39
Informa Purpose Built Student Accommodation Summit Eects of Student Accommodation on Performance and Retention Presenter: GeoHanmer Managing Director ARINA 29 November 2016

Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

InformaPurpose Built Student Accommodation Summit

Effects of Student Accommodationon Performance and RetentionPresenter: Geoff HanmerManaging Director ARINA29 November 2016

Page 2: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

New College, Oxford from 1389 (well, new-ish compared to Oriel).

Page 3: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Great Court, Trinity College, Cambridge, from 1546.

Page 4: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

St Paul’s, the University of Sydney, from 1855.

Page 5: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Trinity College, Melbourne, from 1872.

Page 6: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Holder Hall, Princeton, 1910.

Page 7: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation ForumEuropahaus 1, Heidelberg 1991.

Page 8: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Until WWII, a university was indissolubly

associated with its residential accommodation. Residential colleges

were the university.

Why would this be so?

(Most teaching occurred in colleges and the university only provided a minimum of central facilities. Students were required to belong to a college and still are at many universities.)

Page 9: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Australian Higher Education Student Numbers: 1949 - 2015

0

300,000

600,000

900,000

1,200,000

1,500,000

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Student Numbers (March) i Student Numbers (End of Year) ii

Menzies 145,000

Whitlam 110,000

Dawkins 250,000

Sources: i) “Higher Education Students time Series Tables: Selected Higher Education Statistics 2000,” Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, 2001. ii) “uCube: Higher Education Data Cube,” Department of Education and Training, 2015.

Prepared by ARINA Hayball 24 November 2016

Page 10: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

UNSW Mall ‘O’ Week

Page 11: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

% Growth Rate Comparison - 5 Year Increments - Since 1950

% G

row

th S

ince

195

0

0%

1,250%

2,500%

3,750%

5,000%

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Student Headcount - % Growth RateUniversity of Sydney - No. of Beds - % Growth RateUniversity of Melbourne - No. of Beds - % Growth RateNo. of Beds - % Growth Rate Since 1950

HE Student in Australia370,016

+1,108% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Sydney

1,395 +226% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Melbourne

1,651 +156% since 1950

HE Student in Australia695,485

+2,171% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Sydney

1,555 +263% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Melbourne

1,890 +193% since 1950

HE Student in Australia1,410,133 +4,504% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Sydney3,065 +616% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Melbourne3,179 +393% since 1950

Higher Education Student Numbers

- All A

ustralian Universities

Student Bed Supply University of Sydney, University of Melbourne, and University of Adelaide

Student Beds in University of Adelaide1,322 +455% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Adelaide

942 +296% since 1950

Student Beds in University of Adelaide

545 +129% since 1950

Prepared by ARINA Hayball Monday, 28 November 2016

2

Page 12: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Student Accommodation

UNSW Student Accommodation, 2016

Page 13: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

University of New South Wales - % Growth Rate Comparison - Yearly Increments - Since 2005

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20150%

23% 23% 23%

44%

113% 113% 115%

145%

178% 178%

0% 1%12%

20% 25%36% 38% 38%

44% 47% 48%

Student Beds4,103 +178% since 2005

EFTSL40,118 +48% since 2005

Student Beds3,144 +113% since 2005

EFTSL27,018 +0% since 2005

Student Beds1,475 +0% since 2005

EFTSL36,637 +36% since 2005

Prepared by ARINA Hayball Monday, 28 November 2016 2Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Page 14: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

University of New South Wales - % Beds / EFTSL - Since 2005

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

5%

7%6% 6%

6%

9% 8% 9%9%

10% 10%

Prepared by ARINA Hayball Monday, 28 November 2016 3

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Page 15: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

UNSW has doubled the number of beds

on or near their relatively small campus. (35.7 Ha)

Have they been right to do so?

(Let’s start with the AUSSE Research Briefing Volume 4 June 2009)

Page 16: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

RESEARCH BR I EF INGAustralasian Survey of Student Engagement Volume 4 June 2009

AUSSE

Engaging College Communities: The impact of residential colleges in Australian higher education

Living communities

This briefing affirms that residential colleges make a significant contribution to higher education in Australia. Colleges have been part of university life in this country for over 150 years, with the first college being founded in 1856, just six years after the foundation of University of Sydney. Collegiate education is growing today. Colleges are strengthening their links with academic and professional communities. The Association of Heads of Australian University Colleges and Halls Inc (AHAUCHI) provides national leadership. Markwell (2007) has explored the contributions made by colleges to excellence and equity in Australian higher education. Recent educational redesigns hint that the renaissance of residential life underway in the USA and UK is taking shape in Australia.

While relatively quiet achievers, residential colleges form part of a vibrant, diverse and growing community. Today many tens of thousands of students live in residence, and there are around 100 colleges or halls of residence at Australia’s public universities. Colleges vary from those that offer a full suite of academic and enriching experiences, to those which focus on providing accommodation. For students, residential life is often seen as a formative part of the overall university experience.

Highlights Students living in residential colleges are more likely than those in the general population to be younger, in their first year of study, from a provincial area, studying full time or an international student.

Students living in residence are equally, and in many instances, more engaged than others, particularly in terms of participation in active learning and enriching experiences, their interactions with staff, and their perceptions of support.

Differences between residential and non-residential students’ engagement grew between first- and later-year cohorts, suggesting that the effects of college accumulate over time.

Residential students report greater levels of individually focused support – the kind that retains students in university study.

Residential students’ learning, development and satisfaction is greater than for those who lived off campus.

The AUSSE Research Briefings are produced by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER), drawing on data from the Australasian Survey of Student Engagement (AUSSE). The aims of the series are to bring summaries of findings from AUSSE research to a wider audience and to examine particular topics in brief. Related resources are listed at the end of the paper. Support for this briefing was provided by AHAUCHI.

Page 17: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

1. “In comparison with students living off campus, those who live in residential halls and colleges at university are more likely to be: younger, studying full-time, in their first year, and come from overseas or a non-metropolitan area of Australia;

2. On measures of student outcomes, those living on campus record more positive scores than those living elsewhere, with the most substantial difference in terms of students’ general development;

3. Residential students score higher than those living off campus in five out of the six areas of engagement measured in the AUSSE. The largest positive difference is in relation to perceptions of support; and

4. when other variables are controlled for, the relative impact of living on campus is positive in all six areas of engagement.”

From the AUSSE Research Briefing Volume 4 June 2009

“Residential students’ learning, development and satisfaction is greater than for those who lived off campus.”

Page 18: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Blimling, G. (1989). A meta-analysis of the influence of college residence halls on academic performance. Journal of College Student Development 30(4): 298- 308.

Blimling, G. (1993). The influence of college residence halls on students. Pages 248-307 in: Smart, J. (Ed.) Higher Education: Handbook of theory and research 9. New York: Agathon Press.

Coates, H. (2008). 2007 Australasian Student Engagement Report. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Coates, H. (2009). 2008 Australasian Student Engagement Report. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Daniel, C. (2008). The Educational Attributes of Some of the World’s ‘Top 50’ Universities - A discussion paper. Perth: The University of Western Australia.

Griffin, P., Coates, H., McInnis, C. & James, R. (2003). The development of an extended Course Experience Questionnaire. Quality in Higher Education, 9(3), 259-266.

LaNasa, S.M., Olson, E. & Alleman, N. (2007). The Impact of on-campus student growth on first-year student engagement and success. Research in Higher Education, 48(8), 941-66.

Markwell, D. (2007). A Large and Liberal Education: Higher education for the 21st century. Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing & Trinity College, University of Melbourne.

References: AUSSE Research Briefing Volume 4 June 2009

Page 19: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

OK. So students living on

campus feel better about their experience, is there an impact

on attrition?(In the US, the inverse of this,

‘persistence’ is most often measured.)

Page 20: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

[in the US] Students who live on or near campus during their first year are more likely to persist … (Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991). Even when researchers control for prior academic achievement, gender, race, and socioeconomic status, first-year residence exerts a unique, positive effect on persistence to [the award of a] degree.

Commuter And Resident Students: Attitudes, Expectations, And Their Influences On Integration And PersistenceB. Lauren Young Research AnalystOffice of Institutional AnalysisUniversity at Buffalo

Page 21: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Right. So students living on

campus are less likely to drop out. Is there an impact on

performance?(In the US, the GPA is most often measured to rate performance.)

Page 22: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

[in the US]… we find that living on campus does cause an increase in student performance. We find evidence for an instantaneous effect. Living on campus during the semester before the survey was administered caused an average increase in semester GPA of nearly one full letter grade during that same time. There is also evidence that living on campus has long-term benefits, even after students subsequently move off campus. Estimation results indicate having lived on campus during any time in the past caused an increase in semester GPA and cumulative GPA of almost half a letter grade. Estimating the Effects of Dormitory Living on Student Performance CAEPR Working Paper #002-2010 Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana. Pedro de Araujo, Colorado College James Murray, University of Wisconsin - La Crosse February 9, 2010

Page 23: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Why does on campus living have a positive

effect on performance?(Should we be spending more money

opening the on-campus library for longer, for instance. Is near campus

living as effective?)

Page 24: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Surprisingly, students that live on campus are not more likely to take advantage or tutors, use campus resources outside their residence, or use on-campus fitness resources. Students that live on campus spend more time than others studying in their residence, whose environment is designed to be conducive for studying and learning. Secondly, students that live on campus are more likely to engage in extra-curricular activities and are more likely to stay engaged in extra-curricular activities in subsequent semesters.

Channels For Improved Performance From Living On CampusAmerican Journal of Business Education: December 2010 Pedro de Araujo, Colorado College James Murray, University of Wisconsin - La Crosse

Page 25: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Monash on Campus HousingRMA and Hayball

Page 26: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Monash on Campus HousingRMA and Hayball

Page 27: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

Monash on Campus HousingRMA and Hayball

Page 28: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA
Page 29: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Australia has developed a commuter university system, unlike most other university systems in the world.

Is it good for students?

Page 30: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Australia has developed a commuter university system, unlike most other university systems in the world.

Is it good for students?

In 2014, across Australia, no more than 5 percent of students lived in on-campus accommodation. (National Census of Uni Student Accommodation Providers 2014) In the UK, more than 70 percent of first year students live

on campus (Guardian and NUS 2009-2014).

Page 31: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Australia has developed a commuter university system, unlike most other university systems in the world.

Is it good for students?

In 2014, across Australia, no more than 5 percent of students lived in on-campus accommodation. (National Census of Uni Student Accommodation Providers 2014) In the UK, more than 70 percent of first year students live

on campus (Guardian and NUS 2009-2014).

Page 32: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Australia has developed a commuter university system, unlike most other university systems in the world.

Is it good for students?

In 2014, across Australia, no more than 5 percent of students lived in on-campus accommodation. (National Census of Uni Student Accommodation Providers 2014) In the UK, more than 70 percent of first year students live

on campus (Guardian and NUS 2009-2014).

Attrition Rate, First to Second YearAustralia: 14.8 percent (DoE 2014)

UK: 6.0 percent (HESA 2014)

Page 33: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Australia has developed a commuter university system, unlike most other university systems in the world.

Is it good for students?

In 2014, across Australia, no more than 5 percent of students lived in on-campus accommodation. (National Census of Uni Student Accommodation Providers 2014) In the UK, more than 70 percent of first year students live

on campus (Guardian and NUS 2009-2014).

Attrition Rate, First to Second YearAustralia: 14.8 percent (DoE 2014)

UK: 6.0 percent (HESA 2014)

(The UK government looks at the Australian system with envy because it is cheaper, not because it is better for students.)

Page 34: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

UNSW bus queue, Belmore Park, near Central Station.

Page 35: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

The difference between 14.8 and 6.0 percent is 8.2 percent.

8.2 percent of Australian first year HE

students represents approximately 30,000 EFTSL; worth about $500M PA in income to

the HE sector.

(using ABS and DoE figures on income to the HE sector.)

Page 36: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

RMIT on Campus HousingRMA

Page 37: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Purpose Built Student Accommodation Forum

RMIT on Campus HousingRMA

Page 38: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

Conclusion:

The university has the land, so the university should take the

lead.

(The risk associated with providing student housing is low, and most projects will be self-financing. Universities can choose to manage their

risk by encouraging first and second years to live on campus, in accommodation provided by the university. Delivery methods can vary,

but since risk is low, borrowing is certainly not out of the question.)

Page 39: Geoff Hanmer - ARINA

InformaPurpose Built Accommodation Summit

Thank You. Presenter: Geoff HanmerManaging Director ARINA29 November 2016