In this blog, I share how I organised a student focus group to enhance the learning experience for a second-year module on quantitative methods. This was a compulsory module for Undergraduate Economics students that ran for a double term with a class size of 99 students.
Due to covid restrictions, in term 1, the module consisted of Maths and Statistics, delivered through online lectures and tutorials and on-campus lab sessions. In term 2, the module went fully online and focused exclusively on Econometrics.
In what follows, I explain the challenges of the online delivery that led me to seek a student focus group, describe how I worked with the students, and the value of working with the group. I conclude with a brief discussion of student evaluations of the module.
Challenge Context
This was my 4th year of teaching the module, which had previously been delivered in the traditional face-to-face format. The move to virtual delivery presented several challenges, not least of these being that quantitative methods and working with software are best facilitated through a face-to-face interaction with students. Challenging questions included:
- What technological tools to use to deliver the module?.
- How to effectively communicate messages to students?
- How to encourage engagement outside of the physical classroom?
- How to deliver a complex software like Stata online?
Unlike in previous years where I relied on student feedback from informal discussions, Mentimeter and formal course evaluation surveys, this time, I wanted to work with the students as “partners” (Mercer-Mapstone et al., 2017; Matthews, 2016) to co-create an optimal virtual learning environment. The focus group was intended to be a safe space for me to discuss and pilot ideas and for students to provide feedback and suggestions to improve the delivery of the lessons (Hamilton, 2002).
Process
Two weeks after teaching began, I put up an announcement on Moodle inviting students who wanted to work with me to improve the delivery of the module to sign up. Six students expressed interest and a seventh joined in term 2 by invitation from one of the members (i.e., positive word-of-mouth). The make-up of the group was gender balanced (4 male, 3 female) and a mix of nationalities.
I engaged with the focus group through emails and Microsoft Teams for meetings, which were scheduled as needed. Unlike a traditional focus group which is a one-off meeting, I organised several meetings with the group over the year, similar to the idea of repeat focus group discussions in Ljunggren et al. (2014). Table 1 summarises the objectives of the meetings and emails. We had 7 meetings in total covering general discussions about the classes and experimentations with different teaching technologies. Emails ranged from getting students to check whether procedural messages were clear before writing to the class or asking for feedback on how certain lessons went.
Interestingly, I attempted to improve interaction with the group by setting up a Teams page. However, the students preferred the virtual meetings.
Table 1: Interactions with Focus groups: Meetings and Emails.
| Meetings | Email Exchanges |
| 19th October, 2020 Feedback on delivery of classes; suggestions for improvement | 3rd November, 2020 On whether the use of Mentimeter improved the learning experience. |
| 2nd November, 2020 Focused on the use of alternative technologies: ipad, Word online, MS Whiteboard, visualiser | 23rd November, 2020 Post meeting email to check the clarity of the instructions for online test 1 before dissemination to class. |
| 23rd November, 2020 Strategies to support the class for online test 1. | 29th January, 2021 Request for feedback on first online Stata session. |
| 30th November, 2020 Reflection on the delivery of online test 1, strategies for supporting students for online test 2, Experimentation with break-out rooms | 8th February 2021 Advise on scheduling logistics. |
| 27th January, 2021 Experimentation with delivering a Stata session online | |
| 10th February, 2021 Improving the learning experience of the Econometrics part of the module | |
| 15th March, 2021 Second feedback session on the delivery of Econometrics. |
Value added of Focus group
The student focus group added value in several ways:
First, they provided more in-depth feedback on the module delivery than I received from the class. For instance, the group provided me with reassurance on what went well in the module such as my organisation of the Moodle page and online quizzes. In our first session, they encouraged me to increase the interactivity of the lessons. Their input helped to nuance the feedback given by the general class. For example, I experimented with breakout rooms once, and then followed up with an opinion poll which received an overwhelmingly negative response from students. A subsequent focus group session provided more details, explaining that students tended not to use their cameras or contribute which made the breakout sessions frustrating for the more active students.
Second, in one of their most useful contributions, the group helped me to select the best technology to deliver the tutorials at a time when I was struggling with alternative technologies such as the virtual whiteboard, and the use of a stylus to write directly on a Word document. During a focus group meeting, I experimented with the use of an iPad versus a portable visualiser. The group unanimously voted for the visualiser which had a noticeable effect in improving the tutorial experience for both myself and the students.
Third, the group were extremely useful in helping to troubleshoot potential technical issues in the use of the Stata software before the actual online lab session. Through the pre-lab meeting, we identified difficulties in accessing Stata and came up with solutions. I produced a guide and circulated this to all students ahead of the lab session. During the actual session, members of the group supported the tutor in helping other students to solve technical issues relating to accessing Stata.
Fourth, the group participated in a critical discussion on comparing the value of using Mentimeter versus the Moodle quiz function in the tutorials. The main difference was that Mentimeter provided complete anonymity. We decided on the Moodle quiz to enable me to monitor class engagement during the tutorial activities.
Reflections of a focus group member
Feedback from one of the student focus group members about the value of the group was that it enabled them to make new friends, contribute positively to the class and improve their own engagement:
“The value of participating in the focus group to me personally were that it provided me with an opportunity to make new friends and improved my relationship with the teacher. I felt more engage with the module and a sense of accountability to watch the lectures and participate in the tutorials… I think that providing constant feedback to the teacher is of great help to all.”
Student Evaluation Outcomes
Table 2 presents overall student satisfaction scores from formal student evaluations in the last four years. It shows that the student satisfaction was highest in 2020-21 although the response rate was at its lowest. Qualitative comments suggested that students valued the quality of the academic support received, lecture recordings and the engaging tutorials. The focus group were useful in improving the quality of the lessons delivered as well as academic support.
Table 2: Overall Satisfaction scores from Student Surveys
| 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | |
| Term 1 overall satisfaction score: 1-5(highest) (Response rate in parenthesis) | 4.0 (66.6%) | 4.0 (53.1%) | 4.1 (42.1%) | 4.4 (33.3%) |
| Term 1 overall satisfaction score: 1-5(highest) (Response rate in parenthesis) | 3.8 (56%) | 3.9 (29.8%) | – | 4.6 (26.3%) |
| Total class size | 48 | 46 | 76 | 99 |
Conclusion
The student focus group created a safe space for the “student voice” to be heard which was valuable to me, the focus group members, and the entire class. Working with students as “partners” ultimately led to improving the learning experience of a module that was challenging to deliver online. However, the focus group should not and does not replace communication with tutors or feedback from the full class.
Moving forward, I would certainly work with a student group again as they provide an additional dimension to the student voice and a safe space to test ideas, but would seek to improve the diversity of future groups by encouraging students with different abilities in the subject area as well as those with learning difficulties to participate.
Blog Author
Dr Edna Solomon
Senior Lecturer
Department of Economics and International Business
Greenwich Business School
References
Hamilton, D. M., Pritchard, R.E., Welsh, C.N., Potter, G.C. and Saccucci, M.S. (2002) ‘The Effects of Using In-Class Focus Groups on Student Course Evaluations.’ Journal of Education for Business, 77(6), 329-333.
Matthews, K. (2016) ‘Students as Partners as the Future of Student Engagement.’ Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 1(1), 1-5.
Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, S.L., Matthews, K.E., Abbot, S., Cheng, B., Felten, P., Knorr, K., Marquis, E., Shammas, R. and Swaim, K. (2017) ‘A Systematic Literature Review of Students as Partners in Higher Education.’ International Journal for Students as Partners 1(1), 1-23.
Ljunggren, A., Huang, Z. and Johansson, E. (2014) ‘Repeat Focus Group Discussions as a Tool for Strengthening of Management Capacity in a Community Development Project in Western China.’ Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 63-72.