UniPASS Report Semester 1 2012 - Unilife - Curtin University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Feedback from Non-Attendees (continued) Figure 5 UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report Reasons for not Attending UniPASS 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% It was boring I didn't learn anything I didn't have time I didn't think I needed it They didn't give answers Timetable clash Inconvenient times other The main reasons cited for not coming to UniPASS were: Not having time 30%; Didn’t feel they needed it 25%; Timetable clash 17%; and Inconvenient times 15%. Overall, 72% of the reasons given for not attending where time based reasons. The issue of timetable clash is probably not something we can further improve on as we approached this using multiple strategies. The timetabling is a complicated part of the program as the students’ timetable, facilitator’s timetable and suitable room availabilities all have to coincide. Also, the coordinators believe that too many sessions were scheduled for semester 1 2012 as attendance rates were anticipated at 30% so the number of sessions were planned accordingly. This meant that there were a large number of sessions to choose from for each unit yet by week four many of the sessions had to be cut due to low/nil attendance. So, the availability of session times was probably at maximum level for this program. It is interesting to note that the nature of the program itself were not reasons for low attendance. For example: It was boring 2%, I didn’t learn anything 2% (Figure 5) are negligible ratings. As the collaborative peer learning model is still not commonly employed in many tutorials and workshops we thought that resistance to this new way of learning could have led to low attendance but it does not appear to be the case. Student Comments Some indicative responses for not participating in UniPASS include: “I prefer to study by myself” “Individuals teaching way of studying that didnt work for me” “Didnt look into it at start of semester” “Due to work” “Lazy” “Tutor said: ‘No need to go there if you are attending my class’" UniPASS is not going to appeal to all students and nor does it aim to so comments indicating a preference to study individually are to be expected. The last comment highlights the importance of having academic staff support. This comment is even more relevant when we consider that the most recalled promotional channel was the lecturer. Having academic buy-in gives the program credibility and staff who may discourage attendance could become a concern for the program. Raphael Pereira September 2012 UniLife – START – UniPASS 13
Feedback from Non-Attendees (continued) UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report Figure 6 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 'I am satisfied with my progress in the unit' Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Somewhat Disagree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree This question attempted to see if students believed they needed UniPASS. Only 10% of respondents claimed they were not satisfied with their progress in the unit to some degree, indicating that 90% of these students did not feel they needed UniPASS. The average fail rate of all UniPASS supported units is 29% with some units having fail rates over 40% (Figure 1). Given that this survey was conducted before final grades were released because it was initially paper based, students may have been unduly optimistic in their anticipated final grade and therefore not have been aware of their need for extra study support as only 11% were dissatisfied with their progress but almost 30% failed the unit. It is worth considering whether to conduct this survey once the grades are released but this could result in a lower response rate. Figure 7 'I now wish I had attended UniPASS regularly' 63% 37% Yes No The previous question showed that only 11% of students were dissatisfied with their progress to some degree but here 37% of respondents said they now wish that they had attended UniPASS regularly. This could highlight that the non-remedial aspect of the program is being communicated successfully to students so that even though they are satisfied with their progress they want to do better. Further, this figure could be indicating that positive evaluations of UniPASS by regular attendees had been passed on to non-attendees by word of mouth so non-attendees would now like to have attended. 37% is still a significant number of students who would like to attend. This represents an increase of 153 students or an increase in regular attendees of 60%. This figure demonstrates strong positive support for the program even among those who were not regular participants. Raphael Pereira September 2012 UniLife – START – UniPASS 14
Page 1 and 2: UniPASS Report Semester 1 2012 “T
Page 3 and 4: Acknowledgements UniPASS Semester 1
Page 5 and 6: UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report Summ
Page 7 and 8: UniPASS Results Overview UniPASS Se
Page 9 and 10: UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report Bene
Page 11 and 12: Feedback from Regular Attendees Fig
Page 13: Feedback from Non-Attendees UniPASS
Page 17 and 18: Feedback from Non-Attendees (contin
Page 19 and 20: UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report Grad
Page 21 and 22: HEPPP Targets (continued) UniPASS S
Page 23 and 24: UniPASS Semester 1 2012 Report Tert
Page 25 and 26: Conclusions and Recommendations Uni

UniPASS Report Semester 1 2012 - Unilife - Curtin University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?