Undergraduate student expectations of university in the United Kingdom: What really matters to them?

Money, Julie; Nixon, Sarah; Tracy, Frances; Hennessy, Claire; Ball, Emma; Dinning, Track

doi:10.1080/2331186x.2017.1301855

Cited by 37 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Central to engaging students are teaching styles and teaching staff (Zepke & Leach, 2010), and personal support by academic staff was clearly valued in this study. This agrees with Money et al (2017), who found that students value support and relationships (with academic staff and their peers). Fostering these relationships will encourage student engagement, but staff need time and resource to enable this to happen.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Experience and expectations of transition to higher education: a qualitative exploration

Goldring¹,

Harper²,

Jassal³

et al. 2018

NEW DIR TEACH PHYS SCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transition to higher education is challenging, and may be more difficult for some groups than others. The transition from level 3 foundation year into level 4 offers the opportunity to explore student perspectives. Qualitative survey and focus group data were collected from current and previous Level 3 students, to ascertain student perceptions about induction, level of belonging, confidence about Level 4 and to identify useful support sources. Over a third of eligible Level 3 students (n=102) participated, but numbers of eligible participants from Levels 4, 5 and 6 were limited. Despite the heterogeneous nature of Level 3 students the majority of students recognised the value of the foundation year. Data suggested that Level 3 students did not identify with the university. Those who did highlighted the importance of social outlets such as clubs and societies. A major cause of dissatisfaction was perceived lack of clarity about the foundation year, including the programme, subjects and physical location of the course. This was apparent across all ethnicities, age groups and both genders. Among previous Level 3 students, personal sources of support were uniformly valued although the precise source varied by year of study. Support from academic staff, via office hours and as personal tutors, was rated as most important. Enabling academic staff to offer support to students throughout their study, and clear consistent information available throughout an ongoing transition, may help to minimise these issues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Experience and expectations of transition to higher education: a qualitative exploration

Goldring¹,

Harper²,

Jassal³

et al. 2018

NEW DIR TEACH PHYS SCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Guidance accompanying the TLS defined contact time as 'timetabled hours for attending lectures, seminars, tutorials, practicals, fieldwork etc.'. Between years one and two, the WS and BS samples both showed a significant rise, to around one third, in the proportion who felt this contact was insufficient, replicating previous findings (Bates and Kaye 2014;Money et al 2017). Objective contact hours were not available for current respondents.…”

Section: Perceptions Of Teacherssupporting

confidence: 70%

Deciphering the sophomore slump: changes to student perceptions during the undergraduate journey

Webb

Cotton

2018

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The second year of university is little-researched, despite being a focal point for declining performance, persistence and satisfaction. It is important to establish appropriate methods for studying this 'sophomore slump' and to pinpoint specific antecedents from broad domains noted in literature (e.g. students' social integration, perceptions of the curriculum). Using a novel methodology, 166 undergraduates were surveyed in successive years of study to derive a gold standard 'within-subjects' data sample. Under a replicated design, a 'between-subjects' sample of over 1000 students completed the same e-survey just once, in year one, two or three. Quantitative comparison of the responses across years showed over 85% agreement between samples. This endorses between-subject approaches (i.e. simultaneously surveying students from different years) to facilitate rapid interventions that benefit students before they graduate. In terms of detailed findings, year two saw positive trends in students' academic engagement (e.g. selfreported independent study time), social integration (e.g. feeling accepted, involvement in extra-curricular activities), and views on teaching staff (e.g. approachability). Although appraisals remained broadly favourable there was, in contrast, significant deterioration in global perceptions of the learning atmosphere (e.g. course enjoyment), as well as specific elements of the teaching provision (e.g. contact hours, feedback). Notably, there appeared to be little progression in students' academic self-perceptions (e.g. confidence to make presentations, enter class debates). Year two also saw increased thoughts of drop-out. These results highlight the unique character of the second year at university and indicate potential target areas for enhancing this phase of the undergraduate journey.

show abstract

“…The findings show that students have learning preferences in small classes, compared to learning in large classes (Borghi, Mainardes, & Silva, 2016). Through small classes, students have greater opportunities for face-to-face interaction with teaching staff (Money, Nixon, Tracy, Hennessy, Ball, & Dinning, 2017). Their dependence on obtaining maximum services from teachers they can get because they are in the teaching of small classes.…”

Section: Prior Knowledge Prospect and Learning Behaviour Of Postgramentioning

confidence: 95%

How Prior Knowledge, Prospect, and Learning Behaviour Determine Learning Outcomes of Bipa Students?

Suyitno

Pratiwi

Roekhan

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many learning theories explain that prior knowledge, prospects, and learning behavior affect student learning outcomes. Related with these theories, this study aimed to describe these three variables for graduate students and their correlation in learning in the BIPA elective program (Bahasa Indonesia untuk Penutur Asing/Indonesian Language for Native Speakers). In addition, this study also described the implications of these three variables on student learning outcomes. Therefore, this study used a quantitative approach involving 17 graduate students who choose BIPA specialization programs. Data about the prospects and learning behavior were collected using a questionnaire, while the student's prior knowledge data was collected using a test instrument that contained general knowledge about BIPA. Meanwhile, student learning outcomes were obtained from student achievement index modified to a standard score. Data analysis used multiple correlation techniques. The findings of the study indicate that the prior knowledge of students about BIPA is in a low category, their prospects and learning behavior are in the high category, and the achievement index shows that their learning outcomes are in the very high category. Student prior knowledge does not correlate with prospects and learning behavior, whereas student learning behavior correlates with their prospects. Simultaneously, the three variables do not correlate with their learning outcomes.

show abstract

Undergraduate student expectations of university in the United Kingdom: What really matters to them?

Cited by 37 publications

References 13 publications

Experience and expectations of transition to higher education: a qualitative exploration

Experience and expectations of transition to higher education: a qualitative exploration

Deciphering the sophomore slump: changes to student perceptions during the undergraduate journey

How Prior Knowledge, Prospect, and Learning Behaviour Determine Learning Outcomes of Bipa Students?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About