PADSHE Project - University of Nottingham

Report on pedagogical developments made to harmonise approaches to PDP in HE and pre-HE within the project

1.1 Aim

The aim of this strand of the project was to explore possibilities for pedagogical harmonization in PDP between the HE sector and the 16-19 sector.

1.2 Objectives

A pedagogical feasibility study was proposed, with a baseline C&IT demonstration link. The University of Nottingham was to be linked with four 16-19 institutions in the Nottingham area using the National Record of Achievement and similar schools and colleges in the Progress File Demonstration Projects

The baseline C&IT link was successfully completed in July 2001, with information being transferred from Greenwood Dale School (a school with technology college status) on one of their 6th form students who subsequently took up a place at Nottingham University to study Physics. This was the only institution with sufficient - and sufficiently modern - hardware to carry out the task.

The University was linked with a City 11-18 comprehensive school (with technology college status), a County comprehensive school, a sixth form college and an FE college.

Links between the four Nottingham institutions and the institutions in the Progress File Demonstration Projects varied considerably in their effectiveness. Links with Northumberland were, and continue to be, close and productive. It was extremely difficult, however, to find an institution which "matched" the school with technology college status; a link was found very late in the day and the school was visited, but much more could have been achieved if this link had been made earlier. It is likely that work will be done later with this particular school if objective one is continued.

The main outcome of the feasibility study became, after discussion between teachers and university tutors, a pilot Transition Document to link with the ePARs system at Nottingham University. This was decided, after discussion and wide consultation, to be the most practical method of harmonising the transition.

1.3 Account of Developments

The Transition Document, or New Entrant Profile, was first put forward at a twilight session of university tutors and school and 6th form college teachers. It was agreed that the Personal Statement, useful as it is for deciding university entrance, was not similarly useful for personal tutors. Some discussion took place as to the format of the New Entrant Profile and the questions it should contain, and this became the first draft.

Consultation then took place with first year widening participation students, who talked about the personal nature of some things they would like their tutors to be aware of, e.g. dyslexia, and the fact that the assumption was automatically made that if a student was living at home, there would be no problems. Little was known about what happened during a personal tutorial, so a series of previously answered questions would be a useful indicator.

The second draft was also shown to a group of teachers and FE college tutors, who were quite dismissive, said that their students would not bother to complete it, they had no time to deal with it, their students had no access to IT facilities and never went to the library. This contribution was so negative that it did not form a third draft, but was useful in some ways in that it confirmed the thought that teachers would be less likely to complete any kind of transition document than their students. This was confirmed during the next consultation.

Sixth form students (some of them students of the above-mentioned teachers) were the next consultation group, and their input was valuable in the sense that they were nearest the target group in experience of HE. One student commented that a document completed before term started and sent in advance to a personal tutor would act as a useful ice breaker.

Activists in the Students' Union formed the next consultation group, and, although their input was in some ways rather blasé in respect of the questions in the New Entrant Profile which they felt they would or would not have bothered to answer, they made useful contributions regarding the format, and one student told of a friend who was terrified about her first personal tutorial; a document such as the Transition Document would calm nerves.

The document went back to the widening participation group, and then to university tutors responsible for PARs or ePARs in their schools. With some minor alterations two trials were agreed upon: a paper version in Geography, and an electronic version in Electronic and Electrical Engineering. Both versions were slightly "customised" and then trialled in August/September 2002.

Although both tutors and students strongly felt that the document should have space, for those who so wish, to mention worries, write about disabilities or disclose other personal details, and should therefore be informal in nature and "user friendly", the project team was advised that, under the new disability legislation, it was necessary to rein back some of the questions. This resulted in a much more formal document. (See Annexes 1-3)

Successes

a) Some schools were successfully linked - especially those with links in the Northumberland Demonstration Projects. It depended largely upon the time available and the enthusiasm of staff concerned.

b) The links between university and schools and college staff were both successful and productive, with very effective consultation and collaboration on the Transition Document.

c) Students from 16 -19 institutions were successfully brought into the university for workshops in addition to the usual university Open Day.

d) There was very wide and enthusiastic consultation on the Transition Document; many new undergraduates do not know what to expect at their first personal tutorial, and, with the student socio-economic base widening, this situation is likely to be more common.

Lessons learned

1) Teacher workload and the need to cover for absent colleagues limits what can be done in school.

2) There is little need for academic information to be passed on to universities; it appears on the UCAS form and if a student succeeds in obtaining a place at university, their academic qualifications must of necessity be sufficient.

3) Both students and university staff feel that the UCAS Personal Statement is extremely narrow and limited in the information it gives to the personal tutor at the student's final destination - i.e. the university at which they begin their HE studies. Students can change a great deal between writing their Personal Statement and taking up their place, especially if they have a gap year, or go to work for a year.

4) With Widening Access there will be an increased need for student support as new types of entrants transfer from the schools sector to HE.

5) Students have left school or college by May in their final year, so this makes it difficult for staff to keep in touch with them.

6) There is a national recommendation for an HE Progress File. Schools will be increasingly using the new Progress File as a replacement for the old NRA; a link between the two progress files seems both logical and sensible. Students already using Progress File in schools and colleges are used to reflection and will regard it as natural to continue this.

7) Transition is the weak link, according to UCAS (see latest report - Paving the Way, May 2002) and the Transition Document goes some way to smooth this path.

8) Some students are extremely nervous before their first personal tutorial; most do not know what to expect, and, as the student socio-economic base widens, this is likely to be more common.


1.4 Evaluation

a) Both Transition Documents, paper and electronic, were discussed with the tutor responsible for PARs in their schools, and as far as possible met the needs of each school; piloting would provide the answer. However, several changes were necessary in order to comply with the requirements of the new Disabilities Act. These changes had the effect of making the document more formal, less user-friendly than was the original intention. (See Annexes 1-3)

b) There are no definite outcomes at the time of writing this report; the Transition Document was trialled in August and September 2002 and evaluation is in process. The fact, however, that 187 of a possible 191 students in Geography completed (in great detail) and returned the paper version would indicate a degree of success. The access problem with the electronic version makes evaluation more difficult, although 48 students accessed the site between 10-23 September and 39 chose to complete the questionnaire. The question now needs to be asked: are students more willing to complete a paper questionnaire than an electronic one for reasons of confidentiality?

1.5 Continuation Strategy and Associated Activities

The Transition Document will be subject to review by focus groups of tutors and students which will be convened in 2002-03. Further related work with the University of Nottingham Widening Participation team and the developing Nottingham Passport initiative in the City of Nottingham will begin in October, creating a potential '16-19 into HE' demonstration site of national importance, by linking Progress File work in both sectors.

Back to top Back to ePARs Introduction page PADSHE