Menu
Close
- Research & Evidence
- Case Studies
- NTU & TASO Post-Entry Activity Typology Case Study
This page summarises NTU’s key experiences and recommendations detailed in the case study, with regard to implementing the post-entry MOAT on the HEAT system across multiple departments in a large higher education institution.
The full case study on the TASO website and members can download HEAT’s guidance on implementing the post-entry MOAT from the database.
In September 2023, TASO commissioned The Centre for Student and Community Engagement (CenSCE) at NTU to develop a typology of post-entry activities as part of the TASO Institutional Data Use (IDU) project. This collaboration, involving NTU, TASO, other partner higher education providers (HEPs), and HEAT, aimed to:
1. Map Common Post-Entry Activities and Outcomes: Ensure consistency across the sector through consistent coding
2. Standardise Tracking of Student Participation: Facilitate uniform recording of post-entry interventions across institutions
3. Enable Higher Standards of Evidence: Building a pool of consistent standardised data supports more Office for Students Standards of Evidence Type 2 and Type 3 evaluations
NTU has recorded pre-entry outreach activity data on HEAT since 2011/12. However, until the development of the post-entry MOAT, they had no systematic way to record post-entry interventions. Once the new TASO typology was agreed, NTU tested it using the HEAT system.
Project Insights
NTU opted for a gradual implementation, from the academic year 2023/24, beginning with CenSE activities and expanding to the wider university, in order to create a systematic, centralised approach to recording post-entry activities and participants. This gradual approach has been informed, in the first instance, by three key areas.
1. Agreeing a definition of a post-entry activity that could be implemented across NTU
NTU’s definition may not apply to all HEAT members but it is useful to note that they agreed this definition early on in the process so that there was no confusion across multiple departments about which types of activity should be recorded.
2. Working to align current and future data collection and systems with the post-entry typology
This area included considering GDPR including retention, deciding which students to record and making mandatory fields clear to those collecting post-entry data. The full case study report provides more detail and practical examples relating to the above, including example data collection forms.
3. Testing the typology with end-users (those collecting data) across the university
The case study recommends that others wishing to adopt the post-entry MOAT take into consideration the following:
- Collaborate Institution-Wide: Engage colleagues from all relevant departments to ensure comprehensive data collection.
- Provide Clear Guidance: Develop and distribute clear instructions and well-defined definitions to support departmental data collection.
- Simplify the Process: Keep the data collection process straightforward and user-friendly.
- Test and Refine: Pilot the process with a small group, gather feedback, and make necessary adjustments.
- Consider User Experience: Ensure the platform for data collection is intuitive and accessible, incorporating feedback from initial users.