Despite specific entry requirements, several students show underachievement at early stages and often do not demonstrate strong aptitude required for a particular course. Early underachievement often correlates with underachievement at graduation. This situation gains magnified concern when it is recognised that enrolment standards at the University of Nottingham are very high in comparison with the UK average. This situation is further exacerbated by the fact that enrolment numbers in some schools have risen sharply in recent years. Consequently, if one applies a Bell Curve distribution on large enrolment numbers, it follows that the number of underachievers becomes quite significant. In a class of 40, 5% to 15% failure or underachievement, equates to 2 to 6 students. In a class of 240, 5% to 15% failure or underachievement, equates to 12 to 36 students, who prior to University had done well at A-levels. 36 students could be the size of a whole cohort in a course with smaller recruitment elsewhere in the University. The objective of this project is to consider measures to address early underachievement in large classes, and to offer strategies for a continual approach for addressing aptitude.

How do we recognise aptitude problems as opposed to generically poor academic performance? How is student aptitude for a particular vocation determined at the stage of entry? How does first year education address the continual assessment of aptitude? Crucially, what becomes of the student who enrols in a professionally specific course but discovers midstream a lack of aptitude for that profession? What are the issues that concern students were advised to consider transferring to better suit their aptitude? What strategies are in place to deal with this problem? What academic alternatives are possible?

Aptitude correlation and streaming are sometimes frowned upon. It may be debatable whether under underachievement is specifically due to poor aptitude correlation. It may also be argued that students who are under-prepared should be prepared through teaching. However it may be argued that some courses make more demands of aptitude than others. Whilst it is acknowledged that poor academic performance across all modules is a sign of a poor or uninterested student, this paper deals directly with students who show high academic performance in some modules on one hand, and very low academic performance in very professionally specific modules. These are clearly cases of aptitude issues as opposed to general academic underachievement.

An analysis of a professionally specific course curriculum in the last three to four years, charting the changes that were put in place to respond to large student intakes; and that of a parallel non professional course offered by the same school and its changes provides the basis of the study. In particular, the effect of course curriculum redesign is studied. Further, student academic underachievement and achievement, via the statistics of academic results, are also observed and compared, particularly the some of the curriculum changes put in place. The results are highly revealing. Student responses to questionnaires are also compared.

Various strategies have been put in place to address recruitment, and also to offer a glimpse of what is to come in the course for prospective students. The reality of the student participating in the course is somewhat different. The determination of aptitude at early stages of the course serves both the interests of the school and the student. The impact of the study feeds back into responsible course management and the University; particularly professionally specific courses with large intakes.