The experience of commuting and living at home: how does it affect the engagement of BME students with the university and their learning

The reasons for the black and minority ethnic (BME) student degree attainment gap are complex and multifactorial. However, it appears that increasing numbers of all students are commuting to campus from the parental and family home and this is now disproportionately represented by BME students at one large post-92 university. This paper outlines findings from a small, qualitative, local study of commuting BME undergraduates and explores how their issues and needs have been addressed through a range of cultural, infrastructural and curricular interventions. The main issue of concern which supports the recent report (Thomas and Jones, 2017) is that many commuting BME students will prioritise academic engagement but are unaware of the wider social and cultural capital that can be gained from participating in extracurricular activities. It is clear that some issues faced by BME commuting students are identical to those faced by all commuting students (stress, impractical timetabling and assessment deadlines, “invisibility”).The fundamental issue is that BME students (commuting and non-commuting) are already often coping with a less-adequate student learning experience, poorer degree attainment (Richardson, 2008a & b, Newbold et al, 2011) and reduced employability (Guardian, 2016) and this may be compounded for those disproportionately high numbers of BME students who also commute. University action must be situated within a broader framework of inclusive academic practice, drawing on a “holistic engagement vision” (Pickford, 2016, p.31) of infrastructural support and partnership working between students and staff

Exploring Leeds Beckett University BME students’ experiences of “living at home”: sharing practice for curricular change and institutional actions

This workshop will explore research undertaken at Leeds Beckett University exploring the learning experience of BME students on five courses which have the largest BME student numbers. This project was catalysed by the need to address the national student attainment gap where BME students are consistently getting fewer good degrees than non BME students. The reasons for this are complex and multifactorial. More and more of all our University students are living at home rather than in halls or private rented accommodation. This may be one of the contributing factors influencing student learning experiences. Research has shown that much more must be done “to deepen commuter students’ involvement in learning (Jacoby, 2000). The rate of living in the parental home is even greater for BME students -55% of our female BME students live at home compared to 19% of female non BME students and 42% of the male BME students live at home compared to 17% of male non BME students. This workshop focusses on the BME students, exploring the findings of staff and student focus groups and how living at home impacted on their learning in a range of ways. We will outline some of the underpinning literature which informed our institutional action planning and explore ways we are jointly addressing the findings with students through inclusive curricular design. This workshop will encourage participants to share their own practice focussed on induction, retention and independent and collaborative learning and enhancing all students’ sense of belonging. It will end with a postcard activity where participants (be they students and staff) commit to “change one thing” in their own workplace to address the challenge of students living at home engaging beyond the classroom

Exploring BME commuting students’ experiences: sharing practice for inclusive curricular change and institutional action

This workshop explores the learning experience of commuting BME students and how participants can change practice, even in a small way, in their own universities. The research underpinning this workshop focussed on the commuting BME students and extended the scope of earlier research which explored wider issues relating to the BME student attainment gap where BME students consistently get fewer good degrees than non BME students. (Smith, 2017). More and more of all our University students are living in the parental or family home rather than in halls or private rented accommodation. This may be one of the contributing factors influencing student learning experiences. Research has shown that much more must be done “to deepen commuter students’ involvement in learning (Jacoby, 2000 & 2004). Indeed, a recent report (Thomas & Jones, 2017) calls for a deeper understanding of the barriers to engagement faced by all commuting students. Interestingly the rate of living in the parental home is even greater for BME students -55% of our female BME students live at home compared to 19% of female, non BME students and 42% of the male BME students live at home compared to 17% of male non BME students. At Leeds Beckett we are above the national average for this. This workshop focusses on the BME student experience, exploring the findings of staff and student focus groups and how living at home impacted on the students’ engagement with learning in a range of ways. The ways students, staff and the University are jointly working in partnership to address the emergent findings through improving inclusive curricular design and wider infrastructural and cultural change will be described and then used as trigger questions for small group discussion. This will encourage participants to discuss their own university’s practice and how they engage students in the academic and cultural capital that being “on campus” can provide. It will explore how greater engagement might enhance all students’ sense of belonging. The workshop ends with a postcard activity where participants (be they students and staff) commit to “change one thing” in their own workplace to address the challenge of students living at home engaging beyond the classroom. References: Jacoby, B (2000). Why involve commuter students in learning? In M. Kramer (Series Ed.), & B. Jacoby (Vol. Ed.), New Directions for Higher Education, 109. Involving commuter students in learning (pp. 3-13). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Jacoby, B., & Garland, J. (2004). Strategies for enhancing commuter student success. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 61–79. Smith, S. (2017) Exploring the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Student Attainment Gap: What Did It Tell Us? Actions to Address Home BME Undergraduate Students’ Degree Attainment. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice. 5, 1 Thomas, L and Jones, R. (2017) Student engagement in the context of commuter students. Summary Report. TSEP. Londo

Stories from black minority ethnic students : how can we enhance their University experience to improve their degree attainment?

This poster focusses on the process, initial findings and actions from Leeds Beckett University’s Deep Dive project (completed in July 2016) and explored BME (Black Minority Ethnic) students’ stories of their learning experience at the University and how this is impacting on their learning, degree attainment and achievement level. The poster outlines elements of the BME undergraduate students’ experience narrated in focus groups. It specifically highlights six interventions the University is making to support BME students more effectively to achieve more 2:1 and 1st class good degrees. Changes in progression and achievement rate will be monitored longitudinally over the next 3 years. The interventions are wide-ranging and focus on i) the development of inclusive assessment guidance, ii) an exploration of “white curricula”, iii) enhancing the student voice, iv) staff development about unconscious bias and v) more joined-up, strategic initiatives and collaborative curricular projects in the Faculties

The role of nuclear sensors and positrons for engineering nano and microtechnologies.

A sustainable nano-manufacturing future relies on optimisation of the design and synthetic approach, detailed understanding of structure/properties relationships and the ability to measure a products impact in the environment. This article outlines how bench-top PALS and nuclear techniques can be used in the routine analysis of a wide range of nanomaterials. Traditionally used in the semiconductor industry, PALS has proven to be useful not only in measuring porosity in polymeric materials but also in the monitoring of milling processes used to produce natural fibre powders. Nuclear sensors (radiotracers), designed to probe charge, size and hydrophilicity of nanomaterials, are used to evaluate the connectivity (availability) of these pores for interaction with media. Together they provide valuable information on structure/properties relationship of nanomaterials and insight into how the design of a material can be optimised. Furthermore, the highly sensitive nuclear sensors can be adapted for monitoring the impact of nanomaterials in vivo and the environment.ARC Centre for Antimatter-Matter Studies; Australian National University (ANU); Flinders University; James Cook University (JCU); The Institute of Physics; Australian Government Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Researc

The challenge of supervising students who are doing a Phd by Published Work

I have observed that while many colleagues who are supervisors are clear about the requirements and the role for supervising a student via a traditional PhD route, they admit they are working in the dark with their students on the PW route and have a poor understanding of the process and the different supervisory skills required. Contributing to this confusion is the lack of consistent training available in universities to support building the skills and knowledge for the supervisors of this PW route. As a result, potential candidates are put off, existing candidates are confused and procedural muddle occurs. In fact, I argue that ‘supervising’ is the wrong word (maybe ‘facilitator’ or ‘mentor’ or even ‘PhD life/ research coach’ would work better!). After all, unlike the traditional, typical PhD supervisor the PW supervisor is not ‘keeping an eye on’ their students to check they are safe and competent researchers before they are let loose on the wider community – many PW students are already established, well published researchers in their own right and have all been safely ‘on the loose’ for years. PhD by PW supervisors do not, unlike the traditional PhD route supervisor, need to ensure their students are producing quality research or ensure their methodology is sound – this has already been done and dusted by the peer reviewers for the journals where the work is submitted. It should also be ironed out early at the Confirmation of Registration stage (and very often this is not the case). From my experience, the supervisory skills required by someone who has a PW candidate should focus on something slightly different

Embedding Graduate Attributes into the Undergraduate Curriculum: Reflection and Actions

Gibbs’ (1988) reflective cycle is used as a framework to explore the institutional experience of embedding new graduate attributes (GAs) as part of a major refocus of all the undergraduate courses at Leeds Beckett University. One of the key components of this curricular refocus was the initial conceptualisation and embedding of three new Graduate Attributes (GAs). The University’s three GAs are (i) having a global outlook (ii) being enterprising and (iii) being digitally literate and this paper focuses on the seven main interventions which were used to embed and foster their delivery in the refocused curriculum. The GAs run through each level of every UG course and prepare students for work and life through a variety of embedded intra-curricular module based, credit bearing activities. This reflective paper concentrates on the intra-module core curricular activity manifested by the GAs embedded in course and module learning outcomes and not students’ extracurricular activity even though this can be regarded as strengthening skills for life and the workplace (Bowden et al, 2000). A combination of personal and colleagues’ reflections, evidence from surveys and analysis of actions are highlighted using Gibbs’ (1988) cycle as a framework to explore the process in a systematic way and assist in the illustration and analysis of some of our key interventions. This reflective account considers our successes (resources and building the digital literacy GA) and some of the surprising benefits (communities of practice) of this initiative. The paper also uses Hounsell’s (2011) and Barrie’s (2006) frameworks to deconstruct the curriculum change experience and offers structured reflection on some of the lessons learnt from the challenges, e.g. tight time scales, staff ownership, and constructive alignment (Biggs, 1996). Key future actions are noted; specifically the engagement of staff and students to address application/tailoring to disciplines and their specific course design issues

Developing critical reflection within an interprofessional learning programme

Reflective practice is accepted as being a key component of professional education and practice in health and social care. However an emphasis on self reflection frequently fails to broaden the lens to take into account wider issues of power and inequality, to move beyond technical rationalism and remains at the individual level rather than being embedded within relational notions of dialogue both within teams and across professions. This paper will challenge traditional uniprofessional models of reflection through the development of an approach to interprofessional learning informed by models of critical practice that seek to critique and transcend traditional professional boundaries. Attention will also be paid to the central importance of service users as the essential focus of collaborative team working. The implications of embedding critical reflection as a key component of an integrated strategy for interprofessional learning will be discussed with reference to the development of a new interprofessional learning strategy for pre registration students within which reflective practice is introduced as both a discrete unit and a continuing theme throughout the curriculum. The paper will conclude that a model of critical and reflective practice will enable future practitioners to respond to the transformation of previously compartmentalised ways of thinking and working and the challenge of new ways of working