Flexible and Online Learning Modes and Student Progress in First Year: CDU 2012-2014 - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Flexible and Online Learning Modes and Student Progress in First Year: CDU 2012-2014

for the

Common Unit

Committee and

Office of Learning and Teaching

Bill

Tyler

Charles Webb

Nicola Rolls

Sharon Bridgeman

Malcolm FlackSlide2

Explaining University Retention and Progress Rates: the challenge

University retention and progression rates are driven by many forces:

s

tudents, pedagogies, economic and political climates

impacting at differing levels of intensity

across differing timescales

over radically different types of institutions

with complex and hidden feedback loops

So here goes….Slide3

Students

Part time status

Personal circumstances

Course experience

Integration into learning community

Literacy/educational

background

Academic literacy

Right choice of course

Initial achievement

Age

Motivation

S

tudy

mode

Complexity of variables

effecting

performanceSlide4

This presentationO

verview of project

Trends and patterns in

C

ommon

Units and then first year 2009-2013

Pedagogic impact of flexible and online learning approaches :

Survey students perceptions and use of LearnlineEffect of Learnline

& Collaborate engagement on successGoing ForwardQuestions and DiscussionSlide5

Research questionsWhat are the overall trends in enrolments, retention and success amongst first year students at CDU?

Does mode of attendance

affect progress?

What constitutes flexible and online learning at CDU?

C

an students level of engagement in

Learnline and the effect of this on success be measured – learning analytics?

Are student outcomes affected by demographics?How can these understandings inform our pedagogy?Slide6

Trends and patterns of enrolments in Academic Skills Common Units 1999-2012 in terms of annual rates of: Withdrawals before Census Date / all enrolments

Academic success (Pass or higher

/

continuing enrolments)

Overall retention and success by student backgrounds and learning situations

Section 1:

Equity, Retention and Success in the Common Units 1999-2012Slide7

Trends, Patterns and Outcomes in first year 1999-2014

Intake profile

Demographic

First in family status

Admission basis

Student Situation

Part-time statusYear of course

Field of educationMode of study

OutcomesGradesStudent satisfaction:SELTS

Customised SurveysTrends 1999-2014Slide8

Trends in the Academic Skills Common Units

1999-2012 (n=37,956)

Year Unit Taken

Student

sSlide9

Demographic Profile 1999-2012(n=37,956)

%

25

yrs

and over

Male

Year Unit TakenSlide10

Student Situation Profile 1999-2012 (n=37,956)

Year Unit Taken

%

External Mode

Internal Mode Slide11

Mode of Attendance, Retention and Success

(1999-2012)

External Mode Passes

Divergent Trends in Retention Rates

%

Year Unit TakenSlide12

Relative Risk* of Withdrawal: a Multivariate Comparison

Common Units pre- & post- 2006 (n (1999-2005)

= 13,692

; n (

2006-2012)=24,264

Relative Risk *

Average Relative Risk for the exposed group=1

Risk for external, male and Indigenous studentsSlide13

Section 2: Expanding our study to new first year units, new variables: 2009-13

New data set 2009-13 (

Sems

1 and 2)

:

Total number =

29,665 Common Units

n = 22,359; Core first year units n = 7,306Includes first year core

units across disciplines: BCO101 BCO103 BCO106 CMA100

CMA101 CML101

ECU100 ELA100 ENV102

ENV205 ETL112 LAW101

LWZ100A LWZ118 NUR104

NUR115 NUR125 SBI105 SBI171

Blue = Introduced in 2013;

Red = Not on offer 2013/ discontinued

New “non traditional” student variables:

First in family in HE TER score below 50

Part-time statusRemotenessSlide14

Trending Gaps in Pass Rates* by Student Background

% Difference

2009

2010

2011

2012 2013

TER 50+ minus TER under 50

Female minus Male

Year Unit Taken

*

Excludes Withdrawals ( n=20,526) Slide15

Predicting Withdrawal & Failure Rates Relative Risk Ratios*

Average Relative Risk Ratio for this group=1

*

Failed Excludes Withdrawals

n=8,099

n=6,799

Relative Risk Ratio

Higher W risk:

Cu’s , Ex, 25+, Male

Highest F risk:

TER<50,

Indig

.,Ex, MaleSlide16

Passes and Withdrawals: CU vs First Year Core U’s

Withdrawals : group by mode of attendance

Withdrawals group by mode of attendance

Passes group by type of unit

%

Slide17

Changes in Learning Technologies and Management Systems to enhance delivery across modes

2002

Learnline

available

N=93

2004

Wimba

arrives

n=413

2006

Learnline

V.6

n=534

2009

BB

M

anaged Hosting

2011

Collaborate

arrivesSlide18

Section 3: What Learning technologies helped students learning and why

Student Survey S.2 2013

:

How, why and what regarding

L

earnline

use?n=287 across sample units 17% of total population (1694)12 forced choice questions 2

open ended (best and worst aspects of learnline) Survey voluntary with incentive Slide19

Survey is representative of cohort

Of course, being voluntary, the survey captures those motivated to share their views!Slide20

Frequency of tools accessed

Most accessed weekly but

A

nnouncements & even Collaborate dailySlide21

Learnline

tools that helped their learning

Announcements collaborate, discussion board & rubrics – inform, connect and motivate!Slide22

Factors that motivated you to use

Learnline

Relates to assignments:

Assessable

Interactive links

Language

Accessible

Reminders!Slide23

“Student help” information that helpedSlide24

Forms of Blackboard Collaborate made available

Recorded most common - talking head least commonSlide25

Motivating factors for Collaborate use

Number

of responsesSlide26

Forms of Collaborate favouredSlide27

55%

8 %

35 %Slide28

The most effective types of learning materials/objectsSlide29

BEST ASPECTS (BA)/NEEDS IMPROVEMENT (NI) COMMENT ANALYSIS (n=1085)

Discussion board & LL usability

Assessment relevance

Staff accessibility

Learning resources

Needs improvement

Online classes

Flexibility

Best AspectsSlide30

Section 4: Learnline use and success

1 Semester of data

Across – 8 sample units including CU’s

Number =

LL data for number of “hits” per student correlated with student grade and demographic

More sophisticated analysis will be

availible as we include more units and get access to

Learning Analytics from S.2 2014 Slide31

Learnline use and grades – those who pass tend to use

Learnline

more

F P C D HD

(n=501) (n=384) (n=451) (n=411) (n=139)

HD students tend to have the greatest usageSlide32

Use of

L

earnline

by Cohort

Highly significant difference

(T-Test)

Females more than males and mature students more than young ones!

Those who withdrew hadn’t accessed – would more have stayed if they had?Slide33

Those who use collaborate more have better grades

HD

D

C

P

F

W

DNS

Grade Scale

Grade increase seems to plateau at

u

sage > 25% of sessionsSlide34

Impact of Collaborate use on grade outcomes by mode

Significant

difference

Significant

difference

Significant

difference

externals who used it had higher grades

Over internals and externals who didn’t use itSlide35

The use of Collaborate by cohort(of those using it)

S

ignificant

difference

(M-WU Test

)

Externals and over 24 used it mostSlide36

Summing UpDecadal trends in first year intake composition and student learning situation have profound effects on patterns of retention and

success.

Overall CU & first year trends for success are very positive , external withdrawals are predictably higher given wider cast of the net.

The effects

of student profile and situation

on rates of

retention and success need further investigation.

Learnline is helping students learning and students find tools that inform, connect and motivate them very useful for learning – collaborate & discussion and communication from teaching staff.

They are drawn to tools that keep them connected to each other, are offered in lots of forms (including hard copy) and are relevant to assessment and accessible.Overall qualitative student commentary on Learnline experience is positive but some possible priority areas for improvement have been identified including aspects of

platform useability, assignment relevance and staff accessibility.Initial analysis shows some association of student success with an increasing extent of overall Learnline use and use of the collaborate tool.

External students using collaborate achieve higher grades than other students and consideration might be given to promoting collaborate to ensure more students engage with this tool.Slide37

The Next PhasePost-Pilot Strategies, Priorities, Directions 2013-14

Pursuing

issues

opened up in this presentation by:

Testing

hypotheses of online effects (

eg Collaborate)

Identifying tools that “work” for at risk groupsFurther exploring use of Learnline

by demographicCapturing the view of a broader range of students Understanding motivation to engage with

Learnline and collaborateDeveloping strategies for implementing findings

Expanding and integrating new data sources :

Learning analytics with 2014 Callista-sourced dataStudent-aggregated course progression and completion

Exploring longitudinal online effects across all data sources: data mining, survival analysis, selection models, qualitative methods