mind map of ideas and research around the theme of student transition

1. student experience of change involved in joining the institution
institutional activities to support the process of transition
cultural and community
Johnson (2010)
academic
What is transition? Areas of change
social
seven vectors personal
Chickering & Reisser (1993)
can be a profound change
gender Ecclestone, Biesta & Hughes (2010)
Psychosocial And/ or 'unsettling, difficult & unproductive'
ethnicity Identity development
sexuality
Developmental theories Retention is a consequence of integration Academic sphere
Perry (1981) (later described as engagement)
Retention? Tinto (1993) Social sphere
Baxter Magolda (1992)
Cognitive-structural
Biggs (2004) completion of coursework and examinations
Academic achievement?
Moral development
'becoming' rather than 'having' Academic challenge
Fromm (1978)
Theories that inform our Active & collaborative learning
Categorised in
Learning as community thinking about transition Effort invested in educationally NSSE as Student interaction with faculty
cognitive apprenticeships purposeful activities (Kuh et al 2008) Enriching educational experiences
Lave & Wenger (1991) epistemological theories
becoming a junior member of Supportive campus environment
the academy
A will to learn and the effort institutions devote to using effective
Barnett (2007) educational practices” (Kuh et al 2008)
And
Lea & Street (2000)
Investment of psychoso-
e.g. time management Study skills cial & physical activity Both qualitative & quantitative elements
What is engagement?
(Astin 1985) Development is directly proportional to the quality & quantity of involvement
Students need to develop in the Academic literacies
e.g. learning HE approaches to study Academic socialisation Educational effectiveness is directly related to the level of student involvement
following areas to write for HE
e.g. discipline specific discourses Engagement is socially constructed
Academic literacies
Multi-dimensional & holistic
Includes the whole student identity
moving beyond being stuck Bryson, Cooper & Hardy (2010)
threshold concepts van Gennep (1960) Being and becoming is essential
Land, Meyer & Smith ed (2008) Becoming is a liminal process & Turner (1969) Dynamic & fluid
How do we know if students have
successfully made the transition? Quality rather than quantity is important
Preparation
multiple stages in adapting to Astin (1985)
Encounter
becoming university student Fully engaged
Adjustment Purnell (2002) Engagement?
Falsely engaged i.e. achieving a 2:1
Stabilisation
Students in transition From Minimal effort
After van Gennep takes place Bryson & Hand (2008) Disengaged
easily put off
Separation along a
Tinto (1993) continuum not engaged at all
Transition
Incorporation Not necessarily uni-directional engaged students can become less engaged
Student background Accountable performance – e.g. assignments, attendance where monitored
+ University culture Interaction – e.g. discussion in tutorials, informal interaction outside the classroom
Pascarella (1985) Adams (1979)
This shapes the Experiential – e.g. Enjoyment of the subject, self-direction
students effort create the 'agents of socialisation' College impact models Decision-making – e.g participation in committees
(Pascarella & Terenzini,
e.g. student characteristics Inputs Within the classroom or on a
Models that describe particular task
+ the transition process Within a module
e.g. campus culture Bryson & Hand (2008)
Environment Within the programme
particularly influence of peers I E O Astin (1991) Within the university
= Multiple loci of engagement
engagement tends to be localised
academic achievement
Outputs peers & tutors
career achievement Kember, Lee & Li (2001)
wider programme
Identified 4 stages in which students' then institution
transition needs changed Fitzgibbon & Prior (2006)
support prior to arrival Alienation
2-6 weeks learning is outcome-, not process-driven
Initial induction Mann (2001)
good practice in induction Occurs when reward compliance
Cook & Rushton (2008)
Just enough Education Just In Time exclude students from shaping the discourse
Extended induction
(JEEJIT) Students from non-traditional backgrounds
may lack cultural capital to interpret this has consequences for anticipating what
Social transition comfortably completed by the communication from university the university experience will be like
end of the end of the first year for most Barriers to Quinn et al (2005)
Academic transition far less likely to be complete Bryson & Hardy (2012) transition Sending institution
Similar to Cook & Leckey (1999) Greater differences lead to
Banning (1989) Differences between greater risk of crisis, but also
Receiving institution greater opportunities for growth
Students don't understand the differences
between HE and previous learning
Foster, McNeil & Lawther (2012) May also have unrealistically optimistic expectations about
capacity to cope (Jessen & Elander, 2009)
Students in transition.mmap - 24/11/2011 -