburban

5 0 12 9 10 8 22 10 8 5 2 12

New

1 1 18 26 13 5 8 8 3 4 1 15

International

2 7 17 17 1 20 9 10 8 1 1 16

Regional

4 0 27 6 18 0 14 9 9 1 0 16

Applied

0 5 12 13 16 10 16 12 4 6 0 17

Consolidated

7 1 9 15 16 4 22 5 7 4 0 9

Evolving

3 1 30 18 16 3 11 3 6 6 1 9

Traditional

10 13 22 5 0 7 17 14 6 1 0 26

A1.2 Survey respondents across institutions, 1994-2004 Table A.3 provides details of gender breakdown, the percentage of younger and older students, the proportion of international full fee-paying students and the percentage of part-time first years in the 1994 and 2004 samples. The fact that female respondents across institutions are over-represented has not changed over time. Consistent with the national trend, the proportion of students 19 years and younger has declined or remained static in the majority of the sampled institutions. The exceptions to this are Regional and Applied Universities. The change in the part-time constituency across institutions has been variable over the past decade. Over half of the institutions have an increased proportion of part-time respondents represented in the sample. This reflects changing enrolment patterns of first year students which are evident at the national level.


Table A.3 Selected respondent demographic characteristics by institution

compared with previous samples, 1994 -2004 (%)

Females

19 years and under

25 years and over

International full-fee

Part-time study

1994 2004 1994 2004 1994 2004 1994 2004 1994 2004 Established

62 63 86 81 4 2 6 21 2 7

Suburban

68 66 74 69 13 10 3 7 8 6

New

66 68 70 52 12 14 1 6 8 13

International

60 55 77 78 7 4 11 13 4 8

Regional

66 74 64 78 12 4 3 1 2 6

Applied

61 70 66 75 13 11 5 6 9 6

Consolidated

61 68 43 20 34 47 2 3 27 18

Evolving

-- 72 -- 33 -- 42 -- 2 -- 19

Traditional

-- 63 -- 91 -- 3 -- 6 -- 3

A1.3 Statistical analyses The data analysis and coding procedures used in 2004 were identical to those of the previous two studies. SPSS software enabled the production of descriptive statistics and cross-tabulations. Independent t-tests were used to determine significance levels of relationships between nominated variables. Significance levels are reported at p<0.01 and p<0.05. A1.4 Reliability of previous scales A feature of the 1994 first year experience questionnaire was the emergence of several scales on students’ academic application and orientation, as well as their identity and sense of purpose. The core 1994 scales were retained and statistical analyses support their continued viability for the period 1994 to 2004. Scales on good teaching and course satisfaction were also sustained over the ten-year period. In some cases, scale items were removed in 2004 and the 1994 workload scale was not retained. Decisions to remove certain items were informed by an analysis of their reliability on the past two FYEQ occasions. The project team also gave careful consideration to the key aims of the 2004 study and current research imperatives and emerging issues in the first year experience. Some items were rephrased to reflect subtle linguistic changes that have taken place in the last decade, while others were deleted to minimise redundancies or because they were not considered sufficiently


101

informative in the context of this study. Practical issues were also taken into account, including the importance of achieving coherence in the questionnaire while not adding to its length. Nevertheless, the most statistically robust and relevant items were retained, as indicated in Table A.4.

Table A.4 Reliability of existing and amended FYEQ scales, 2004

Scales

Reliability

Academic orientation The lectures often stimulate my interest in the subjects I enjoy the intellectual challenge of the subjects I am studying I get a lot of satisfaction from studying Items omitted in 2004 I really enjoy the theoretical content of my subjects So far I have found most of my subjects really interesting Lectures are a valuable source of learning for me

Cronbach alpha:

0.7829

Sense of purpose I know the type of occupation I want I am clear about the reasons I came to university Studying at university is just marking time while I decide my future Items omitted in 2004 Being at university will really help me get what I want in life

Cronbach alpha: 0.6792

Student identity I really like being a university student University hasn’t lived up to my expectations Items omitted in 2004 I think university life really suits me I really like the atmosphere at this campus

r=-0.54771 (p<0.001)

Academic application I find it difficult to get myself motivated to study I regularly seek the advice and assistance of the teaching staff Items omitted in 2004 I worked consistently throughout first semester I have a strong desire to do well in all my subjects

r=-0.21481 (p<0.001)

1 One item reverse coded

continued over page


Table A.4 continued Reliability of existing and amended FYEQ scales, 2004

Scales

Reliability

Teaching The staff make a real effort to understand the difficulties students may be having with their work Teaching staff here usually give helpful feedback on my progress The teaching staff are good at explaining things Most of the academic staff in my subjects take an interest in my progress Most of the academic staff are approachable The quality of teaching in my course is generally good Staff are usually available to discuss my work Staff are enthusiastic about the subjects they teach Staff try hard to make the subjects interesting

Cronbach alpha:

0.8814

Course satisfaction Overall I am really enjoying my course I am finding my course intellectually stimulating Overall I am very satisfied with my university experience so far


A1.5 Reliability of new scales in 2004 The 2004 questionnaire comprised a number of items related to student engagement. Based on previous research the project team believed that some of these could be grouped together to describe a number of underlying constructs of engagement in the first year. Factor analyses were undertaken to test our hypotheses. Three engagement scales emerged as a result of this analysis. Scale items and reliabilities are presented in Table A.5.


103

Table A.5 Reliability of new FYEQ scales, 2004

Scales

Reliability

Peer engagement I borrow course notes and materials from friends in the same subjects/units I study with other students I work with other students on projects during class I work with classmates outside of class on group assignments

Cronbach alpha:

0.6326

Online engagement I use email to contact friends in my course I use email to contact lecturers/tutors I use online discussion groups I use web-based resources and information designed specifically for my course


Comprehending and coping I find it really hard to keep up with the volume of work in this course I feel overwhelmed by all I had to do My course workload is too heavy I find it difficult to comprehend a lot of the material I am supposed to study I have had difficulty adjusting to the style of teaching at university


Prepared and present I skip classes You can miss a lot of classes in this course because most notes and materials are on the web I come to class without completing readings or assignments



APPENDIX 2

GLOSSARY OF TERMS Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (ATSI)

A student self-identifying as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin. The term ‘Indigenous’ is used to encompass these two categories.

Broad Field of Education (BFOE) classification (known as Broad Field of Study prior to 2001)

A classification of courses based on similarity in terms of the vocational field or specialisation or the principal subject matter of the course.

Commencing student A student who is enrolled after the census date and has enrolled for the first time in a given course at the institution since the last census date.

Domestic or local student An Australian citizen with Australian home address and eligible for participating in the Higher Education Contribution Scheme.

High and low achieving students Based on self-reported average grades. High achievers are those with an overall average mark of 70% or higher in first semester, low achievers reported a grade of 60% or below.

International students In this report, international students are identified as those who are full fee-paying students in Australia for the purposes of studying at university. DEST categorises these students as overseas students. We use the terms interchangeably.

Non-English Speaking Background students (NESB)

Students from non-English speaking backgrounds (NESB) are classified as a DEST equity group. NESB students are those i) born in any country overseas; ii) who speak any language other than English at home; iii) who have been in Australia for less than ten years. In this study we asked students to identify whether they speak a language other than English (LOTE) at home. In some cases we use LOTE as a proxy for NESB.


105

Low socio-economic status (SES) classification

A DEST equity group – classified by applying the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Index of Education and Occupation to postcodes of students’ home residence. Australian postcodes in the lowest quartile of the Index are defined as low SES.

Languages Other Than English (LOTE)

See NESB

Mode of attendance Internal – all units of study for which the student is enrolled are undertaken through attendance at the institution on a regular basis. Other modes include external and mixed mode which are beyond the study scope.

New to higher education A student is enrolled after the census date and has enrolled for the first time ever in an undergraduate university course.

Non-traditional age or mature age student

For the purposes of comparing the experience of school-leavers (aged 19 years and younger) with older students in the cohort, we define students aged 20 years and older as belonging to the non-traditional age category for first year undergraduate study. In some contexts, these students are known as ‘mature age’ students, but typically the latter category refers to students 25 years and older.

Rural students (including rural and isolated students)

A DEST equity group - classified in this study according to the Rural, Remote and Metropolitan Areas (RRMA, 1996) classification of postcodes.

Overseas students See International students

School-leavers

Those who completed secondary education in the year prior to the survey. Typically aged 19 years or younger.

Type of attendance

Full-time or part-time enrolees

Note: Some of the above are adapted from DEET, 1995

final report a project funded by the higher education ... · study and with the quality of teaching...

Documents