9.3 Findings from the review of the grey literature
9.3.4 Category 4: reports on the usage of facilities or services for students
The reports identified were on services related to student welfare or well-being. All the higher education institutions collected information on the access to learning fund, which provided financial support to students in need. However, none collected information by year or level of study but according to the criteria students must meet in order to access the fund (at the time of the review the fund mainly benefited final-year students or mature students without dependents). At the University of Bradford (2004a) the report on the ‘Disbursement of Student Support Funds’ for 2003–4 claimed that the distribution of financial assistance continued to play a major role in student retention and that many European Union and international students have financial difficulties during their studies, referring specifically to problems created by the death of a family member (needing unanticipated journeys home), the death of a sponsor or a change in political régime in their home country. The report referred to different forms of financial assistance, with an appendix indicating how much money was disbursed for each type of fund but not the year or level of study for the student it went to.
Of the provision by the institution’s student services departments (variously named), the counselling service had the most easily accessible reports in all four higher education institutions as they were on the universities’ web sites. All the reports indicated that first-year undergraduate students used the service most, then second-year students, then final-year students and counselling services were least used by postgraduate students. There was, however, no further breakdown of information by year of study. It was not possible, for example, to identify which presenting issues were most common for first-year students. At the University of Bradford (2005a) the report provided statistical information on users and presenting issues but did break down this information by year of study. The appendix of the University of Leeds (2005b) Counselling Service Report gave statistics showing users by year (1–6), so that first-year undergraduates could be identified but not first-year postgraduate (i.e., some undergraduate courses might be longer than three years). The statistics gave users by issue raised and faculty but not against these variables by year of study. Sheffield Hallam University, Student Services Centre (2005a) report provided presenting issues (most commonly anxiety, depression, relationships and academic issues) and comments on concerns, such as the degree of social dependence of 18–19 year olds on their parents. Although this issue was most likely to relate to first-year undergraduates, there was no explicit information about year of study, although there was very full statistical information against other variables (clients by gender, ethnicity, mode of referral, number of sessions).
This tendency not to focus on first-year students was reflected in other reports of student provision. The accommodation offices at York St John collected
information about why students left university accommodation, for example, but not by year or level of study.
The University of Bradford’s (2004b) nursery annual reportdid not include information about student parents using the nursery but rather about activities with the children. Other recent annual reports for its disability service (University of Bradford Disability Service, 2005) and its division of sport and exercise
(2005c) did not provide information about students by year. The university had information on its training for student representatives and group workshops for student representatives, which included information about the number of first- year students participating, but it was not available in report form. The University of Leeds (2005c) Skills Centre Report had an appendix giving statistical
information about usage but it was not by year.
At Sheffield Hallam, student services professionals (counselling, educational guidance, careers, and disability support) enter information about clients into a database that links, via the student ID, into the student information system and therefore to biographical data. The database has fields for the appointments held, presenting issue and notes on the discussions. Although, therefore, data
currently exists that would allow for reporting by year of study, it is not presented in that way. Usage of the database is increasing and each year its ‘interrogation’ becomes more sophisticated, so in future there may be reporting by year of study. The Learner Development Annual Report 2004–5 (Sheffield Hallam University, Student Services Centre 2005b) indicated numbers of students using drop-in study support, by campus, gender, fee status, ethnicity, socio- economic groups, age, presenting issue, number of visits, school, mode of attendance but not year of study. Its review of workshops indicated which ones were for first-year students and gave student feedback on those sessions. The International Student Support Annual Report 2003–4 (Sheffield Hallam University, Student Services Centre 2005c) reported on first-year students in relation to pre-arrival guidance and the orientation programme. However, reports on individual consultations did not indicate year of study, although they did refer to biographical data and presenting issues. The same applied to the Education Guidance, Annual Report 2003–4 (Sheffield Hallam University, Student
Services Centre, undated), which usefully gave patterns of usage, indicating the months when most students sought support. Some of these services could provide a considerable amount of information about the first-year experience, for example, in 2003–4 there were 5987 initial enquiries to the educational guidance team.
In 2005, a new survey (also known as the ‘student web CT survey’) was conducted at York St John about Student Services, recently re-formed and co-located in one building as a one-stop-shop, on the Sheffield Hallam model. As well as using an online questionnaire, Student Union officers interviewed a sample of students, and there were a small number of focus groups. The report was for the Student Services Committee (with recommendations at college level), which reports to Academic Board. The questionnaire asked for year of study, so that responses by first years can be identified, and the questions asked for views on the Student Guide and on Student Services provision.
An exception to the lack of reporting by year of study occurs when a service is directed at first-year students. Sheffield Hallam has a volunteer mentoring scheme where second- and third-year students over the age of 23 mentor first- year mature students. The scheme aims to provide an opportunity for new mature students to discuss experiences, build self-confidence, be directed to services, improve their awareness of university facilities and processes and to ‘belong’. The evaluation report for 2004–5 gave the number of first-year mature students participating as mentees by gender (more women), age (more in the 31–40 range), ethnicity (mostly white), discipline area (most in health and social care), gender preference for the mentoring partner (most no preference), number of
meetings (most up to four times). It also included student statements about what participants found most and least positive about the scheme and about the impact of the scheme on their adjustment to university.