First semester academic performance: The importance of early indicators of non-engagement

Stephen Scott,Jacques Van Der Meer,Keryn Pratt

doi:10.5204/ssj.v9i4.652

Abstract

Success, progression and retention of students are goals of many university strategic directions and policies. For many decades it has been recognised that the greatest focus in any retention strategy should be on first-year students. University of Otago too has goals around student success. The Strategic Plan of the institution also identified that in the context of a fiscally constrained environment, all of our activities and processes need to be assessed for efficiency and effectiveness. To this end, a pilot was undertaken in one area of the university to identify possible indicators of first-year students’ non-engagement in the first semester and their possible impact on the first semester academic performance. The findings suggest that there are indeed some indicators that predict Grade Point Average at the end of the first semester.

Highlights

Student success and retention are important foci of higher education institutions worldwide
We considered the influence of aspect of the students ‘pre-entry context’: their academic performance at high school and some other student characteristics
Students who do not engage in low-threshold, low-effort and lowstakes learning management systems (LMS) activities may not engage in other academic activities either

Summary

Introduction

Student success and retention are important foci of higher education institutions worldwide. There is more than 40 years of research into first-year retention and student success (Braxton, Milem, & Sullivan, 2000; McInnis, James, & Hartley, 2000; McInnis, James, & McNaught, 1995; Tinto, 1982, 2000, 2007) there is no single ‘magic bullet’ intervention that has proven to address the needs of all students in any context. Retention and academic success interventions need to be tailored for particular contexts, taking into account local affordances and constraints (Nelson, Clarke, Kift, & Creagh, 2011; van der Meer, Scott, & Neha, 2010; Yorke, 2004; Zepke & Leach, 2005)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion