5: Analysis of Survey Results

[next chapter] [previous chapter] [contents] [Part 2 Chapter 5]

• Introduction
• Results

  Reasons for Enrolling at the University of South Australia
  Transition Experiences
  Course Experiences
  Personal Issues Affecting Studies
  Use of Student Support Resources
  Reasons Students Withdrew

• Case Study: the Associate Diploma in University Studies
• Summary

Introduction

As outlined in the previous chapter, the University of South Australia has had a history of diversity in its student population since its foundation. This diversity is a direct outcome of a policy framework developed from the University’s mission and goals and implemented through attention to such matters as the range of admissions avenues, flexibility in mode of program delivery and inclusive curriculum reform. In 1995 almost half of the University’s students belonged to at least one of the equity groups targeted in the national higher education equity framework, increasing to nearly 75 per cent when all women and external students are added. With the exception of women, however, students from the equity groups tend to have lower success rates and, with the added exception of students from non-English speaking backgrounds, have generally experienced higher rates of attrition than the University average. This is particularly the case for Indigenous students and students studying externally. Consequently, further attention needs to be given to addressing the causes of these differential outcomes of the experience of university education as it is currently constructed and delivered. The third objective of this project is designed to assist in this process by identifying aspects of the higher education teaching and learning environment which can be changed to enhance the academic performance of those students who have been admitted to the University of South Australia through its diverse admissions criteria.

This chapter presents different perspectives on some of the matters involved in addressing this objective. It uses data collected from a postal survey of commencing undergraduate students who withdrew during first semester 1995, together with a sample of students who were active at the start of second semester, to explore some dimensions of these matters from a student perspective (see Appendices 3 and 4 for questionnaires, available in print copy only). Specifically, profiles of commencing undergraduate students who withdrew from the University are developed, the reasons given for withdrawal are investigated, and suggestions with respect to the services which may assist students to enhance their performance are discussed. In addition, this chapter incorporates the responses to two open ended questions in the questionnaires, information gathered by informal interviews with a small number of survey respondents (see Appendix 5 for interview instrument) and views on related matters from the perspective of key staff members of the University whose primary function is to provide support services for students.

Results

The following tables present profiles of students who withdrew from the University and of a control group who persisted with their studies. The data contained in these tables are the means of responses to questions 7, and 9 to 13 in the ‘withdraw’ questionnaire, and the corresponding questions in the ‘persist’ questionnaire (Appendices 3 and 4) in which students were asked to rate the importance of a number of statements relating to their university experience. It was expected that an analysis of similarities and differences in responses between the four groups of respondents identified in Chapter 4, and between equity groups, would provide insights into factors in the current experience of university education which could be targeted to reduce attrition rates and improve the performance of different groups of students across the University. In particular, it was hoped that issues for attention would be identified in the experience of university study of those students in the targeted equity groups which currently exhibit poorer educational outcomes than their peers. The nature of these insights and the interventions they suggest will be discussed later in the chapter.

Reasons for Enrolling at the University of South Australia

Table 5.1 identifies a list of eight reasons for enrolling at university and gives the mean scores (on a scale of 1 to 5) for the responses of each of the four groups of students surveyed on their importance.

Table 5.1: Reasons Selected by Students for Enrolling at the University of South Australia, by Response Group (Means of Responses)

All four groups were consistent in indicating that the most important of the listed reasons for enrolling at university were ‘to study in a field that really interests me’ and ‘to gain entrance to an attractive career’. This finding reflects those of McInnis et al. and earlier similar studies (McInnis, James and McNaught 1995, p. 30). Those students who did not withdraw (group 4) had slightly stronger responses to the latter reason than those who withdrew, possibly indicating stronger motivation to study and/or greater clarity with respect to career aspirations. In particular, students in group 4 indicated that gaining entrance to an attractive career was more important and that advancing in their present job was less important than those in the other three groups, suggesting that group 4 comprised a higher proportion of school leavers and fewer mature aged students already in paid work. (Table 4.10 in Chapter 4 indicates that school leavers generally have lower attrition rates than other entrants to the University). The reasons selected as least important for enrolling at university across all four groups were ‘to be with my friends’, ‘to gain entrance to another university’ and ‘to meet community expectations’.

The reasons for enrolling were further analysed by equity group, both for those who withdrew and for those who did not withdraw, as outlined in Table 5.2 and Table 5.3 below. These tables indicate that most equity groups followed the overall trends outlined above. Of particular note, however, is the strength of response of external students to the reason ‘to advance me in my present job’, especially those who did not withdraw, indicating that a high proportion of these external students were in employment, relative to the other groups. External students were the least likely group to report that pleasing their family was important, probably reflecting the high proportion of mature aged students in this group. In contrast, students from non-English speaking backgrounds were the most likely equity group to report that they had enrolled to please their family or to meet community expectations. They also felt strongly motivated by the prospects of gaining entrance to an attractive career. Students from non-English speaking backgrounds were the least likely group to indicate that they had enrolled to study in a field that interested them or, for those who withdrew, that they had enrolled to advance in an existing job. The results suggest that students from non-English speaking backgrounds at the University were less likely to be in the workforce and more likely to experience a sense of obligation to their family and/or community.

Indigenous students who withdrew indicated that ‘to advance me in my present job’ was particularly important, in contrast to those who did not withdraw for whom this was far less important than gaining entrance to an attractive career. The strong difference in responses between those who withdrew and those who did not withdraw, suggests that those who withdrew were more likely to be currently employed and studying part-time. Women, rural/isolated students and those from low socio-economic status backgrounds tended to identify reasons for enrolling which reflected those of the total groups of withdrawing and continuing respondents.

Table 5.2: Reasons Selected by Students for Enrolling at the University of South Australia, by Equity Group: Students who Withdrew (Means of Responses)

Table 5.3: Reasons Selected by Students for Enrolling at the University of South Australia, by Equity Group: Students who did not Withdraw (Means of Responses)

In summary therefore, respondents reported that they enrolled at university for largely vocational reasons but with a strong desire to study in an interesting field. Students who did not withdraw appeared to have a slightly stronger commitment to these reasons, or greater clarity about them, except in the case of ‘advancing in a present job’ where students who withdrew expressed a stronger commitment.

Transition Experiences

The mean scores, by response group, for the responses to a set of transition experiences listed in question 9 of the questionnaire are summarised below in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4: Transition Issues by Response Group (Means of Responses)

The four groups of respondents reported generally similar perceptions of their transition experiences with no strong variation across the groups. Students appeared to be reasonably confident about their study skills and pre-requisite knowledge, and did not feel ‘burnt out’ by gaining university entrance. Rather more concern was reported, particularly by respondents who withdrew after the HECS deadline, in relation to organising study time, their understanding of the expectations of them with respect to lectures and tutorials, and difficulties associated with the general transition to university. Investigation of the raw data, to check for any effects of bimodal distribution of results, in fact reveals that around one-third of each group of respondents expressed strong concerns about understanding expectations, the adequacy of their pre-requisite knowledge and their overall transition to university.

Analysis of responses to the open-ended questions in the survey and to the interviews further suggests that many students who withdrew felt concerned about their transition to university. Principally, inadequacy of pre-requisite or assumed knowledge, time management of heavy workloads and knowing what was expected of them were raised. Mature aged students in particular indicated that, prior to enrolment, they needed more information on what is involved in university study in the areas of prior knowledge, workloads and other academic expectations. Examples of comments include: ‘educate those who wish to enter about what to expect, the type of commitment necessary to succeed’; ‘give first year students more of an understanding of what they are letting themselves in for’; ‘more realistic information to be given to new students, especially those who have been away from study for a long time’; ‘pre-requisite knowledge in form of pamphlet given to all people (i.e. number of hours required to study, number of assignments, exams etc and the time given to these)’; ‘In orientation week, maybe explain more about the particular subject and ... what is expected of us in and between tutorials, practicals?’.

McInnis, James and McNaught in First Year on Campus (1995, p. 33) reported that ‘having a clear understanding of academic expectations at university is an important element in successful academic adjustment’ but that nearly half of the approximately 4000 or so first year students they surveyed were not confident about what was required of them. The importance of setting clear goals, standards and expectations at the beginning of the semester was emphasised by McInnis, James and McNaught and echoed in the comments of respondents to the current study. The need for structured academic orientation, possibly prior to enrolment, was also emphasised by several respondents, who suggested this include details of course-specific expectations as well as more general information on study skills, time management and support available.

While the University of South Australia, like most universities, offers a comprehensive orientation program prior to the commencement of first semester, it appears that many students feel the need for a more formal introduction to university study, and to their course in particular. Several mature age students, returning to study after a long break, suggested that a pre-enrolment session on expectations and, in particular, the study skills and nature of commitment required for successful university study would have been useful, possibly in the form of a short introduction to university studies or structured induction program. Other students proposed a more formal introductory subject as part of their course, incorporating study skills, time management and an introduction to the specific discipline concerned. Key informants also identified the need for a more formal introductory program to assist students in the transition process.

An additional matter raised by respondents in relation to academic transition was the need for early feedback, an issue also raised by key informants and seen as essential in helping reduce attrition. McInnis, James and McNaught (1995) once again point to a similar factor, emphasising the importance of frequent, quality feedback on academic progress as early as possible in the first year of undergraduate studies. Respondents to the current survey expressed concern that initial feedback was rarely received before the date for withdrawal without fail. In addition, assignment due dates for different subjects often coincided: ‘the year starts slowly and then suddenly hits you’, ‘subject co-ordinators should work together in order to organise assignment due dates’, ‘spread the workload ... instead of getting all the work at the same time’.

Analysis of the transition issues listed in question 9 of the survey, by equity group, for those who withdrew compared with those who persisted, revealed that in general all groups of students who withdrew tended to express more concern about transition issues than those who did not withdraw (Table 5.5 and Table 5.6). Of particular note were the responses of two groups of students who withdrew, both those from non-English speaking backgrounds and Indigenous students. These groups expressed relatively high levels of concern regarding transition, the adequacy of their pre-requisite knowledge, their ability to organise time and, especially the Indigenous students, their understanding of academic expectations. In each of these cases, students who did not withdraw reported less concern.

As Australian universities internationalise programs and the cultural and linguistic diversity of the student population broadens, key informants argued that an increasing number of students are experiencing major difficulties in their transition to a higher education system in which English is the language of teaching. The University has recognised the difficulties faced by those students for whom English is not their first language, particularly for its growing number of international students. Extensive programs are provided to assist the development of their English language skills and to support them through their courses. Key informants suggested that recognition for undertaking these often extensive English language studies should be given within formal course structures. Their proposals included developing the means for such studies to be undertaken in lieu of some of the broadening and elective subjects in degrees, particularly in the case of the more advanced English language courses completed after initial pre-entry bridging courses. An extensive range of support programs are also provided for Indigenous students, many of whom may also speak English as a second language. While some of these programs are incorporated in the nested range of courses designed by the Faculty of Aboriginal and Islander Studies to focus on Indigenous issues, an increasing number of Indigenous students enrol in courses outside the Faculty. Further investigation of the study loads, time management and other transition issues for these students should be undertaken.

In addition to the non-English speaking backgrounds and Indigenous students, respondents who were enrolled externally but withdrew, reported a relatively high level of concern regarding their time management and their understanding of academic expectations. As with other equity groups, those who persisted were more positive about these matters. The responses to transition issues clearly support the findings of Chapter 4: that the Indigenous students, students from non-English speaking backgrounds and students studying externally generally find the transition to university the most difficult. Those students who persisted with their studies, and did not withdraw, however, appear to have experienced a more positive transition experience, and closer to that of the total group of respondents.

Table 5.5: Transition Issues by Equity Group: Students who Withdrew from the University of South Australia (Means of Responses)

Table 5.6: Transition Issues by Equity Group: Students who did not Withdraw from the University of South Australia (Means of Responses)

Course Experiences

Table 5.7 outlines the mean responses, by survey group, to question 10 on the course experiences of students.

Table 5.7: Course Related Experiences Selected by Respondents, by Response Group (Means of Responses)

Responses to the question on course experiences indicate that the most common areas of concern amongst those listed were feeling under pressure, lack of motivation and encouragement by teaching staff, not knowing what was expected of them, dissatisfaction with the way material was taught, large class sizes and the heavy workload. Generally students reported that they found their courses reasonably interesting and relevant to their future plans and found teaching staff helpful and approachable. This was particularly so for group 4, those who did not withdraw. These responses indicate that clarity of, and commitment to future plans or goals and interest in an area were important motivations to remaining enrolled (see also Table 5.1). In answer to virtually all statements, group 4 indicated a generally more positive course-related experience.

Analysis of the raw data for question 10 revealed some bimodal distribution of results in responses to the statements on class size, expectations, and motivation and encouragement from the teaching staff, with a third to a half of respondents in each group being satisfied and another third to a half of respondents indicating concern. These bimodal distributions probably reflect the wide diversity in the teaching and learning contexts experienced by students across the University’s range of campuses, faculties, schools and courses. The qualitative information collected by the open-ended questions and interviews echoes the concerns expressed in Table 5.7. In particular, respondents indicated that they experienced heavy study pressures and that expectations were not always clear.

An analysis of course experiences, by equity group, revealed that students from non-English speaking backgrounds generally reported more negative experiences than other groups of students. This was particularly so for those students who withdrew (see Table 5.8). The strongest responses outlined in this table were, however, from Indigenous students to the issues of feeling under pressure, not knowing what was expected of them and not being motivated by teaching staff, and from non-English speaking backgrounds students in relation to large and impersonal classes, heavy workload and being under pressure. On the other hand, Indigenous and non-English speaking backgrounds respondents who withdrew were the most likely groups to report that their course was interesting and relevant to their plans.

Interesting comparisons can be made between equity group students who withdrew and those who did not withdraw. In particular, Indigenous students who withdrew reported finding (commonly) teaching staff less helpful, motivating or approachable than those who did not withdraw, while those not withdrawing indicated relatively high levels of satisfaction with the support from teaching staff. Indigenous students who withdrew also expressed a high level of concern in relation to understanding course expectations, in contrast to those who did not withdraw who reported the lowest level of concern of all equity groups in this area. The responses of students from non-English speaking backgrounds who withdrew were also in strong contrast to the responses of those who did not withdraw. In particular, non-English speaking background students who withdrew were more likely to indicate that the course was not relevant to their plans, that they did not work hard at their studies, that they were under a lot of pressure, that classes were large and impersonal, that the teaching staff were unapproachable and that the workload was too heavy. For both withdrawing and persisting student groups, students from non-English speaking backgrounds were the most likely equity group to report that they found the course material too difficult, that the workload was too heavy, that classes were too large and impersonal, and that the teaching staff were not helpful, indicating that these students were the most likely group to report difficulties with their course experience.

Table 5.8: Course Related Experiences Selected by Respondents, by Equity Group: Students who Withdrew from the University of South Australia (Means of Responses)

Table 5.9: Course Related Experiences Selected by Respondents, by Equity Group: Students who did not Withdraw from the University of South Australia (Means of Responses)

Personal Issues Affecting Studies

Question 11 of the survey asked students to respond to a number of personal issues that may have affected their studies. Table 5.10 outlines the mean responses to this question for each survey response group.

Table 5.10: Personal Issues Affecting Studies at the University of South Australia,
by Response Group (Means of Responses)

The three statements which received the strongest response from all four survey groups were: ‘I had problems combining study and family/social/community responsibilities’, ‘I had problems combining work and study commitments’, and ‘financial problems adversely affected my studies’. In general the surveyed groups indicated similar responses to each issue but those who did not withdraw (group 4) were less likely to indicate problems combining study with either work or other responsibilities, or with loneliness and depression at university, than were those who withdrew. There was a bimodal distribution to the responses in relation to financial problems, with between 40 and 50 per cent of each survey group reporting that financial problems had significantly affected their studies, while for the remaining 50–60 per cent financial issues were not considered important.

The qualitative data collected in the survey and by interview revealed that in fact financial pressures and work pressures were the issues students reported most frequently as an influence on their study experience and their decision to withdraw, with family pressures also being important. A high proportion of the students who experienced difficulties with their studies, and who subsequently withdrew, were older people who most likely had work and family commitments (refer to Table 5.3). Analysis of the personal issues reported as affecting studies by equity group (Table 5.11 and Table 5.12) further supports the prominence of the issues discussed above. For those who withdrew, external students in particular had problems combining paid work and study, along with Indigenous and rural/isolated students. This result is an outcome of the considerable overlap between these groups and further confirms that a high proportion of these students are mature aged and trying to combine either part-time study with full-time work or full-time study with part-time work.

Table 5.11: Personal Issues Affecting Studies at the University of South Australia by Equity Group: Students who Withdrew (Means of Responses)

Table 5.12: Personal Issues Affecting Studies at the University of South Australia by Equity Group: Students who did not Withdraw (Means of Responses)

While students from non-English speaking backgrounds who withdrew were the least likely group to report problems combining work and study, they were the only group who reported significant pressures from parents and partners, and also the most likely group to indicate that financial problems adversely affected their study or that they felt lonely or depressed at university. On the other hand, NESB students who did not withdraw were less likely than those who withdrew to report that they felt depressed, or experienced pressure from parents or partners, but still reported strong responses relative to other groups on these issues This suggests that students from non-English speaking backgrounds felt more socially isolated at university than other groups of students and that the attitudes of their families had a greater impact upon their experience of university study. Students from non-English speaking backgrounds who did not withdraw were less likely to report financial problems but more likely to report problems combining work and study commitments than those who withdrew; their involvement in paid work possibly alleviating one set of problems while contributing to others.

The groups of students most likely to report problems combining study and family/social/community commitments were the rural/isolated, Indigenous and external students, groups with considerable overlap of membership. A further interesting finding is that students from non-English speaking backgrounds revealed the lowest level of concern with combining study and family responsibilities, particularly those who did not withdraw, despite their relatively high response to feeling pressure from their families. This suggests that family pressures experienced by NESB students were related to study expectations rather than to family responsibilities.

As with the survey results discussed elsewhere in this chapter, the groups which reported the highest levels of concern regarding their university experience tended to be the Indigenous and non-English speaking background students, together with external students. Students from low socio-economic backgrounds who withdrew indicated relatively high levels of concern with their family not understanding the demands of university study and with feeling lonely or depressed, but in these cases the mean scores were still low, between 2 and 3. In relation to the other issues, and particularly for those who did not withdraw, the results for low socio-economic status students, along with rural/isolated and women students, were similar to the results for the total group of students.

Use of Student Support Resources

The University of South Australia provides a wide range of learning resources and support services to assist students in their studies as well as on a more personal level. Tables 5.13 to 5.18 identify a selection of the support services/resources provided, the level of use reported by respondents and their perceived adequacy. Means of responses are presented on a scale of 1 to 4 in Tables 5.13 to 5.15 and 1 to 3 in Tables 5.16 to 5.18.

Table 5.13 illustrates that, in general, the pattern of usage of these resources was similar for three groups of respondents, those who withdrew before the HECS deadline (group 1), those who withdrew without fail (group 2) and those who persisted (group 4). Students who persisted with their studies, however, tended to make slightly greater use of facilities than groups 1 and 2. The library and computer facilities were the resources that all response groups indicated they used most frequently. Many other resources were reported as rarely or never used by groups 1, 2 and 4. Group 3, those who withdrew late and failed, had a very different response to this question, as discussed in the note to Table 5.13. Two points of interest are important:

• that students in group 3 were far less likely to respond at all to these statements, possibly indicating that they did not use these resources or that they were not even aware of their availability; and
  
• that those resources which did attract a reasonable response had a relatively high usage by this group.

This latter point is confirmed by analysis of the raw data for this question; students in group 3 who did respond, reported a much higher level of use than students from the other three response groups.

Table 5.13: Reported Use of Selected Student Support Resources at the University of South Australia by Response Group (Means of Responses)

A breakdown of student use of support resources by equity group is provided in Table 5.14 and Table 5.15. These tables indicate that external students were the least likely group of students to use student support resources, followed closely by the Indigenous students who withdrew. Clearly the off-campus status of these students affects their ability to use many of these resources (over 60 per cent of the Indigenous commencing undergraduates were studying externally) although some supports are readily availabl