Detecting uncertainty, predicting outcome for first year students

Abstract

PurposeThis study evaluated the use of two psychometric measures as predictors of end of year outcome for first year university students. DesignNew undergraduates (N=537) were recruited in two contrasting universities: one arts based, and one science, in different cities in the UK. At the start of the academic year, new undergraduates across 30 programmes in the two institutions were invited to complete a survey comprising two psychometric measures: Academic Behavioural Confidence Scale and the Performance Expectation Ladder. Outcome data were collected from the Examining Boards the following summer distinguishing those who were able to progress to the following year of study without further assessment from those were not. FindingsTwo of the four Confidence subscales, Attendance and Studying, had significantly lower scores amongst students who were not able to progress the following June compared to those who did (p<.003). The Ladder data showed the less successful group to anticipate a poorer performance at graduation relative to their year group than did the other group (p<.05). ValueThe results suggest that these two psychometric measures could be instrumental in predicting those at risk of non-completion; such identification could enable the DETECTING UNCERTAINTY, PREDICTING OUTCOME 2 targeted use of limited resources to improve retention. Given the background of limited resources in which institutions are exhorted to improve retention rates, this approach, facilitating the early identification of those at risk of non-completion, could enable focussed use of additional support to reduce attrition.

What Do You Expect? Low Self-Control Predicts College Newcomer Expectations

“…As previously noted, individual expectations -whether met or unmet -can have a substantive impact on outcomes such as satisfaction and retention. In college newcomers, this phenomenon is of particular importance because expectations are often high and the transitional period into college is challenging regardless of the potential for experienced reality shocks (Gkorezis & Kastritsi, 2017;Sanders et al, 2016). When navigating the incongruities between expectation and experienced reality, the literature indicates that newcomers will rely on self-regulatory mechanisms (Ashforth & Saks, 2000;Saks & Ashforth, 1996).…”

La verifica dell’efficacia del counselling universitario: recenti indagini empiriche

“…Da questo punto di vista, infatti, un'analisi approfondita dei profili di rischio di abbandono precoce può fornire importanti indicazioni per i Centri Universitari per l'Orientamento al fine di programmare azioni di supporto e assistenza in grado di rispondere tempestivamente e con specifici programmi di supporto alle criticità presentate (Sanders, Mair, & James, 2016).…”

Why don’t they attend? Factors that influence the attendance of HE students of education

“…This paper addresses the common concern in higher education (HE) that students' physical presence in scheduled lectures appears to be decreasing (Oldfield et al 2018;Mearman et al 2014;Kelly 2012). Attendance has become a matter of considerable importance for lecturers and HE institutions (Moore, Armstrong, and Pearson 2008), partly for the reason that this issue is associated with concerns about retention (Sanders, Mair, and James 2016;Bowen et al 2005) and the consequences that students who withdraw from their courses have for institutional accountability (van der Velden 2012; Wolbring 2012).…”