journal - University of South Australia

JOURNAL

of

the WORLD

UNIVERSITIES FORUM

Volume 2, Number 1

Understanding and Improving First-Year University Student Experiences Jyothi Thalluri and Sharron King

www.universities-journal.com

JOURNAL OF THE WORLD UNIVERSITIES FORUM http://www.universities-journal.com/ First published in 2009 in Melbourne, Australia by Common Ground Publishing Pty Ltd www.CommonGroundPublishing.com. © 2009 (individual papers), the author(s) © 2009 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground Authors are responsible for the accuracy of citations, quotations, diagrams, tables and maps. All rights reserved. Apart from fair use for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act (Australia), no part of this work may be reproduced without written permission from the publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact . ISSN: 1835-2030 Publisher Site: http://www.universities-journal.com/ JOURNAL OF THE WORLD UNIVERSITIES FORUM is peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterion-referenced article ranking and qualitative commentary, ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance and highest significance is published. Typeset in Common Ground Markup Language using CGCreator multichannel typesetting system http://www.commongroundpublishing.com/software/

Understanding and Improving First-Year University Student Experiences Jyothi Thalluri, University of South Australia, SA, Australia Sharron King, University of South Australia, SA, Australia Abstract: It has been shown that the first-year of university study can be the most critical in a student’s academic life with consequential impact on future student learning, engagement, and success (McInnis, 2001; Pitkethly & Prosser, 2001). Some studies have directly linked adverse social, health and financial circumstances to increased student drop-out, negative experiences and failure during the first year of study (Armour, 1999, Devlin, 2002, Kreber, 2003). This paper describes a research project which was conducted in order to understand and improve first-year student experiences within the Bachelor of Medical Radiation, and the Bachelor of Nursing and Midwifery courses (internal and external) at a leading Australian University. The research investigates first-year student needs and expectations of the university experience, particularly for employed students with family responsibilities. The project was undertaken in three phases: phase one involving early focus groups and semi-structured in-depth interviews to investigate the expectations of university life for these students; phase two involving a questionnaire to compare expectations with actual experiences; and, phase three involving further focus groups and in-depth interviews to explore the experiences of students’ university experience and issues impacting their study after one year. The paper outlines the project’s main findings, with a particular focus on a preliminary analysis of data from students within the external nursing program. Keywords: First Year Experience, Student Expectations, Satisfaction Gap, Nursing

Introduction HE MASSIFICATION OF higher education has created a large increase in the diversity of university student population due to improved access and participation rates. Many students now enter the sector from non-traditional backgrounds and as a consequence may have diverse characteristics including academic-ability, socioeconomic background, ethnicity, and physical location. Such factors can influence students’ university experience which may adversely impact their persistence with university study (King & Thalluri 2006). It has been shown that the first-year of university study can be the most critical in a student’s academic life with consequential impact on future student learning, engagement, and success (McInnis, 2001; Pitkethly & Prosser, 2001). Negative experiences in first-year can lead to student dissatisfaction (Peat et al., 2001), particularly for external students where drop-out rates are greater than those for students undertaking on-campus courses (Thompson 1997; Kember, 1995; Zajkowski, 1992; Thalluri 2006). Nursing undergraduates, in particular, come from non-traditional backgrounds. For example, the majority are female, mature-aged, and come from varied socioeconomic circumstances which may include single parenting or carer responsibilities. As a consequence, some of these students experience considerable difficulty in managing the extra demands of work

T

Journal of the World Universities Forum Volume 2, Number 1, 2009, http://www.universities-journal.com/, ISSN 1835-2030 © Common Ground, Jyothi Thalluri, Sharron King, All Rights Reserved, Permissions: [email protected]

JOURNAL OF THE WORLD UNIVERSITIES FORUM

and family concurrently with their full-time study commitment (King & Thalluri 2006). Furthermore, Nursing attracts a large external rural/remote contingent and it has been observed that nursing undergraduates in particular experience higher first-year drop-out rates when compared with other health professional programs (AFK report, August 2006). Some studies have directly linked adverse social, health and financial circumstances to increased student drop-out, negative experiences and failure during the first year of study (Williams 1982; Tinto 1996). As a consequence, understanding students’ initial expectations, actual experience, and subsequent perceptions of university life, is seen as fundamental to improving student levels of satisfaction and learning experience. This understanding also leads to the development and production of better quality student learning packages and improving academic and administrative support (Garrison, 1987; Bernard & Amundsen, 1989). In this regard, it has been suggested that comparing students’ expectations early in their first-year with actual experiences at, or towards the completion of, their first year of university, can yield useful information (Devlin 2002; Armour 1999; Kreber 2003). Moreover, it is suggested that the nexus between student expectations and actual experience of university study – the ‘satisfaction gap’ - can be influenced by students’ family, social, educational, health and financial backgrounds (Armour 1999; Devlin 2002; Kreber 2003). Rangecroft et al (2002) have claimed that the gap between student expectations and their actual experience of university study affects their satisfaction with the program which is reflected in course evaluations. Hence, to better understand and improve students’ retention rate and improve course/program evaluations, it is important to determine student expectations of the course as well as the factors which impact significantly upon their experiences within the course. In this paper, the authors add to the body of knowledge in this area and report data from a research project which included surveys of a cohort of first-year students enrolled in Bachelor of Medical Radiation (internal mode) and Bachelor of Nursing and Midwifery (internal and external modes). While some limited comparative assessment is made between the three groups, the discussion is strongly focused on first-year external Nursing students and in particular three areas identified in the study as having significant impact; (1) the extent to which the program prepares students for working in their future profession; (2) perceived adequacy of support provided by academics and learning support staff; and (3) students’ perceptions of the impact of balancing study, work and family/personal commitments.

Method A multifaceted three-phase process was undertaken for gathering and analysing data from first-year nursing (internal and external) and medical radiation students enrolled at the University during the academic year.

Phase 1 In Phase 1, recently enrolled first-year nursing and medical radiation students were invited to participate in focus groups. This phase was aimed at gathering qualitative data on student expectations of university study. For those students not able to attend the on-campus focus groups, data collection was via semi-structured in-depth telephone interviews. Phase 1 was undertaken early in the academic year and before students had embarked upon their study program in earnest. Table 1 summarises the number of groups for each of the university programs involved. Each focus group comprised 5 to 8 students.

68

JYOTHI THALLURI, SHARRON KING

Table 1: Phase 1, 2 and 3 Responses, focus Groups and Phone Interviews Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Program No. of No. of Total in Responses focus telephone program received groups interviews

% of Total

No. of No. of focus telephone groups interviews

Bachelor 10 of Nursing (Internal)

-

380

212

56%

4

-

Bachelor 2 of Nursing (External)

3

376

83

22%

-

4

Bachelor 4 of Medical Radiation

-

105

83

79%

3

-

Phase 1 focus group sessions and in-depth interviews lasted approximately one hour and were organised and facilitated by a researcher not directly involved in the undergraduate program. Questions were based on a number of key issues including students’ expectations of university study; educational background; external work and family commitments and their impact on study; students’ home study environment; and, student social support networks. Demographic questions were also asked such as: “Is English your first language?, Are you full time or part time? What is your highest previous qualification? How many hours per week do you spend in paid employment? How many hours per week do you spend on family care responsibilities?” Questions addressed key issues involving student expectations of university study; work and family commitments and the expected impact on study; the ability to study effectively at home; access to a computer and internet; and, the reasons students chose to study externally. Students were also asked about the critical issues they expected to face in their first year at University. All focus groups and interviews were audio or digitally recorded and then transcribed ready for analysis. The qualitative data gathered from Phase 1 was utilised to develop a detailed questionnaire designed to obtain quantitative data on student expectations of university study versus their perceptions with a view to identifying the ‘satisfaction gap’. Questions related to elements of the student’s program, academic life, social life, teaching and learning, and general satisfaction.

Phase 2 In Phase 2, all first-year nursing (internal and external) and medical radiation students were invited to participate in a survey utilising the questionnaire developed in Phase 1 of the study. This was a self-administered questionnaire provided under the guidance of appropriate protocols required by the University. The questionnaire comprised three sections: • •

Section 1: Background information comprising questions relating to demographic data. Section 2: Expectations and perceptions using a rating scale.

69


•

Section 3: Actual experience using the same rating scale as for Section 2.

Phase 2 was implemented mid-year after students had settled into the academic year and at a time when students would be able to recollect and compare original expectations/perceptions with actual experiences, thereby revealing a possible ‘satisfaction gap’. Table 1 summarises the number of questionnaire responses received relative to the total number of students in each university program involved. The results of the Phase 2 questionnaire were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. Limited analysis was performed with cross tabulations for variables such as age and level of previous qualification, which highlighted suggested areas for development and ongoing monitoring.

Phase 3 In Phase 3, follow-up focus groups and telephone interviews were conducted at the end of the academic year with the same student cohort. Questions were aimed at collecting qualitative data in relation to students’ actual experiences. Table 1 summarises the number of groups for each of the university programs involved. As for Phase 1 of the study, each focus group comprised 5 to 8 students. Also, in Phase 3 of the project, survey reports were developed which ‘cross-tabulated’ the SPSS survey data (obtained from Phase 2) and the thematic analysis of the Phase 1 and Phase 3 focus group and interview transcripts. While minimal analysis was performed on cross tabulations, it did assist in identifying areas for further development and ongoing monitoring as outlined in the discussion section of this paper. The multi-phase methodology applied to this project provided a rich source of both qualitative and quantitative data and information which enabled researchers to gain insights into the expectations, perceptions and experiences of first-year students over a one-year timeframe and across three distinct cohorts associated with health science programs. Ethics approval was sought and granted by the University of South Australia’s Human Research Ethics Committee. At all times throughout the project emphasis was placed on the principles of informed consent, confidentiality and anonymity, protection from harm, and appropriate storage of data. All participants provided written consent before participating in the project.

Findings In presenting the findings from this research, emphasis has been placed on the external nursing cohort with reference to the internal nursing and medical radiation groups as considered necessary and for comparison purposes only. The main reason for focussing on external nursing is the fact that external nursing surveys have yielded some of the largest negative satisfaction gaps providing potential scope for discussion and further development. The findings are summarised under the following sub-headings: ‘areas of potential impact’ (extracted from the phase one qualitative survey results); ‘background information’ (phase 2 demographic data); ‘expectations and perceptions’ (extracted from phase 2 quantitative data gap analysis); ‘student experiences’ (extracted from phase 2 questionnaire quantitative

70


and qualitative data and phase 3 qualitative survey results). Each of these will now be briefly discussed.

Areas of Potential Impact The thematic analysis of all qualitative data obtained from Phase 1 focus groups and in-depth interviews highlighted a number of key issues that students self-identified as being likely to impact upon their study experience: •

•

• • • •

Many students expected to continue to work throughout their undergraduate degree. Hence the impact of part-time or full-time work on study was considered a particular issue. A significant number of students, particularly those enrolled in the external nursing and midwifery programs, indicated they had ongoing child-care and/or family care responsibilities which would require careful management of study versus family-care obligations. In general, students anticipated having to work hard, including after hours and weekends, to adequately cope with their study requirements. A number of students were anxious about whether they possessed the required skills and ability to undertake and commit to tertiary level study. A significant number of the mature-aged students indicated that they had modified work and/or social/family obligations in order to undertake their university study. In general, students felt that they would have liked more information prior to commencing university and found some of the enrolment procedures confusing or overwhelming.

Background Information Section 1 of the Phase 2 questionnaire obtained demographic data and other statistical data such as the number of hours spent on study, sources of financial support, home environment, and access to infrastructure, etc. Table 2 summaries a selection of data considered most relevant to the discussion. Table 2: Demographic Summary Description

Nursing (External)

Nursing (Internal)

Medical Radiation

Total sample size (n)

83

212

83

Mean age (yrs)

37.1

24.7

22.2

Female (%)

96

86

78

Full-time study (%)

71

92

Only offered fulltime

16 hrs/wk (%)

85

35

18

Mean hours in paid employ- 26.7 ment

13.1

8.6

1st person to attend university 61 (%)

51

40

Highest previous qualification Enrolled nurse (Category with max. number)

Year 12

Year 12

Major sources of financial support

Part-time/Youth Allowance/Austudy

Parent support/Casual work/Austudy

Full/Part-time work

Table 2 indicates some differentiating demographics between the three groups surveyed. In particular, the external nursing group has characteristics which might adversely impact on the quality of the university experience and potentially affect student drop-out rates. For example, compared with internal nursing students and medical radiation students, the external nursing students have a high percentage of mature-age females whose income depends on undertaking full-time or part-time work. Furthermore, this group are more likely to struggle with university study because of the difficulties of combining a possible full-time study load with full-time or part-time employment which is further exacerbated by minimal education experience at the time of entry into their course. Also, other commitments such as family or carer responsibilities further impact this situation.

Expectations and Perceptions In section 2 of the Phase 2 questionnaire students were asked to rate their levels of expectations and perceptions in relation to the fifteen elements of their particular program. A five point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) was utilised. The ‘expectation mean’ refers to the extent to which students believe the particular element of their program will occur or the accuracy/appropriateness of the statement relating to that element. The ‘perception mean’ measures how the students currently rate the performance of that element. The ‘satisfaction gap’ therefore represents the difference between the perception mean and the expectation mean (i.e. Satisfaction Gap = Perceptions Mean minus Expectations Mean). Table 3 depicts expectations and performance means and the gaps for Bachelor of Nursing and Midwifery (external mode) (NE), the combined nursing programs (external and internal) (CN), and all data sets combined (HSC), the latter being the results for all three health science programs participating in the study, including medical radiation.

72


73


Figure 1 presents the ‘satisfaction gap’ only for the fifteen elements surveyed for the program Bachelor of Nursing and Midwifery (external mode) (NE) in comparison with the corresponding gaps for those elements from the combined data sets for nursing programs (CN) and the combined data sets for all programs (HSC).

74


Figure 1: Gap Scores NE, CN and HSC, Zero (Perceptions Mean = Expectations Mean) Results for the perceptions and expectations means for this program are mixed, with some elements showing more favourable results than the combined data sets means, and some elements showing less favourable results. The resultant gap results are also mixed. Three elements show positive gap results for the external nursing cohort (viz. performance exceeds expectations), with gaps that are more favourable than those of the combined data sets. However, three elements show gaps that are significantly less favourable than the combined data sets results: •

•

The extent to which the program prepares students for working in their future profession (-0.8 for external nursing students compared to -0.5 and -0.4 for the combined nursing programs and all programs respectively). Support from teaching staff in areas of difficulty (-0.8 compared to -0.4 and -0.2).

75


•

The extent which students were able to balance study, work and family/personal commitments (-0.7 compared to -0.4 for both combined data sets).

The above three elements will be outlined in detail in the ‘discussion’ section of this paper.

Student Experiences In section 3 of the Phase 2 questionnaire students were asked to record their level of agreement with a series of scaled questions grouped under the following headings: • • • •

Academic life Social life Teaching and leaning environment Summary questions (i.e. overall satisfaction, etc)

As for section 2, a five point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Low) to 5 (High) was utilised. Figure 2 depicts the relative mean values for external nursing (NE), combined data sets for external and internal nursing programs (CN), and the combined data sets for all health science programs participating in the study (HSC).

76


Figure 2: Academic Life, Social Life and Teaching & Learning Environment mean Values Also, in section 3 of the Phase 2 questionnaire students were given the option to provide written responses to the following questions: •

Are there any other aspects of your academic life you would like to comment on?

77


• •

Are there any other comments you would like to add regarding your social life as a student? Are there any other comments you would like to add regarding the teaching and learning in your program?

Tables 4, 5 and 6 summarise external nursing student comments in response to these three questions. Table 4: Comments on other Aspects of Academic Life Other aspects of academic life

n

Feel isolated/missing out/disadvantaged

5

Difficulty in balancing study & other commitments

5

Human Biosciences not suited to external study (too difficult)

5

Feedback – needs to be more timely

5

Feel a lack of support and encouragement from staff

3

Want more emphasis on practical aspects than theoretical/assignments – more emphasis on content and less on formatting

2

Need more computer knowledge & skills/problems negotiating website`

2

Table 5: Comments regarding Social Life as a Student Social Life as a student

n

Little/no social life

20

Problems due to commitments (study, work, family)

12

Few organised social activities – suggest contact list for external students

3

Table 6: Most Significant Aspects Experienced Most significant aspects (where answered Yes to Q19)

n

Support and assistance from staff – more wanted (access to / delays in or non- 10 responses) Want more emphasis on practical aspects & less on academic theory & being able to write essays and assignments

7

Workload/time & effort needed – more than expected

7

Balancing work/study/family /personal commitments

2

Need for time management skills

2

To add to the richness of the above data, a second round of focus groups/interviews was conducted at the end of the academic year in November 2004 as part of phase 3 of the study.

78


This phase 3 was aimed at examining in more detail students’ experiences after one year of study by asking the students within focus groups such questions as: How had their first year actually gone? What were the major hurdles experienced as they undertook their studies? What were their experiences of studying externally? (Both positive and negative) Did they think they had been adequately prepared for the reality of university? What advice would they give to new students? Students were allocated to specific focus groups according to their demographic data, such as whether they were studying full time or part time, and whether they had childcare responsibilities, etc. Examples of the questions directed at the focus groups were as follows: (for the Parents Group) How many hours per week did you spend on family responsibilities such as caring for children or other relatives? How did you expect to manage your study and family commitments? Did you have a specific study space at home? Did you have adequate access to a computer/ internet at home? Specific questions for the “Workers Group” included: “How many hours per week did you spend in paid employment? What impact did your paid employment have on your study? Do you work to survive or to maintain a lifestyle? What skills have you developed from working that are useful in your study? Are there any positive benefits (besides money) from working? Does working limit the number of hours you can spend with other students on campus? And for the external student group generally: “What impact do you think being external had on your study? What is your main reason for doing this course by external mode? Is your accommodation and home environment conducive to study? What critical issues did you face in first year?”

Discussion Of the three cohorts surveyed, the first-year external nursing group yielded some of the highest negative ‘satisfaction gaps’. Consequently, this discussion primarily focuses on this group with comparisons to the other two groups as appropriate. More specifically, for the external nursing cohort, three elements in particular were identified as having a significant negative satisfaction gap of between -0.7 and -0.8. These elements are: • • •

Program prepares for working in future profession (-0.8). Support from teaching staff in areas of difficulty (-0.8). Ability to balance study, work and family/personal commitments (-0.7).

Each of these elements will now be discussed in more detail.

Program Prepares for Working in Future Profession This element recorded a high expectations mean of 4.7 (equal largest for the entire survey) and a moderately low perceptions mean of 3.9, yielding a significant satisfaction gap of -0.8 (also equal largest of the survey). It should be noted that while this expectations mean is similar to the corresponding mean for the combined data sets (HSC), the satisfaction gap is twice that of the overall HSC result of -0.4. However, it should also be noted that the internal nursing and medical radiation cohorts also recorded negative satisfaction gaps (-0.4 and -0.2

79


respectively), hence these negative results need to be tempered by the fact that first-year students do not possess the ‘full course’ experience and can only make judgements on the relevance and value of their course within the context of what they have experienced to date. Notwithstanding, it is clear that the external nursing result (at -0.8) is significantly greater than the others and that this can not be ignored as a possible contributor to drop-out rate for this cohort. Some further possible explanation can be gleaned from a closer inspection of other survey results for the external nursing group. For example, of the total number of external nurses surveyed (n=83), a significant number (n=43) were enrolled nurses and many were either seeking to upgrade their qualifications (n=13), improve job prospects (n=29), and/or further their careers (n=28). It is not unreasonable therefore, to assume that such a cohort would have high expectations of the practical aspects of their course. Indeed, this is supported by other survey data where some respondents (n=7) were clearly wanting more emphasis on practical aspects than theoretical/assignments with others (n=2) suggesting there should be more emphasis on content and less in written assignments. Furthermore, a low result was recorded for some aspects of the teaching and learning environment statements (Figure 2). For example, for the statements ‘the links between theory and practice were made clear to me’ and ‘I have a clear idea where the program is going’ the recorded means were 3.1 and 3.7 respectively. This contrasts with the statement under the social life heading (Figure 2), that ‘being at university will help me get what I want from life’, which recorded a relatively high mean of 4.3 suggesting that students remain optimistic that university study is important to their development and future prospects. While some of these results are reasonably consistent with those from the other cohorts (internal nursing and medical radiation), the specific characteristics of the external nursing cohort seem to impose unique concerns over the relevance of their course with a resultant significant negative satisfaction gap for how the program prepares them for working in their future profession. Cross-tabulations by age reveal the expectations means for the different age groups are mixed, ranging from 4.0 for the one 19 year old, to 4.9 for the group aged 20 to 24 years, and 4.7 for the group aged 25 years and older. Those aged 25 years and older have the highest perceptions mean at 3.9 (gap -0.8; n=71), followed by those respondents aged 20 to 24 years (mean 3.4; gap -1.5; n=7), and the 19 year old (mean 3.0; gap -1.0). These results further support a view that the respondents from this program are relatively unsure about the value of the program to their future work endeavours. The above discussion strongly suggests that managing expectations and ensuring that programs introduce practical and case-based learning strategies as early as possible may be important factors in improving the satisfaction gap for first-year students, particularly for those undertaking external nursing studies.

Support from Teaching Staff in Areas of Difficulty The satisfaction gap for this element for the external nursing cohort was the equal largest for the whole survey (-0.8), with a relatively low perceptions mean of 3.1. This compares with a -0.3 satisfaction gap for internal nurses and a positive 0.4 satisfaction gap for the medical radiation cohort (also internal students). This suggests that there is scope for improving external nursing students’ perceptions in this area. Some insight into this negative satisfaction for the external nursing cohort can be gleaned by considering other relevant factors surveyed for this group. For example, a low (neutral) mean of 3.0 was recorded forthe social

80


life statement that students feel part of a group of students and staff committed to learning (Figure 2). Also, some written responses to questions posed in section 3 of the phase 2 questionnaire in relation to other aspects of academic life, suggest that a number of external students felt a sense of isolation in their first year of university (Table 3). Furthermore, relatively moderate to low means were recorded from the external nursing cohort (in comparison to the internal nursing and medical radiation cohorts) for questions on Teaching and Learning Environment (Figure 2). The means for the following statements are of particular relevance: quality of teaching (mean 3.7), teaching taking into account possible differences in students’ backgrounds (mean 3.0), approachable teaching staff (mean 3.8), staff enthusiasm (mean 3.6), and encouragement to be an independent learner (mean 4.1). This suggests that external nursing students have higher expectations and less favourable perceptions of the support they received from teaching staff through the academic year compared to their contemporaries in other related programs. Similar feedback was given by external nursing respondents (n=83) in other written phase 2 responses. More specifically, some respondents (n=10) said they wanted more support and assistance from staff and a smaller number of respondents (n=3) commented that they felt a lack of support and encouragement from staff. With respect to the teaching and learning in the external nursing cohort, some respondents (n=6) wanted more support from staff. Variations in perceptions of teacher support are to be expected, however some further insight is provided from cross-tabulation with age which suggest that respondents in the age group of 25 years and over (n=72) appear most concerned with this element, having recorded a gap of -0.9 from a moderate expectations mean of 4.1 and a low perceptions mean of 3.2. Those aged 20 to 24 years (n=7) had a very low expectations mean (2.7) and an even lower perceptions mean (1.9; gap -0.8), whereas the one respondent aged 19 years and under had low expectations (3.0) and moderate perceptions (4.0), resulting in a positive gap of 1.0 (that is, performance exceeded expectations). Further insight is provided from cross-tabulations with ‘highest level of qualification’ where respondents whose highest level of education was Year 10/11 (n=8) recorded a gap of -1.5 from a high expectations mean of 4.4 and a low perceptions mean of 2.9. Those who had completed a Technical and Further Education (TAFE) program (n=9) had low expectations (mean 3.6) and perceptions (mean 2.9), and those who have completed Year 12 recorded similar results (expectations mean 3.7; perceptions mean 3.1). Those who currently hold an enrolled nurse qualification (n=40), and those with another university degree (n=4) had similar expectations (means 3.9 and 3.8) and perceptions (both means 3.3). The above suggests that external students have significant needs for support which becomes more critical as these students feel a sense of isolation which is heightened by their higher than average expectations. The older age groups recorded a more negative satisfaction gap suggesting that this group may require greater support in their first-year of study. Perhaps this suggests that the on-line availability of staff, or technology as an aid to study are potential issues to external students. Also, it might be important to identify key disparities in perceptions of students and staff and identify strategies to improve students’ perceptions of staff availability when such students opt for an external mode of study.

81


Ability to Balance Study, Work and Family/Personal Commitments This element recorded a moderate expectations mean of 4.0 and a low perceptions mean of 3.3, resulting in a high gap score -0.7 for the external nursing cohort. In comparison, both the internal nursing and medical radiation expectations means were 3.9 and the perceptions means were 3.5, giving gap scores of -0.4 each. As a consequence, the gap score for the external nursing cohort is in excess of (less favourable than) the gap scores for this element for the combined data set of nursing programs and the combined data set of the three HSC programs surveyed. A further consideration of this element suggests that while external nursing respondents disagreed with the suggestion that they only do the minimum amount of work to pass the program (mean 2.2), it is evident that many other factors impact on their availability to undertake study. For example, on a typical university day, the average amount of time that the majority of respondents (n=71) spent studying by self-directed learning (SDL) was 3.62 hours. Twenty-one respondents (studying by mixed internal/external mode) reported spending an average of 2.67 contact hours per university day. Forty respondents reported responsibilities in caring for children (mean 6.58 hours) and 14 reported caring for relatives (mean 2.5 hours). Other activities (including paid work) recorded a mean of 6.55 hours (n=38); sleep recorded a mean of 6.92 hours (n=76); and recreation/exercise and travel recorded similar means of 1.85 hours (n=59) and 1.43 hours (n=49) respectively While the majority of respondents reported working part-time (less than 35 hours per week) in paid employment, the mean is a high 26.7 hours per week. Forty-eight percent of respondents reported working between 16 and 34 hours per week, and 37% reported working full time (35 hours or more per week). Seven respondents (9%) were working 1 to 15 hours per week, and 6 respondents (7%) stated that they were not working. Also, in the written responses to questions in section 3 of the phase 2 questionnaire, in relation to ‘significant aspects experienced’ (gap between expectations of university study and experiences so far) (Table 5), seven respondents suggested the workload and time/effort needed were more than expected; two respondents commented on the aspect of balancing work/study/family/personal commitments; and two commented on the need for time management skills. Furthermore, a small number of comments relating to other aspects of academic life (n=5) (Table 3) suggested that some respondents may have difficulty in balancing study and other commitments. A total of 12 students commented that their study, paid work and family commitments had caused problems with their social lives; and 20 respondents said they had little/no social life (Table 4). A low mean of 2.9 was recorded for preparedness for university study. Cross-tabulations by age groups revealed a mixture of expectations and gap scores within each age group, with the means being: 19 years and under – expectations mean of 5.0, gap -1.0; 20 to 24 years – expectations mean of 4.0, gap -1.1; and 25 years and over – expectations mean of 4.0, gap -0.7 for this element of balancing study, work and family/personal commitments. Comparison of cross-tabulations by previous highest qualifications revealed the groups who had completed Year 12 (gap –1.0), or Year 10/11 (gap -0.8) or a previous university degree, had similar expectations means (4.2 to 4.3) but contrasting perceptions means (3.2, 3.5 and 4.0 respectively). Those respondents who had completed a TAFE or an enrolled

82


nurse program, or some other qualification had lower expectations means (3.8 to 4.0), and also had contrasting perceptions means (3.3, 3.3 and 2.0 respectively). Further cross-tabulations reveal that the amount of time spent on various activities may have an impact on recorded satisfaction gaps. For example, those spending around 2, 3 or 4 hours on self-directed study (SDL) time per day had satisfaction gaps of -1.0 and those spending 1 hour or 3 hours of SDL per day had gaps of -1.6 and -1.4 respectively. This is in contrast to those groups spending 4, 6 or 8 hours per university day on SDL, who recorded smaller than average gaps of -0.3 to -0.5. For those who had responsibilities in caring for children for 5, 6, 8 or 10 hours per day, satisfaction gaps of -1.0 to -1.4 were recorded. In contrast, two small groups of respondents, namely those who care for children for only 2 hours (n=3) or 7 hours (n=2) per day reported their perceptions/performance exceeded their expectations, suggesting they are finding it relatively easy to balance their commitments responsibilities in caring for other relatives for between 3 and 8 hours per day (gap of -1.5, n=5). Respondents who worked more than 33 hours per week also recorded higher than average gaps for this aspect, but the respondent groups were very small. The above suggests many factors can influence a student’s ability to adequately balance study, work and family/personal commitments. However, where there are significant demands on a student’s time, the satisfaction gap is adversely affected. This is not surprising but what is probably surprising is the amount of study that an external student commits to, despite having significant other commitments. For students to balance study, work and family/personal commitments a helpful strategy might be to assist students to formulate and adopt realistic perceptions of required study time and commitment levels and in this regard, universities may have to adopt a more proactive stance in ensuring that students are fully cognisant of their obligations and requirements for successful outcomes at university.

Conclusion The results of this study identify a range of issues that impact upon students’ first-year experience. In particular, students in the external nursing cohort did not feel well-prepared for university study. More specifically, some students, typically those in the external nursing and midwifery program, found that the links between theory and practice were not clear. The students had initially expected more emphasis to be placed on the practical aspects of their future profession. In terms of the social aspects of the university experience, a number of students, particularly external students, did not feel part of a learning community. This same group also had difficulties managing the balance between study, work and family care responsibilities; although this was common across all three undergraduate programs surveyed. The results of the study demonstrate that for the majority of first-year students the expectations of university study were matched by the actual experience. However, a number of significant gaps were identified between students’ initial expectations and experiences, particularly in the areas of: • •

their ability to balance study, work and family care responsibilities (all programs surveyed); the amount of self-directed learning required (medical radiation program only);

83


• •

the degree that their program prepared them for work in their future profession (nursing and midwifery program-internal and external mark); and, support from teaching staff in areas of difficulty (nursing and midwifery program-internal and external mode).

Although the study is limited, in that it was conducted over only three programs across the provision of health sciences, the students within these programs are representative of the general student body. In particular, it is considered that the findings in relation to external nursing students may be relevant to similar cohorts in other universities. In view of the changing student demographic, particularly for nursing students, it is considered that further research be conducted into students understanding of the commitment required to undertake university study. Such research should also include a review of the information provided to prospective and incoming first-year students.

Acknowledgements Our acknowledgement to Mr John Wibrow in assisting with the manuscript preparation

References Armour, R. (1999) University student experiences questionnaire. Open University. http://www.cityyu.edu.hk/pdqs/esep/armour.html (accessed 2003, 27 June). Devlin, M. (2002) An improved questionnaire for gathering student perceptions of teaching and learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 21(3), 289 - 304. Dickson, J., K.-L. Krause, et al. (2002). Making the transition to university - An evaluation of academic orientation, QUT web site. 2004. King, S., and Thalluri J., (2006) Bridging the Gap between fist year students’ expectations and experiences of first year courses. Fill the Gaps, ANZAME, Gold Coast. Kreber, C. (2003) The relationship between students’ course perception and their approaches to studying in undergraduate courses: A Canadian experience. Higher Education Research and Development, 22(1), 57 - 75. McInnis, C. (2001a) Researching the first year experience: where to from here? Higher Education Research and Development, 20(2), 105 - 114. McInnis, C. (2001b) Signs of disengagement? The changing undergraduate experience in Australian universities,, 1- 15. Melbourne: University of Melbourne. McInnis, C., James, R. and McNaught, C. (1995) First year on campus: Diversity in the initial experiences of Australian undergraduates. Canberra: AGPS Moffat, K. J., A. McConnache, et al. (2004). “First year medical student stress and coping in a problembased learning curriculum.” Medical Education 38: 482 - 491. Peat, M., Dalziel, J. and Grant, A. M. (2001) Enhancing the first year experience by facilitating the development of peer networks through a one-day workshop. Higher Education Research and Development, 20(2), 199 - 215. Pitkethly, A. and Prosser, M. (2001) The first year experience project: A model for university-wide change. Higher Education Research and Development, 20(2), 185 - 198. Planning-Unit. (2003) Statistics, [Web Page]. University of South Australia. http://www.unisa.edu.au/pln/Statistics.htm (accessed 2003, 22 July). Rangecroft, M., Gilroy, P., Tricker, T. and Long, P. (2002) Gathering and using quality-of-student: Experience data on distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 17. Thompson E (1997) Distance education drop-out: What can we do? The Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Murdoch university ,February Pages 324-332

84


Thompson, E (1997). Distance education drop-out: What can we do? In Pospisil, R. and Willcoxson, L. (Eds), Learning Through Teaching, p324-332. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Teaching Learning Tinto, V. (1996) Reconstructing the first year of college. Planning for Higher Education, 25(1), 1 - 6. Wilcox, P., S. Winn, et al. (2005). “‘It was nothing to do with the university, it was just the people’: The role of social support in the first-year experience of higher education.” Studies in Higher Education 30(6): 707 - 722. Williams, C. (1982) The early experiences of students on Australian University campuses. Sydney: University of Sydney.

About the Authors Dr. Jyothi Thalluri I am a senior lecturer teaching Human Anatomy and physiology/pathophysiology to health sciences students at the University of South Australia. Dr. Sharron King Lecturer in Human Anatomy and Physiology to allied health students at the University of South Australia.

85

EDITORS Fazal Rizvi, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA. Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA. Mary Kalantzis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Brenda Gourley, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK. Lily Kong, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Bob Lingard, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom. Kris Olds, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA. Michael Peters, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA. Paige Porter, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. Dato’ Dzulkifli Abdul Razak, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia. Susan Robertson, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom. Sulaiman Md. Yassin, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia.

Please visit the Journal website at http://www.Universities-Journal.com for further information about the Journal or to subscribe.

THE UNIVERSITY PRESS JOURNALS

Creates a space for dialogue on innovative theories and practices in the arts, and their inter-relationships with society. ISSN: 1833-1866 http://www.Arts-Journal.com

Explores the past, present and future of books, publishing, libraries, information, literacy and learning in the information society. ISSN: 1447-9567 http://www.Book-Journal.com

Examines the meaning and purpose of ‘design’ while also speaking in grounded ways about the task of design and the use of designed artefacts and processes. ISSN: 1833-1874 http://www.Design-Journal.com

Provides a forum for discussion and builds a body of knowledge on the forms and dynamics of difference and diversity. ISSN: 1447-9583 http://www.Diversity-Journal.com

Maps and interprets new trends and patterns in globalisation. ISSN 1835-4432 http://www.GlobalStudiesJournal.com

Discusses the role of the humanities in contemplating the future and the human, in an era otherwise dominated by scientific, technical and economic rationalisms. ISSN: 1447-9559 http://www.Humanities-Journal.com

Sets out to foster inquiry, invite dialogue and build a body of knowledge on the nature and future of learning. ISSN: 1447-9540 http://www.Learning-Journal.com

Creates a space for discussion of the nature and future of organisations, in all their forms and manifestations. ISSN: 1447-9575 http://www.Management-Journal.com

Addresses the key question: How can the institution of the museum become more inclusive? ISSN 1835-2014 http://www.Museum-Journal.com

Discusses disciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches to knowledge creation within and across the various social sciences and between the social, natural and applied sciences. ISSN: 1833-1882 http://www.Socialsciences-Journal.com

Draws from the various fields and perspectives through which we can address fundamental questions of sustainability. ISSN: 1832-2077 http://www.Sustainability-Journal.com

Focuses on a range of critically important themes in the various fields that address the complex and subtle relationships between technology, knowledge and society. ISSN: 1832-3669 http://www.Technology-Journal.com

Investigates the affordances for learning in the digital media, in school and throughout everyday life. ISSN 1835-2030 http://www.ULJournal.com

Explores the meaning and purpose of the academy in times of striking social transformation. ISSN 1835-2030 http://www.Universities-Journal.com

FOR SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT [email protected]