Background First year experience (FYE) programmes are standard offerings across a number of higher education institutions (HEIs), both locally and internationally. The increase in FYE programmes has been due to the fact that many first-year university students struggle with the academic and social transition from high school to university (Anderson, Wason, & Southall, 2016; Briggs, Clark, & Hall, 2012). The Discover Commerce (DC) Programme is a FYE programme that was first implemented at the University of Cape Town (UCT) in 2019. The DC Programme targets all first-year students enrolled in any degree programme offered by the Faculty of Commerce. The overarching aims of the programme are: (a) to equip students with the requisite knowledge and skills to successfully transition from high school to university and thrive academically within this higher education environment, and (b) to provide students with a strong foundation for success at university and in their careers post university. The programme includes an online learning component, face-to-face group work sessions and peer mentoring. Evaluation Focus The main objectives of this evaluation were to determine: (a) whether or not the DC Programme had been designed in a way to achieve its intended outcomes, (b) to clarify whether the personal, academic and social needs of first-year students were correctly identified by the stakeholders who designed the DC Programme, and c) to use the DC's reconstructed programme theory and logic produced in the theory evaluation to inform the development of a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework. As such, a theory evaluation and needs assessment were conducted. An M&E framework was also developed for the programme. The following questions were addressed: 1. What are the assumptions that underlie the DC Programme? 2. Is there evidence that the DC Programme's activities, outcomes and causal linkages are plausible? 3. What elements of the DC Programme theory could be modified to maximise the intended outcomes? 4. What are the personal, academic and social needs of first-year university students in a South African context? 5. What indicators, implementation and outcome measures need to be incorporated into the M&E framework for the DC Programme? Methodology The evaluator used Donaldson's (2007) five-step process for developing and assessing the programme theory. An initial programme theory was developed for the programme by engaging a purposive sample of three programme stakeholders in a structured discussion session (evaluation question 1). A plausibility assessment of the initial programme theory was conducted through an extensive literature review to address evaluation question 2. Based on the plausibility assessment findings, the evaluator was then able to make recommendations on how the programme theory could be reconstructed to improve the likelihood that the DC Programme will achieve its intended outcomes. A needs assessment was conducted by qualitatively analysing the data from a sample of 60 reflective assignments completed by first-year Commerce students who participated in the DC Programme. This needs assessment was conducted to shed light on whether the programme had correctly identified the needs and challenges of its target population. The evaluator used a modified five-stage process developed by Markiewicz and Patrick (2016) to outline the M&E framework. The evaluator used the reconstructed DC Programme theory and logic produced in the theory evaluation to inform the development of the evaluation questions, indicators, and targets for the framework (evaluation question 5). Key Evaluation Findings from the Theory Evaluation and Needs Assessment The final output of the theory evaluation was a critically reconstructed programme theory of the DC Programme (evaluation question 1). The evaluation found that the activities, outcomes and causal linkages of the programme theory were plausible (evaluation question 2). However, the literature suggests that the success of these types of programmes is dependent on the programme incorporating best practices and several design considerations. These include: a) appropriate staff recruitment, training and support; b) content and grading of assessments; c) structure and dosage of the programme; and d) quality of programme staff-student relationship (evaluation question 3). • The literature review findings indicated that the DC Programme did incorporate some of the design requirements for an effective FYE programme. For instance, content offered in the programme was aligned to best practice literature which includes problem-solving activities, collaborative group work and a reflective assignment. • In terms of the structure and dosage of the programme, the DC Programme has small class sizes for the face-to-face component and runs for a full academic year, which is in accordance with best practice literature for effective FYE programmes. • There are, however, various areas of improvement for the design of the DC Programme. According to best practice literature, students should receive written feedback on assessments and these assessments should be letter-graded to ensure that expectations for students are set at appropriately high levels. The group sessions and major assessments in the DC Programme are not letter-graded and students do not receive written feedback on tasks or assessments. • In terms of appropriate staff and recruitment, literature review findings indicate that the face-to-face component in FYE programmes are most effective when taught by academic staff. The DC Programme does not meet this design requirement as it uses third-year undergraduate students to facilitate the group sessions of the programme. • Literature review findings emphasise that ongoing professional development opportunities for FYE programme staff is a best practice for FYE programmes. In the case of the DC Programme, although programme staff undergo training before being recruited onto the programme, the programme does not have ongoing professional development opportunities for programme staff. Several key themes emerged from the needs assessment which related to the personal, academic and social needs of first-year university students (evaluation question 4). • Students reported various academic challenges and successes experienced during the first-year of university. The DC Programme has addressed these academic challenges in the programme through the online modules that provide structured academic guidance and support. • Students were also positive about the exposure to different disciplines and courses during the first-year of university. This need has been addressed by the programme as the face-to-face component of the course exposes students to different Commerce disciplines in the various group case study projects. • In addition, students reflected on their personal growth during the year. The DC Programme considered the need for students to reflect on their overall experience of university through the reflective assignment. • The needs assessment findings, however, indicated that not all of the needs of first-year university students were adequately addressed by the programme. For instance, students placed importance on social engagement with their peers. Although the DC Programme incorporates group work which is meant to facilitate student engagement, this group work is academic-focused and may not provide students with sufficient opportunities for social interaction. • Students also reported experiencing mental health challenges due to academic demands and other external factors experienced during the first-year of university. Although the DC Programme does include online modules that contain stress management strategies, it does not include specific initiatives to support students who experience mental health challenges. Recommendations The evaluation findings informed the key recommendations in this dissertation which include the following: • It is recommended that the DC Programme uses a letter-grading system for the tasks that have to be completed as part of the programme and award a final grade on completion of the course. Grading rubrics could be designed for major assignments (e.g. the reflective assignment) to help students understand what the expectations are for each assignment. These grading rubrics may also guide the instructor or the marker on how to give constructive written feedback. • It is recommended that the DC Programme appoints faculty staff to facilitate the face-to-face group discussions (if resources permit). Peer mentors could still be involved in a support capacity (i.e. to assist faculty staff during the sessions and with grading of assignments). • The DC Programme should consider providing structured professional development opportunities to programme staff. This is an essential component of successful FYE programmes. These structured development opportunities could take the form of check-in meetings before and after each of the face-to-face group sessions. These meetings could serve as a platform to share insights, strategise on how to tackle common or unique challenges encountered and develop new facilitation skills. • To increase the opportunities for social interaction and foster a sense of community amongst the groups, it is recommended that students are given an opportunity to engage and connect meaningfully with peers on a social level. Small-group social gatherings could be arranged at different points during the academic year. • It is recommended that the DC Programme strengthens its linkages with the UCT Wellness Service, and provide structured in-person guidance on how to access this service. Peer mentors could be involved in the referral and information dissemination process.

With the increase of first-year initiatives throughout postsecondary education around the world, student affairs personnel are becoming more involved with the programs and strategies of the First-Year Experience. This report focuses on the First-Year Seminar (FYS), one of various strategies that could be used as a part of an institution’s First-Year Experience. Student affairs personnel are increasingly being asked to instruct and take part of an FYS course. In this endeavor, these individuals sometimes lack the background and knowledge to begin the process for planning, developing, and teaching such a course. This report provides theoretical foundations, case studies, and descriptions of general considerations for future development of a FYS course by student affairs personnel. / text

The academic and social integration of first-generation college students into institutions of higher education continues to be a topic of concern for university administrators, faculty, and staff. Students enter college with different background traits and experiences as well as have different college experiences that can either permit or prohibit their ability to integrate into the college environment (Choy, 2001; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1983). Academic and social integration are two key factors used in predicting whether or not a student will persist from one academic year to the next (Cabrera, Nora, & Castaneda, 1993; Ishitani, 2003). This is especially important for first-generation college students. A student's ability to navigate the college system determines their ability to academically and socially integrate. By understanding how the different background characteristics, pre-college experiences, college experiences, college environments, and academic performances of first-generation college students can influence academic and social integration, universities could increase retention and graduation rates. The development of comprehensive academic support programs by institutions of higher education has been one strategy used to improving the integration of first-generation college students. The purpose of this study was to investigate the longitudinal impact of comprehensive academic support programs on the academic and social integration of first-generation college students during the 2008 academic year at a large public research university. This study employed a quantitative research design using variables from the 2008 CIRP Freshman Survey and the 2009 YFCY Survey. Astin's Input-Environment-Outcome model (1991) was used to examine the impact of the independent measures selected. The analysis plan utilized statistical weighting, factor analysis, descriptive statistics, and multivariate regressions. The results of this study indicated: 1) first-generation FYE students were not academically integrated into college by the end of the first year but participation in a comprehensive academic support program did have a positive impact on their academic integration; and 2) first-generation FYE students were socially integrated into college by the end of the first year and participation in a comprehensive academic support program did have a positive impact on their social integration. These findings have implications for theoretical frameworks, secondary education, and large public research institutions. / text