Using surveys of student engagement to understand and support first-time entering students at a university of technology

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/2519-4984.2022.267206

Keywords:

student engagement, student retention, student success, first time entering students, university of technology

Abstract

Surveys of student engagement are receiving increased attention across the whole world, because data generated assist educational institutions in increasing student retention and improving student success. These surveys raise issues worthy of consideration particularly by institutions that might be interested in using survey data to develop their curriculum and to help their students succeed. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the significant role of student engagement surveys in the development of mechanisms to understand and effectively respond to the needs of first-year students entering university. Drawing from Astin’s involvement theory (1984) and the Inputs-Environments-Outcomes (I-E-O) framework (1991), we argue that a thoughtful and innovative use of student engagement survey data to predict readiness for university has a tremendous potential to improve success through data-informed interventions. The study utilised data on first-time entering students who participated in the Beginning University Survey of Student Engagement (BUSSE). This study used a quantitative research approach. The major findings reveal differences in the frequencies of student-staff interactionand how students’ experiences and expected academic difficulties varied across their gender, social class, and first-generation status. The frequencies of the nine subscales or engagement indicators of the BUSSE provide information regarding high school experiences with quantitative reasoning and learning strategies as well as students’ expectations of a university. The results also provide an overview of the calibre of incoming first-year students and their perceived level of academic preparedness

Author Biographies

Muntuwenkosi Chili, Vaal University of Technology

PhD Chemistry

Centre for Academic Development

Jeremiah Madzimure, Vaal University of Technology

DTech Business

Centre for Academic Development

References

  1. Motta, S. C., Bennett, A. (2018). Pedagogies of care, care-full epistemological practice and ‘other’ caring subjectivities in enabling education. Teaching in Higher Education, 23 (5), 631–646. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1465911
  2. Enhancing student engagement using technological solutions (2022). JISC & Emerge Education. Available at: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/enhancing-student-engagement-using-technological-solutions Last accessed: 10.10.2022
  3. A New Funding Framework: How Government Grants are Allocated to Public Higher Education Institutions (2008). Pretoria: Department of Education.
  4. Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., Lehr, C. A. (2004). Check & Connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology, 42 (2), 95–113. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2004.01.002
  5. Zhoc, K. C. H., Webster, B. J., King, R. B., Li, J. C. H., Chung, T. S. H. (2019). Higher Education Student Engagement Scale (HESES): Development and Psychometric Evidence. Research in Higher Education, 60 (2), 219–244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-018-9510-6
  6. A New Funding Framework: How Government Grants are Allocated to Public Higher Education Institutions (2018). Pretoria: Department of Education.
  7. Strydom, F., Mentz, M., Kuh, G. (2010). Enhancing success in South Africa’s higher education: Measuring student engagement. Acta Academica, 42 (1), 259–278.
  8. Ben-Eliyahu, A., Moore, D., Dorph, R., Schunn, C. D. (2018). Investigating the multidimensionality of engagement: Affective, behavioral, and cognitive engagement across science activities and contexts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 53, 87–105. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.01.002
  9. Christopher, R., de Tantillo, L., Watson, J. (2020). Academic caring pedagogy, presence, and Communitas in nursing education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nursing Outlook, 68 (6), 822–829. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2020.08.006
  10. Tyler, R. W. (1931). A generalized technique for conducting achievement tests. Educational Research Bulletin, 10 (8), 199–208.
  11. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25 (4), 297–308.
  12. Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  13. Hartwig, E. K., Maynard, B. R. (2015). Practitioner perspectives of implementing Check & Connect. Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 12 (4), 438–449. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15433714.2013.873752
  14. Mercer, S., Gregersen, T. (2020). Teacher wellbeing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  15. Bergdahl, N., Nouri, J., Fors, U., Knutsson, O. (2020). Engagement, disengagement, and performance when learning with technologies in upper secondary school. Computers & Education, 149, 103783–103717. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103783
  16. Mercer, S., Dörnyei, Z. (2020). Engaging language learners in contemporary classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024563
  17. Reason, R. D., Terenzini, P. T., Domingo, R. J. (2006). First Things First: Developing Academic Competence in the First Year of College*. Research in Higher Education, 47 (2), 149–175. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-8884-4
  18. Zepke, N., Leach, L., Butler, P. (2014). Student engagement: Students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Higher Education Research & Development, 33 (2), 386–398. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832160
  19. Krause, K. L., Hartley, R., James, R., McInnis, C. (2005). The First-Year Experience in Australian Universities: Findings from a Decade of National Studies. Canberra: Australian Department of Education, Science and Training.
  20. Svalberg, A. M.-L. (2017). Researching language engagement; current trends and future directions. Language Awareness, 27 (1-2), 21–39. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2017.1406490
  21. Yew, E. H. J., Goh, K. (2016). Problem-Based Learning: An Overview of its Process and Impact on Learning. Health Professions Education, 2 (2), 75–79. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2016.01.004
  22. Dunleavy, J., Milton, P. (2009). What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of student engagement and its implications for teaching and learning in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.
  23. Hockings, C., Cooke, S., Yamashita, H., McGinty, S., Bowl, M. (2008). Switched off? A study of disengagement among computing students at two universities. Research Papers in Education, 23 (2), 191–201. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520802048729
  24. Northey, G., Bucic, T., Chylinski, M., Govind, R. (2015). Increasing Student Engagement Using Asynchronous Learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 37 (3), 171–180. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475315589814
  25. Reschly, A. L., Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L. (2017). Student engagement at school and with learning: Theory and interventions. NASP Communiqué, 35 (8), 18–20.
  26. Datu, J. A. D., Yang, W., Valdez, J. P. M., Chu, S. K. W. (2018). Is facebook involvement associated with academic engagement among Filipino university students? A cross-sectional study. Computers & Education, 125, 246–253. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.010
  27. Kuh, G. D., Kenzie, J. L., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., Hayek, J. C. (2006). What Matters to Student Success: A Review of the Literature. Vol. 8. Washington: National Postsecondary Education Cooperative.
  28. Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., Gannaway, D. (2019). Learner engagement in MOOCs: Scale development and validation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51 (1), 245–262. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12810
  29. Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17 (1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
  30. Masserini, L., Bini, M. (2020). Does joining social media groups help to reduce students’ dropout within the first university year? Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 73. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100865
  31. Miller, C. J., Perera, H. N., Maghsoudlou, A. (2020). Students’ multidimensional profiles of math engagement: Predictors and outcomes from a self‐system motivational perspective. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (1), 261–285. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12358
  32. Finn, A. N., Schrodt, P. (2016). Teacher discussion facilitation: a new measure and its associations with students’ perceived understanding, interest, and engagement. Communication Education, 65 (4), 445–462. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1202997
  33. Davis, M., Dias-Bowie, Y., Greenberg, K., Klukken, G., Pollio, H. R., Thomas, S. P., Thompson, C. L. (2004). “A Fly in the Buttermilk”: Descriptions of University Life by Successful Black Undergraduate Students at a Predominately White Southeastern University. The Journal of Higher Education, 75 (4), 420–445. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2004.11772266
  34. Chiu, T. K. F. (2021). Student engagement in K-12 online learning amid COVID-19: A qualitative approach from a self-determination theory perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1926289
  35. Fredricks, J. A., Hofkens, T. L., Wang, M.-T.; Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S. E. (Eds.) (2019). Addressing the challenge of measuring student engagement. The Cambridge handbook of motivation and learning. Cambridge University Press, 689–712. doi: http://doi.org/10.1017/9781316823279.029
  36. Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., Mercer, S. (2020). Student engagement in the language classroom. Multilingual Matters. doi: https://doi.org/10.21832/hiver3606
  37. Guadagnolo, G. (2020). Peer support can help student engagement in challenging times – if you know what works. WONKHE. Available at: https://wonkhe.com/blogs/peer-support-can-help-student-engagement-in-challenging-times-if-you-know-what-works/ Last accessed: 09.10.2022
  38. Pöysä, S., Poikkeus, A.-M., Muotka, J., Vasalampi, K., Lerkkanen, M.-K. (2020). Adolescents’ engagement profiles and their association with academic performance and situational engagement. Learning and Individual Differences, 82, 101922. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101922

Downloads

Published

2022-11-30

How to Cite

Chili, M., & Madzimure, J. (2022). Using surveys of student engagement to understand and support first-time entering students at a university of technology. ScienceRise: Pedagogical Education, (6(51), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.15587/2519-4984.2022.267206

Issue

No. 6(51) (2022)

Section

Pedagogical Education

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Muntuwenkosi Chili, Jeremiah Madzimure

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Our journal abides by the Creative Commons CC BY copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.

Authors, who are published in this journal, agree to the following conditions:

1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons CC BY, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.

 2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.