Deakin University CRICOS Code: 00113B

Retention, completion and success: what do we know?

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Published by Deakin University Tower 2, Level 12 727 Collins Street Melbourne, Victoria, 3008

First edition September 2018

© Deakin University 2018

This work is copyright. Unless otherwise indicated, all content is copyright of Deakin University. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from Deakin University.

This subject material is issued by Deakin University on the understanding that:

x Deakin University, its officials, author(s) or any other persons involved in the preparation of this publication expressly disclaim all or any contractual, tortious, or other form of liability to any person (purchaser of this publication or not) in respect of the publication and any consequences arising from its use, including any omission made by any person in reliance upon the whole or any part of the contents of this publication.

x Deakin University expressly disclaims all and any liability to any person in respect of anything and of the consequences of anything done or omitted to be done by any such person in reliance, whether whole or partial, upon the whole or any part of the contents of this subject material.

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 1 of 24

Retention, completion and success: what do we know? Overview This paper considers Australian and international literature on student success and retention. The selection of literature is biased towards peer-reviewed papers, institutional documents and national reports that speak to the Australian context.

The paper considers the context of this work on student retention, which includes data from a recent national report and the Department of Education and Training. It covers some of the factors known to affect student retention and guidelines for improving access, participation and success for those students studying online.

The paper explores interventions that have been shown to impact on student retention, for example in their first year of studies. A summary is provided in tabular form that briefly describes the issues and how student retention and success may be supported. It includes specific evidence-based examples of successful interventions drawn from Australian and international sources that focus on:

x students, early in their studies, such as: effective social and academic integration; enhancing the first-year experience; personalised feedback on early assignments; and early warning and support systems for students who are not engaging

x general teaching and learning matters, such as: creating inclusive, stimulating learning spaces for all students, both in the cloud and on campus; peer support and mentoring; building a strong sense of identity with the discipline; and scaffolding academic skill development across the course

x general academic, professional and peer support, such as: enhanced instructor support for students; effective partnerships with students; personal and academic support; and frequent contact with students throughout the student lifecycle

x institutional climate, support and action, such as: clear retention-focused policies, priorities and actions; generating and using quality data on retention; and monitoring and evaluating student success and retention actions and initiatives.

Finally, consideration is given to several discipline-specific, retention-related interventions. Where applicable, an indication as to their ease of implementation, strength of impact and adaptability or transferability is provided.

This paper was developed by Professor Les Kirkup, to support the 20 Course Retention Project that ran across 2017. Professor Kirkup was supported in developing this summary by the Dean of Students, Professor Bernie Marshall, the Associate Deans Teaching and Learning and the Course Directors involved in the project.

Major resources In addition to the literature mentioned in the body of this report, two major Australian Department of Education and Training reports are of relevance:

x Higher Education Standards Panel (2018), Final Report – Improving retention, completion and success in higher education, Department of Education and Training).

x Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) (2017), Characteristics of Australian higher education providers and their relation to first-year student attrition, Department of Education and Training).

Deakin’s Strategic Intelligence and Planning Unit (SIPU) provides success, retention and attrition data and reports at https://wiki.deakin.edu.au/display/staff/Success%2C+Retention+and+Attrition.

Page 2 of 27 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Contents Retention, Completion and Success: What do we know? 1

1

1

3

4

4

4

6

Overview

Major resources

Glossary

Some context

The national context

The Deakin context

Success, completion and retention

Cloud students 8

What can we do to improve retention, and will our interventions make a difference? 9

Students early in their studies 9

General teaching and learning matters 10

General academic, professional and peer support 10

Institutional climate, support and action 11

What supports retention, completion and success, and what approaches have been adopted? 12

Personal issues that may impact on retention 17

Sources describing discipline-specific and evidence-based initiatives and interventions positively impacting on student success and retention 18

References 22

Other useful sources 26

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 3 of 27

Glossary Attrition The proportion, usually expressed as a percentage, of students commencing a course of study in a given year who neither complete in that year or the following year, nor return in the following year. It does not identify those students who intermit study at their university or transfer to another institution, who are thus counted as having ‘attrited’.

Adjusted attrition Adjusted attrition makes allowance for students who transfer between institutions based on the tracking of students through their Commonwealth Higher Education Student Support Number (CHESSN). Adjusted attrition indicates the proportion of students who have left the university and not enrolled at another university or higher education provider within the specified time frame. The CHESSN is not available to students in institutions that do not have access to FEE-HELP loans or for international students. The use of adjusted attrition by the Australian Department of Education and Training thus focuses solely on Commonwealth-supported domestic undergraduate students.

Normal retention rate The normal retention rate for year (x) is defined by the Department of Education and Training (DET) as the number of students who were enrolled in a course in year (x) and did not complete in year (x) and continued in year (x + 1) (= retained students), as a proportion of all students who were enrolled in a course in year (x) and did not complete in year (x). This gives a crude retention rate that identifies students who are retained the following year at the same institution. This is calculated from the full-year enrolment in one year to the full-year enrolment in the following year. Per this definition, students who remained at the same institution but changed course are counted as retained, and students who changed institutions are not counted as retained. This measure is also known as institutional retention. The Department of Education and Training (DET) also publishes adjusted retention (also known as sectoral retention) for commencing domestic undergraduate students. This measure takes into account students who transfer to another university.

New normal retention rate DET has recently amended the definition of normal retention rate to cover students who graduate early in the following year (e.g. at the end of Trimester 3) and thus would not be enrolled at the Trimester 1 census date and would otherwise have been classified as not-retained. The new normal retention rate for year (x) is thus the number of students who commenced a bachelor course in year (x) and did not complete in year (x) or year (x + 1) and continued in year (x + 1) (retained students), as a proportion of all students who commenced a bachelor course in year (x) and did not complete in year (x) or year (x + 1). DET also publishes adjusted retention figures for commencing domestic undergraduate students that take into account students who transfer to another university.

Student completion rates Completion rates are defined as the number of completions of students in a course as a proportion of the total number of students who commenced in a course in a given year. Completion rates have traditionally been reported for the minimum enrolment time (three years for a bachelor degree) but are not frequently reported over longer time frames.

Success rate Success rate for year (x) is the proportion of actual student load (EFTSL) for units of study that are passed divided by all units of study attempted (passed + failed + withdrawn after the relevant teaching-period census date). Students who withdraw from a unit prior to the relevant teaching-period census date are not included and thus do not affect the success rate.

Page 4 of 27 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Some context The national context Australian universities attract students from a wide range of backgrounds, personal circumstances and with degrees of variability in preparedness for study (Stone, 2016). Student-to-staff ratios have grown steadily since 1990 (Bradley et al, 2008, p72), less face-to-face teaching occurs in most disciplines (McLaren and Kenny, 2015) and the availability of the internet allows students the possibility to study most, and in some cases all, of their degrees online at a time and in a place to suit them. Results of national surveys probing issues related to success and retention are now in the public domain. For example, prospective students can now compare learner-engagement scores in many disciplines at several universities (and other degree-awarding institutions) across Australia (https://www.qilt.edu.au/).

The increase in diversity of student background, experience and degree of preparedness for study might be anticipated to lead to an increase the rate of attrition. Evidence cited in a recent paper by the Higher Education Standards Panel (HESP) (2018) indicates that this is not the case. Specifically, Australian university retention data from 2005 to 2014 shows that the attrition nationally was about 15.0% in 2005, 12.5% in 2009 and 15.2% in 2014 (Higher Education Standards Panel, 2018, p5). The Panel’s 2017 discussion paper noted that ‘student characteristics explained only a small part (22.5%) of the overall variation in student attrition.’ We can conclude that a broad range of social and institutional factors must also impact significantly. The Higher Education Standards Panel (2018, p.5) considered that ‘significant improvements in provider approach are possible to maximise students’ chances of successfully completing their studies’ and provides a list of recommendations for institutional action (see HESP 2018, page 7).

The consolidated national figures hide details of importance. Inspection of the data shows variations between disciplines/fields of education, institutions and modes of study. As an example, in 2014, Engineering and Related Technologies recorded an attrition rate nationally of 9.3% compared to Education with an attrition rate of 19.6% (Higher Education Standards Panel, 2017, Appendix C p42)

The Deakin context Over the past five years for which data are available, overall retention has been relatively constant at Deakin, ranging between 79% and 81%. Within this, our retention of commencing students has declined slightly, offset by a similarly sized increase in retention of returning students. There has been a significant increase in postgraduate retention, although this is still below 80%. Cloud Campus students continue to have significantly lower retention that internal students.

There are a number of student attributes more common to Cloud Campus students that are predictive of lower retention; for example, students who are above 25 years of age, domestic, studying part-time, working full-time and from regional areas are more likely to discontinue their studies. All of these attributes are more common among online than on-campus students. For these reasons, the University has a number of initiatives that seek to address the factors that impact significantly on cloud students and to ameliorate their effects.

Deakin is not alone in its decision to increase its number of students studying in the cloud. In recent years, many, though not all, universities have increased their intake of external (cloud) students who study exclusively in an external mode. Figure 1 shows the links between the percentage adjusted attrition across 2015-2016 for commencing bachelor students for all Australian universities, plotted against the percentage of students studying ‘externally’ Deakin compares favourably with other universities, having lower attrition than would be expected for its relatively high number of Cloud Campus students. Deakin’s achievements in enhancing digital learning and the online experience are also highlighted in Table 1 which shows we had the highest retention rate for commencing cloud undergraduate students in 2015 among all high-volume providers. At postgraduate level, we are not as successful as at undergraduate level, but are still within the top third of universities.

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 5 of 27

% External

Figure 1: Variation of adjusted attrition rate with proportion of commencing undergraduate students studying externally, all Australian universities, 2015-16. (Deakin is shown in red.) Data sourced from the Department of Education and Training (https://www.education.gov.au/student-data).

Commencing UG Cloud Students Commencing PG Cloud Students

2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015

Deakin Retention 74.0% 72.2% 70.1% 70.4% 69.0% 63.6% 70.9% 68.0%

Deakin National Rank 2/12 1/12 4/12 1/12 9/19 16/19 5/19 6/19

National Average 67.1% 64.3% 63.6% 63.0% 67.6% 66.0% 66.8% 67.0%

National High 75.3% 72.2% 74.1% 70.4% 78.0% 76.0% 79.0% 76.1%

National Low 57.2% 48.4% 42.7% 48.6% 58.8% 55.4% 47.8% 59.0%

Table 1: Retention of commencing cloud students among Australian high-volume higher education providers. Data sourced from the Department of Education and Training (https://www.education.gov.au/student-data)

However, we cannot be complacent about our current retention status. While our focus on digital learning and the cloud experience has seen us ranked well in Figure 1 and Table 1, the retention of Cloud Campus students is still well below that of campus-based students. And while our overall retention data has been stable over the last five years, our relative ranking with our major comparison universities has decreased – some of them have been able to decrease attrition and increase retention while we have remained relatively static.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

% A

ttrit

ion

Page 6 of 27 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Success, completion and retention Despite the challenges faced by students as they progress through their courses, which may include poor preparation for study, work commitments, family responsibilities and financial pressures, most students are successful (ie they pass the units they have enrolled in) and complete their studies. Figure 2 shows the success rate for students in Victorian universities between 2001 and 2015 (Higher Education Standards Panel, 2017, Appendix C p12); Deakin has experienced a decline in success rates across this period. Figure 3 shows the six-year completion rate for students at Victorian universities with Deakin showing an increase in completion rates over this period, but still lagging behind some of our major benchmark institutions.

Figure 2: Success rate for students at Victorian Universities between 2001 and 2015 (Higher Education Standards Panel, 2017, Appendix C p12). Department of Education and Training)

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 7 of 27

Figure 3: Six-year completion rates for commencing domestic bachelor students enrolled at Victorian universities (Higher Education Standards Panel, 2017, Appendix C table 29).

What impacts student retention and students’ commitment to persist with their studies? Tinto (2003) points to five conditions that promote persistence:

1. Settings in which there are high expectations of students; as Tinto puts it, ‘No-one rises to lowexpectations.’

2. Settings that provide academic, social and personal support. Where expectations are high, for example,students will not succeed without high levels of academic support.

3. Settings that provide personalised feedback on student progress, particularly early in their studies. Howare commencing students to know what is expected of them and how they are progressing, if they are notgiven such feedback?

4. Settings in which students are involved as valued members of the university, requiring frequent andquality contact with academics, support staff and other students.

5. Settings that foster learning – those students who are actively involved in their learning, spend time onlearning tasks and collaborate with others are likely to persist in their studies.

The conditions that support persistence, as expressed by Tinto, are echoed by authors who bring an Australian perspective to the issue of retention in higher education. These authors point to other related factors that affect attrition. For example, Crosling, Heagney and Thomas (2009) emphasise the importance of early engagement of students through pre- and post-entry induction activities; better understanding of the diversity of students which can inform the development of the curriculum; authentic curricula that build on student experiences, expectations and career destinations and in contexts students can relate to; student-centred active learning and integration of study skills that support student success. In their synthesis of student engagement, belonging, retention and success, Krause and Armitage (2014) consider the findings of influential Australian reports focusing on retention, including those that considered student expectations of their course as expressed in responses to the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ). These expectations included that courses be personally and vocationally relevant; deliver timely responses from academic, administrative and support staff; have clear curriculum guidelines and assessment and have opportunities to interact with teachers and peers (Scott, 2008).

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Deakin Federation La Trobe Monash RMIT Swinburne Melbourne Victoria

Com

plet

ion

(%)

2005-10 2006-11 2007-12 2008-13 2009-14

Page 8 of 27 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Cloud students Online student attrition is at least twice as high as that of students who are campus-based (Higher Education Standards Panel, 2017, p32). The findings of a recent Australian-based study on improving access, participation and success in an online environment have led Stone (2016) to develop guidelines for improving the outcomes of online learning, which include:

1. knowing your online students, who generally have quite different demography to on-campus students.This can aid the development of teaching and support strategies

2. intervening early to manage and shape student expectations, build skills and engagement with an onlinelearning community

3. recognising and supporting the vital role of ‘teacher presence’: teacher presence promotes a sense ofbelonging and helps students feel connected to a community of learning

4. building collaboration across campus to offer integrated and embedded support, for example, throughembedding academics skills and technology support into the curriculum

5. contacting and communicating with students throughout their time at university: establishing regular contactpoints where the institution reaches out to students through, for example, targeted, personalised messages.

Stone (2016) illustrates, through the inclusion of specific examples, how the guidelines can be translated into action.

In an examination of more than 200 interviews with students studying online with Open Universities Australia (OUA), Moore and Greenland (2017) found that failure to complete assessments due to unforeseen and unavoidable work-related commitments was the most prominent reason for students dropping out of the OUA’s open-access courses. Their research suggests that higher education policies (at those universities who teach into OUA’s degree programs) ‘do not acknowledge the fundamental differences between on-campus and on-line students.’ The authors found that the responsibility for granting extensions largely fell to the discretion of unit chairs. They conclude:

Online students’ work-related commitments should be overtly considered in assessment policies. Other considerations include designing assessments that align more closely with workplace challenges, providing greater choice of assessment options, and offering flexible assignment submission deadlines. In this manner, online educators can overcome, or at least ameliorate, the biggest driver of online student attrition and have a positive effect on student retention. (Moore and Greenland, 2017).

In their study of the online experiences of Australian students from non-traditional backgrounds, Thomas, Herbert and Teras (2014) considered how a sense of belonging was understood by students and was supported by staff. Teacher encouragement and teacher presence was seen as key to engagement by some students. Thomas et al (2014) share a comment from one student on the impact of teacher presence:

I think the thing that made the difference as to whether you felt you were actually part of a class and there was any interaction was how involved the lecturer was as in, in the forums, there were some lecturers who would say after everyone had sort of introduced themselves, not really have any more to do with us so there’d be discussion between students about topics but some lecturers would just not be involved whereas others would check it frequently, have their input … she (tutor) was so interactive on the forums that it really got a lot of people involved that I don’t think would have normally bothered. (Thomas et al 2014, p76).

Thomas et al (2014) conclude that where academics were able to foster a sense of community and engagement in learning online, students enjoyed their experience, felt the learning had been enhanced and were less likely to disengage from their learning.

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 9 of 27

What can we do to improve retention, and will our interventions make a difference? Hoyt and Winn (2004) argue that interventions designed to promote retention need to recognise that students who leave a particular course may fall into several categories, including those who opt out because they have accomplished what they wanted to achieve and do not want or need to complete the course; those who transfer to other courses within the same institution or another institution, perhaps for reasons of prestige or interest, geographical convenience or dissatisfaction with the current course; those who are taking time out, perhaps due to financial pressure, personal difficulties or family/work commitments, or rethinking their career trajectory and those who leave higher education for any of the above reasons, or others, and have no intention to return.

Within any of these categories, it is unlikely that a single reason leads a student to exit their course or a single reason that leads a student to stay. Where students leave for a combination of personal reasons and those related to the curriculum, a university can have most impact on the latter (Tinto, 2006) but can ameliorate the impact of the former.

This was borne out in a survey Deakin undertook with all postgraduate students who ceased to study with us (discontinued, intermitted or became inactive) between 15 February and 30 April 2017. Family and work commitments were major reasons for ceasing, but the respondents indicated that there were many ways in which the University could have supported them to continue to study. Greater flexibility in study and assessment requirements, better support for course planning, support in returning to study, workload management and planning, reduced group work and increased interaction with other students and staff were all mentioned. Another major factor was their feeling of being overwhelmed and falling behind, particularly among commencing students who made the call to discontinue as census date approached, as they were uncertain as to whether they would be able to cope later in the trimester.

To provide an evidence base for action, this document presents below examples from the peer-reviewed literature, where particular interventions/initiatives have been implemented to promote success and retention and the outcomes examined, or where particular insights, based on success or retention theories, models or data may assist in developing effective interventions or initiatives. These innovations, initiatives and insights from the literature are organised under four broad headings:

x Students early in their studies

x General teaching and learning matters

x General academic, professional and peer support

x Institutional climate, support and action

Students early in their studies It is recognised that students’ first experiences of university have a major impact on decision to persist with their studies (Nelson, Smith and Clarke, 2012). This is true for all students, but particularly those from under-represented groups at university, such as those from low socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds, students with disability, Indigenous students and those who are first in family (and, of course, a student may fit into more than one of these categories). Students’ experiences in their first period of study can make the difference between staying and going (Swecker et al, 2013). Kift, Nelson and Clarke (2010) argue that the first-year experience of students is ‘everybody’s business’ and that it is an ‘intentionally designed curriculum’ supported by a partnership of academic and professional staff that is the ‘optimal vehicle for dealing with the increasingly diverse commencing cohorts by facilitating a sense of engagement, support and belonging’ (Kift, Nelson and Clarke, 2010).

Page 10 of 27 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Several Australian universities have developed guides for academics that adopt the approaches, principles and actions advocated by Kift and her colleagues (see, for example, ‘Successful Student Transition’ from the University of Technology Sydney)

The literature focusing on students early in their studies points to student retention being supported by:

x students’ social and academic integration

x managing and shaping students’ academic expectations

x students’ preparedness for study and study support

x enhancing the first-year learning experience

x an early-warning and response system for students who appear to be disengaging

x personalised feedback on early assignments

x raising students’ awareness of support services

Specific interventions and initiatives related to each of the above, with supporting references can be found in Table 2 beginning on page 12.

General teaching and learning matters Student engagement, evidenced by students devoting time and energy to activities that are educationally purposeful, is a key factor in improving student success and retention not only in the first year of studies, but throughout the study lifecycle (Coates, 2009). In a recent large scale study in the UK (What Works, 2017) that reported on successful, evidence-based teaching and learning approaches to improving success and retention, emerging themes that impact on student engagement included: supportive peer relations; meaningful interactions between staff and students; authentic and relevant curricula; building on students’ career aspirations and their previous experiences; active learning teaching strategies (such as inquiry-oriented learning) including those that encourage collaboration.

The literature focusing on general teaching and learning relating to retention and success points to student retention being supported by:

x creating inclusive, stimulating and effective learning spaces for all students

x students investing time on learning tasks, including attending lectures and tutorials

x enculturation of students into their chosen discipline

x building skills and engagement through a student-centred curriculum

x peer support and mentoring with an explicit academic purpose integrated into the curriculum

x a strong sense of identity with the chosen discipline

x embedding academic skills development within units of study.

Specific interventions and initiatives related to each of the above can be found in Table 2, beginning on page 14.

General academic, professional and peer support In his synthesis of evidence impacting on student success and retention, Jones (2008) highlights the need to support students through integrated skills development, proactive personal tutoring and easy-to-access student services. Peer-assisted study and peer mentoring have been used successfully in many institutions (O’Brien et al, 2012). Tout, Pancini and McCormack (2014) report an extension to the provision of peer support, namely ‘mobile peer mentors’ operating in learning commons. Tout et al (2014) suggest that such an approach is not only successful in engaging students but represents a precursor to institutional recognition of the role of students paid to support the learning of others.

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 11 of 27

The literature focusing on general academic, professional and peer support points to student retention being supported by:

x resourcing instructor support for students

x academic, professional staff and students working in partnership

x ongoing academic and professional staff capacity building

x delivering ongoing interventions that have an explicit academic purpose

x availability to students (including outside normal office hours) of support, advice, feedback and direction to where further support can be found

x contact with students throughout the student lifecycle.

Specific interventions and initiatives related to each of the above can be found in Table 2, beginning on page 15.

Institutional climate, support and action The work of Tinto has influenced thinking and action on student retention in Australia and internationally. In his book, Completing College: Rethinking Institutional Action, Tinto explores a range of issues related to retention, including a framework for institutional action that establishes the conditions for promoting student success (Tinto, 2012, p6). With respect to institutional effort in the US to improve retention, Tinto remarks:

… most institutional efforts have been situated at the margins of students’ educational life. They have neglected the classroom where the great majority of students meet [academics] and one another and engage in formal learning activities. (Tinto, 2012, p5)

Tinto advises on a range of actions that institutions can take to enhance student retention and success, which include that institutions should (Tinto, 2012, p120-124):

x establish a team of academics, support staff and administrators whose task it is to oversee institutional planning and action for student success

x assess student experiences and analyse patterns of student progress through the institution

x invest in forms of practice that enhance student success, in particular those that impact success within the classroom

x establish an early-warning system for key first year units

x invest in the professional development of academics, particularly for new academics and those who teach key first-year units.

The literature on institutional climate, support and action points to student retention being supported by:

x retention-focused climate, policies, priorities and actions

x resource provision

x quality data on retention and success

x auditing, monitoring and evaluating student success actions and initiatives.

Specific interventions and initiatives related to each of the above can be found in Table 2, beginning on page 16.

Page 12 of 24 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

What supports retention, completion and success, and what approaches have been adopted? Table 2: Issues related to student retention and approaches adopted to address those issues

Issues related to: Student retention is supported by: Approaches adopted: References

Students, early in their university studies

x students’ social and academic integration, sense of belonging, discipline/professional identity, connectedness and ‘being known’

x discipline-based induction program consisting of engaging activities with specific academic purpose

x What Works (2017), p33

x Ulster University (2017)

x Kift et al (2010)

x Jones and Thomas (2012)

x development of positive student-instructor relationships x Polinsky (2003)

x Allen and Bowles (2012)

x Angelino et al (2007)

x peer and one-on-one mentoring x O’Brien et al (2012)

x Student-success advisors focusing upon transition and the first-year experience x What Works (2017), p44

x Birmingham City University (2017)

x Thomas, Hill et al (2017)

x ‘settled score’ initiative: students advise the program director (weekly/monthly) on how settled they feel at the institution (with follow up if ‘unsettled’)

x What Works (2017), p53

x St Mary’s University (2017)

x peers assisted study programs x Fontaine (2014)

x conspicuous and sustained online teacher presence x Stone (2016)

x understanding, managing and shaping students’ academic expectations and experiences

x orienting students to the course context including expectations of the teaching and learning methods

x Pitkethly and Prosser (2001)

x understanding challenges experienced by students from different backgrounds/origins by identifying key characteristic of students

x University of Tasmania (2014)

x university induction interventions that include an employability focus x What Works (2017), p85,

x University of Brighton (2017), p12

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 13 of 27

Issues related to: Student retention is supported by: Approaches adopted: References

x setting high expectations of students x Tinto and Pusser (2006)

x assuring context and content relevance for students located in large enrolment service units (eg maths for engineers or statistics for business students)

x Jackson et al (2014)

x students’ preparedness for study and study support

x enhancing students’ time-management skills x Polinsky (2003)

x co-curriculum activities supporting students, for example, numeracy and literacy and related to their immediate academic needs

x Jackson et al (2014)

x George and Larwin (2015)

x assessing students’ readiness for study x Britto and Rush (2013)

x increasing student confidence in independent learning through enhancing students’ self-efficacy

x Habel (2009)

x Sawtelle et al (2012)

x Walker (2016)

x enhancing the first-year learning experience

x integrated holistic approach, institution specific, embodying pedagogy, curriculum design and teaching practice

x Kift et al (2010)

x Pitkethly and Prosser (2001)

x first-year workplace learning (WPL) experiences x Trede and McEwen (2015)

x building learning communities x Tinto (1993)

x an early-warning and response system for new students who appear to be disengaging

x employing learning analytics to identify issues and target interventions x West et al (2016)

x Griffith University (2015)

x using commercial software to track extent of students’ online engagement followed by advisor intervention

x Britto and Rush (2013)

x giving students personalised feedback on their early assignments/assessed activities

x classroom assessment, feedback and reflection x Angelo and Cross (1993)

x raising students’ awareness of/reception to available academic and professional support services

x high levels of receptivity to services associated with enhanced retention x Smith (2004)

x mathematics learning support x MacGillivray and Wilson (2008)

Page 14 of 24 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Issues related to: Student retention is supported by: Approaches adopted: References

General teaching and learning

x creating inclusive, stimulating and effective learning spaces

x technologically enhanced spaces supporting student success x Brooks (2011)

x students investing time on learning tasks, including attending lectures and tutorials

x promoting involvement in learning for example by utilising active, collaborative or cooperative learning

x Tinto (2003)

x Class attendance positively and significantly related to performance x Lukkarinena et al (2016)

x enculturation of students into their chosen discipline

x research projects linked to institutional research strengths x Boyer Commission (1998)

x curriculum relevant to students’ futures through partnerships with employers x Glover et al (2002)

x building skills and engagement through student-centred curriculum

x implementing an inquiry-based, research-informed curriculum x Boyer Commission (1998)

x adoption of active learning strategies such as inquiry-based learning and peer instruction

x Bullard et al (2008)

x Crosling et al (2009)

x Crouch and Mazur (2001)

x stress on student-instructor and student-student dialogue especially for online learning success

x Eom and Ashill (2016)

x O’Shea et al (2015)

x learning designs emphasising student-active activities x Rienties et al (2016)

x persistent connection of the curriculum to employment including workplace learning experiences

x Trede and McEwen (2015)

x use of analytics dashboard to track engagement and attainment x Lawther and Edwards (2014)

x peer support and mentoring with an explicit academic purpose, integrated into the curriculum

x students helping students, for example through peer-mentoring schemes x Yomtov et al (2017)

x facilitating the creation of learning communities and/or study groups x Fontaine (2014)

x Baker (2010)

x creating a strong sense of identity with the chosen discipline

x catalysts that promote discipline identities of underrepresented students x Lane (2016)

x student support circles encouraging strong sense of professional identity x Bass et al (2016)

x embedding academic skills development/enhancement within units of study

x linking communication skills and course work x Boyer Commission (1998), p24

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 15 of 27

Issues related to: Student retention is supported by: Approaches adopted: References

General academic, professional and peer support

x resourcing instructor support for students

x investing resources at an institutional level over the long term x Tinto and Pusser (2006)

x academic, professional staff and students working in partnership

x staff-student partnerships enhancing student engagement x What Works (2017), p56

x Ulster University (2017)

x Kift et al (2010)

x mobile student rovers active in learning commons x Tout et al (2014)

x trained advisors and knowledgeable academics working together x King and Kerr (2005)

x planning and information office and counselling services working together to provide tailored advice and support to students

x Barnes et al (2015)

x creation of broad-based student success and retention teams to optimise student outcomes and embed in core business.

x Griffith University (2015)

x students working with staff to unpack the relationship between the student experience and retention

x Oberhollenzer and Brady (2017)

x ongoing academic and professional staff capacity building

x communities of practice explore, examine and disseminate innovations and initiatives

x Egea et al (2014)

x training in the use of technology for online delivery x Bawa (2016)

x creating a culture of support for online teaching x Marek (2009)

x delivering ongoing interventions that have an explicit academic purpose

x aligning support with learning tasks x Tinto (2012), p 26

x availability to students including outside normal office hours for support, advice, feedback and direction to where further support can be found

x 24/7 technical-support help desk, including synchronous chat x Britto and Rush (2013)

x interventions focused on specific demographic populations x Young-Jones et al (2013)

x contact with students throughout the student life-cycle

x advisors contact every student several times every semester x Carey (2005)

x advisors provide cognitive, affective and systemic support x Gravel (2012)

Page 16 of 24 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Issues related to: Student retention is supported by: Approaches adopted: References

Institutional climate, support and action

x retention-focused climate, policies, priorities and actions

x assessment and special consideration policies that recognise the challenges faced by online learners

x Moore and Greenland (2017)

x advocacy at the highest level that student success is high and enduring institutional priority

x Tinto (2012)

x expectational climate set by senior policy makers x Tinto and Pusser (2006), p12

x Tinto (2012)

x intentional, structured and proactive actions consistently applied x Carey (2005)

x incentivising academics‘ involvement in learning communities, for example through workload allocation

x Tinto (2012)

x resource provision x investing resources to mainstream and sustain improved practices x Tinto and Pusser (2006)

x prioritising professional development of academics to develop and deliver student-centred curricula

x Tinto (2012)

x quality data on retention and success

x using data to inform strategic development x What Works (2017), p58

x University of South Wales (2017)

x analysing data to identify which factors most impact student retention x Rienties et al (2016)

x audit, monitor and evaluate student-success actions and initiatives

x routinely assess and realign, if necessary, policies and actions. x Tinto (2012), p117

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 17 of 27

Personal issues that may impact on retention In their paper examining factors that facilitate student retention or act as barriers to improving student retention, Bowles and Brindle (2017) considered 34 studies, mainly from the US, but also others from Australia, the UK and New Zealand. Based on the framework of Carroll, Ng and Birch (2009), the factors as identified in each study were placed into one of three categories: dispositional, which includes students’ self-efficacy and satisfaction with their studies; institutional, which includes student-support systems and program design; and situational factors such as a student’s financial position and family commitments.

In this paper we have chosen to categorise issues largely outside of the direct influence or control of the teaching, the curriculum, student support and the institution, as ‘personal’. Table 3 documents some of the personal issues that may impact negatively on student success and retention, and approaches that have been adopted to lessen that impact.

Table 3: Personal issues faced by some students and possible approaches to lessening their impact

Issue Impact lessened by: Reference

Personal Financial difficulties x providing information and guidance on financial matters, facilitating part-time employment, introducing a hardship fund

x Yorke and Thomas (2003)

Work and other commitments

x enhance students’ time-management skills

x Polinsky (2003)

x reviewing/revising assessment submission/extension policies for mature-age students

x Moore and Greenland (2017)

Parental influence and pressure

x parent orientation programs x Copeland and Levesque-Bristol (2011)

Health x supporting the emotional wellbeing of students transitioning to university

x Lisciandro et a. (2016)

Course not in line with student’s interest

x advisor assists students to connect present academic experience to future life plans

x Drake (2011)

Page 18 of 26 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Sources describing discipline-specific and evidence-based initiatives and interventions positively impacting on student success and retention Many papers on student success and retention can be found in discipline-specific journals such as CBE Life Sciences Education. Such papers often speak more directly to the retention issues and contexts that students, academics and professional staff face in those disciplines. Table 4 highlights some of the interventions/initiatives that have a particular discipline focus and include links to journals or websites where the initiatives/interventions can be found.

This paper makes an attempt to assess the ease of implementation, strength of impact and adaptability/transferability of the interventions/initiatives that appear in the papers or other documents. It is recognised that the evaluation of these attributes is at best tentative and requires detailed consideration, based on what would be required to adopt/adapt the initiatives/interventions to a Deakin context.

A rubric that articulates degrees of ease of implementation (EOI), strength of impact (SOI) and adaptability/transferability (AT) can be found in Table 5 on page 21.

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 19 of 24

Table 4: Discipline-based intervention and initiatives from the literature

EOI – ease of implementation, SOI – strength of impact, AT – adaptability/transferability1 N/A indicates Not Applicable. U indicates Unclear from the documentation available.

Faculty Discipline/degree Journal/source, country + general link Topic/issue(s) considered EOI SOI AT References

Arts and Education

x Arts Student Success x Predictors of attrition within the BA degree N/A N/A N/A Harvey and Luckman (2014)

x Education Higher Education Research and Development, Australasia

x Identifying factors improving student retention rates

N/A N/A N/A Bowles and Brindle (2017)

Business and Law

x Law ‘First Year Experience in Law School: A New Beginning?’ Bond University

x Renewal of LLB curriculum using transition pedagogy

L U L Bradshaw et al (2011)

What Works? Student Retention & Success, Higher Education Academy, UK

x Addressing law student expectations and building confidence through a pre-arrival activity

H M L Ulster University (2017)

x Business Open learning x Factors affecting retention and progression in postgraduate business students

N/A N/A N/A Carroll et al (2009)

What Works? Student Retention & Success, Higher Education Academy, UK

x Student profiling, induction review and pre-entry webinars enhance student engagement, belonging and retention

M M L University of South Wales (2017)

‘The Whole of University Experience: Retention, attrition, learning and personal support interventions during undergraduate business studies’

x Retention in business studies, Australia N/A N/A N/A Willcoxson et al (2011)

Health x Health sciences

CBE Life Sciences Education, US x Impact of an enrichment program on retention and success

L M L Lane (2016)

Quality Assurance in Education x Factors that impact on the postgraduate student experience

N/A N/A N/A Jancey and Burns (2013)

1 See rubric on page 21.

Page 20 of 26 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Faculty Discipline/degree Journal/source, country + general link Topic/issue(s) considered EOI SOI AT References

x Exercise and sport science

What Works? Student Retention & Success, Higher Education Academy, UK

x Assessing the extent to which students have settled into their course

M U M St Mary’s University (2017)

x Nursing Nurse Education Today, UK x A review of recruitment, advising and retention N/A N/A N/A Mooring (2016)

Nursing Education Perspectives, US x Effective retention strategies as rated by nursing academics

N/A N/A N/A Baker (2010)

x Evaluation of retention intervention program L U L Fontaine (2014)

Journal of Nursing Education, US x Student success strategies

x Improvement course

H L L Walker (2016)

Nurse Education in Practice, UK x Factors affecting program completion N/A N/A N/A Wray et al (2017)

x The potential of support circles to promote retention

M U L Bass et al (2016)

Journal of Advanced Nursing x Effect of personality and self-efficacy in the selection and retention

N/A N/A N/A McLaughlin et al (2008)

Science, Engineering and Built Environment

x Science Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), US

x Active learning reduces failure rates N/A N/A N/A Freeman et al (2014)

Science, US x Peer discussion improves student performance M M H Smith et al (2009)

Crouch and Mazur (2001)

x Engineering National HE STEM programme, UK x Enhanced interaction between students and students, and students and academics

H M L Jones and Thomas (2012)

National HE STEM programme, UK x Co-tutor: monitoring student attendance and performance

L H H Thomas and Jones (2012)

Research in Higher Education Journal, US x Lab-intensive development course prepares maths deficient students for sustained STEM achievement

L M L George and Larwin (2015)

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 21 of 26

Table 5: Rubric describing ease of implementation (EOI), strength of impact (SOI) and adaptability/transferability (AT) of interventions

Ease of implementation (EOI) The intervention/initiative required:

High modest changes to current practices and/or resourcing at institutional, course or unit levels

Medium significant changes to current practices and/or resourcing at institutional, course or unit levels

Low large scale changes to current practices and/or resourcing at institutional, course or unit levels

Strength of impact (SOI) There is:

High qualitative and/or quantitative evidence showing strong improvements in student success and retention

Medium qualitative and/or quantitative evidence showing moderate improvements in student success and retention

Low qualitative and/or quantitative evidence showing small improvements in student success and retention

Adaptability/transferability (AT) The intervention/initiative example:

High has been adopted at several institutions or has been shown to be transferable to several disciplines

Medium has been adopted at more than one institution or has been shown to be transferable to another discipline

Low has been adopted at one institution, but there is no evidence of transferability to other disciplines

Page 22 of 26 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

References Allen, KA, Bowles, T (2012) ‘Belonging as a Guiding Principle in the Education of Adolescents’, Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, vol. 12, pp. 108-119.

Angelino, LM, Williams, FK, Natvig, D (2007) ‘Strategies to Engage Online Students and Reduce Attrition Rates’, The Journal of Educators Online, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1-14.

Angelo, T, Cross, P (1993) Classroom assessment: A handbook for college teachers (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Baker, BH (2010) ‘Faculty ratings of retention strategies for minority nursing students’, Nursing Education Perspectives, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 216-220.

Barnes, S, Macalpine, G, Munro, A (2015) ‘Track and Connect: Enhancing student retention and success at the University of Sydney. A Practice Report’, The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 195-202.

Bass, J, Walters, C, Toohill, J, Sidebottom, M (2016) ‘Promoting retention, enabling success: Discovering the potential of student support circles’, Nurse Education in Practice, pp. 109-116.

Bawa, P (2016) ‘Retention in Online Courses: Exploring Issues and Solutions – A Literature Review’, SAGE Open, <https://doi,org/10.1177/2158244015621777>.

Birmingham City University (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’, (Accessed 16 July 2018).

Bowles, TV, Brindle KA (2017) ‘Identifying facilitating factors and barriers to improving student retention rates in tertiary teaching courses: a systematic review’, Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 903-919.

Boyer Commission (1998) Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America's Research Universities. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Bradley, D., Noonan, P, Nugent, H, Scales, B (2008) ‘Review of Australian Higher Education: Final Report’. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

Bradshaw, R, Corbett-Jarvis, N, Galloway, K, Shircore, M, Thiriet, D (2011) ‘First Year Experience in Law School: A New Beginning?’, Bond University. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Britto, M, and Rush, S (2013) ‘Developing and Implementing Comprehensive Student Support Services for Online Students’, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 29-42.

Brooks, C (2011) ‘Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning’, British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 42(5), pp. 719-726.

Bullard, L, Felder, R, Raubenheimer, D (2008) ‘AC2008-521 Effects of Active Learning on Student Performance and Retention’, Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the American Society of Engineering Education. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Carroll, D, Ng, E, Birch, D (2009) ‘Retention and progression of postgraduate business students: an Australian perspective’, Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance e-Learning, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 197-209.

Carey, K (2005) ‘Choosing to Improve: Voices from Colleges and Universities with Better Graduation Rates’, A Report by the Education Trust. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Coates, H (2009) ‘Engaging Students for Success’, Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). (Accessed 10 July 2018).

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 23 of 26

Copeland, KJ, Levesque-Bristol, C (2011) ‘The Retention Dilemma: Effectively Reaching the First-Year University Student’, Journal of College Retention, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 485-515.

Crosling, G, Heagney, M, Thomas, L (2009) ‘Improving Student Retention in Higher Education’, Australian Universities’ Review, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 9-18.

Crouch, CH, Mazur, E (2001) ‘Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results’, American Journal of Physics, vol. 69, no. 9, pp. 970-977.

Drake, J. (2011) ‘The Role of Academic Advising in Student Retention and Persistence’, About Campus, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 8-12.

Egea, K, Griffiths, N, McKenzie J. (2014) ‘An evolving approach to developing academics’ understanding of transitions for first year students. A Practice Report’, The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 103-109.

Eom, SB, Ashill, N (2016) ‘The Determinants of Students’ Perceived Learning Outcomes and Satisfaction in University Online Education: An Update’, Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 185-215.

Fontaine, K (2014) ‘Effects of a Retention Intervention Program for Associate Degree Nursing Students’, Nursing Education Perspectives, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 94-99.

Freeman, S, Eddy, SL, McDonough, M, Smith, MK, Okoroafor, N, Jordt, H, Wenderoth, MP (2014) ‘Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics’, PNAS, vol. 111, no. 23, pp. 8410-8415. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

George, JH, Larwin, KH (2015) ‘Impact of coursework preparing math-deficient university students for sustained STEM achievement’, Research in Higher Education Journal, vol. 29, pp. 1-27.

Glover, D, Law, S, Youngman, A (2002) ‘Graduateness and Employability: student perceptions of personal outcomes of university education’, Research in Post-Compulsory Education, vol., 7, no. 3, pp. 293-306.

Gravel, CA (2012) ‘Student-Advisor Interaction in Undergraduate Online Degree Programs: A Factor in Student Retention’, NACADA Journal, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 56-67.

Griffith University (2015) ‘Case Study 5’, Let’s Talk Learning Analytics and Student Retention. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Habel, C (2009) ‘Academic self-efficacy in ALL. Capacity building through self-belief’, Journal of Academic Language and Learning, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. A94- A104.

Harvey, A, Luckman, M (2014) ‘Beyond demographics: Predicting student attrition within the Bachelor of Arts degree’, The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 19-29.

Higher Education Standards Panel (2017), ‘Improving retention, completion and success in higher education. Higher Education Standards Panel Discussion Paper, June 2017’ and Appendix C – Attrition, Retention, Success and Completion Data, Department of Education and Training. (Accessed 31 July 2018).

Higher Education Standards Panel (2018), ‘Final Report – Improving retention, completion and success in higher education’, Department of Education and Training. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Hoyt, JE, Winn, BA (2004). ‘Understanding Retention and College Student Bodies: Differences between drop-outs, stop-outs, opt-outs, and transfer-outs’, NASPA Journal, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 395-417.

Jackson, DC, Johnson, ED, Blanksby, TM (2014) ‘A Practitioner’s Guide to Implementing Cross-Disciplinary Links in a Mathematics Support Program’, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 67-80.

Jancey, J, Burns, S (2013) ‘Institutional factors and the postgraduate student experience’, Quality Assurance in Education, vol. 21, no. 3, pp.311-322.

Page 24 of 26 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Jones, R (2008) ‘Student retention and success: a synthesis of research’, Higher Education Academy, (Accessed 31 July 2018).

Jones, R, Thomas, L (2012) ‘Promoting Social Engagement: Improving STEM student transition, retention and success in higher education’, The National HE STEM Programme, (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Kift, S, Nelson, K, Clarke, J (2010) ‘Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE – A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector’, The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-20.

King, M, Kerr, T (2005) ‘Academic Advising’, in Challenging and Supporting the First-Year Student: A Handbook for Improving the First Year of College, edited by Upcraft, M, Gardner, J, Barefoot, B. pp. 320–338. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Krause, K-L, Armitage, L (2014) ‘Australia student engagement, belonging, retention and success: a synthesis of the literature’, The Higher Education Academy. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Lane, TB (2016) ‘Beyond Academic and Social Integration: Understanding the Impact of a STEM Enrichment Program on the Retention and Degree Attainment of Underrepresented Students’, CBE Life Sciences Education, vol. 15, no. 3, ar. 39, pp. 1-13.

Lawther, S, Edwards, R (2014) ‘The NTU Student Dashboard: developing a learning analytics platform to improve student retention and attainment’, Nottingham Trent University. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Lisciandro, J, Jones, A, Strehlow, K (2016) ‘Addressing social and emotional learning: fostering resilience and academic self-efficacy in educationally disadvantaged learners transitioning to university’, National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, pp. 1-10. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Lukkarinena, A, Koivukangas, P, and Seppälä, T (2016) ‘Relationship between class attendance and student performance’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 228, pp. 341-347.

Marek, K (2009) ‘Learning to Teach Online: Creating a Culture of Support for Faculty’, Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 275-292.

MacGillivray, H, Wilson, T (2008) ‘Quantitative diversity: disciplinary and cross-disciplinary mathematics and statistics support in Australian universities’, Australian Learning and Teaching Council. (Accessed 16 July 2018).

McLaren, HJ, Kenny, PL (2015) ‘Motivating change from lecture-tutorial modes to less traditional forms of teaching’, Australian Universities' Review, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 26-33.

McLaughlin, K, Moutray, M, Muldoon, OT (2008) ‘The role of personality and self-efficacy in the selection and retention of successful nursing students: a longitudinal study’, Journal of Advanced Nursing, <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04492.x>.

Moore, C, Greenland, S (2017). ‘Employment-driven online student attrition and the assessment policy divide: An Australian open-access higher education perspective’, Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 52–62.

Mooring, QE (2016) ‘Recruitment, advising, and retention programs – Challenges and solutions to the international problem of poor nursing student retention: A narrative literature review’, Nurse Education Today, vol. 40, pp. 204-208.

Nelson, KJ, Smith, JE, Clarke, JA (2012) ‘Enhancing the transition of commencing students into university: an institution-wide approach’, Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 185-199.

Oberhollenzer, Y, Brady, S (2017) ‘Partnering to Investigate Employability and Retention in the Humanities and Social Sciences’, Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, vol. 1, no. 21, pp. 1-6.

O’Brien, MA, Llamas, M, and Stevens, EM (2012) ‘Lessons learned from four years of peer mentoring in a tiered group program within Education, Journal of the Australia and New Zealand Student Services Association, vol. 40, pp. 7-15.

179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918 Page 25 of 26

O’Shea, SE, Stone, C, Delahunty, J (2015) ‘“I ‘feel’ like I am at university even though I am online.” Exploring how students narrate their engagement with higher education institutions in an online learning environment’, Distance Education, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 41-58.

Pitkethly, A, Prosser, M (2001) ‘The First Year Experience Project: a model for university-wide change’, Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 185-198.

Polinsky, TL (2003) ‘Understanding Student Retention Through a Look at Student Goals, Intentions, and Behavior’, Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, vol. 4, no. 4, pp 361-376.

Rienties, B, Edwards, C, Gaved, M, Marsh, V, Herodotou, C, Clow, D, Cross, S, Coughlan, T, Jones, J, Ullmann, T (2016) ‘Scholarly insight 2016: a Data wrangler perspective’, Open University UK. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Sawtelle, V, Brewe, E, Kramer, LH (2012) ‘Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and retention in introductory physics’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 49, no. 9, pp 1096-1121.

Scott, G (2008) ‘University student engagement and satisfaction with learning and teaching’, Review of Australian higher education. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR).

Smith, JS (2004) ‘The effect of student receptivity on college achievement and success’, Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 273-288.

Smith, MK, Wood WB, Adams WK, Wieman C, Knight, JK, Guild, N, Su, TT (2009) ‘Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions’, Science, vol. 323, pp. 122-124.

Sparks, J, Bennett, I, Crosby, A, Egea, K, Griffiths, N, Aitken, A, Parker, N, McKenzie, J (2014) ‘Successful Student Transition’, University of Technology Sydney. (Accessed 31 July 2018).

St Mary’s University (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Stone, C (2016) ‘Opportunity Through Online Learning: Improving student access, participation and success in higher education’, NCSEHE and The University of Newcastle. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Swecker, HK, Fifolt, M, Searby, L (2013) ‘Academic Advising and First-Generation College Students: A Quantitative Study on Student Retention’, NACADA, vol. 33, no. 1, <https:doi:10.12930/NACADA-13-192>

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) (2017), ‘Characteristics of Australian higher education providers and their relation to first-year student attrition’, Department of Education and Training.

Thomas, L, Herbert, J, Teras, M (2014) A sense of belonging to enhance participation, success and retention in online programs. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 5(2).

Thomas, L, Hill, M, O’Mahony, J, Yorke, M, (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Thomas, L, Jones, R (2012) ‘Using Data in Improving STEM student retention and success in higher education’, The National HE STEM Programme. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Tinto, V (1993) Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd. Ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V (2003) ‘Promoting Student Retention Through Classroom Practice’, presented at Enhancing Student Retention: Using International Policy and Practice. An international conference sponsored by the European Access Network and the Institute for Access Studies at Staffordshire University. Amsterdam. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Tinto, V (2006) ‘Research and Practice of Student Retention: What Next?’ Journal of College Student Retention, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1-19.

Tinto, V (2012) Completing College: Rethinking Institutional Action, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Page 26 of 26 179168_DU_RETENT-COMP-SUCCESS_V01_FA.DOCX—190918

Tinto, V, Pusser, B (2006) ‘Moving from Theory to Action: Building a Model of Institutional Action for Student Success’, National Postsecondary Education Cooperative (NPEC). (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Trede, F, McEwen, C (2015) ‘Early workplace learning experiences: what are the pedagogical possibilities beyond retention and employability?’, Higher Education, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 19–32.

Tout, D, Pancini, G, McCormack, R (2014) ‘Using mobile peer mentors for student engagement: Student rovers in the learning commons’, Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 33, no. 3, pp 595-609.

Ulster University (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

University of Brighton (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

University of South Wales (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

University of Tasmania (2014) ‘Retention and Success Strategy 2015-2017’. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Walker, LP (2016) ‘A Bridge to Success: A Nursing Student Success Strategies Improvement Course’, Journal of Nurse Education, vol. 55, no. 8, pp 450-453

What Works (2017) ‘Supporting student success: strategies for institutional change’, full report. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

West, D, Heath, D, Huijser, H (2016) ‘Let’s Talk Learning Analytics: A Framework for Implementation in Relation to Student Retention’, Online Learning, vol. 20, no. 2. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Wray, J, Aspland, J, Barrett, D, Gardiner, E (2017) ‘Factors affecting the programme completion of pre-registration nursing students through a three year course: A retrospective cohort study’, Nurse Education in Practice, vol. 24, pp.14-20.

Willcoxson, L, Manning, M, Wynder, M, Hibbins, R, Joy, S, Thomas, J, Girardi, A, Leask, B, Sidoryn, T, Cotter, J, Kavanagh, M, Troedson, D, Lynch, B (2011) ‘The Whole of University Experience: Retention, attrition, learning and personal support interventions during undergraduate business studies’, ALTC final report. (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Yomtov D, Plunkett SW, Efrat R, Marin AG (2017) ‘Can Peer Mentors Improve First-Year Experiences of University Students?’, Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 25-44.

Yorke, M, Thomas, L (2003) ‘Improving the Retention of Students from Lower Socio-economics Groups’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 63-74.

Young‐Jones, AD, Burt, TD, Dixon, S, Hawthorne, MJ (2013) ‘Academic advising: does it really impact student success?’ Quality Assurance in Education, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 7-19, <https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881311293034>.

Other useful sources Barrie, S, Ginns, P, Symons, R (2009) ‘Student Surveys on Teaching and Learning’, ALTC final report (Accessed 10 July 2018).

Ramsden, P (1991) ‘A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The Course Experience Questionnaire’, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 16, no. 2, pp 129-150.

Notes

Deakin University 1 Gheringhap Street Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia

t +61 3 5227 1100

w deakin.edu.au