Mind the gap: students' expectations and perceptions of induction to ...

Mind the gap: students’ expectations and perceptions of induction to distance learning in higher

education

1Forrester, Gillian & 2Parkinson, Gillian

Presented at British Educational Research Association (BERA) Annual Conference, UMIST, Manchester, UK,

September 16-18, 2004

1Research Associate, Language and Literacy Studies in Education Research Group, School of Education, University of Manchester, UK.2Senior Lecturer, Educational Support & Inclusion Research Group, School of Education, University of Manchester, UK.

Address for correspondence:Dr Gillian ForresterLanguage and Literacy Studies,School of EducationThe University of ManchesterOxford RoadManchesterM13 9PL

Tel: 44 + (0)161 275 3452Email: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Forrester, G. & Parkinson, G. (2004) ‘Mind the gap’: students’ expectations and perceptions of induction to distance

learning in higher education. Presented at BERA Annual Conference, UMIST, Manchester.

[email protected]

Abstract This paper reports on research which investigated students’ experiences of induction to distance learning. The research sought to illuminate students’ expectations and perceptions of their induction experiences in order to inform the provision of services offered to 36 students commencing three distance learning programmes. The research explored whether there was a ‘gap’ between students’ expectations of induction (in terms of it meeting their needs as distance learners and providing appropriate support) and their perceptions of the induction to the programme they in fact received. The research was guided by a conceptual framework based on a ‘gap analysis’ model originating from the business and marketing literature. This model and the methodology underpinning it provided a starting point for our own empirical investigation and a means of exploring gaps between expectations and perceptions. The usefulness of this model in educational settings is discussed as is its modification and application to our own research enquiry. A qualitative approach was adopted and data derived from two questionnaires, participant and non-participant observations, focus groups and individual semi-structured interviews with students and tutors. Preliminary findings indicate that a number of guiding issues should be borne in mind when planning induction sessions for distance students, in particular: ensuring the format combines mixed approaches to teaching and learning which include a significant element of active student participation; making a pre-course diagnosis of students IT skills in order to establish students abilities to use course-related tools (for example, accessing the online library catalogue and e-journals, using databases); including a hands-on IT session as part of the induction programme; giving attention to developing social cohesion within the group and establishing the foundations for peer support networks; facilitating a sense of belonging to both the programme and the wider university. The paper concludes that the approach of identifying gaps has facilitated in gauging students’ needs as distance learners, the level of student satisfaction with their induction and also has revealed specific areas where developments in the induction process can be made. Appropriate adjustments within the programmes have thus been initiated so that students’ needs are more fully met during induction and the gap between students’ expectations and perceptions significantly narrowed.

Background to the Distance ProgrammesThe distance programmes which were the focus of this research are offered by Educational Support and Inclusion (ESI), University of Manchester. ESI offers programmes of different academic levels delivered by distance learning in Profound Learning Disability and Multi-Sensory Impairment leading to an Undergraduate Certificate, Postgraduate Diploma or Masters (MSc) degree. These have been running for five years in collaboration with MENCAP. Their design and structure is based on that of the traditional Open University model. The programmes are aimed at a wide range of people who are involved in some way with children and adults who have complex learning needs and sensory impairments. For example, students may be care workers, speech and language therapists, generic practitioners, residential house managers,

1

mailto:[email protected]



social workers or teachers working with pupils who have learning disabilities. Students enrolled on these programmes are mature learners who are predominately, though not exclusively, women. Some students are self funding while others are sponsored by their employers or charitable trusts. The Undergraduate Certificate is primarily aimed at those who may not hold the standard entry requirements for undergraduate study, but who may be parents or carers for example. The Postgraduate Diploma and Masters levels are designed for those with professional qualifications and a first degree. The duration of the Undergraduate Certificate and Postgraduate Diploma is 2 years part-time. The MSc is 2 years part-time plus an additional year to complete the dissertation. Distance students receive written, audio visual and audio materials for the course units which involves approximately 3-4 hours of private study per week and students take three course units per year. Telephone contact with academic tutors forms part of the tutorial support available to students. A recent development is an online forum, which was introduced to promote peer communication and support. Assessment is by course unit assignments and there are no examinations. The programmes attract students from the UK and overseas.

The students registered on all three programmes attend a compulsory three-day residential study schools held on the University campus twice each year. One is during the autumn, the other in spring. These can be both complementary to and independent of the course materials students receive. Students attend lectures and workshops as one cohort. Cross level training of this nature is considered good practice in the field as are professional development opportunities which reflect collaborative, interdisciplinary team-working. Undergraduate and postgraduate students thus attend the same lectures at the study schools though have different assignments and courses of study.

Tutors are available at the study schools for individual tutorial support. The study schools accommodate first, second and third year students and sessions are organised in a way that largely separates them. The autumn study school is essentially regarded as the induction to the programmes for new students joining the programme. Here they are formally introduced to their programme of distance study and the systems and people that will support them. Prior to arrival students receive an information pack which contains a welcome letter, relevant course information and material, general information about the university and also the library and lending facilities. The induction comprises an informative and welcoming introductory session by the programme director, a tour of the library and an introduction to its services, a support session on study skills and individual tutorials.

Arguably, preparing new students appropriately for distance study and providing them with the requisite skills is empowering and enables them to effectively engage in self-directed learning. This is one of the chief aims of the autumn study school. Accordingly this research, funded by our Faculty of Education’s Teaching Standards Committee, came about as the result of an appreciation that the induction experience of students plays a critical role in laying the foundations for successful study and eventual completion. We

2



were interested in identifying the needs of our students, analysing the usefulness and appropriateness of the current induction to the three distance learning programmes from the student perspective (see Evans, 1994; Evans, 1995) and addressing any gaps in provision. The main aim of the research was to gain a more comprehensive understanding of students’ induction experiences in order to inform the provision of services offered to students commencing the programmes and ensure that they become acclimatized to the new self-directed study conditions and in doing so are enabled to study and learn effectively at a distance.

Student Induction and Support for Distance LearnersThe isolation and loneliness that distance learners experience is well documented (Eastmond, 1995). Ludwig-Hardman & Dunlap (2003:2) contend, ‘students feelings of isolation can be compounded if they are ill equipped to deal with the demands of studying at a distance’. The very nature of distance education is that students typically learn in isolation from other students and their tutors, are not physically present at the institution of study and are separated geographically and/or by time (Simpson, 2000). According to the literature on student induction to higher education generally, laying the foundations for students to take ‘greater responsibility for their own learning’ is a factor behind effective induction design (Barton, 2001: 49). Thus for distance students, encouraging and facilitating independent learning is crucial as learners will be studying alone for most, if not all of the study period (for a fuller discussion on ‘independent learning’ see, Wedemeyer, 1981; Moore, 1973). However, while minimizing the role of the teacher and encouraging autonomy is one approach adopted by some (see Keegan, 1990) others, for example Lewis (1982: 136), prefer to regard the teacher more as a supportive ‘friend’ who is actively engaged in the student learning process.

Greater attention to induction processes in higher education has developed in recent years in response to the growing realisation that providing students with a more comprehensive and integral introduction to their studies helps alleviate potential anxieties, assists in helping students adjust to the university environment and facilitates the effective integration of students to their courses or programmes of study (Frame, 2001; Shobrook, 2003). Induction has consequently become ‘student-centred’ (Edward, 2003: 230) and innovative ways of guiding students through inductive and transitional processes in higher education environments have been piloted and developed (for example, Sackville, 1997; Carter and McNeill, 1998; Stanley, 2001). In reality, student induction still often involves institutions providing large amounts of information upfront with the focus on providing content (Edward & Middleton, 1997) which can however overwhelm, confuse and dishearten students in the early days of study (Edward, 2003).

Granger (1990) suggests that while distance students may function quite effectively in their own workplace or community when confronted with the demands of academic study and having necessary skills such as analytical, conceptual, written or those relating to the use of technology, they may feel inadequate or deficient. Again, induction should arguably also aim to help students identify any areas of weakness which might require development

3



and attend to the wider learning processes. Other functions of induction include enabling students to connect to the programme, having a sense of identity as a student within a particular institution and fostering a sense of belonging to that institution. If realised then they are likely to promote satisfaction with the learning experience, retain students on their courses and facilitate eventual successful completion (see Tinto, 1975; Yorke, 1995).

The development of appropriate support systems for distance students from enrolment, through induction and beyond has grown considerably in recent years (Tait, 1995) with student services comprising both ‘academic support’ and ‘non-academic support’ (Simpson, 2000: 6-7). Student support services for distance learning according to Tait (2000: 289) have three ‘essential and interdependent’ functions:

1. cognitive: supporting and developing learning through the mediation of the standard and uniform elements of course materials and learning resources for individual students;

2. affective: providing an environment which supports students, creates commitment and enhances self-esteem; and

3. systematic: establishing administrative processes and information management systems which are effective, transparent and overall friendly.

Student support and support services feature quite considerably in recent distance education literature (and in the higher education literature more generally) where students are perceived as ‘customers’ or ‘consumers’ of education. The trend of customer care and customer satisfaction from the service sector has been influential in developing support services provided for students (Sewart, 1993; Nunan et al, 2000; Kenworthy, 2003). A broad range of support services are identified in the literature including ‘timely student feedback’, ‘on-site support’ (i.e. a range of personnel to support distance students in different way) ‘access to library materials’; ‘the presence of which seem to have a positive affect on learner satisfaction’ (Threlkeld & Brzoska, 1994: 55)

Students as ‘Consumers’ of Educational ServicesLargely as a result of the marketisation of education, growing importance has been placed on service quality in education and issues pertaining to quality assurance in education have recently come more into play (see Rivis, 1997; Thorpe, 1993). The heightened competitiveness in higher education through the marketplace has positioned students as customers (Sewart, 1993; Klenk, 1999; Nunan et al, 2000; Kenworthy, 2003) who are increasingly having greater awareness of their rights as consumers of education (Long et al, 1999) and are more mindful of disparities between their expectations of service delivery and the reality of that service (Darlaston-Jones et al, 2003). Arguably consumer satisfaction in terms of value for money is an imperative issue for distance students (or their employers) who are often paying fairly substantial fees for their courses and programmes. As Rowntree (1992: 39) notes:

4



These new consumers want a wider range of products, they want relevance, they want it when they want it, and they want value for money. In short, consumers more and more expect a product that is tailored to their individual needs.

Quality has become a key concern in education. Slack et al (2004: 596) suggest that, ‘quality needs to be understood from a customer’s point of view because, to the customer, the quality of a particular product or service is whatever he or she perceives it to be.’ Similarly Parasuraman et al (1985: 46) argue, ‘the key to ensuring good service quality is meeting or exceeding what consumers expect from service.’ Thus, in order that customers are satisfied with a particular product or with the level of service provided, it is imperative that it at least meets their expectations. A predicament for service providers is that individual customer expectations may well be different. The same is true of students who come from a variety of backgrounds, each with unique experiences and knowledge that will shape and inform their expectations and their perception of quality. Furthermore the service or product received may be also perceived in different ways.

Research Methodology As a means of improving the induction activities currently offered to students we conducted research which explored potential disparities between the induction activities offered to students and what they considered an induction to the programme should consist of or entail in terms of it effectively introducing them to the programmes and meeting their needs as distance learners. Fundamentally, we were concerned with identifying any gap between ‘what was offered’ and ‘what should be offered’ defined at the level of the learner (see Eastmond, 1994: 90; also Petracchi, 2000). We were interested in exploring a number of aspects as part of this research for example, assessing the current content of the programme’s induction activities, eliciting students’ needs, concerns and anxieties and their expectations of induction to distance learning, tutors perceptions of students’ needs and expectations, and students perceptions (experiences) of the actual induction activities.

A literature search alerted us to a ‘gap analysis’ model designed by Parasuraman et al (1985) in the mid 1980s. The model was developed to determine the satisfaction of service delivery against the expectations of the consumer of the service. A widely used instrument to objectively measure service quality named SERVQUAL was the outcome of their work (Parasuraman et al, 1988; Zeithaml et al, 1990), but consideration of this is beyond the scope of this paper and so will not be discussed suffice to say it has subsequently been adopted in other service industries and is also used in higher education settings (Engelland et al, 2000; Mac Keogh & Stevenson, 2001; Darlaston-Jones et al, 2003). Gap analysis then is essentially a model of consumer-perceived quality and was developed to diagnose quality problems by identifying and measuring ‘gaps’ in the provision of services between users expectations and perceptions of service quality. It also serves the purpose of bringing to light aspects of a service which could be developed

5



or improved thus making the service more effective and enhancing consumer satisfaction. The model (Parasuraman et al, 1988: 44) was the outcome of an empirical investigation in the retail sector and principally proposes that a series of gaps might exist between the various parts of service provision.

The model and the methodology underpinning it provided a starting point for our own empirical investigation and a means of exploring gaps between expectations and perceptions. We used it a basis to develop our own conceptual framework (see Figure 1) which assisted in framing the research enquiry as well as providing a tool for analysis of the data. As Miles and Hubermann (1994: 18) suggest:

A conceptual framework explains, either graphically or in narrative form, the main things to be studied – the key facts, constructs or variables and the presumed relationships among them.

Figure 1: A conceptual framework for exploring any disparity between students’ expectations and perceptions of induction provision

The left hand side of our conceptual framework represents the student’s ‘domain’ of quality and within this the student’s expectations are shaped and informed by a number of factors. These might include past experiences (including education, work, training, prior knowledge), their personal learning needs, any word-of–mouth communication about the programme or university (through informal networks) and the reputation or image they had of the university. Slack et al (2004: 597) consider that such ‘expectations are internalised as a set of quality characteristics’. The right hand side of the diagram represents the university’s domain. Within this tutors (academics)

6



are responsible for designing the induction and (in some instances) may be required to address faculty or institutional guidelines, specifications or policies regarding the induction of students. Tutors will invariably have perceptions of students’ needs and expectations and these will also inform the conception and design of an appropriate induction. Details of the induction are included in the general programme documentation which is posted to students. When the students attend the first study school they receive their induction to the programme. For purposes of this particular piece of research the two domains meet in the actual delivery of the induction to the programme. This is provided by the programme provider (within the university) and experienced by the student.

We were not concerned with attempting to offer any objective measurement of quality of service provision. Rather we were seeking rich descriptive data which would enable us to gain an in-depth understanding of students’ experiences and give insight into the process of this particular aspect of distance education. We were attracted to generating more detailed and meaningful expressions of student views and preferences in order to inform our induction activities. This kind of data would not be possible from the confines of a rigid, pre-coded tick box survey. As Sherman and Webb (1988: 7) suggest:

…qualitative implies a direct concern with experience as it is ‘lived’ or ‘felt’ or ‘undergone’… Qualitative research, then, has the aim of understanding experiences as nearly as possible as its participants feel it or live it.

A qualitative approach was adopted as the nature of the study was exploratory (Creswell, 1994) and would also allow students to raise issues pertinent to them. Open-ended questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were used so that opinions could be enunciated at length. This approach typically generates a wider range of depth of responses though is often more difficult to tabulate into neat and absolute categories.

Data CollectionEmpirical research was conducted during the study schools and an exploratory questionnaire was administered at the beginning of the first study school to elicit student’s needs, expectations, concerns and anxieties as distance learners. The questionnaire comprised 5 closed questions to ascertain social demographic information and a series of 12 open-ended questions allowing students considerable scope to express their points of view on induction to learning at a distance. Students were asked about, for example, their expectations of the programme, the preparations they had made prior to beginning the programme, about their main concerns and worries about studying at a distance, what they considered were important or necessary skills and attributes required by distance learners, and since joining the programme what support had they found most helpful or unhelpful.

7



ParticipantsThirty-six questionnaires were distributed and 27 of these were completed and returned giving a response rate of 75%.

Gender Age Programme Nationality Country of residence

Studied by distance before

Males 2 18-24 2 UG 7 UK 25 UK 24 Yes 6Females 25 25-29 5 PG Dip 5 Overseas 2 Overseas 3 No 21

30-34 3 MSc 15

34-39 8

40-44 5

50-54 3

60-64 1

Table 1: Social demographic information of participants

Most students on the programmes are women and this is reflected in the questionnaire responses. Many were new to distance education with 78% of respondents indicating they had not previously undertaken any form of distance study. An information sheet accompanied the questionnaire explaining the purpose and scope of the research and how the findings would be used. A formal focus group was also held with five students (4 female, 1 male).

A second questionnaire which required more reflective responses from students was distributed at spring study school. Students were asked to describe their needs as distance learners and how, on reflection, their induction helped to meet these needs, what kind of support they expected from their induction and how their expectations were met (or not met), the kind of support they have required from tutors and how satisfied they were with the support provided. The response rate was 61% on this occasion (21 females, 1 male and the most common age group of respondents being the 35-39 category). Individual interviews were conducted with 5 students (all female) and interviews with the programme director, tutor and administrators also informed the research.

AnalysisThe data were analysed using the qualitative data analysis software programme QSR NVivo (Qualitative Solutions and Research Software: Version 2). The questionnaire responses were entered onto Rich Text Format (RTF) files and loaded to NVivo (Gibbs, 2002) as were the full transcriptions from the interviews and focus groups. Sections of data that indicated similar perceptions, experiences, ideas and concepts for example, and which reflected the general questions, themes and objectives embedded in the research were brought together using NVivo’s coding facility. This assisted in organising the data so that it could be more manageably retrieved, sorted and grouped.

8



Research Outcomes:

Students learning needs Ascertaining students learning needs was of paramount importance to this research as we considered that to a large extent students expectations of support during induction would be fuelled by students perceived learning needs (as identified in Table 2). The main concern and worries students had about their programme reported by of over half students related to their isolation as distance learners, the lack of contact and social interaction, their physical distance from the university and being able to ‘sustain the motivation’ or ‘willpower’ to study. Students thus need to feel supported and encouraged throughout the duration of their studies but especially reassured, as they commence their studies, that appropriate support is available to them. Identifying students’ needs so that the induction offered could be tailored more to addressing these was a primary concern of this research. The data generated illustrated the wide-ranging and various needs of our distance learners. These are presented below, not in any order of priority, but have been assembled under either ‘the need to’ or ‘the need for’.

The need to… The need for…belong clear informationinteract with other students guidancebe self-directed study skills supportbe part of a community technical supportunderstand how to access resources (library, e-journals, databases)

reassurance

understand how to use resources (library, e-journals, databases)

advice

know what facilitates are available clear precise instructions of what is expected

share experiences resources (human and material)communicate with tutors support and directiondevelop study skills a student support networkmanage own time computer accessbe determined to complete an understanding family/employerbe self-disciplined space to studybe self-motivated flexibility

Table 2: Students perceived personal learning needs

Along side learning needs we also recognised however that students past experiences (including education, work, training, prior knowledge), any word-of–mouth communications about the programme (through informal networks) and the image they had of the university were also likely to impact upon their expectations of support during induction. These factors are all identified in the students’ domain of our conceptual framework (see Figure 1).

9



In addition, some students reported that their attendance at the study school had highlighted some concealed or unknown needs. For example, the following student considered herself to be a fairly competent computer user. However, her comments illustrate the difficulties students may face when they are required to use the technology for unfamiliar purposes (accessing e-journals, online forums):

‘I’ve never felt stupider in all my life. I thought I was computer literate…I think we should have had more hands on…It’s frustrating. And then you think ‘oh well I’ve failed again’. A negative feeling comes out…it was exasperating not being able to get into any journals at all. Could not get in…I did register [for the forum] by the date, but I couldn’t get in again. I only registered and got sent a number. That was it…I can’t get anywhere. I’m not blaming the university; it was certainly my fault’.

These kinds of comments clearly illustrate the points made by Granger, (1995) where students may feel inadequate or skills-deficient (see earlier discussion above). A well-conceived induction can thus offer appropriate support to students. In reality, it is difficult for an induction, no matter how comprehensive, to address all the needs identified in Table 2. For example, the need for ‘an understanding family’ or ‘understanding employer’ is really beyond the scope of an induction as is finding physical ‘space to study’. In the following section we discuss the gaps explored in the research and draw on empirical evidence as examples and illustrations of the points we raise.

Exploring the ‘gaps’The conceptual framework (see Figure 1) enabled us to identify a number of areas, which could be fruitfully explored and aid in highlighting any gaps in the induction provision. Parasuraman and colleagues argue that any mismatch between expectations and perceptions (our gap 4) results in consumer dissatisfaction and perceived poor quality and can be explained by other gaps elsewhere in the model. Accordingly, the existence of any gap depicted in the conceptual framework (i.e. gaps 1 to 3) manifests itself in gap 4. Essentially gap 4 represents the most significant gap in terms of perceived service quality provision and it is the nature of this particular gap, which was the concern of our own research. The areas we investigated were as follows:

Students’ expectation of support - tutors perceptions of students’ needs and expectations of support (Gap 1)

Tutors conception of induction - actual delivery of the programme (Gap 2)

Faculty guidelines – programme documentation communicated to students (Gap 3)

Students’ expectations - students’ perceptions (Gap 4)

10



Gap 1: Students’ expectation of support - tutors perceptions of students’ needs and expectations of supportStudents’ responses indicated, as we anticipated, an assortment of expectations. Most students had quite developed and distinct expectations while there were a few who were ‘uncertain’ or had ‘no specific expectations’ or stated ‘I wasn’t quite sure what to expect in some ways. It’s at least what I was expecting it’s probably a bit higher you know it’s probably exceeded them a little bit’. The responses were categorized and coded under various headings namely; ‘social expectations’ ‘academic expectations’ ‘technical expectations’ and ‘pastoral expectations’. Some students indicated that they expected the opportunity during induction to become more formally acquainted with their fellow students and tutors. Some responses were as follows:

‘Getting to know people, faces and places’

‘The opportunity to meet students and tutors’

‘Longer ‘getting to know others’ session when first arrive with time to discuss backgrounds etc.’

Some responses were programme-related and which we categorised as ‘academic expectations’, for example:

‘Meeting tutor and having questions answered’

‘A sort of route map so that I can fulfil course requirements with minimum hassle’

‘Some practice skill workshop for assignments or something’

Some responses were specifically related to using the technology and which we categorised as ‘technical expectations’ for example:

‘Information on resources and how to access them’

‘Access to the computers to just have a practice’

‘How to access literature once back home’

‘Library system – checking out books, using e-journals’

Some responses were humanistic as these related more to the ‘pastoral expectations’ of support, for example:

‘Reassurance regarding the availability of tutors for any support required’‘Meeting 2nd year students, gaining reassurance of what to expect’

11



Tutors perceptions of students’ needs and expectations were on the whole relatively comparable. Tutors anticipated a ‘wide variation’ of student expectations largely because of the different levels of the three programmes. Generally it was considered that ‘many of their needs are in common to any mature student returning to learning’ though distance students have ‘fewer opportunities’ to be together with other learners and to support each other. So essentially, providing appropriate levels of guidance and support to a diverse cohort of distance students during induction was a primary challenge for tutors. Tutors expected that students would want to know the requirements of the programme and understand how it operates in practice, would want to be introduced to and personally meet their tutors and would want to gain ‘a sense that they’ll be supported through their studies’. Tutors considered that students probably expected more interaction with their peers, more opportunities to formally socialise and possibly less specialist content than was offered. So, on the one hand, it may be reasonable to say that tutors perceptions of students expectations were somewhat along the same lines as students’ expectations. However while there was an awareness by tutors of students needs and expectations, there was also the realisation that what was actually delivered to students at induction was passive and slightly different to what students expected.

Gap 2: Tutors conception of induction - actual delivery of the programmeIn the past the induction has been considered successful in introducing students to the programmes; in providing appropriate and detailed course information, ‘in generating a positive ethos’ and ensuring that students ‘feel they get attentive service’ and support. The induction has largely been a passive event which involved the dissemination of necessary information so that students have all the particulars about the programmes and course units, how to obtain support and from whom, the assignment criteria and submission and so on. This was considered important by tutors enabling students to make ‘informed choices’ during their studies. However, too much information distributed in a short space of time can be overwhelming resulting in some students being unable to comprehend and retain much more than the essentials. This comment from an undergraduate student exemplifies this particular concern:

‘A lot of information bombarded on to us and what I’d taken in didn’t help’

Tutors were keen to create a ‘supportive atmosphere’ and so welcoming and encouraging students and making them feel at ease is part of the introductory session. Again this can be illustrated by student feedback:

‘It’s kind of like a family environment...Because they encourage everyone to talk to each other’

The induction also comprised a tour of the library and an introduction to its services, a support session on study skills and individual tutorials. While all these serve specific purposes tutors considered that the induction was

12



perhaps lacking in providing opportunities for students to introduce themselves through ‘icebreaker’ sessions, to formally interact and network and to become familiar and interact with the technology.

The induction process itself had not been formally evaluated previously. However, while tutors had an ‘implicit and explicit awareness’ that more introductory sessions concentrating on the process of learning with greater student participation might be more beneficial to students (with more opportunities to develop study skills as appropriate), these kind of sessions would have to be at the expense of the specialist content. It was perceived that the specialist lectures and workshops were highly valued by students and so the format of the induction had remained unchanged. So here there is some evidence of a mismatch between what tutors considered induction should comprise and how it should be designed, compared with the actual content of the induction that was delivered.

Gap 3: Faculty guidelines – programme documentation communicated to studentsThe University does not have a consolidated or specific institutional policy for student induction preferring that guidelines for induction procedures are issued at the level of individual faculties. The Faculty of Education prepared guidelines as part of its review of quality (QAA) extracts of which are quoted below:

On arrival students will participate in a comprehensive programme of induction activities…All students receive programme handbook detailing essential information on the programme and the support services available within the University...Students receive details of registration and the programme of events…they meet with their personal tutor, other members of staff at a social gathering and receive information on the programme content, administrative arrangements and the timetable. In addition they have…the Introduction to Study Skills course units. They also benefit from a tour of the …University Library. They are issued with the Programme Information booklet, Programme Content booklet and the Applied Study booklet, which include details of student support and guidance as well as unit outlines and other relevant information …

The documentation communicated to our students detailing the induction activities is consistent with these guidelines and we are confident that there is no apparent mismatch or gap here.

Gap 4: Students’ expectations - students’ perceptionsWith few, if any, exceptions students who attend the study schools gain immensely from them. Certainly by the spring study school there was

13



evidence of students feeling much more comfortable with their learning, their understanding of how the programme operates and some acquaintance with peers had been made. Many students reported that their expectations had been met and were generally favourable of the induction they received stating:

‘It was somewhat reassuring’

‘Tutor support and support from department is very good’

‘Good preparation’

Of students expectations those relating to the academic and pastoral side of the induction were perceived well:

‘I was provided with numerous handouts/leaflets with precise instructions’

‘I became a lot clearer about the structure of the course and the support structure’

‘Very helpful. Explained what is expected in the year ahead’

‘Staff were very supportive and approachable, friendly and positive’

Of students expectations those relating to the social and technical side of the induction were perceived as falling short:

‘Not much ‘social’ support. Nothing organised socially for new students. Quite daunting to be on first induction weekend not knowing anyone/ or anywhere’

‘I left with not being able to contact any fellow students’

‘More introductions to each other would have been helpful’

‘Good induction, but I still struggled to use forum and contact tutor by email’

The library visit not good as computers were down that day. This should really have been rescheduled as vitally important. I didn’t really get the opportunity to try computer access’

‘I did not come away with a clear idea of what was available and how to access it’

The social integration of students is very important to programme tutors though there was the notion held by them that students are after all ‘mature adults’ who should be able to mix reasonably well with other people.

14



However, this concept does seem to be daunting for some students and so the research has highlighted a gap where more could be done at the point of induction to facilitate the process of peer support and networking. Ensuring that students can and know how to obtain relevant resources is also a high priority for tutors. The development of technology has made it possible for library materials to be accessed from anywhere with the proliferation of online databases, e-journals and e-books, for example. It is thus vital that an induction equips students with these access skills. It was unfortunate that when this cohort of students were timetabled to attend the library that the computer system was down temporarily. Students were unable to receive suitable instruction on that occasion, but student comments suggest that that would also prefer a practical hands-on session in order to use the library and information facilities more purposefully and productively.

Students’ comments regarding their needs, expectations, perceptions and experiences of induction have thus been taken very seriously and changes to the current induction have been made accordingly. These responses are representative of some of the suggestions made by students:

I think an open day prior to the course, to look at study skills, peer support, identify with teachers, introduction to library and databases. I was very overwhelmed at the start of the course when two parcels arrived on my door step. I had never studied by distance learning and was completely overwhelmed. I did not know the best ways to work through activities at the same time as collecting information for the assignment.

Icebreakers organised, and a walk around buildings, organised trip to a social event. Whole afternoon in library to download a journal, sign up to the forum and take out a book.

Recommendations for InductionBased on the responses of students, discussions and interviews with academic and administrative staff, a review of relevant research literature (induction and student support in distance and higher education, more generally) and guides for induction, we have developed our approach to induction as follows:

The induction will ensure that a significant element of active student participation occurs. Work in small groups as part of an opening icebreaker session, students will be provided with the opportunity to talk to each other and get to know each other right from the beginning. This session will involve students exploring their own role as students and their expectations of the programme and of tutors. One of the aims of this session will be to develop an informal student-tutor contract so that expectations can be managed from the outset.

15



A pre-course diagnosis of students IT skills will be made in order to establish students’ abilities to use course-related tools (for example, accessing the online library catalogue and e-journals, using databases). This session will enable students to investigate their existing technical skills, understand their strengths and identify areas for improvement. It is then possible to establish a short-term plan whereby study skills can be honed and developed as appropriate.

A hands-on IT session will familiarise and in some cases introduce students to communication tools such as email and the online forum. Students will have the opportunity to practice accessing online library catalogue for example and accessing the special services for distance learners. It is imperative that students know not only how to access the online library catalogue, e-journals, e-books and databases, but also are comfortable navigating the sites and know how best to use the resources when they have gained access to them.

More focus on developing social cohesion within the group and establishing the foundations for peer support network will be made through formalising social evenings providing more opportunities for networking, peer support and collaboration. This will hopefully help to combat the sense of loneliness and isolation common to distance students.

Facilitating a sense of belonging to both the programme and the wider university is probably the most difficult aspect to achieve with students who are studying at a distance, though arguably one of the most important. Tutors will continue to fully support students in their studies offering academic, technical and pastoral support and by doing so assist in integrating students so that they feel they belong to the programme and are part of a student body within the wider university.

ConclusionThe research we have conducted is based upon a model which examines the needs and expectations of consumers against how they perceive the level of service provided. Any mismatch highlights a ‘gap’. The conceptual framework we developed from this model for our own research purposes has been a fruitful tool for revealing gaps between expectation and experience. Gathering information about what students consider to be their needs and expectations as distance learners as they commence programmes and then evaluating students experiences of their induction to the programmes has informed the induction activities offered to students as they embark on our programmes. Students’ needs and concerns have been illuminated in this research, which has given tutors a more comprehensive understanding of students’ engagement with distance education and their perspectives of induction to distance learning. This is important because the more that is known of how students experience induction, the better our influence over the learning process can be.

16



Arguably the level of students’ satisfaction with a programme is in part dependent upon their perceptions of it, their understanding of how it operates and what it requires of them, and how affectively they prepare themselves for learning. The data generated through this research identified a number of areas which have subsequently been developed to better match student needs and meet their expectations, thus narrowing gaps. In this research our attention has essentially focused on and resulted in adopting a more holistic approach to student induction. However, it should be noted that it is not always possible to make certain changes or desirable to simply react spontaneously. Given the current economic restraints in universities, for example, it might be difficult to formulate programme developments especially if substantial extra resources are required. Thus in order to overcome potential student dissatisfaction it may be that programme providers actually look more to sensitively managing students expectations at the outset of their studies to a more realistic or appropriate level. In both instances programme providers should be enabled to narrow the satisfaction gap and in so doing enhance students’ learning experience and improve the quality of their programmes.

ReferencesBarton, H. (2001) ‘Induction at Oxford Brookes: principles and practices’, in: Frame, P. (Ed.) Student Induction in Practice. SEDA Paper 113. Staff and Educational Development Association.

Carter, K. & McNeill, J. (1998) ‘Coping with the darkness of transition: students as the leading lights of guidance at induction to higher education’, British Journal of Guidance & Counselling. Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 399-415.

Creswell, J.W. (1994) Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.

Darlaston-Jones, D., Pike, L., Cohen, L., Young, A., Haunold, S. & Drew, N. (2003) ‘Are they being served? Student expectations of higher education’, Issues in Educational Research, Vol. 13. (http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/iier/darlaston-jones.html)

Eastmond, N. (1994) ‘Assessing needs, developing instruction, and evaluating results in distance education’, in: Willis, B. (Ed.) Distance Education Strategies and Tools. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 07632: Educational Technology Publications.

Eastmond, D.V. (1995) Alone But Together. Distance Study Through Computer Conferencing. Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press, Inc.

Edward, N.S. (2003) ‘First impressions last. An innovative approach to induction’, Active Learning in Higher Education. Vol. 4, No. 3 pp. 226-242.

Edward, N & Middleton, J. (1997) ‘Induction – a contextual approach to the start of engineers’ formation. Paper prepared for the Scottish Educational Research Association Annual Conference (September 18-20) West Park Conference Centre, Dundee. (http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/)

Engelland, B.T., Workman, L. & Singh, M. (2000) ‘Ensuring service quality for campus career services centers: a modified SERVQUAL scale’, Journal of Marketing Education. Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 236-245.

17

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/

http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/iier/darlaston-jones.html



Evans, T. (1994) Understanding Learners in Open and Distance Education. London: Kogan Page Ltd.

Evans, T. (1995) ‘The potential of research with students to inform development’, in: Lockwood, F. (Ed.) (1995) Open and Distance Learning Today. London: Routledge.

Frame, P. (2001) ‘Managing the induction crisis: students can make a difference’, in: Frame, P. (Ed.) Student Induction in Practice. SEDA Paper 113. Staff and Educational Development Association.

Gibbs, G.R. (2004) Qualitative Data Analysis. Explorations with NVivo. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Granger, D. (1990) ‘Bridging distances to the individual learner’, in: Moore, M. G. (Ed.) Contemporary Issues in American Distance Education. New York: Pergamon Press.

Keegan, D. (1990) Foundations of Distance Education (2nd Edn.) London: Routledge.

Kenworthy, B. (2003) ‘Supporting the student in new teaching and learning environments’, in: Tait, A. & Mills, R. (Eds.) Rethinking Learner Support in Distance Education. Change and continuity in an international context. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Klenk, S.W. (1999) ‘Customer-based transformation’, in: Beede, M. & Burnett, D. (Eds.) Planning for Student Services: Best Practices for the 21st Century. Ann Arbour, Michigan 48104: Society for College and University Planning.

Lewis, R. (1982) ‘The role of the correspondence tutor’,. in: Daniel, J., Stroud, M. & Thompson, J. (Eds.) Learning at a Distance: A World Perspective. Edmonton, Alberta: Athabasca University.

Long, P., Tricker, T., Rangecroft, M. & Gilroy, P. (1999) ‘Measuring the satisfaction gap: education in the market place’, Total Quality Management, Vol. 10, Nos. 4 & 5, pp. S772-S778.

Ludwig-Hardman, S. & Dunlap, J.C. (2003) ‘Learner support services for online students’, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. Vol. 4, No. 1.(http://www.irrodl.org/content/v4.1/dunlap.html)

Mac Keogh, K. & Stevenson, K. (2001) ‘Student expectations of tutor support: An expectations led quality assurance model’. Paper prepared for ICDE Conference, Dusseldorf, April. (http://odtl.dcu.ie/talks/2000-2001/tutor-expectations/ICDE-2001.html)

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd Edn.). London: Sage Publications.

Moore, M. G. (1973) ‘Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching’, Journal of Higher Education. Vol. 44, No. 12, pp. 661-679.

Nunan, T., George, R. & McCausland, H. (2000) ‘Rethinking the ways in which teaching and learning are supported: the flexible learning centre at the university of South Australia’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 85-98.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L. (1985) ‘A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Fall), pp. 41-40.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. & Berry, L.L. (1988) ‘SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality’, Journal of Retailing. 64 (1), pp. 41-40.

Petracchi, H.E. (2000) ‘Distance education: what do our students tell us?’ Research on Social Work Practice, Vol. 10, No.3, pp. 362-376.

18

http://www.slis.indiana.edu/CSI/wp99_01.html



Rivis, V. (Ed.) (1997) Managing Guidance` in Higher Education, Using Quality Assurance Guidelines: Selected Case`Studies. London: Higher Education Quality Council.

Rowntree, D. (1992) Exploring Open and Distance Learning. London: Kogan Page.

Sackville, A. (1997) ‘Student induction – a pivot for guidance and learner support’ in: Rivis, V. (Ed.) Managing Guidance in Higher Education. Using Quality Assurance Guidelines: Selected Case Studies. London: Higher Education Quality Council.

Sewart, D. (1993) ‘Student support systems in distance education’, Open Learning, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 3-12.

Sherman, R.R. & Webb, R.B. (1988) Qualitative Research in Education: focus and methods. London: Falmer.

Shobrook, S. (2003) ‘The role of pre entry practices and induction strategies in relation to student retention’. Progress 3 Conference.http://www.hull.ac.uk/engprogress/Prog3Papers.htm)

Simpson, O. (2000) Supporting Students in Open and Distance Learning. London: Kogan Page Ltd.

Slack, N., Cambers, S. & Johnston, R. (2004) (4 th Edn.) Operations Management. Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.

Stanley, N. (2001) ‘Appropriate and opportunistic: the continuing student as induction expert’, in: Frame, P. (Ed.) Student Induction in Practice. SEDA Paper 113. Staff and Educational Development Association.

Tait, A. (1995) ‘Student support in open and distance learning’, in: Lockwood, F. (Ed.) (1995) Open and Distance Learning Today. London: Routledge.

Tait, A. (2000) ‘Planning student support for open and distance learning’, Open Learning. Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 287 – 299.

Threlkeld, R. & Brzoska, K. (1994) ‘Research in Distance Education’, in: Willis, B. (Ed.) Distance Education Strategies and Tools. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 07632: Educational Technology Publications.

Thorpe, M. (1993) Evaluating Open and Distance Learning. (2nd Edn.) Harlow: Longman.

Tinto, V. (1975) ‘Dropout from higher education: a theoretical synthesis of recent research’, Review of Educational Research. Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 89-125.

Wedemeyer, C.A. (1981) Learning at the Back Door. Reflections on Non-traditional Learning in the Lifespan. Madison Wisconsin 53715: The University of Wisconsin Press.

Yorke, M. (1999) Leaving Early: Undergraduate Non-Completion in Higher Education. London: Falmer Press.

Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. & Berry, L.L. (1990) Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations. New York: Free Press.

19

http://www.slis.indiana.edu/CSI/wp99_01.html

Mind the gap: students' expectations and perceptions of induction to ...

Documents

Transcript of Mind the gap: students' expectations and perceptions of induction to ...