Boosting student success was a key policy priority for the Vice-Rectorate for Education and Student Affairs. To that end, Head of Student Guidance Rebecca Léonard and Head of Educational Support Steven Van Luchene joined forces. Thanks to this collaboration, both students and degree programmes that benefit most on the basis of data receive the targeted support they need to improve student success rates.
Why was the focus on student success a common thread throughout the past policy period?
Steven: “Student success – by which I mean the ratio of credits obtained to credits taken – has of course always been important. But, as elsewhere, student performance took a hit during Covid. That has partly recovered, but compared with other Flemish universities we have bounced back less strongly. That probably has to do with the specific characteristics of our student population, combined with curricula that are sometimes still quite traditional. As a university, we have to be willing to look critically at ourselves and analyse carefully where problems stem from entry and study skills, and where there are still barriers within the programmes themselves. After all, we do not want to lose the diversity of our student body – it is something we value and actively embrace. That is why we have stepped up our efforts, both at student level and at programme level, to improve student success – but let me be very clear about this: without compromising educational quality.”
You describe this as a data-informed policy. Does that mean new figures are being used?
Steven: “We have had most of the information for quite some time – take performance figures, for example. The knowledge and expertise on how to achieve student success were also already there. What *is* new is that, for programmes whose performance figures over the past five years are significantly below the Flemish average, we have adopted a more proactive approach. Not by saying, ‘You’re not doing well’, but by addressing them with the message: ‘We are concerned and want to support you in getting back to higher levels of student success.’”
Rebecca: “The same applies to students with limited study progress. We now approach them more proactively and with clearer messages. That already starts after the first semester. If a student has made insufficient progress by then, we may ask them to complete a reflection tool and, based on that, offer tailored support – both in terms of reorientation and remediation.”
Steven: “There are very clearly two sides to this story: supporting students, and supporting lecturers and degree programmes.”
Rebecca:“It is also worth noting that this was not just a matter for Educational Support and Student Guidance. The faculties and programmes themselves also fully committed to it. In addition, the project follows a continuous line – it is not an ad hoc initiative. We are working along four pillars, starting with entry into higher education.”
What can a degree programme do to boost student success right from the point of entry?
Steven: “In the past, the brochures and online information used by VUB to recruit students did not always set the right expectations.”
Rebecca:“Often the focus was on reaching as many students as possible. But the message cannot simply be that life at VUB is enjoyable – there also has to be a clear sense of what is expected in return.”
Steven:“Together with the Marketing and Communication Department – which had itself come to the same conclusion – we looked at how to communicate in a way that is both appealing and clear about expectations. Several brochures have already been adapted accordingly.”
The second pillar concerns the welcome days, which have been revamped this academic year. Is it true that there will be less emphasis on the social side?
Rebecca: “We will certainly continue to invest in social integration, which is also important for student success. But in addition, during those days we will explicitly spell out the academic expectations for students. In the ‘Ready for the Start’ sessions, we will focus on the to-dos for being successful as a student.”
“Last year, 20 students signed up for the ‘Ready for the Start’ sessions: this year we are heading towards 2,500”
Steven: “Some students, for instance, think it is enough to watch the lecture recordings and do not attend classes. For us it is obvious that being present – and above all actively engaged – enhances student success, but with the new generation of students you have to make that explicit.”
Will students actually attend the welcome days, then?
Rebecca:“Unlike in the past, the welcome days are no longer optional. Everyone is expected to attend. And the figures show the difference. Last year, 20 students signed up for the ‘Ready for the Start’ sessions; this year we are heading towards 2,500.”
At the start of the academic year, a number of competences will also be assessed. What is the purpose of that?
Rebecca:”The third pillar of the student success policy is to strengthen students’ sense of ownership by enhancing their self-regulating study skills. To do that, they need to know not only what is expected of them, but also where they themselves stand. We will therefore test cross-disciplinary entry competences, and in time also programme-specific entry competences. In addition, there will be a compulsory language test. Students will receive feedback, and where problems are identified, they will be guided towards appropriate support. This will help improve student success.”
Is there not a risk of over-supporting students?
Rebecca: “We offer a differentiated and tiered support system. There is basic support for every student, do-it-yourself tools, group provision and individual support. At-risk students are approached proactively. However, students themselves still decide how and to what extent they make use of the support on offer.”
Can lecturers also play a role in strengthening students’ sense of ownership?
Steven:“Absolutely. If you only give traditional lectures – three hours of explanation at a stretch, followed by a recording – you leave very little room for active participation and therefore for self-regulation. Within Educational Support, we have developed tools to help lecturers foster that sense of ownership. We primarily reach new professors in this way. As part of their onboarding, they are required to follow a year-long professional development programme in which they redesign their course to align with VUB’s educational vision and to strengthen students’ self-regulation. So new professors are certainly on board. Reaching more experienced professors is a bit more challenging – they need the time and mental space to engage with it.”
What small, feasible interventions can experienced lecturers make to enhance student ownership?
Steven: “Just yesterday I spoke to a lecturer who uploads his PowerPoint slides to Canvas (VUB’s digital learning platform, ed.) in advance, assuming students like to look through them before class. That is a perfectly reasonable idea, but it does not really increase students’ ownership. He came up with a neat solution himself: from now on, he will leave some slides blank. Students will have to complete them together during the lecture. It is a very small change, but it ensures that students actively co-construct part of the course content. You can do something similar with a Q&A on Canvas: instead of always answering yourself as a lecturer, you can first invite other students to respond.”
The final pillar concerns interventions within the curricula themselves. What changes at that level can improve student success?
Steven:“The different courses within a curriculum are not always well aligned. Take methodological components such as statistics or research skills. Sometimes they are taught as a separate course; in other cases they are spread out, or only addressed during preparation for the master’s thesis. Very often, however, this methodology does not come at the right moment. Creating a coherent thread throughout a programme can have a major impact on student success.”
“What we do notice is that the integrated policy makes everyone feel mobilised”
That also requires a significant time investment.
Steven:“It does. That is why we provide financial support for programmes that want to tackle performance issues structurally, in the form of curriculum innovation mandates. Each year, €300,000 is made available for this. These mandates replace the former innovation funds, which individual lecturers could apply for for their own course. Today, we reserve this budget for projects that have an impact on an entire programme, for example on learning pathways.”
Are curriculum innovation mandates only available to programmes with lower student success rates?
Steven: “No. Last year we focused on two strategic priorities: student success on the one hand, and artificial intelligence on the other. All programmes were able to submit a proposal on integrating artificial intelligence into the curriculum. The Law programme, among others, received such a mandate.”
The student success policy was approved by the Education Council last December. What changes are already noticeable?
Steven: “The programmes that require priority attention are currently hard at work. I have an overview of what they are doing. It all sounds promising, but it is still too early to see results in the performance figures.”
Rebecca: “What we do notice is that the integrated approach makes everyone feel mobilised. There is a strong sense of shared commitment. Student success is no longer solely the responsibility of Student Guidance, Educational Quality or the faculties. Today, everyone seems to be involved.”
Steven:“Partly thanks to funding from the government’s *Voorsprongfonds*, the curriculum innovation mandates are now in their third year. We have therefore been able to evaluate their effects. The common thread is that lecturers really appreciate the fact that this approach buys time to talk about education together. With that €300,000, you can fund roughly the equivalent of six junior positions at half time to work with colleagues on the curriculum. In other words, it is a very powerful instrument, and we are genuinely seeing revised curricula emerge as a result.”
Law professor Frederic Eggermont on the implementation of ‘LexTech’ in the law programme
“Over the past few years, we have noticed that our students have been making increasing use of AI. That naturally raised the question: what should we do with it? There was a concern that it might undermine their ability to think independently. It was out of that concern that we developed a curriculum renewal project focused on the use of AI within the law programme. A key principle was that, as a rule, the use of AI would be permitted, while critical thinking would remain central and misuse could be detected.”
“In practical terms, we have started to incorporate AI into the methodology courses in every academic year. In the first year, we teach students to engage critically with chatbots. In the second year, students are required to write a paper using ChatGPT. They initially think, ‘Great’, until they realise they have to investigate which information is actually correct. In that way, each year builds on the previous one.”
“One of our aims is to improve the study success of first-year students. We see that pass rates for the course Introduction to Law are relatively low. We will therefore explore how we can allow students to upload parts of that course into a chatbox so that they can be questioned on the material. In other words, they will have access to a virtual assistant 24/7. In addition, we will sharpen other skills that can support their learning, such as effective prompting. I expect students – particularly those from more socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds – to benefit greatly from this. They may not be able to rely on highly educated parents to proofread a text, whereas ChatGPT can offer that support. Finally, we hope this will lead to fewer irregularities involving the illegitimate use of AI in papers and master’s theses. That, too, should indirectly have a positive impact on student success.”
“In short, we are very pleased that a curriculum innovation mandate has enabled us to roll this out. Without a teaching release, it simply would not have been feasible. But the ambition is clear: to train strong lawyers who can use AI in a responsible and critical way, and are thus well prepared for the labour market.”
AI support officer Inge De Cleyn on the GenAI Canvas module in Art History and Archaeology
Inge De Cleyn is an AI support officer with AI4education and supported the Art History and Archaeology programme in developing a bespoke GenAI Canvas module for the course Workshop Art History and Archaeology (BA1).
“The request for support came from the programme itself, following a VUB-wide Educational Support scan carried out by AI4education. For students, the guidelines on the use of AI were unclear. As a result, some did not dare to use it, for fear of doing something that was not permitted. Others, by contrast, used it far too casually. For instance, they would ask ChatGPT to rewrite a paragraph, without realising that it had changed the text quite substantially, and then copy it wholesale. We therefore clarified the guidelines. In BA1, students are allowed to use GenAI in their essays for a grammar check and for adjustments in word choice.”
“To support students in this responsible use of GenAI, the module we will be implementing shortly keeps track of different versions of their writing tasks. It will also store the feedback they have requested from GenAI and how they have processed that feedback. This allows students to check for themselves whether they have used GenAI correctly. Lecturers, in turn, have something to fall back on if they suspect improper use of GenAI.”
“We will pilot the module in the first semester with the new cohort of students. The intention is to continue working with these students in the future, in order to encourage responsible use of GenAI in other areas as well.”
“I am curious to see what effect this will have on students’ writing assignments and on their attitude towards GenAI. We expect students who previously did not use it to feel confident enough to do so now. After all, this is a safe testing environment with clear steps. At the same time, we expect students who used it too casually to adopt a more responsible approach. We are also aware that the module will need to be fine-tuned after the first test run and following updates to large language models.”
“The module can contribute to student success. If students are able to use GenAI responsibly, there will be less misuse, meaning they are less likely to be penalised for it in the first place. At the same time, they strengthen their AI skills and learn how to deploy them efficiently and responsibly as support where they need it. This is becoming increasingly important and can improve the quality of their work.”
