Accommodating those Most at Risk. Responding to a Mismatch in Programme Selection Criteria and Foundation Biology Performance

Abstract

In South Africa, foundation programmes are a well-established alternative access route to tertiary science study for educationally disadvantaged students. Student access to, and performance in, one such foundation programme has been researched by the authors seeking opportunities to improve student retention. The biology module in particular has been recognised to place students at risk of failing the foundation programme, thereby reducing throughput into mainstream science programmes. This study uses decision tree analysis to provide a detailed description of foundation biology student performance so that points of weakness and opportunities for remedial action may be pinpointed. While students’ alternative-entry selection scores have previously been found to most effectively account for performance in the programme as a whole, no similar positive relationship was identified for any subgroup of students in the foundation biology module. Conversely, academic language proficiency in the medium of instruction (English), formerly found to play no role in overall student performance, was revealed as primary in explaining achievement in foundation biology, most adversely affecting students rendered particularly vulnerable by an additional academic and/or socio-economic disadvantage. A pass in the stand-alone foundation academic literacy module did not necessarily correspond to a pass in biology. Compromised by educational disadvantage, compounded by a mismatch in programme selection criteria and inadequate academic literacy support, discipline-specific, fundamental literacy development in the biology curriculum is proposed to enable students towards epistemic access in the module. Pending this intervention, formal access to mainstream study is unlikely for the foundation students most at risk of failure.

Keywords:

• Tertiary science access programme
• Biology student performance
• Programme selection criteria
• Students at risk
• Academic literacy development

Acknowledgements

This research was part of Nicola Kirby's doctoral study. This author is particularly indebted to Professor Colleen Downs of the School of Life Sciences, UKZN, for her mentorship, encouragement and award of funding for this research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. In line Statistics South Africa (2014), the term ‘Black African’ used in this paper describes the ‘population group’ that excludes Coloureds and Indians.

2. South African secondary schools are categorised into quintiles according to the national Department of Education's ‘Poverty Index’ which is used for resource targeting purposes. National Quintile 1 (NQ1) includes the poorest (most disadvantaged) and NQ5, the least poor schools (DoE, 2006). Information pertaining to the quintile of the schools attended by the foundation students was accessed from this national department's management system (DBE, 2012).

3. The post-democracy curriculum, the National Curriculum Statement (NCS), was introduced in a phased manner, and by the end of 2008, all South African learners in Grade 12 wrote the same national exams for the first time. This common NSC exam replaced the SC. The NCS is recognised to differ in many respects from the former school curriculum in terms of organising principles, curricular content and emphasis on skills, sequence, progression and pacing of the curriculum, and teaching approaches and methodologies (Grussendorff et al., 2010). In addition, the subjects which make up the NCS are offered at one level only, dispensing with Higher Grade (HG) and Standard Grade (SG, less cognitively challenging) levels formerly used.