Pre-entry qualifications – staff perceptions versus reality

Abstract

The Student Transition and Retention Project (STAR, 2007) conference in 2004 raised awareness of the gap between the expectations of first-year lecturers at Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and the reality of the secondary school curriculum. This article will provide an introduction to the issues covered by the conference. Examples will be provided of changes in practice that have addressed the issues raised. The aim is both to identify ways in which practice can be modified to support students through the period of transition, taking a realistic starting point, and to demonstrate a developmental way of approaching the problem.

Introduction

Members of the Staff Development Team at the University of Ulster lead the University’s project on Enhancing the First Year Experience and inform strategic policy development linked to this. In addition, we are routinely involved in providing consultancy and training/educational development support relating to first year teaching and retention throughout the university and, increasingly, through other UK HEIs in our roles as advisors for a number of HE Academy Subject Centres including the GEES Subject Centre. Through this engagement with academic staff we became aware of a significant mismatch between what academic staff expect first-year students to have experienced in the secondary curriculum, in terms of teaching, learning and assessment strategies, and the reality of that experience. Concern was apparent regarding students’ perceived lack of basic knowledge of core concepts and also skills such as the ability to write in an academically mature fashion or to manage the numeracy requirements of certain courses. It was clear that, apart from staff whose own children were progressing through the secondary system and those who acted as examiners for curriculum boards, few of us had up-to-date knowledge and understanding of our students’ secondary experience. In addition to this, it was becoming apparent that our current advice for teaching staff, which drew extensively on the body of literature on student retention (McInnes et al. 1995; Ozga and Sukhnandan, 1997; Rickson and Rutherford, 1995; Tinto,1987; Yorke,1999; Upcraft et al., 2005) and guided staff to consider first year as a period of transition requiring extended induction to allow social and academic integration, was only having partial success when applied to practice.

To address this knowledge gap, Staff Development, in conjunction with the FDTL funded Student Transition and Retention Project (STAR, 2007), organised a one day conference in 2004 with inputs from examination boards, secondary teachers, FE lecturers and students. This was extremely well received and reinforced the need for more staff to gain an understanding of the issues raised.

This led the Staff Development Team to develop a workshop aimed at helping staff teaching first-year students to understand the dichotomy inherent in the current approaches of the secondary and tertiary educational systems. This workshop has been customised for delivery in a variety of contexts and has been used both in our home institution and elsewhere. Participants have commented on its value in terms such as ‘this should be compulsory for all staff’ and ‘now I understand that it’s not all the students’ fault’.

Workshop development: understanding pre-entry qualifications

The workshop was developed to raise staff awareness and also to encourage them to consider the implications of the issues for their own teaching and learning environments.

The initial section of the workshop involved updating participants’ awareness of the key qualifications our students had achieved prior to entry. As participants were drawn from a wide range of subject areas, we concentrated on providing generic information regarding the structure, teaching and learning approaches and assessment strategies. In addition, we identified the strengths and weaknesses students, who had experienced these teaching approaches, were likely to have developed. A summary of key aspects of this range of qualifications is provided in Table 1 and further discussion can be found in Cook (2005). In the section below, we have provided a summary of the key points covered in relation to A-levels, as these are still the most common pre-entry qualification. It should be noted that these apply to students currently being recruited, and that very recent changes in the qualifications are not covered.

An overview of A-levels

Structure

Students take six modules over two years, three at AS level and three at A2. The modules carry equal weighting whether at AS or A2 level. Currently around 15–20% of marks are allocated for a synoptic element in an A2 paper. Coursework counts for not more than 30% of the total marks.

Specifications

Each module is highly specified for every A-level, and students will have access to detailed information on:

• Subject content

• Scheme of assessment—detailing assessment objectives and the key features being sought, together with the particular exam they will appear in, and the weightings for each one

• Grade descriptors—published for Grades A, C & E

Teaching methods

Feedback from teachers has indicated that, due to pressures from league tables, governors and parents, teachers have become increasingly strategic and skilled in their preparation of students for assessment. This has impacted significantly on the teaching approaches adopted. Students are taught closely to the syllabus requirements. Teachers direct them in ‘unpacking’ assignment requirements, selecting and highlighting the key words, and focusing their learning when reading texts/materials. One teacher stated that reading beyond the subject requirements could lead to a student loosing marks when answering exam questions, due to there being only limited space to provide exactly what was being looked for in the mark scheme.

Marking criteria are highlighted to raise pupil awareness of standards required, and students are given samples of good coursework to enhance their understanding of the required standard and to learn how to structure assignments. Teachers devote class time to the supervision or correction of coursework attempts. In addition, this facilitates teacher monitoring of student progress. Teachers try to ensure that students remain ‘on message’ at all times. All students submit at least two drafts of each piece of coursework. Some may also enter their coursework project in January and re-submit in June to secure an improved grade.

Examinations

The AS exams for one subject may not last more than 3 hours in total e.g.,

• Geography 2 × 1h (17.5% of marks each); 1 × 1h (15%) (no coursework)

• Biology 2 × 1h (16.7% of marks each); 1 × 1h (9.3%); internal practical work (7.4%)

At A2, exams can last longer but students are unlikely to have experienced the standard 3 hour university length exam e.g.,

• Geography 2× 1h 30m (15% each); 1 × 2h (20%) (synoptic questions in 2 modules amounting to 20% of total marks)

• Biology 2 × 1h 30m (16.7%); 1 × 1h (9.3%, synoptic paper); internal practical work (7.4%)

A-level examination papers are highly structured, with many subjects requiring students to respond with short answers needing knowledge recall and limited literary skill. Again, this experience is unlike the essay-type questions routinely set in university examinations. Where exam questions have multiple parts, students will be provided with a breakdown of marks for each section. Following examinations, students have access to their scripts and can identify clearly how and why they have achieved the marks allocated.

Each module may be retaken and the best mark counted for the final grade, so students may decide strategically to repeat AS modules to gain a few extra marks and increase their likelihood of achieving the final grade they need. This is contrary to most university regulations, where only one initial attempt is allowed and resits for those who fail only permit a pass mark to be recorded. This may also help to explain why many university students are prepared to strategically fail modules, concentrating on a few and resitting the others during the summer without any stigmatisation of failure.

Independent learning

Many teachers feel that the current approach to teaching A-levels and other pre-entry qualifications is less likely to develop and encourage independent learning habits and skills than in previous years. The coursework burden places heavy demands on students’ time and workload, which teachers should recognise by providing greater direction and support, and also by carefully monitoring progress. Students are trained to use assessment criteria to structure their study. High university ‘asking grades’ contribute to pressure on students and teachers to achieve these grades. Students will be supported to ensure that any coursework makes a positive contribution to the overall mark, so it will probably be marked through at least two drafts. Students are unlikely to have to learn to manage their own time as incremental deadlines are carefully mapped out for them. The reality at this stage is that learning is structured and focused. Students are also used to receiving frequent feedback on their progress. They are encouraged to think and work independently, but there remains a strong element of guidance. Only the very best students will go beyond the course requirements and acquire a more comprehensive knowledge of topics.

Students’ views

When university students were asked to provide us with an idea of how their school and university experience differed they highlighted the following.

What was different about coursework and assessment from school/college?

• University Group working is difficult to achieve successfully—training needed

• A lot is expected in presentations at an early stage i.e. use of Powerpoint—again training needed

• Getting notes from WebCt is not always straightforward—needs to be clearly explained/demonstrated

• Intensity of continuous assessment

• Tend to leave all assessment until the last minute, as not reminded by teachers

• Not chased for submission of work

What helped the transition?

• Module handbooks are very useful, all relevant information

• Studies Adviser

• Tutorial sessions were invaluable

• Assessed practicals help to structure work as they have to be done on a regular basis

What more could be done?

• Training in some areas—mentioned above

• Information on marking schemes

• Quick feedback on first assignment

What advice would you give new first years?

• Find out how much to read

• Don’t be afraid to ask

• Keep on top of work and assessment—don’t leave it to the last minute

It is evident from their responses that students are expecting and seeking the same level of direction and support from their university teachers as they received in school and that they struggle where this is not forthcoming.

Workshop tasks

The second stage of the staff workshop allowed participants to clarify their understanding of the earlier presentation by examining, in some detail, curriculum specifications, exam papers and chief examiner reports covering a range of subjects, exam boards and qualification types. Specifications are downloadable from exam board websites and other documents can be purchased from the relevant boards. We attempted to resource each workshop with subject materials broadly relevant to the range of staff we knew were attending, to increase the relevance for them. At each workshop we also provided materials for GCSE English and Mathematics. The tasks varied depending on the group, but sample activities are described below.

The workshop concluded with staff identifying how they were going to take their new learning from the session forward. Examples of changes that we are aware of are discussed later in this article.

Workshop tasks:

Task 1

• Compare content of both qualifications (A-level and Advanced Vocational Certificate Education (AVCE)) and reflect on current 1st year university curriculum for that subject

Task 2

• Focus on the assessment of both qualifications particularly the style of questions. Compare against current assessment of 1st year modules

• Focus on marks and levels of each qualification and student effort required. See Chief Examiner’s Reports

Evaluation

…this should be compulsory for all staff

…now I understand that it’s not all the student’s fault

These quotes are representative of those collected at each workshop, with staff talking about ‘penny dropping’ moments. When asked to identify what has been particularly revealing the following are regularly mentioned:

1. Understanding why students are so unconcerned about failing at the first attempt

2. Understanding why surface learning prevails

3. Recognising that it is unrealistic to expect students to start off as independent learners

4. The disparity between the ways they have been assessed previously compared to HE practice

5. The lack of scope for developing literacy skills e.g. essay writing within the pre-HE curriculum

6. Understanding why students struggle in ‘getting’ what we are looking for in assignments

Changes in T&L Practice

As a result, in part at least, of attendance at these workshops, we are aware of a number of modifications that have been made to courses across the university. One example which includes several interventions is provided below:

• more guidance on assessment requirements and criteria provided in year 1 tutorials

• Early formative feedback provided on a piece of coursework

• Greater use of MCQ assessment within semester 1 modules (instead of essays to test knowledge acquisition), together with input on essay writing, so that these can be introduced in Semester 2.

• Regular monitoring of attendance and performance linked to personal development planning.

• Briefings for all staff at a School Away Day, regarding the content, and teaching and learning approaches of pre-entry

Conclusion

Learning about the prior educational experiences of our students has been illuminating, challenging many of our views that the standard of our intake was slipping. Repositioning our viewpoint to see our incoming students as the, often highly successful, products of a teaching and learning environment with different approaches and expectations to our own, has allowed academics to move from a ‘blame’ stance to one where it is possible to identify practical solutions to guide students through the transition to more independent, open ended and deeper learning.

As a result of this journey, we, in Staff Development, have included outcomes of the workshop within a range of our activities, including broader 1st year experience workshops, Academic Induction, post-graduate higher education practice modules, and within our advisory work.

Comparison of qualifications

Table 1 Summary of Key Qualifications

	A-level	AVCE (Advanced Vocational Certificate Education)	BTEC National	Irish Leaving Certificate	Access Courses
Structure	2 year course. Final pass grades A - E	2 year course, may be double or single. Vocational subjects. Often taken with 1 or 2 A-levels Final pass grades A — E UCAS tariff same as A-level.	2 year course. Vocational subjects related to work. Final pass grades pass, merit, distinction. Award = 6 units, Certificate=12 units, Diploma = 18 units. UCAS tariff: P (for 6 units) = 40, M=80,D=120.	2 year course. Subjects taken at either ordinary or higher level. System of grades at each level, A1, A2, B1-3, C1-3, D1-3 are passes. A1 at ordinary is equivalent to C3 at higher. Grades then translated into points.	2 year part-time. Final grade is % mark, >60% gets commendation.
No. of modules	3 modules at AS, 3 further at A2.	6 modules for single AVCE, equivalent to 1 A-level.	6 units are equivalent to 1 A-level.	At least 5 subjects must be studied, including Irish. Most students take 6/7.	Part-timers take 3 modules per year. Modules will include basic maths and english, other modular content will vary between type of course and colleges.
Assessment type	Mainly exams, externally set, marked and moderated, coursework not more than 30% of any subject AS level exams not more than 3 hours in total. Years weighted 50:50	At least 1 module out of 6 must be assessed by external examination. Modules use only ONE assessment type. Portfolio work externally moderated at end of module	Mainly internally assessed. At diploma level, 16 of 18 units must be passed	Exams, externally set, marked and moderated, all taken at end of course.	Mostly 50% CA, 50% exam. Latter include both short answers and essays. University of Ulster validated courses have UU appointed external examiner.
Assessment objectives	Clearly specified	Clear specifications	Explicit assessment criteria
Grade descriptors	Clearly set out for A, C, E grades	Clearly set out for A, C, E grades	Descriptors for pass, merit and distinction		UU validated courses use Level A descriptors