Undergraduates’ learning profile development: what is happening to the men?

Abstract

Higher Education Institutions in the UK that offer programmes leading to professional registration with the Health Professions Council have been charged to provide the National Health Service with graduating autonomous professionals. Autonomous professionals are said to need: (a) self-directed learning skills and attributes; (b) a positive academic self-efficacy; (c) an internal academic locus of control and (d) a positive academic self-concept. The curricular influences on the development of these learning profile skills and attributes can be mapped overtime using batteries of self-rated inventories. In response to initiatives to widen access into Higher Education, increasing numbers of mature (aged 21 + years on admission) and male students are commencing undergraduate healthcare programmes. This study follows the learning profile changes of the mature, male physiotherapy students from two BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy cohorts and compares their development with that of their mature, female peers. Results suggest that the three-year undergraduate curriculum (validated 1997) had a negative effect on mature, male learning profile development. Most profile variables had fallen significantly overtime such that just prior to graduation the mature, male group was displaying a learning profile almost opposite to that suggested for an autonomous professional. The male group's cumulative assessment score was significantly lower than that for the mature, female group. The study explores the female dominance of the academic and clinical placement areas used to support undergraduate education, and considers the unintentional gender bias within elements of the curriculum and assessment design. Curricular adjustments made for the 2002 validated programme are discussed. With physiotherapy widening access initiatives striving to increase entry from non-traditional students (with mature and male students particularly targeted), this study suggests that the possible effects of curricular gender bias should not be overlooked.

Background and introduction

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the UK that offer programmes leading to professional registration with the Health Professions Council (HPC) have been charged with the dual tasks of producing graduates who are capable of contributing effectively to society through their lifelong personal development (National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education, 1997; Section 5:11), and to provide the National Health Service with graduating autonomous professionals (Morris, 2002). Such graduates must be capable of defining the limits of their autonomous practice (in accordance with the Health Professions Council Scope of Practice; Physiotherapy, 2002; Rule 1a.1) through reflective practice. In the near future, retention of registration status for Allied Health Professionals will depend upon the evidencing of continuing professional development through portfolio building and profile mapping (Burgess Report, 2004; Health Professions Council, 2004).

Personal learning profiles offer an opportunity for academic staff to start the process of undergraduate reflection on their personal metacognitive development path (Lizzio et al., 2000). One source of learning profile data is the regular administration of batteries of self-rating inventories selected on the basis of their measuring variables deemed important to the particular undergraduate context. Inventory scores can provide undergraduates and staff with a focus for their reflections and discussions about students’ progress towards attaining the learning profile of an ‘ideal’ autonomous professional.

Over recent decades many researchers have suggested learning variables that might be used to profile autonomous, life-long learners. Readiness for self-directed learning (SDLR) reflects a learner's ability to diagnose their learning needs, their confidence and ability to seek and use appropriate solutions and their ability to evaluate and reset targets (Candy et al., 1994; Abourserie, 1995). SDLR relies heavily on personal academic beliefs (academic locus of control, academic self-concept and academic self-efficacy; Bandura, 1986; Yoo et al., 2000) and is seen as fundamental to both personal and professional lifelong learning and development (Higgs et al., 1999; Devlin, 2002). Autonomous professionals are said to need: (a) a strong belief in their capability to perform as a member of a specific profession (academic self-efficacy, ASE; Cassidy & Eachus, 2000); (b) an acceptance of their own role in their personal successes and failures (academic locus of control, ALOC; Long, 1990) and (c) a positive view of their academic self-worth transmitted as an interest and excitement in learning, leadership and development (academic self-concept, ASC; House, 1992; Fazey & Fazey, 2002).

Further studies suggest that there is a relationship between personal academic beliefs and the way learners approach specific learning activities. Learners who feel little personal control over their academic success or failure tend to have a low self-worth and adopt approaches intended to satisfy short-term, goal-orientated outcomes (Cassidy & Eachus, 2000). These students are said to adopt surface approaches to their learning being motivated by a fear of failure (Tait & Entwistle, 1996; Entwistle, 2000). While all learners may choose to use surface/memorising approaches in some circumstances, ‘mature’ learners are motivated by an intention to understand and apply new learning; such depth of understanding and intention to apply is an essential feature of an autonomous professional (Hunt et al., 1998).

Study rationale

Previous studies have used the data generated from the student learning profiles to map the curricular influence on whole cohort learning development (Kell and van Deursen, 2000, 2003). The results have repeatedly shown that, instead of developing positively, cohort learning profiles have declined away from a mature profile over time. Consistently the three-year BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy programme (validated in 1997) has been shown to significantly reduce students’ perceived SDLR, ALOC, ASE and ASC (see Figure 1 for an illustration using the variable SDLR). Discussions within the academic staff team have resulted in the development of an innovative curriculum (validated 2002). Staff also observed that the whole cohort results were not representative of their experiences during metacognition discussion meetings with tutees. Academic staff expressed a concern that studying in a ‘female dominated’ professional environment was negatively effecting the mature, male students.

Figure 1. Change in whole cohort perceived SDLR over year 1. A significant change occurred over time (p = 0.00) with all cohorts responding similarly (p = 0.14). (Admission data = Take 1, End year 1 data = Take 2; Bold line indicates mean score for similar samples, Guglielimino, 1977.)

This study therefore sought to evaluate this latter observation by exploring the whole cohort mean score data. The study was felt to be timely with the development of widening access initiatives intended to attract more mature and male students into undergraduate training programmes. It was expected that, on admission, mature students would have higher, more mature learning profiles than their school-leaver peers (Richardson & King, 1998).

Curriculum outline

The BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy programme relevant to this current study was validated by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, the HPC and the University of Wales College of Medicine in 1997. The three-year programme comprised a pre-clinical year that afforded access to the clinical component. Years 2 and 3 contributed to degree classification. A problem-solving approach was fundamental to the curriculum design and delivery.

Methodology

Outline

The completion of a battery of self-rating learning profile inventories is a timetabled event for all three years of the undergraduate programme. Students complete a randomly ordered pack of questionnaires at the beginning and end of each academic year. This study combined the admission (Take 1) and final (Take 6) data collection results for the 1999 (n = 52) and 2000 (n = 74) cohorts. Whole cohort profile analysis suggested that the two cohorts responded similarly to the curriculum over time (see Figure 2 for an illustration using the variable SDLR). Methodological discussion suggested that it was appropriate and acceptable to merge the cohorts into one study sample.

Figure 2. Change in whole cohort perceived SDLR over the three-year programme. A significant change occurred over time (p = 0.008) with both cohorts responding similarly (p = 0.64). (Admission data = Take 1, End year 1 data = Take 2; Beginning year 2 data = Take 3, End year 2 data = Take 4; Beginning year 3 data = Take 5; End year 3 data = Take 6. Bold line indicates mean score for similar samples, Guglielimino, 1977).

The current study therefore investigated the change in perceived learning profiles over time for undergraduates on the BSc (Hons) three-year Physiotherapy programme validated in 1997. The study sample was the merged cohorts of 1999 and 2000 (n = 126). Learning profiles were described for the mature students as a group and then using gender as a factor.

Data collection tools

Table 1 summarizes the data collection tools used in this study and offers a basic outline of their interpretation. Readers requiring more detailed information are requested to seek the published texts.

Table 1.  Summary of data collection tools. In all cases the higher the score the greater the variable is perceived to be held

Inventory	Variables measured	Score ranges
Self-directed learning readiness scale-A Guglielmino, 1977	Perceived readiness to undertake  self-directed learning	Range: 58–290 Average ‘band’ for a  sample similar to this study: 189–240
Health Student Locus of Control Scale	Internal (personal) and external  (other) academic control belief	A score for each variable ranging from  10–60
Cassidy and Eachus, 2000
Academic Self-efficacy Scale	Perceived ability to succeed in  particular programme	Range: 23–207
Eachus, 1993
Dimensions of Self-concept  Questionnaire Form H	Perception of the following dimension  of academic self-concept:	A score for each dimension ranging  from 10–60
Michael & Smith, 1989	Aspiration for learning
	Satisfaction as a learner
	Identification as a learner
	Willingness to take the
	initiative for learning
	Anxiety in learning
Approaches and Study Skills Inventory  for Students––short version (52 items)	Perceived general approach for any  given academic task. Profiles  respondents across three approach  dimensions:	The three main dimensions score  from 12–60
Tait & Entwistle, 1996	Deep approach
	Strategic approach
	Surface approach
	Inventory can also be used to explore  motivations behind the approaches  adopted

Data analysis

The inventory results for the whole study population were analysed according to student admission maturity. A mature student label was given to all students aged 21 years or over on commencement of the programme (UCAS descriptor for a mature student). Change over time was explored using a repeated-measures ANOVA with a first-order polynomial contrast. The gender effect on profile development was explored within the mature student group using a paired t-test analysis for Take 1 and Take 6 scores. Statistical analysis was performed using the package SPSS for windows (Version 11) and levels of significance set at 0.05. A trend towards significance was noted for values less than 0.1.

Results

The results are based on the completed data profiles of 123 undergraduates 84 of whom were defined as school-leavers on admission and 39 (31.7%) as mature. Ninety-four (76.4%) students were female and 29 (28.6%) were male. National undergraduate data suggests that the male recruitment in the current sample was slightly higher than the national average of 22.75% (CSP, personal communication, 2004) for the intake years 1999 and 2000.

Effect of age on learning profiles

Figure 3 reflects the perceived change in SDLR over time with the sample grouped by admission age. Respondents were matched across Takes 1–6 resulting in a complete data set being returned for 68 school-leaver and 28 mature students. The significant decline in SDLR mean scores over time (p = 0.002) was replicated across all study variables. The mature undergraduates demonstrated significantly more mature mean scores for SDLR (p = 0.016), external locus of control (p = 0.026, variable lower than school-leaver group), the ASC variables aspiration (p = 0.044), anxiety (p = 0.017, lower than school-leaver group) and initiative (p = 0.030) and the ASSIST variable surface learning (p = 0.029, variable lower than school-leaver group). There was a trend towards significant difference between age groups with respect to the ASSIST variable: deep learning (p = 0.070). In all cases the mature and school-leaver groups responded similarly to the curriculum (Table 2).

Figure 3. Change in perceived SDLR over the three-year programme defining by admission age. A significant change occurred over time (p = 0.002) with both groups responding similarly (p = 0.431). There was a significant age effect (p = 0.016). (Admission data = Take 1, End year 1 data = Take 2; Beginning year 2 data = Take 3, End year 2 data = Take 4; Beginning year 3 data = Take 5; End year 3 data = Take 6. Bold line indicates mean score for similar samples, Guglielimino, 1977.)

Table 2.  Change in variable scores over 3 years profiling for admission age. Values reflect p-values obtained from a repeated-measures ANOVA with a first-order polynomial contrast

Learning profile variable	Change over time p=	Age effect on change over time p=
SDLR	0.002**	0.431
ASE	0.001**	0.241
Internal ALOC	0.000**	0.856
External ALOC	0.024*	0.853
ASC:
Aspiration	0.000**	0.620
Anxiety	0.048*	0.977
Satisfaction	0.000**	0.442
Initiative	0.000**	0.124
Learner Identity	0.000**	0.623
ASSIST:
Deep learning	0.030*	0.945
Strategic learning	0.001**	0.687
Surface learning	0.022*	0.807

Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

Effect of gender among the mature group

The mature students from both cohorts responded positively to the data collection exercises with the result that the completed profiles were returned for 35 undergraduates; twenty-one mature students were female and 14 male. All variable summated scores were confirmed to follow a normal distribution and the data were therefore analysed using parametric tests (Blanchard & Carey, 1987; Velleman & Wilkinson, 1993).

Learning profiles on admission

Comparing mean score data for each variable on admission (Table 3) showed that in most cases the female students’ scores were higher/more mature than those of their male peers. Mean scores for perceived SDLR and the academic satisfaction dimension of ASC were significantly greater for the female group (p = 0.042; p = 0.030). Three learning variables received more mature (though non-significantly) mean scores from the male group: academic self-efficacy, external academic locus of control and the anxiety dimension of academic self-concept.

1. Change over time. Consistent with the profile change of the whole cohort, the mature student groups demonstrated a staged decline in their perceived variable scores over the three years of the programme (Table 3). Figure 4 illustrates the familiar changes again using the variable SDLR. While statistical analysis suggests that both gender groups responded similarly to the curriculum, it is interesting to note the separation of mean scores that occurs from Takes 3–6, the clinical component of the programme. This greater decline is mirrored in all the male variables scores such that at Take 6 their scores are significantly lower than the female group over six variables, with trends towards significance demonstrated for a further three variables. Table 4 presents the relevant significance values. In all cases the female students demonstrated the more mature profiles.

2. Net effect of the curriculum on mature students’ learning profiles. Mean score data suggests that, over the three-year programme, the female students’ perceived scores for most variables were essentially unchanged. Where large drops in scores had occurred during year 1 of the programme, recovery had taken place over years 2 and 3. Three variables, however, did not follow this pattern and were significantly reduced by Take 6. All of these latter variables were dimensions of academic self-concept: aspiration (p = 0.025), satisfaction (p = 0.002) and identity as a learner (p = 0.012).

Figure 4. Change in the perceived SDLR of mature students over the three-year programme. A significant change occurred over time (p = 0.045) with both groups responding similarly (p = 0.3). There was a significant gender effect (p = 0.022). (Admission data = Take 1, End year 1 data = Take 2; Beginning year 2 data = Take 3, End year 2 data = Take 4; Beginning year 3 data = Take 5; End year 3 data = Take 6. Bold line indicates mean score for similar samples, Guglielimino, 1977).

Table 3.  Variable mean scores on admission (Take 1), at the end of Year 1 (Take 2) and at the end of Year 3 (Take 6) of the mature student study sample (Female n = 25, male n = 14)

	Mean score Take 1		Mean score Take 2		Mean score Take 6
Variable	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
SDLR	213.64	227.64	212.64	218.21	199.88	221.86
ASE	158.14	159.04	143.86	149.67	145.20	161.14
ALOC:
Internal	48.57	50.68	45.07	49.29	44.25	51.36
External	24.43	25.20	25.57	24.17	30.13	25.71
ASC:
Aspiration	57.93	60.84	52.64	56.29	49.07	55.86
Anxiety	37.00	39.72	41.50	39.75	43.27	40.07
Satisfaction	51.93	57.16	48.29	51.42	45.93	50.79
Initiative	42.64	46.64	39.57	42.38	40.47	44.75
Identification	57.00	58.72	58.00	58.46	52.07	55.21
ASSIST:
Deep	45.50	47.17	No data available		41.88	46.43
Strategic	43.80	45.22			38.94	44.21
Surface	30.20	27.94			32.25	27.57

Table 4.  The difference between female and male variable score at Take 6. In all cases the more mature profile is displayed by the mature female group

Variable	Gender effect at Take 6 p=
SDLR	0.002**
ASE	0.009**
Internal ALOC	0.001**
External ALOC	0.063^†
ASC:
Aspiration	0.005**
Satisfaction	0.078^†
ASSIST:	0.052^†
Deep learning	0.012*
Strategic learning	0.014*
Surface learning

Notes: ^†p < 0.1; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

The mature male students however displayed a different learning profile by Take 6. Such was the decline in variable mean scores that nine of the twelve variables had significantly lower scores at Take 6. Table 5 describes the learning profile of ‘Ideal’ autonomous professionals and compares this with the profile of end of Year 3 male, mature undergraduates.

Table 5.  Comparison of learning profiles: ‘Ideal’ autonomous professional versus mature, male undergraduates at the end of year 3. The p-values reflect the change in matched variable mean scores from Take 1 to Take 6

‘Ideal’ autonomous professional learning variable profile		Mature, male final year undergraduate learning variable profile
High	Low	High	Low
SDLR			SDLRS (p = 0.004**)
Internal ALOC	External ALOC	External ALOC (p = 0.014*)	Internal ALOC (p = 0.043*)
ASE			ASE (p = 0.019)
ASC:	ASC:	ASC:	ASC:
Satisfaction Aspiration Initiative	Anxiety	Anxiety (p = 0.098^†)	Aspiration (p = 0.001**) Satisfaction (p = 0.24) Identification (p = 0.019*)
Deep/strategic learning mix	Surface learning	Surface learning (p = 0.040*)	Strategic learning (p = 0.031*)
			Deep learning (p = 0.051^†)

Notes: ^†p < 0.1; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

Results summary

Building upon the findings of earlier studies, this exploration of learning profile data has confirmed that variable mean scores reduce over time. The current study, however, has demonstrated that the change is not uniform to all subgroups within the undergraduate cohorts. The presented results would suggest that the perceived learning profiles of the mature male students fare the worst over time. Just prior to graduation this mature male group was displaying a profile almost juxtaposed with that suggested for an autonomous professional.

Discussion

The results of this study have highlighted some important observations about learning profile development in undergraduate allied health professions students. The results will be discussed in light of available research into the possible rationale for the observed gender effects.

Admissions profiles

Take 1 profiles confirmed the findings of Richardson & King (1998) that mature students generally exhibit approaches to learning that are more desirable than those of school-leaver groups in that they are ‘more compatible with the avowed aims and objectives of institutions of higher education’ (p. 81). Guglielmino (1977) suggested that the confidence of mature students in managing their various non-academic roles is translated, at least on admission, into higher perceived SDLR, self-esteem and self-concept. The significant difference in admission scores for male and female SDLR and the academic satisfaction dimension of ASC are not supported in the literature and may perhaps be a feature of this specific group of female students. As data collection included only the demographic data of age and gender, the possible influences of prior life-experience factors cannot be explored. Abouserie (1994) observed 675 second-year undergraduates (female students = 473) and determined that, in her sample, female students demonstrated significantly more academic stress than their male peers. Her results may be supported by the Gender Working Party's (1994) suggestion that female students have a strong personal investment in ‘getting it right’. While, in the current study, significant gender differences were not observed, the female mature students did achieve higher admission scores for the variables related to academic stress: external ALOC and the anxiety variable of ASC.

Change over time

Year 1 of the 1997 validated BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy programme consisted of the intensive study of preclinical sciences and the practice of preliminary physiotherapeutic treatment techniques on normal subjects. The year contained four compulsory assignments spread over three terms, and ended with three compulsory written and three compulsory practical examinations. As seen in Table 3, Year 1 accounted for the greatest drop in perceived variable mean scores across the mature students, but particularly effecting the female group. Jackson (2003) explored the transition into higher education for students of all ages and noted that the transition ‘represents a period of diequilibrium as students move from a familiar environment into an unfamiliar one’ (p. 341). Her study supports the observed significant decline in the mature female students’ mean self-concept scores. Jackson suggests that the transition phase can be eased if students are helped to find their equilibrium within the new context through regular assessment, feedback and reflection. The curriculum development team for the 1997 revalidation process had taken the deliberate decision to reduce the number of annual assessment points for year 1 from 7 to 4 in an attempt to reduce the years’ focus on ongoing assessment. The results of the current study suggest that, however well intentioned and evidence-based, this decision, when not coupled with increased formative processes, may have led to the students of 1999 and 2000 feeling particularly ‘at sea’ during Year 1.

After Year 1, the mean scores of the mature female group rose slowly to achieve near admission levels by the end of year 3. The results suggest that, having successfully completed the Year 1 assessment procedures, the students were now more confident of their place within the programme. The clinical component of the programme further develops the problem-solving skills commenced in year 1, with students practising and honing these skills while on their clinical placements. The recovery of variable mean scores however, was far from apparent in the mature male group; as illustrated in Table 5, their learning profile was actually the exact opposite of that deemed important for successful development within an autonomous healthcare profession.

Reviewing the available literature has failed to find support for these results. Many studies have reported significant reductions over time in female students’ learning profile variables (Rudd, 1984; Jackson, 2003; Richardson & Woodley, 2003), but the contexts of these studies differ from physiotherapy in that the changes have been seen in subjects acknowledged as ‘male-dominant’ (science, mathematics or earlier studies where female undergraduate numbers were low). Arnot et al. (1998) drew together gender-related school-based research and suggested that female students may be favoured by programmes assessed using assignments, coursework and problem-solving tasks. The authors describe female students as more attentive than males with a greater ability to sustain activity for tasks that are ‘open-ended, process-based and related to realistic situations’ (p. 28). Male students are reported to be better ‘risk-takers’ and as such perform better on multiple choice and other assessment tools where memorising and speed are rewarded. There are no such assessment opportunities on the undergraduate programme.

To compound the possible ‘female’ biasing of programme assessment procedures, Murphy and Elwood (1998) draw attention to the issues of ‘gendered feedback’ (p. 172) where academic staff reward work and offer feedback in alignment with their own gendered beliefs and attitudes. Indeed Robson et al. (2004) suggest that university teachers and their students are ‘caught in a complex web of interaction between aspects of their social identities and the subjects of study’ (p. 11).

The results of the current study have caused the academic staff to reflect upon the experiences they offered the cohorts of 1999 and 2000. For those years there was an academic staff gender ratio of female : male 11 : 5. During the clinical component of the programme, undergraduates went to placement locations throughout Wales for 12 three-week placements. For the time period in question the approximate gender ratio for clinical staff with whom students would have had daily interaction was 89% female : 11% male.

While both these observations add weight to the reported ‘female-dominance’ of the Physiotherapy profession, they also set the context of this study apart from other reported research. At this time the negative impact of the BSc programme on the mature male student can only be supposed to be related to: the female dominance of the subject team; the female dominance of the clinical placement staff; the suggested ‘female’ biasing of the curricular problem-solving ethos; and the possible female gendering of assessment tasks and ensuing feedback.

Relevance to academic outcome

While the results of this study cannot be ignored, one question remains: What, if anything, is the academic significance of these gendered learning profile findings? Table 6 presents the mean scores for the mature students’ academic breakdown at graduation. The clinical placement scores did not contribute to degree classification on the 1997 validated programme. The assessment scores perhaps support the observation of assessment gender biasing with female students performing significantly better in the cumulative assignments of Years 2 and 3 (p = 0.05) and tending towards significance with respect to final examination scores (p = 0.07). Of particular interest however, are the project and clinical placement scores. The final year dissertation offers students the opportunity to conduct a small research project in a self-selected area; students engage actively in this project with frequent discussions between peers and academic supervisors encouraged. The near identical gender group scores may suggest that, when able to pursue an area of particular interest, male students can demonstrate comparable academic thinking and writing skills. Finally, the identical clinical placement mean scores suggest that when ‘on-the-spot’ decisions about patient care have to made, and when knowledge and practice issues are assessed by clinical placement staff, the mature male and female students perform equally well.

Table 6.  Mean final year assessment scores for mature students by gender. The clinical placement scores were not included in the degree classification calculations for the 1997-validated programme

Assessment	Male mean score	Female mean score	P-values for difference between scores
Assignments	57.65	62.468	0.017*
Research project	60.31	61.62	0.889
Final papers	56.38	61.22	0.010**
Overall mark	58.11	61.80	0.043*
Clinical placement  assessment	66.97	66.41	0.246

Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

Curriculum development implications

The revalidation event of 2002 afforded the curriculum development team the opportunity to address some of the issues raised above through curricular change based upon published best practice (Chipcase et al., 2004).

• Metacognition activities and reflection became an integral part of undergraduate personal portfolio development, with explicit sessions in Year 1 facilitating transition both into the cultures of Higher Education and Physiotherapy itself (Case & Gunstone, 2002; Neumann et al., 2002; Rust et al., 2003).

• SDLR was facilitated through staged activities to develop students’ workload, time management and independent learning skills. Group work and shared learning have become encouraged for all students (Grow, 1991; Tait and Entwistle, 1996; Fazey & Fazey, 2001).

• Assessment frequency has been maintained but with an element of choice introduced. Students are offered early and individual feedback from assignments (Fazey & Fazey, 2001; Lizzio et al., 2002). Personal tutors take an active role in encouraging and supporting student reflections on their learning development and ongoing achievement.

• Clinical Placement scores contribute to final degree classification.

While staff await the evaluation of these changes as students graduate in 2006, they are aware that the issues of possible gender biasing have not been addressed. With the recent introduction of explicit metacognition sessions, staff are concerned about processes for supporting students who see their profiles declining rather than developing over time.

Potential service and personal development implications

The disparity between the mature male students’ learning profiles and their clinical placement scores suggests that the undergraduates do not need ‘mature’ learning profiles in order to perform in current practice. What remains unclear at this stage is the effect of the poor learning profiles on their future ability to act as autonomous professionals. Will these mature male students develop their profiles once free from the constraints of the programme or will clinical practice further restrict their growth?

Limitations of the study

This study has produced results that have generated discussions among local allied health care professionals (academic and clinical staff alike). A common criticism is raised however about the study sample size and the minimal demographic data that was collected in order to explore the contexts of the results. These criticisms are valued and have been used to inform future studies. The discussions have, however, been limited by the apparent paucity of literature from similar academic contexts. Many staff are reluctant to discuss curricular changes that might not be substantiated by evidence from other sources. However small the study sample though, we do feel that the results have opened our eyes to gender bias issues that had previously never entered our curriculum discussions. With widening access initiatives striving to increase entry from non-traditional students (with mature and male students particularly targeted), we value the results as an initial step to further exploration.

Recommendations for future study

Admission numbers to undergraduate Physiotherapy programmes have greatly increased in recent years with annual programme cohorts reaching 120. Qualifying routes have also grown with the rapid development of part-time and accelerated programmes. Such numbers provide good annual sample sizes for the ongoing monitoring of gender bias issues for both learning profile and academic outcome studies. The academic staff do however, take very seriously their knowledge limitations when exploring metacognitive development with the mature male students particularly. A qualitative approach will be taken in a new study to follow this undergraduate group over time so that we can start to explore the contexts of origin and real significance of the observed learning profile changes.

Conclusions

This study has built on previous learning profile studies to specifically explore the influence of a BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy programme on the learning development of its mature students. The results suggest that gender bias may exist within the curriculum as evidenced by the decline in mature male students’ profiles over time. With educators obliged to ensure that their curricula ‘produce’ graduates who are responsible autonomous professionals capable of regulating their own lifelong professional development, the study supports the increasing use of personal development profiling initiatives, reflective practice and metacognitive training among undergraduate students. Without these tools academic staff have little more than academic outcomes to measure their curricular influences. A humbling, concluding statement summarizes the rationale for this and future related research:

‘As an educator when [we] teach somebody how to learn [we] are giving them arguably one of the greatest gifts, namely, the ability to learn things after [we] have disappeared off the scene, indeed the ability to shape their own destinies’ (Candy, 2000; p. 111).

Practice points

Table

•Personal learning profiles provide useful information for the evaluation of undergraduate curricula.

•Learning profiles can be used to track students’ development into the mature learners needed to practice in autonomous healthcare professions.

•There may be evidence of curricular gender biasing in female-dominated healthcare undergraduate programmes.

•Curricular gender biasing may be to the detriment of mature, male undergraduates.

Notes

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Clare Kell

CLARE KELL studied physiotherapy at Addenbrooke's School of Physiotherapy, Cambridge; she worked clinically in South Wales, completed an MSc in Medical Education (UWCM) and is now lecturer at the Department of Physiotherapy, Cardiff University. She leads the Departmental Educational and Professional Practice Research Group with a particular interest in undergraduate curriculum development, lifelong learning, CPD and reflective practice.

Notes

[1] This work was the substance of an oral presentation at the Society for Research in Higher Education (SRHE) conference, December 2003, Royal Holloway.