Towards a Conceptual Model of Retention and Success in Distance Education:

1. Towards a Conceptual Model of Retention and Success in Distance Education: • The Case of the University of South Africa Presented at the NADEOSA Annual Conference Unisa, 17-18 August, 2009 Prof George Subotzky, ED: Information & Strategic Analysis Dr Paul Prinsloo, Education Consultant, DCLD University of South Africa

2. Overview • Brief background and context (GS) • Towards a (unique?) Conceptual Model for Distance Education Retention and Success • Overview of literature review (PP) • Key constructs (PP) • Outline of model and underlying propositions (GS) • Exposure at/to two international conferences (GS) • Critical engagement

3. Background • Retention and Success a major focus of concern in HE system and, in particular, at Unisa • Strong external imperative to improve retention and success rates from government outcomes-based funding framework • Focal area in all key institutional policy and planning documents • 2015 Strategic Plan • Recent Institutional Operational Plan Reviews • Recent QA Audit Reports: 3 cohort case studies conducted

4. The UNISA Throughput Forum • Co-ordinated and integrated effort to improve retention and success • Approach adopted: to achieve the comprehensive understanding of all factors shaping retention and success through modeling initiative • Purpose of modeling initiative: to provide a systematic, evidence-based, contextually-relevant foundation to inform and guide initiatives to improve retention and success • This work undertaken by modeling Task Team

5. 2-fold Framework for Enhancing Retention & Success • Comprehensive modelling initiative • Literature review (conducted by Dr Paul Prinsloo) • Drawing from this, the conceptual/hypothetical modelling of the positive and risk factors shaping the student experience, retention & success in the ODL context of Unisa (Modelling Task Team) • Together, the literature review and conceptual model released as a Strategic Discussion Forum discussion document during April for comprehensive engagement & feedback and then to STLSC & Senate • Regarding the model, determining what variables are knowable, measurable, (is/may be) available and actionable • Utilising model to shape student tracking system, to gather relevant and available quantitative and comprehensive complementary qualitative data (myUnisa) • Statistical and analytic modelling to determine factors shaping success and to predict and address risk and readjusting the model as necessary

6. A 2-fold framework for enhancing throughput & success • Transforming institutional identity, attributes & practices • Utilising consolidated findings (as actionable intelligence) to inform and guide existing and new Learner Support Framework and initiatives and academic practices and operational improvements in order to improve success, throughput and the student experience; • Monitoring and evaluatingthese initiatives over time as part of continuous reflection and improvement and ongoing QA

7. MANAGEMENT OF STUDENT EXPERIENCE, RETENTION, SUCCESS & GRADUATENESS Shaped by modeling process Conceptual Modeling M & E Learner Support Interventions and other academic & administrative changes Identifying what is relevant, measurable, available & actionable Tracking System (In-depth qualitative & quantitative information) Statistical & Analytic Modelling producing Actionable Intelligence

8. SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as uncertain) • Social structure, macro & meso shifts: globalisation, political economy, policy; National/local culture & climate • Personal /biographical micro shifts TRANSFORMED STUDENT IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES: • STUDENT • IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES: • Situated agent: SES, demographics • Capital: cultural, intellectual, emotional, attitudinal • Habitus: perceptions, dispositions, discourse, expectations • Domains: • Intra-personal • Inter-personal • Modalities: • Attribution • Locus of control • Self-efficacy • Processes: • Informed responsibility & ‘choice’ • Ontological/epistemological dev. • Managing risks/opportunities/ uncertainty: Integration, adaptation, socialisation & negotiation FIT FIT FIT FIT FIT FIT • THE STUDENT WALK: • Multiple, mutually constitutive interactions between student, institution & networks • Managing complexity/ uncertainty/ unpredictability/risks/opportunities • Institutional requirements known & mastered by student • Student known by institution through tracking, profiling & prediction Retention/Progression/Positive experience Success Choice, Admission Learning activities Course success Gradua-tion Employ-ment/ citizenship FIT FIT FIT FIT FIT FIT TRANSFORMED INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES: • INSTITUTIONAL • IDENTITY & ATTRIBUTES: • Situated organisation: history, location, strategic identity, culture, demographics • Capital: cultural, intellectual, attitudinal • Habitus: perceptions, dispositions, discourse, expectations • Domains: • Academic • Operational • Social • Processes: • Informed responsibility & choice • Managing risks/opportunities: • Transformation, change management, org. learning, integration & adaptation • Modalities: • Attribution • Locus of control • Self-efficacy • SHAPING CONDITIONS: (predictable as well as he uncertain) • Social structure, macro & meso shifts: globalisation, internationalisation, political economy, technology, social demand • HE/ODL trends, policy • Institutional biography & shifts; Strategy, business model & architecture, culture & climate, politics & power relations

9. Proposition 1 Student success is broadly interpreted and indicated by retention, progression through the main phases of the student walk, and ultimately successful graduation and effective entry into the labour market and/or citizenship. Success also incorporates a positive student experience as a result of student-centred service excellence and efficient operations provided by the institution.

10. Proposition 2 Student success and positive experience is the outcome of sufficient fit between the identity and attributes of the student and the institution through all phases of student walk.

11. Proposition 3 Fit arises when elements of the student and institutional identity and attributes (capital and habitus) are optimally aligned at each successive stage of the student walk. Fit at these various points is the outcome of the specific individual student and institutional preconditions.

12. Proposition 4 In order for fit to arise at each successive stage of the student walk, relevant transformative changes in the identity and attributes of the student and the institution are required.

13. Student & Institutional Transformation • Processes • Crucially dependent on relevant mutual actionable knowledge • This is an essential precondition in the management of risks, uncertainties and opportunities • Student: understanding institutional expectation & requirements & executing these • Institution: tracking, profiling, predicting relevant activities, risks & opportunities and adapting practices accordingly

14. Institutional Transformation • The institution’s obligation is to continually reflect on its assumptions and practices not only in order to improve delivery but to eradicate hidden socio-economic and cultural barriers to equitable student access & success and thus to achieve the QA criterion of fitness to purpose • This captures the transformative approach, failing which the institution perpetuates the social reproduction of elites

15. Proposition 5 The student walk comprises a series of multiple, mutually constitutive interactions between the situated student and the situated institution and between the student and his/her various networks through all points of the walk (Articulation with ODL model)

16. Proposition 6 The formation and transformation of student and institutional identity and attributes is continuously shaped by overarching conditions at the macro, meso and micro levels

17. International conferences • Retention 2009, New Orleans: Educational Policy Institute • Pre-conference workshops: • General conceptual issues • Developing an institutional retention strategy • Annual forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Atlanta • Pre-conference workshops: • Statistical modelling • Data mining • Balanced scorecard in HE

18. International conferences • Strong corroboration of key elements of model: • Focus on students, institution and interaction • Focus on intensive engagement with a view to mutual knowledge • Strong interest in: • Quantitative & qualitative mechanisms for in-depth engagement, prediction & proactive interventions • Constructs • Key lessons: • Need for institutional strategy • Need for mixed quantitative methods: statistical modelling & data mining

19. Conclusion Unisa: Integrated, comprehensive approach to addressing the imperative of improving success, throughput & student experience – modelling approach Literature Review: Rich field of enquiry, with interesting array of theoretical perspectives International models not appropriate to developing country ODL context and do not recognise imperative for institutional transformation International conference exposureprovided strong corroboration Unique features of Unisa Model: Key constructs and propositions, especially the central component of the need for student and institutional transformation on the basis of relevant, mutual knowledge & engagement Evidence suggests that non-cognitive and institutional variables impact equally (if not more) on student retention and success 5. The initial indications from the literature and the conceptual model, as well as the envisiged qualitative and quantitative actionable intelligence should provide the basis of a much more comprehensive understanding of the student experience, retention & success at Unisa. 6. In turn, this should provide an important basis for fulfilling the objectives of the ODL model by helping to bridge the various distances between the student and retention and success, as well as a positive student experience.

20. Thank you!