title: The lived experience of second-year science academic program of study students at an Australian University
Creators: name: Gregory, Mary S
Publisher: name: Griffith University
Year: 2021
Subjects: subject: phenomenological approach
subject: lived experience
subject: second-year cohort
subject: science undergraduate degree programs
subject: science academic curriculum

description: This study provides a voice to students in the second academic year of their program of science study at one Australian university. It builds on previous work focusing on the phenomenon of ‘sophomore slump’, in conjunction with escalating attrition. This research aimed to address a gap in understanding the influential factors that characterise the lived experience of this second-year cohort. The study utilises an embedded mixed methods phenomenological approach. Two surveys comprised of Likert questions, open responses and demographic data were administered to capture student expectations and reflections, representing their lived experience. Data were analysed via the quantitative analysis of Likert scale questions and thematic content analysis of open responses. Survey data were collected from three separate second-year cohorts from the years 2015 to 2017 in four science undergraduate degree programs, across three time points within the academic calendar year. The response rate was variable with a total of 132 (18% response rate) for the expectations survey, 54 (11% response rate) for middle-of-year reflections; and 182 (24% response rate) for the end-of-year reflections from students. The key finding from the expectations survey was that respondents demonstrated an understanding that the academic curriculum would escalate both in quantity and difficulty along with how their evidence of learning would be assessed. Furthermore, they expected to spend more time on their university studies to be successful and this factor would contribute to a reduction in participating in other activities, including gaining sufficient rest. Of concern for universities was the finding that respondents anticipated receiving equivalent or higher levels of academic support for their learning journey than those offered to first-year students. Yet the support available was both reduced and varied in nature, thus indicating a disconnection. While initially most respondents believed they possessed appropriate expectations of how their second academic year would transpire, many found their expectations did not match the lived experience. This misalignment between expectations and actuality was an area that contributed to a poorer overall lived experience. The key findings from respondents’ reflections across the surveys of their second academic year was the identification of three major areas of influence that were both academic and non-academic in nature. These were: (i) The science academic curriculum: The nature of the curriculum, supporting resources, learning environments and assessment were highly influential on the lived experience of the curriculum. Interactions with academic staff and peers supported framing appropriate expectations and successful academic outcomes. (ii) The ability of students to balance priorities effectively: This area was impacted by students’ perceived value and thus desire to undertake various pursuits (academic or otherwise); and their need to undertake paid employment. The capacity of respondents to manage their time effectively to allow for these activities impacted effective balance. (iii) Overall student wellbeing: This was impacted by how connected they were to others; an established sense of purpose that could bephysiological and psychological wellbeing. Previously there has been a dearth of research pertaining to second-year undergraduates in Australia, including in the sciences discipline. The outcomes of this study resonate with those from studies in the United States of America and the United Kingdom but also have discreet points of difference, by establishing three major areas of influence for science students. When considered holistically, the aims of this study have been achieved. It has provided a voice for second-year students and has contributed to a greater understanding of the interplay of academic, social, and personal aspects and provides evidence that can be utilised to enhance the lived experience of second-year science students.