Warnings at uni

[Wearywinnie]

My son has had 2 warnings over the past two years for poor attendance at uni. He has told me that if he gets a third they will kick him out. I am furious with him although he has been working much harder. Is it possible for him to get through another year without a single absence? Is it that simple? I don't know how the system works :(

I think that's where the rest of us, who aren't Oxbridge, but fish in the same pool, IYSWIM, get frustrated.

When asked about contact hours, mentally I am answering "if this were Ox, would you be asking me that?" Two hours a week ...

Similarly, an intellectually "tough" or "harsh" course, or being challenged: students sort of know they should be doing all this, but I suspect that their NSS responses reflect that they don't really like it. However, the "I'm at Ox" overcomes other responses, unlike at places like mine, where panic & confusion cloud their rational judgement.

I'm in a post-92 now (although I was in one of the research-intensive universities previously). The students satisfaction agenda where I am now is absolutely ridiculous and totally unhelpful. There is absolutely no way to have satisfied students who learn anything because as soon a you expect them to do any work, they start whinging and complaining.

Our teaching and learning experts did a presentation for my department recently where the focus was all on the students having fun. But there was no intellectual rigour in it. One of my colleagues ended up asking them straight out at what point we're supposed to challenge them or get them to do all the absolutely necessary but not most people's idea of fun reading so that they can have a firm grasp of the main theories and debates that underpin the field. Apparently, that doesn't matter so long as they're enjoying themselves.

This is why our third year students can't string a sentence together, or understand that wikipedia, some fairly random websites and a couple of newspapers does not constitute research, or that their own assumptions and absolutely unfounded 'beliefs' (about things like 'there are too many immigrants in the country' or 'no child would read a book on an iPad') are not sufficient evidence to base an argument around. But they get very angry if they're asked to provide evidence. Apparently, it's unreasonable to challenge anyone's beliefs and there's no point having systematically gathered evidence if there's no 'belief' behind it,.

have had to wade through several dissertation proposals where, beyond the almost negligible engagement with literature and little knowledge of research design displayed, I was dismayed that the only justification for any project offered was that it was a topic they personally find interesting so they won't get bored doing the dissertation. Nothing about contributing to debates nor anything about being of value to any part of society; they only thing that could possibly matter was whether they were interested.

I despair.

The thing is, it's a combination of too many students arriving at university expecting more of what they got at school (which was to have their teachers take responsibility for them getting the marks the league tables demand), not actually having a clue why they're actually at university (beyond its just what you do after school), and us then pandering to the satisfaction agenda rather than trying to teach them anything.

I really believe that the NSS is done at entirely the wrong time and asks entirely the wrong things. Well, Ok, I believe the entire endeavour is fundamentally misguided but, if we have to have one, it should ask something meaningful at a sensible time. The students interpret satisfaction as enjoyment, rather than anything to do with quality, rigour or challenge. And we're asking them while they're still studying. It would be far more enlightening to know how happy they were with their qualification 5 years down the line when not having learned anything much is probably something that will bother them a lot more.

When I worked at research intensive universities, the staff reactions to the NSS were very different to here. No one would have said we should dumb it all down and make sure they're having fun. The fact is, learning basic statistics is not a whole lot of fun, but it is important. Reading proper academic books and papers is often hard going because you need to concentrate and think. The fact the students enjoy being shown videos doesn't mean that we should replace reading with movies and YouTube videos of cats. People would have talked about how we can manage the students' expectations better. But here we just get told to make it more fun, and to ensure that more of them get 2:1s at the same time.

Like, like, like.

Are you sure 'like' is the word you want there?

I totally agree with you on quotation. I find myself rolling my eyes as colleague tell students that they need to think about 'quotes' rather than 'quotations'. I don't care if it's pedantic; precision of language actually does matter in academic study.

"Quote" is a verb; 'quotation' is a noun.

Simple.

Google "College Misery" -- it's hilarious!

I agree with everything above by CalamitouslyWrong, except that research intensive universities are taking NSS more seriously given the changes in tuition fees and competition for students - there is pressure to make sure that students feel content and to ensure not too many get 2:2s or lower. There is very definitely dumbing down going on at universities which parents on Mumsnet perceive as the best universities outside Oxbridge.

Yes, they're taking it more seriously than they used to, but they are still mostly approaching it differently. I've only been in a post-92 for a year, and DH is at a RG university, and the contrast is startling. At DH university, they approach the NSS as an exercise in managing student expectations and communicating to them that a crap NSS rating devalues their own degree. At mine we approach it in a 'how can we make this more fun/less demanding and would a free hoodie help?'manner. DH's department scores far better than mine.

I do agree that there is ludicrous pressure to give 2:1s everywhere though. But the standards here were already quite a lot lower than they should be. The marks given are consistently 10-15 higher than they would be where I've worked before (and the marking scheme pretty much forces this). Yet, there's still pressure to inflate the grades further.

The student satisfaction numbers completely confuse me, as it never seems to say what they were satisfied or dissatisfied about! Is it that they thought something was wrong with the course or did their accommodation not include enough mood lighting? When you take the satisfaction bit out of the equation, the universities switch place in the tables. Bananas really.

Again, I could name "top" RG universities which are in the titles of many recent threads on this board where the approach is also "how can we make this less demanding and give more 2:1s/firsts". The number of firsts in my field at one particular university is going up by a few percent per year - my colleagues joke that within a short time they will be awarding 100% firsts. The marks are indeed 10+% higher than they should be. I think there will be a backreaction from employers, as they realise that a first (in this subject) from this place is not worth as much as it should be, but it will take a while.

I really want to know which one now and I know you can't tell me.

Torture!

I don't doubt any of that, actually. I'm just saying that it's a lot worse in places where the standards were lower to start with.

If they thought the SU was a bit rubbish they could rate their overall satfisfacton as low. It really tells you nothing.

And, also, that they might want to give more 2:1s and firsts, but they aren't at the 'would a hoodie help?' stage yet. This is actually the sort of thing that gets said in meetings, and the people saying it aren't joking.

Well at least nobody has tried to give one of my daughters a hoody yet.

It must be depressing if you get downgraded as a department just because the student union needs an overhaul. The more you know about this whole business, the harder it all gets to unravel.

I got a free hoody at my uni but since i'm a mature student I don't get swayed by such things

On the attendance question, it is extremely unlikely that single absences would count against you, so I would guess, OP, that your son has missed quite a bit. At my institution, an email warning is sent when a student has missed a significant number of sessions over a four week period and they are asked to see their personal tutor. If it continues it would be head of dept, and could lead to expulsion though to be honest, most students who miss so much effectively sabotage themselves by not being able to submit work that is good enough to pass, and exit on that basis before anything else happens. Also, on the 9am lecture time issue; unless I have been misled most schools start at 9am, so I can't see why this should suddenly pose a problem when the same pupils go to university.

OP, I'd talk to him about taking a year out but only if he finds something specific to do with it. Lying in bed for long periods won't help. And encourage him to see the university counsellors - they are confidential and should help.

Calamitously I'm surprised to read about your DH's institution 'communicating to them that a crap result devalues their own degree' as we've been specifically told we can't say things like that, as it is tacitly telling them to be positive regardless and that is ethically questionable.

They're pretty cunning about it, but they definitely do it. It's not ethical, but since the entire thing is beyond problematic, I'm not sure it matters.

blimey, lucky they did not take registers in my day .....

Well it cuts both ways!

If students and pushy parents are going to keep asking about contact hours then they'd better bloodywell attend!

Indeed.
There will be a case for more hours and extra sessions laid on for essay support when a 100% attendance is the norm rather than a noteworthy oddity!

Uilen,

My earlier post is in direct contrast to yours. DS is at a University which is considered (by MN and elsewhere) to be one of the best outside Oxbridge. The pace of learning and expectations are very high, much higher than in my day. DS mastered the art of doing sufficient homework to keep teachers happy at a very early stage. What on earth is he doing in the library till 1.00am - in his first year?! He claims others are working far harder in a quest to get a first and walk straight into a well paid City job including being tactical about choice of second and third year courses, and has ruled out this path.

Its not unlike the junior doctor who recently told DD that getting into medical school was only the start. That would be tough enough but she should be under no illusions. Medical school would be far tougher.

Oxbridge students may appear to work harder, but if you factor in the shorter terms I am not sure this is true. DS is certainly pleased he has the extra six weeks over an academic year to help keep the pressure down.

Over time several people have reported that some employers focus their recruitment on a small number of Universities. I certainly heard this from a relative who recruits for a major consultancy and who claims that her Exeter degree would no longer get her through a pre-sift. The Universities they considered went beyond Oxbridge, but much further.

Is this another symptom of the same phenomenon. Some Universities focussing on delivering student satisfaction, others trying to maintain quality by insisting of students do the work. The economics course DS is taking gets pretty low student satisfaction ratings, but so does the Cambridge one. Both are one which employers actively recruit from.

It is not in contrast - I didn't say that all "top" universities were dumbing down. I said above that those with relatively low NSS scores are often the ones offering challenging, high level courses. (Nor did I say anywhere that students at non-Oxbridge universities work less hard - actually in my experience a lot of Oxbridge students don't work as hard as they should do, with short terms and lots of extra-curricular activities to cram in.)

BTW as an academic I would claim that at no university in the UK (I know of) are students in my field working anywhere near the amount they were when I was an undergraduate or postgraduate (at Cambridge). While I don't generalise from my experiences to other fields, you can't accurately generalise from your DS's experiences either.

It is a factual statement that the number of firsts has considerably increased in the last twenty years. You may well believe that this is entirely caused by students working harder (a reason that is often given for the increases in GCSE and A level grades too) but as an insider who has seen the evolution in exam papers I don't believe it.

Hear hear to uilen on degree grade inflation.

I got a 3rd. As did several of my friends.
I still got an interview with Arthur Andersen a couple of years after graduating.
Fees have brought in an arms race of grade inflation.

In my subject group at Uni two people got firsts - both are now academics
About 25 got 2:1 - all of them are doing well on linked in
About 40 got 2:2 - most are still findable and thriving
A couple of us got 3rds
One guy got a pass degree

and that was when only 5% of the population went to Uni.