ZoekresultatenZoekresultaten
Volg ons op
Volg ons op
Types
0Instelling
26Bestandstype
9Taal
5Publicatiejaar
12Thema's
14Producttype
14Publicaties met bestand / URL
2Projectstatus
3The changes that have taken place in higher education in the last decade, such as output-based funding, global competition, and the marketization of higher education, call for a re-focus on the establishment of bonds between students and their educational institution. Previous studies have emphasized that teacher–student relationships should be a focal point in the educational process (e.g., Wubbels & Brekelmans, 2005). Still, research in educational psychology is mostly limited to student–teacher relationships. Students have multiple and ongoing interactions with many different people from their university, contributing to their educational experience. Besides their teachers, students also have contact with other faculty or staff working at their university, of instance, the study counselors or advisors for their program of study, student psychologists, members of an exam board, janitors, librarians, and receptionists.Furthermore, educational researchers investigating student relationships have mainly focused on primary or secondary education (e.g., Roorda et al., 2011, 2017). Although their research findings are important for gaining insight into educational processes, the instruments used in these studies are not always applicable in all educational settings. More specifically, higher education differs from other educational contexts regarding students’ involvement and participation (Leenknecht et al., 2020). In primary and secondary education, the student–teacher relationship exists between a child and an adult; in higher education, the relationships are formed between adults (Hagenauer & Volet, 2014) The attention paid to student–faculty relationships in primary and secondary education (e.g., Roorda et al., 2011, 2017) did not answer the question of how to establish and maintain positive relationships between students and their educational faculty/staff in higher education. Building and maintaining (long-lasting) relationships with stakeholders are the cornerstones of relationship management. Underlining previous research on the use of relationship and services management in higher education (Ng & Forbes, 2009), these ideas are now more often applied in the higher education context (e.g., T. Gibbs & Kharouf, 2020; Yousaf et al., 2020). In these studies, education is treated as a service. Drawing from social exchange theory (e.g., Homans, 1961), educational service in higher education is based on the exchange between students and their educational institution. When a service consists of high-involvement interactions (Bloemer & De Ruyter, 1999) as educational service in higher education does, it is important to focus on how higher education students, as the primary stakeholders (Bunce et al., 2017), perceive the educational service. The outcomes of the educational learning process depend on how students perceive the educational exchange. The gap model by Parasuraman et al. (1991) is often used to investigate possible quality gaps between stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions, and the gap with organizations in services research (Zeithaml et al., 2009). The first steps in the “gap analysis” is to ask the main stakeholders for their quality expectations and perceptions. Therefore, the customers/recipients of the service, in this case, students, play a central role. These ideas formed the starting point for our research. In this thesis, we examined how students perceive the quality of their relationships with their educational faculty/staff, that is, relationship quality. As indicated by Osobajo and Moore (2017), definitions of relationship quality vary, which is mainly caused by the specific context under study. Osobajo and Moore provided a general description of relationship quality: “how healthy a relationship is based on the evaluation or assessment of the parties within that relationship” (Osobajo & Moore, 2017, p. 4). The relationship quality instrument used in this thesis was a new approach in the educational literature measuring the quality of relationships between students and their educational faculty and staff. The construct was taken to consist of five relationship quality dimensions based on relationship management research (Roberts et al., 2003). We adapted the instrument to fit the context of higher education. It included trust in benevolence, which refers to the extent to which students believe faculty/staff are concerned about their welfare, have intentions and motives beneficial to them, and avoid acting in a way that will result in negative outcomes for students. We also included trust in honesty, which represents the trust students have in a university’s credibility as represented by faculty/ staff, and affective commitment, which refers to students’ willingness to belong or be connected to their university (i.e., their faculty/staff). Satisfaction was also included, referring to cumulative student satisfaction with the overall quality of the student– faculty relationships, representing students’ cognitive and affective evaluations based on their personal experiences across all educational service encounters. Finally, we included affective conflict, which can be seen as a negative indicator of relationship quality (Roberts et al., 2003). The affective conflict that students perceive, evident in such reactions as irritation, frustration, and anger, will lower the levels of perceived relationship quality. To create an in-depth understanding of how students perceived the overall quality of their relationships with their university, we asked students to respond to questions in which we referred to the quality of relationships with all educational faculty/staff, thus including all members of the educational faculty and staff. If positive, these relationships could be beneficial for higher education institutions in terms of students’ involvement, both during and after graduation.
DOCUMENT
In dit white paper wordt ingegaan op het begrip student engagement. Waarom nu inzetten op engagement? Wat levert dat op? Is student engagement te meten? En is er een blauwdruk voor HO instellingen?
DOCUMENT
Author-supplied abstract: Developing large-scale complex systems in student projects is not common, due to various constraints like available time, student team sizes, or maximal complexity. However, we succeeded to design a project that was of high complexity and comparable to real world projects. The execution of the project and the results were both successful in terms of quality, scope, and student/teacher satisfaction. In this experience report we describe how we combined a variety of principles and properties in the project design and how these have contributed to the success of the project. This might help other educators with setting up student projects of comparable complexity which are similar to real world projects.
DOCUMENT
How are the students of Inholland University of Applied Sciences doing? How do students assess their health and how engaged are they? What are the biggest stressors during their time as a student and what stress reactions do they experience? How resilient and optimistic are the students, and from whom do they get the necessary support? Based on the Student WellBeing Model, this fact sheet shows the most important results of the Student Well-Being Study 2017–2018. The questionnaire was completed by students in the classroom (n=407).
DOCUMENT
Wil je de customer experience verbeteren? Hoeveel aandacht besteed je dan aan het soort relatie dat je organisatie heeft met de klant? Uit onderzoek blijkt dat dit juist een belangrijke beïnvloeder is van klantbeleving. In dit artikel lees je meer over de effecten van de klant-leverancierrelatie.
LINK
When addressing problems with wicked tendencies in higher professional education, students experience complexity, uncertainty, and value divergence. Furthermore, they are confronted with disciplinary, organisational, and sector boundaries. Prior research has revealed variability in students’ experiences and boundary-crossing behaviour when dealing with problems with wicked tendencies. In this study we explore these differences by identifying student profiles based on the attributes that comprise the competence for dealing with problems with wicked tendencies, and by identifying their relations with students’ boundary-crossing behaviour and relevant work experience. Person-centred cluster analysis in a sample of first-year students (N = 264) from a bachelor’s programme in social work identified four student profiles, based on students’ self-assessed degree of creativity, critical thinking, initiative, proactivity …
MULTIFILE
At the beginning of May 2020 Inholland students received an invitation to participate in a large international study on the corona crisis impact on student life and studies. Almost 3000 students participated. This factsheet shows data on their lifestyleand their resilience. But also on their worries about corona, their knowledge of it and their opinion on the information supply.
DOCUMENT
At the beginning of May 2020 all Inholland-students received an invitation to participate in a large international study on the corona crisis impact on student life and studies. This poster, presented by the Study Success Research Group, covers relevant results divided in four themes. These themes are student wellbeing, student engagement, satisfaction and the coronavirus. To determine student wellbeing we asked students about their feelings and contacts. Student engagement is phrased in time allocation and engagement. We also wanted to find out how satisfied students were with things like ICT facilities, quality of education and provision of information. Of course we asked students about (not) having corona and adhering to the measures.
DOCUMENT
Obtaining credits, studying for exams, attending classes, engaging with fellow students and lecturers, living alone or with others, and taking part in extra-curricular activities: there is a fair amount for students in higher education to take in. There are also numerous external factors — such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the changing labour and housing market — that affect students. However, students experience these situations differently and deal with them in different ways. How can we ensure that, notwithstanding these stress factors and differences, as many students as possible become and remain engaged and energised? Happier students tend to be more engaged and generally achieve better study results.1 That is why student well-being is also a widely researched and important topic. The search is on for measures to promote student well-being and success. Having a clear idea of how things are going for a student and what they need is a starting point. This booklet helps readers to identify different student profiles and understand what is needed to improve student success. We zoom in on two key aspects of student success: engagement and emotional exhaustion.
MULTIFILE
A decline in both student well-being and engagement were reported during the COVID-pandemic. Stressors and internal energy sources can co-exist or be both absent, which might cohere with different student needs. This study aimed to develop student profiles on emotional exhaustion and engagement, as well as examine how profiles relate to student participation, academic performance, and overall well-being. Survey-data from 1,460 Dutch higher education students were analyzed and resulted in a quadrant model containing four student profiles on engagement and emotional exhaustion scores. Semi-structured interviews with 13 students and 10 teaching staff members were conducted to validate and further describe the student profiles. The majority of the survey participants were disengaged-exhausted (48%) followed by engaged-exhausted students (29%). Overall, the engagedenergized students performed best academically and had the highest levels of well-being and participation, although engaged-exhausted students were more active in extracurricular activities. The engaged exhausted students also experienced the most pressure to succeed. The qualitative validation of the student profiles demonstrates that students and teachers recognize and associate the profiles with themselves or other students. Changes in the profiles are attributed to internal and external factors, suggesting that they are not fixed but can be influenced by various factors. The practical relevance of the quadrant model is acknowledged by students and teachers and they shared experiences and tips, with potential applications in recognizing students’ well-being and providing appropriate support. This study enriches our grasp of student engagement and well-being in higher education, providing valuable insights for educational practices.
DOCUMENT
