SPHERE UG Project Evaluation UW Learning

1
SPHERE UG Project Evaluation UW Learning
Teaching Conference 2008Dr. Ann Bicknell
C.Psychol.a.bicknell_at_worc.ac.uk
2
Topics for today

• Consider Graduate Employability or not?
• Is HE Supporting graduate functionality an
  applied as well as an academic education?
• Consider some results from one evaluation of WBL
  focusing on the UG dissertation
• What is needed now to promote integration of
  employability into the curriculum?

3
A general problem
Annually Britain turns out quarter of a million
graduates. (Gordon Brown, 2006) a tangible
skills gap between what employers want and what
universities are delivering (Morely, 2001).
almost half of the businesses questioned in a
survey of 222 companies by the Association of
Graduate Recruiters believe that universities
were not equipping students with the right skills
to succeed in the workplace. (AGR Ford, 2004).
4
Why is this happening?
5
Employability

• 65-70 or more of UK HE students report their
  reason for attendance is to gain employment at
  graduation (HESA)
• Credentialling makes commensurate employment
  more of a challenge more of a competition?
• Concern about potentially under-employed
  subsets of graduates (HEFCE, 2006)

6
What is the purpose of HE?

• The notion of HE as a research training skills
  area is not borne out by the most popular
  subjects studied at degree law, design studies,
  psychology, management, business studies and
  computer science (UCAS, 2006).
• With the onset of tuition fees it is not
  surprising that degree choice has become a more
  rational one.
• The learning should not be any shallower for
  having this utilitarian choice (Brookfield,
  1986).

7
Employability is more than a (good) degree

• The assessment of functionality in a work role
  a competency
• a set of behaviours required to perform a task
  well (Kurz Bartram, 2002).
• Specific
• Observable
• Objective - can be transparently assessed through
  organisational selection procedures

8
What else is directly involved in employability?

• The Great 8 Competency Framework
• Leading and Deciding
• Supporting and Cooperating
• Interacting and Presenting
• Analysing and Reporting
• Creating and Conceptualising
• Organising and Executing
• Adapting and Coping
• Enterprising and Performing
• Bartram, D. (2003) SHL Group.

• 4 and 5 are predicted by ability (can be inferred
  from HE grades)
• The remaining six are predicted more by
  personality or behavioural consistencies, in
  particular 1 and 8.
• Leading (part of 1) was found to be expected of
  graduates in a recent international study
  (Andrews Higson, 2008).

9
Our Problem

• We accept that employability is more than a
  (good) degree
• We want our graduates to compete for commensurate
  employment in the job market
• So, we offer a vehicle to directly improve their
  employability potential (EmP)
• A WBL opportunity to complete a real world
  project for the UG dissertation
• And hardly any students take it up!

10
Evaluation demographics

• 13 Staff/WMC interviews
• (across departments student services)
• 45 UW responded to a Staff e-survey
• Most respondents 4-6 yrs UW SL or PL
• 80 (35) supervised UG projects
• (between 3-15 annually)
• 270 UW responded to a Student e-survey
• Most respondents in final year 47 (126)
• 85 in full time study (226)
• 80 (214) male
• 30 (82) 21-25 further (115) 26-46 ranges

11
Staff Key Themes

• Awareness Concerns about SPHERE
• Potential benefits afforded to students through
  SPHERE e.g. employability
• Experiences of supervising a student through a
  SPHERE project
• Barriers to working (more) with SPHERE in UG
  supervision

• Knowledge Transfer Awareness
• Knowledge Transfer activities undertaken
• Issues in KT responsibilities becoming part of
  the academic role
• Training and development needs for staff related
  to Knowledge Transfer SPHERE

12
Staff Lack of awareness

• 80 (35) had not seen a SPHERE project titles
  list
• 80 were NOT aware that there was a student
  initiated SPHERE project route at all
• Actions
• Review advertising and publications strategies
  for SPHERE UG student projects
• Re-launch 2 models

13
Staff Concerns
the design and eventual nature of the research
MUST be free from external political agenda and
must permit the student and staff the academic
freedom permitted by the University. If the
external body has too much input and a
pre-determined project I do not feel it
appropriate for Independent Study, but it is
excellent for work placement or a project based
module. Subjecting self to control of the
authority. Left wing view of what academic
life should be like. May feel unable to work
with an organisation in a prescriptive
position. Also, concept of IS. Academic
atmosphere is different from world of work. Not
to be so vocationally oriented. What must be
avoided, is the assumption that a university
degree should . merely serve superficial demands
of industry.
14
Staff Barriers 1
Almost 50 of e-survey respondents referenced the
following issues Staff training and development
needs A presentation on the ethos of sphere and
a mentoring system for the first year. More
suitable topics, faster response to student
initiated ideas and more freedom for the student
to develop as researcher not just project
assistant. Strategic management and integration
of KT activity Greater awareness and
communication between all with budgets and
managerial accountability, which ever
organisation. I already try to do KT work. The
shear volume of all the work I have to do
prevents me from doing more. Selection
procedures for students for 'show casing' our
institution? Concern over relative academic
merit for KT
15
Staff Barriers - 2
Resource issues Timescales imposed and level of
governance received from the 'external' body A
reduced teaching load, particularly overburdening
in science areas with their concomitant high
contact hours. Awareness that there are very
clear systems and processes to support
supervising SPHERE projects time to give to
these. New ideas should be promulgated which
reduce administration rather than increasing it,
as has always been the case... Further funding
and further resource.
16
Student Key Themes

• Awareness of SPHERE
• Experiences of being a student supervised
  through a SPHERE project
• Barriers to working (more) with SPHERE UG
  projects
• Potential benefits ( challenges) afforded to
  students through SPHERE e.g. employability
• Training and development (support) needs for
  students related to SPHERE / Partnership working

17
Students Lack of awareness
87 (230) report never having heard of SPHERE UG
projects 89 (231) students report knowing
almost nothing about SPHERE compared with only
10 (27) students who report their awareness as
good. 91 (238) students report never having
seen a Tableslips advert or a SPHERE flyer
Actions In order to improve the marketing
impact the 10 (25) indicated how they would like
to receive adverts for similar UG
opportunities By an all-students email
85 From your Lecturers 61 From visiting
speakers in your lectures 32 Through
Tableslips in the canteen 33 At UW Careers
Fairs 21 By contacting the UW careers service
11

18
Students Benefits

• The benefits of such WBL schemes are widely
  endorsed, in particular by Students.
• 103 Students attribute the following
  characteristics to opportunities such as SPHERE
  UG projects
• Applying learning and theory in the real world
  2-way credibility
• Benefits to the IS process (support with
  focusing their topic and access to real world
  data)
• Considering career choices (mature students as
  well)
• Dealing with challenges (negotiation, planning,
  liaising, team working)
• Confidence building
• Thereby improving employability/targeting
  graduate competencies (such as planning and
  organising, communication skills and networking,
• cooperating, executing, leading and deciding).

19
SPHERE Students Feedback
Negotiation Early discussion with a member of
the west Mercia police team involved in SPHERE
would be useful (maybe by them visiting the
university). Communications Slightly better
communication between the students and the
organisation would be beneficial.  There was that
flurry of e-mails early in the month that gave us
the impression we were holding them up.  However,
it's now the other way around, with us unsure
what they are doing.  Resource support
implications I understand that our two contacts
also have a lot of work to do, and can't be
dedicated to us solely, but perhaps the creation
of a once a month catch up tele-conference? 
Everyone sits down and makes sure that everyone
knows what the others are doing, rather than
chasing each other.

20
Students Needs

• 79 would like to learn more about SPHERE in
  project seminars
• 54 would like workshops on managing
  relationships with external organisations

21
Levels of Response
Strategic Endorsement for KT activity ?
WBL Liaison and Administration support for
Partners Students (ensure QA, sustainability,
managed relationships) Staff Awareness
raising Support development
interventions Incentives recognition Student
s Awareness raising Support development
interventions