Introducing immersive scheduling in a UK university: Potential implications for student attainment

ABSTRACT

Traditionally, undergraduates study several ‘long thin’ modules at the same time. Under ‘immersive scheduling’, students complete a ‘short fat’ module (i.e. a single subject studied over a compressed period), before moving onto other modules. This piece of social research capitalised on the introduction of immersive scheduling to the first year of all undergraduate programmes at one UK University. Both semesters began with a short fat module, before students switched to studying long thin modules simultaneously. A novel ‘within-subjects’ analysis compared how individuals (N > 3000) performed in immersively-delivered modules versus traditional modules. Overall, marks on immersively-delivered modules were significantly higher, with this pattern replicated across semesters and in various demographic subgroups. This real-world evaluation complements existing ‘between-subjects’ studies, where an identical module is delivered in immersive and traditional formats to separate cohorts. It offers further indications that immersive scheduling may be a beneficial pedagogic tool for enhancing student attainment.

KEYWORDS:

• Widening participation
• attainment
• inclusivity
• first year induction

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. For ease of reading, the two module formats will be described from here as ‘immersive’ and ‘traditional’.

2. Although it should be noted that previous between-subjects studies do not describe any formal ‘fidelity’ measures i.e. systematic checks that delivery was consistent in all aspects other than delivery method.

3. Data were excluded from modules that followed an atypical approach to assessment, which did not generate percentage marks (i.e. modules assessed on a ‘pass/fail’ basis only). Individuals’ marks were also identified as outliers and excluded using the conventional boundaries of 1.5 x the interquartile range (See Tukey 1977).

4. This refers to students’ level of academic attainment at prior to entry into university. Under the framework, qualifications, such as A-levels, are converted into points to allow course providers to compare applications during the admissions process https://www.ucas.com/file/63541/download?token=uz826-Cb

5. https://www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/classificationsandstandards/otherclassifications/thenationalstatisticssocioeconomicclassificationnssecrebasedonsoc2010

6. In this context, coursework represented an end of module assessment completed in a format other than an unseen exam. Examples include an essay, report, reflective account or creative output.

7. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/performance-indicators/non-continuation

8. The four conditions shown in Figure 3 are not independent, in that each may include data from one or more individual student(s). As such, formal analysis using ANOVA is inappropriate as a core assumption has been violated (independence of groups).

9. A series of additional mixed-design ANOVAs were performed to explicitly compare student performance in I1 modules versus I2 modules, and T1^MEAN versus T2^MEAN. These confirmed that performance in both immersive and traditional modules was significantly lower in semester two, compared to the corresponding type of module in semester one.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Rebecca Turner

Dr. Rebecca Turner is an Educational Developer at the University of Plymouth. Her research interests include representation of the student voice, the contribution evaluation can make to educational development practice, and student transitions.

Oliver J. Webb

Dr. Oliver J. Webb is an Educational Developer at the University of Plymouth. His research interests include student transitions and widening participation.

Debby R.E. Cotton

Professor Debby R.E. Cotton is the Director or Academic Practice at Plymouth Marjon University. Her research interests include sustainability and inclusive practice in higher education.