1 / 20

Format of Presentation

Engagement, Motivation and the First Year Experience: Best Practice in Course Design Sally Knipe & Gerald Wurf. Format of Presentation. Introduction to CSU as a regional multi-campus university Changes in course profile introduced in 2014 Discuss a research project

cormac
Télécharger la présentation

Format of Presentation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Engagement, Motivation and the First Year Experience: Best Practice in Course DesignSally Knipe & Gerald Wurf

  2. Format of Presentation Introduction to CSU as a regional multi-campus university Changes in course profile introduced in 2014 Discuss a research project Strategies that have been introduced to address findings from the project as well as other research regarding undergraduate students first year experience.

  3. Multi-campus regional University

  4. Modification of Course Profile Reviewed course profile in 2011 Based on this review several courses were phased out such as undergraduate double degrees, primary Other programs expanded such as K-12 (with expanded secondary options, EC/P)

  5. Relationship between ATAR and success in teacher education degrees • No specific Australian research examining ATAR & teacher education (Caldwell & Sutton, 2010) • LSAY data (Marks, 2007) - strongest influence on completions was Year 12 ENTER. Palmer, Bexley & James’ (2011) Go8 report – similar conclusion • ENTER accounted for ≈ 11% of the variance in university achievement scores & 70% of students with an ENTER score < 70 completed their studies (Marks, 2007)

  6. First-year undergraduates • Currently ≈ 40% of Year 12 students enter university • Bradley et al. (2008) goal 40% of 25-34 year olds with an undergraduate degree by 2020. Of these 20% will be from low SES • Nationally a more academically, socially and economically diverse student population - success story • Tension between increasing diversity & perceived falling status of teachers/standards – the “battered profession” (Dinham, 2013)

  7. Students studying education • Nationally, around 80% of Marks’ (2007) sample of education students completed the degree within 4 - 5 years (very high) • AUSSE (2009, 2011) data: • High course demands compared to other disciplines • Rank ‘academic challenge’ vey highly • Some of the highest scores for the number of prescribed textbooks/readings • Highest number of written assignments • Regional/metropolitan and low SES students (once admitted) have similar completion rates

  8. DIISRTE, 2012, p. 33

  9. Motivation, engagement & EQ • The first-year experience and student engagement (e.g. Kift; Tinto) • Three factor models of engagement • behavioural • cognitive • emotional (e.g. Fredricks & McColsky, 2012) • EQ - links to teacher communication, positive relationships and collaboration • Martin’s (2009, 2011) motivation wheel & MES -UC

  10. Motivation Wheel (Martin, 2009, 2011)

  11. Hypotheses 1. ATAR scores will significantly predict student grade point average (GPA) 2. Self-report measures of emotional intelligence, and motivation/engagement will significantly add to models predicting student GPA 3. Use of a school teaching experience (PE) will enhance the overall first year experience

  12. Method • Explanatory sequential mixed methods or two phase design (Creswell, 2012) • Psychometrically sound self-report questionnaires + focus groups • Participants 110 first year BEd undergraduate students, 83 (75%) consented to release their University records & participate • Initial data collection in Week 4. Focus groups were conducted at the end of 1st year

  13. Assumptions & Measures • Assumptions (evidence for GPA & later teaching effectiveness; appropriate & supported PE) • ATAR , GPA (F=0, P=4, C=5, D=6, HD=7) • MES-UC (Martin, 2011) (44 items) • Booster behaviours (Adaptive) • Booster thoughts (Adaptive) • Mufflers (Anxiety) • Guzzlers (Disengagement) • SUEIT (Palmer & Stough, 2001)

  14. Results: Regression model & coefficients

  15. Focus group themes relating to engagement

  16. Ideal self as teacher • Because I want to be a teacher, so I’m going to do what I have to do, to be a teacher (Jemma,013). • I want to be a teacher, and I’m willing to put in the hours and the work and take the criticism with the positive feedback (Lucy,014).

  17. Professional Experience ….. people didn’t expect to have to study like all those kinds of subjects ….. with prac …..the nice thing about it is that it did deter some people but I found it encouraged me more …… before prac I was like, oh, I’m a bit over uni and stuff and then you go on prac and then you go, no, this is what I want to do – I want to teach (002).

  18. Implications • ATAR not the best predictor of achievement (GPA) • Additional attributes could be important in selecting teachers especially motivation cf. Teacher Selector (UMelb) but is it more important to develop these attributes in the degree? • EQ did not add to the model – limitations • Strong support for the use of multi-dimensional models of student engagement (+ social)

  19. First year course design (Kift, 2009) As a result of these finding the following have been implemented into undergraduate courses. • Preparedness (O’Week Symposium) • Finances (Access) • Peer support (Mentor/Transition Coordinators) • Quality teaching (Experienced Teaching Staff) • Good course design (including opportunities for appropriately supported PE – first year in school/diverse placement) • ‘Just-in-time’ student support • Assessment for learning & timely feedback – low stakes assessment items/relevant

  20. References ACER (2011). Australasian Survey of Student Engagement (AUSSE) 2011. Melbourne, Vic.: Author. Accessed 27 June 2011 from: http://ausse.acer.edu.au. Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Caldwell, B., & Sutton, D. (2010). Review of teacher education and induction. First report - full report. Retrieved from Education Queensland http://education.qld.gov.au/students/higher-education/resources/review-teachereducation-school-induction-first-full-report.pdf Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education (DIISRTE). (2012). Undergraduate Applications, Offers and Acceptances, 2012. Canberra: Author Dinham, S. (2013). The quality teaching movement in Australia encounters difficult terrain: A personal perspective. Australian Journal of Education, 57(2), 91-106. Fredricks, J. A. & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement pp. 763-782. New York, NY: Springer. Kift, S. (2009). Articulating transition pedagogy to scaffold and to enhance the first year student learning experience in Australian higher education:Final report, Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved 25 November 2010 from http://www.altc.edu.au/resource-first-year-learning-experience-kift-2009 Knipe, S. (2012). Crossing the Primary and Secondary School Divide in Teacher Preparation. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(5).http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n5.6 Marks, G. N. (2007). Completing university: Characteristics and outcomes of completing and non-completing students. (LSAY Research Report No. 51). Melbourne: ACER. Martin, A. J. (2009). Motivation and engagement across the academic life span: A developmental construct validity study of elementary school, high school, and university/college students.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(5), 794-824 DOI: 10.1177/0013164409332214 Martin, A. J. (2011). The motivation and engagement scale university/college. Sydney, NSW: Lifelong Achievement Group. Palmer, N., Bexley, E., & James, R. (2011). Selection and Participation in Higher Education: University Selection in Support of Student Success and Diversity of Participation. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education. Palmer, B. R., & Stough, C. (2001). The Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test technical manual. Melbourne, Vic: Swinburne University of Technology. Wurf, G., & Croft-Piggin, L. (Forthcoming). Predicting the academic achievement of first year, pre-service teachers:  The role of engagement, motivation, ATAR and emotional intelligence. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education.

More Related