Abstract
Ph.D.
Poor student success rates as a result of problems with the transition and integration
of first-year students into Higher Education has come into sharper focus for both
Higher Education institutions and government in the last decade (van Zyl, 2010;
Council of Higher Education in South Africa, 2013; Tinto, 2014). Although various
stakeholders have roles to play in improving this situation, Tinto (1993) proposes that
HE institutions are mainly responsible for initiating the necessary changes.
In addressing the complex problem of first-year integration, Tinto (1993-2014)
advocates structured institutional action through his Longitudinal interactionist model.
As a point of departure, Tinto’s work on student integration guided this study in
answering the “what is needed and when?” questions regarding student support.
Complementary to this, the Self-determination theory (Deci & Rayan, 1985) served to
give details to the practical implementation of such support by answering the “how to
achieve the stated goals?” in the design of this support intervention. This study thus
reports on the development of a practical first-year integration intervention (as
promoted by Tinto, 1993-2014) designed to address the three basic psychological
needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness, as central to the Self-determination
theory of Deci & Ryan (1985-2016).
Situated in the Pragmatic paradigm and following a design-based process, this
research implemented the methodology of Educational Design Research (EDR)
known for its aims to produce knowledge with practical relevance to a real-world
problem in a given context (van den Akker, Gravemeijer, McKenney, & Nieveen,
2006:4; Plomp, 2007:9; Flick, 2007:6; Plomp, 2013:20). The study was conducted in
an educational environment at one residential South African university, involving three
cohorts of first-year students and it has met all the requirements as set by the
Educational Design Research process.
The unit of analysis in this research was not to justify, evaluate or make claims about
the content of the intervention activities themselves, but rather to present an
Educational Design Research process implemented in several iterative phases
culminating in two specific outcomes: 1) a proposed integration intervention as a viable...