REPORT II JUNE 2012
Trusted. Supportive. Confident. Empowering.
Student Voice 2012 Contents 1. Introduction Page 2. 2. Key Findings Page 4. 3. Student Experience at UCA: Expectations and Satisfaction Page 6. 3.1. For each of the following please state: how important each factor is to your student experience and currently, how satisfied are you with what UCA offers. 3.2. Has your current student experience fulfilled your expectations which were advertised to you such as on the UCA website/prospectus/interview? 3.3. Are you proud to study at UCA? 4. Academic: Timetabling, Course Organisation and Communication Page 17. 4.1. On average, between Sept ’11 and Feb ’12 how many of your timetabled sessions were cancelled? 4.2. Are you satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations? 4.3. What form of communication is used to communicate timetable alterations and which form of communication would you prefer? 4.4. Are you satisfied with how timetable alterations are communicated? 5. Student Engagement: Delivering on Student Feedback Page 21. 5.1. Are you given the opportunity to feedback on your course and individual units? 5.2. If you have voiced an opinion or concern within the University have they been listened to and acted upon? 5.3. If you haven’t voiced an opinion or concern, do you believe that they would be listened to and acted upon? 6. The Students’ Union Page 25. 6.1. Do you think the Students’ Union contributes positively to your experience at University? 7. Conclusion Page 26. Appendix 1: Questionnaire
Page 27.
Appendix 2: Results
Page 29.
1
1. Introduction In June 2011 UCA Students’ Union published the first Student Voice report, 634 students were surveyed across all 5 campuses about a wide range of areas which affect their experience of being a student at UCA. The Student Voice was the first major research project that the Students’ Union had undertaken. The resulting report which made recommendations for improvement based on the data evidence collected from the surveys was well received by the University. As a result of the success of the first Student Voice report we have conducted another survey of students from all campuses using questions from the previous Student Voice survey for comparison. This year 758 students completed the survey, compared to 634 students last year; this is an increase of 19.5% and represents 11.2% of all UCA students. This report will analyse the results of the 2012 Student Voice survey both in isolation and in comparison to the 2011 Student Voice. This comparative analysis will enable us to track and analyse the effectiveness of the actions undertaken following the recommendations in the first Student Voice report. Overarching statistics Students from all 5 campuses completed the survey which is broken down as follows: Campus
Total number of respondents
Percentage of all respondents
Canterbury Epsom Farnham Maidstone Rochester Overall
141 136 161 130 190 758
18.6% 17.9% 21.2% 17.2% 25.1% 100%
Percentage of respondents 2011 14.9% 21.9% 21.6% 14.8% 26.8% N/A
Proportion of total students on campus 14.9% 8% 7.7% 22.1% 12.9% 11.2%
For comparative purposes the fourth column shows the percentage of total respondents from each campus in the 2011 survey. We can see that the number of completed surveys at each campus in 2012 is broadly similar to that of 2011. The final column in the above table shows the proportion of students who completed the survey from each campus. A disappointing proportion of Epsom and Farnham students completed the survey, our target is to reach 10% of the student population at each campus and both Epsom and Farnham fall below this threshold. We also asked students what year they were in to ensure that the survey is representative of the whole student body at UCA. The percentage of the total respondents is stated along with the number of students this represents in brackets. The final column in the table below shows the percentage proportion of students that completed the survey from the total number of students in that level of study. Note: the total number of students used to calculate the proportions also includes part time students. 2
Campus
FE Year 1
FE Year 2
FE Total
Canterbury Epsom
9.3% (11) 9.7% (11)
16.9% (20) 36.2% (41)
1.4% (2)
25.7% (38)
15.3%
2.7% (3)
14.3% (16)
10.3%
9.2% (16)
23.6% (41)
14.7%
Overall
7.6% (9) 26.5% (30) 24.3% (36) 11.6% (13) 14.4% (25) 17% (113)
Proportion of FE students on campus 7% 12.7%
6.5% (43)
23.5% (156)
12.1%
Campus
UG Year 1
UG Year 2
UG Year 3
UG Total
Canterbury
40.7% (48) 34.5% (39) 27.7% (41) 17% (19) 36.2% (63) 31.6% (210)
17.8% (21) 14.2% (16) 36.5% (54) 17% (19) 23% (40)
17.8% (21) 14.2% (16) 9.5% (14)
76.3% (90)
Proportion of UG students on campus 14.6%
62.9% (71)
5.4%
73.7% (109)
6.2%
84% (94) 75.9% (132)
21.8% 11.6%
74.7% (496)
9.4%
Farnham Maidstone Rochester
Epsom Farnham Maidstone Rochester Overall
Campus
Post Graduate
Canterbury Epsom Farnham Maidstone Rochester Overall
6.8% (8) 0.9% (1) 0.7% (1) 1.8% (2) 0.6% (1) 2% (13)
22.6% (150)
50% (56) 16.7% (29) 20.5% (136)
Proportion of PG students on campus 17% 1.6% 1.5% 66.6% 1.9% 5.6%
From these tables we can see that in some campuses some levels of study are underrepresented in this survey. In particular Further Education (FE) students at Canterbury, Undergraduate (UG) students at Epsom and Farnham and Postgraduate (PG) students at Epsom, Farnham and Rochester are underrepresented. The Students’ Union is undertaking wider work on our engagement with hard to reach groups and will be seeking to improve this underrepresentation in all areas of our work in the future.
3
2. Key Findings We found: 23% of students say their student experience does not fulfill the expectations sold to them as prospective students. Our recommendation: We have received a commitment from the University to conduct research on the ‘hidden’ costs of study and properly identify and advertise them to prospective students. We found: 23% of students had 4 or more timetabled sessions cancelled in semester 1 of this academic year 2011/12. Only 50% of students are satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations. 26% of students are not satisfied with how timetable alterations are communicated. 33% of students would prefer timetable alterations to be communicated via text. 37% would prefer email to be used. Our recommendation: We welcome the creation of a Course Organisation and Management subcommittee of APQS, and its commitment to address timetabling issues.
This should include guidance published detailing the expected procedure to follow should a timetabled session need amending, including a commitment to inform students in a timely manner. The institution should commit to communicating to students using the forms in which students have stated they prefer including a review of using text messages. We found: 69% of students are given the opportunity to feedback on their course and individual units. Our recommendation: Develop and implement robust policies and procedures to ensure that students are given the opportunity to feedback on their courses and that student opinion is responded to. We found: Only 39% of students said that their opinions or concerns had been listened to and acted upon. 21% of UCA students said that they do not believe that if they raise an opinion or concern that they would be listened to and acted upon. Our recommendation: To ensure the continued development of the course rep system for future 4
years ensuring that the rep system is embraced universally across the institution with recognition that the system is a joint venture by the University and Students’ Union. Students’ Union commitments •
Our key priority in 2012/13 is the continued development of the course representative system. We will continue to work with in partnership with the institution to ensure that the University has a robust representative system in place for students to positive enhance their learning experience.
•
We are committed to actively targeting students who do not currently engage with the Students’ Union.
•
We are committed to continuing the Student Voice project and will be working on the third annual Student Voice report throughout 2012/13.
Further Students’ Union commitments can be found in section 6 of this report entitled ‘The Students’ Union’.
5
3. Student Experience at UCA: Expectations and Satisfaction 3.1. For the following please state: a) How important you feel each factor is to your student experience 1=not very important 5=very important b) Currently, how satisfied are you with what UCA offers 1=not very satisfied 5=very satisfied. As in last year’s Student Voice survey we asked students to rank certain categories pertaining to the student experience on a 1-5 scale for importance and satisfaction. 1= not very important/very unsatisfied 5= very important/very satisfied. The table below shows a comparison of the importance ranking that students place on the factors, and their current satisfaction with the categories. The table below shows the results as a weighted mean in order to provide a more accurate analysis and comparison. The categories are ordered in the table by most to least important. Category Quality of Teaching Course and Course Content Course facilities Tuition Links with employers/industry Employment of Graduates Safety and Security Reputation of Course and University Community and Interaction on Campus Location Provision of other facilities Profile of Academics Study Abroad Additional Opportunities Nightlife
Importance 93.6% 93.1%
Satisfaction 76.8% 75.3%
Difference 16.8% 17.8%
92.3% 86.6% 86.4%
74.6% 67.9% 62.6%
17.7% 18.7% 23.8%
84.8%
61.6%
23%
83.8% 83.7%
79.5% 72.8%
4.3% 10.9%
80.8%
64.4%
16.4%
77.4% 76.2%
65.5% 64%
11.9% 12.2%
74.2% 68% 67.7%
66.2% 61% 55.2%
8% 7% 12.5%
66.6%
52%
14.6%
6
As in 2011 the top five categories for importance are: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5)
Quality of Teaching Course and Course Content Course facilities Tuition Links with employers/industry
From the table, as in 2011 we can see that current satisfaction for each category never exceeds the importance. The 15 categories we use for students to rank their importance and satisfaction together create the total student experience. It is therefore imperative that satisfaction is equal to or exceeds importance, particularly for the areas which for two consecutive years have been identified as the most important to students. The table below shows the comparison to the 2011 Student Voice report. Comparison to Student Voice 2011 Category Additional Opportunities Course and Course Content Course facilities Employment of Graduates Links with employers/industry Location Nightlife Profile of Academics Provision of other facilities Quality of Teaching Reputation of Course and University Safety and Security Community and Interaction on Campus Study Abroad Tuition
Importance 2011 2012 61.2% 67.7%
Satisfaction 2011 2012 47.4% 55.2%
95.8%
75.8%
93.1% 92.3% 84.8%
75.6% 62.4%
74.6% 61.6%
84.4%
86.4%
64.2%
62.6%
76.4% 69.2% 71.8% 78%
77.4% 66.6% 74.2% 76.2%
65.9% 49.4% 48.4% 65.9%
65.5% 52% 66.2% 64%
96.2% 84.2%
93.6% 83.7%
76.2% 74.8%
76.8% 72.8%
83.8% 80.6%
83.8% 80.8%
74.8% 64.8%
79.5% 64.4%
68% 86.6%
55.8% 65.2%
6.5%
7.8%
-2.7% 0.1%
-0.5% -1.0%
1.4%
-0.8%
2.0% 1.0% -2.6% 2.4%
-1.6% -0.4% 2.6% 17.8%
-1.8% -2.6%
-1.9% 0.6%
-0.5% 0.0%
-2.0% 4.7%
0.2% 4.6% -0.6%
-0.4% 5.2% 2.7%
75.3%
92.2% 83.4%
63.4% 87.2%
Improvement Importance Satisfaction
61% 67.9%
7 Â Â
Importance There are no statistically significant differences in the importance that students place on the categories from 2011 to 2012. However, it is worth noting that additional opportunities and study abroad have increased in importance 6.5% and 4.6% respectively. It will be interesting to note any changes in this area in the 2013 Student Voice and whether first year UG students place more importance on some or all categories. Satisfaction Satisfaction with additional opportunities has increased by 7.8% from 2011. Glue Media, a student run magazine and radio station which showcases students’ work from all 5 campuses, was launched in January 2012 and has so far engaged around 200 students with a circulation of around 5,000. We believe that the success of Glue Media has significantly contributed to the increase in satisfaction of additional opportunities. It is very disappointing to see a decrease in satisfaction for the categories that relate directly to academic areas and those categories which students deem the most important. Course and course content, course facilities, employment of graduates, links with employers and industry have all decreased in satisfaction from 2011. However, satisfaction with quality of teaching and tuition has increased slightly. The lack of increase in satisfaction in these areas demonstrates a lack of action from last year’s Student Voice. Satisfaction with the profile of academics has increased significantly by 17.8%. However, in 2011 we did not specify the meaning of profile of academics which led to many students questioning what the category meant. For the 2012 Student Voice survey we specified in the survey that Profile of Academics meant ‘if they are well known in their field’. The increase in satisfaction for this category is likely attributable to this. Other categories which have shown small decreases in satisfaction include location, provision of other facilities and reputation of course and university with -0.4%, -1.9% and -2% respective decreases in satisfaction. Three categories which do not pertain to academic areas have experienced small increases in satisfaction. Nightlife increased by 2.6%, safety and security increased by 4.7% and study abroad by 5.2%.
Campus specific importance and satisfaction The following tables detail importance and satisfaction levels that students from each campus place on the categories. As with the table above the weighted mean has been calculated and is stated in the table as a percentage.
8
Category Additional Opportunities Course and Course Content Course facilities Employment of Graduates Links with employers/industry Location Nightlife Profile of Academics Provision of other facilities Quality of Teaching Reputation of Course and University Safety and Security Community and Interaction on Campus Study Abroad Tuition
Canterbury Impor Sati 71.1
56.9
Epsom Impo Satis r 63.5 46.4
93.5
75.8
92.6
91.7 84.7
72.9 60
84.9
Farnham Impor Satis
Maidstone Impor Satis
Rochester Impor Satis
67.4
58.4
71
64.5
66.5
51.1
75.4
91.2
69
93.7
74.2
94
75.9
91 85.8
69.9 59.5
91.7 80.2
77.1 60.8
93 87
77.4 60.3
93.4 86.8
75.5 65.7
61.3
85.7
61
85.5
64.1
86.8
58.4
88.4
66.7
78.1 72.9 76.7
78.4 63.6 66.4
78 65.9 71.2
60.8 34.2 62.4
73.8 64.7 72.2
63.4 50.8 67.1
75.7 65.3 72.7
70.1 61.6 66.6
80.2 64.7 77.5
57.6 50.3 67.8
77.4
63.5
73
56.8
74.2
65
76.3
71.2
79
63.8
92.6 82.6
78.3 69.8
93.5 84.7
76.8 72
91.4 81.3
75.9 75.6
92.8 82
75.6 69
96.4 86.8
76.9 76.2
81.9 84.3
78.3 70.8
82.3 80.5
76.7 54.8
82.2 77.4
80.2 66.5
82.1 81.6
80.9 70.7
88.6 81
80.8 60.3
72.8 89
66.4 75
70.2 87
56.3 63.1
62.4 81
52.8 63.7
64.2 86.7
66.5 69.8
70.8 89
63.8 67.9
Importance From the table above we can see that the categories which recorded the highest importance levels overall are the categories where individual campuses all record the same factors as the most important. These categories include course and course content, course facilities, with employers and industry, quality of teaching and tuition all were recorded as very important in the overall results. All campuses, when we look at their individual results also recorded these factors as the most important. For the other factors; Students at Epsom place slightly less importance on additional opportunities, while Canterbury and Maidstone believe that additional opportunities are more important. Students at Maidstone place the highest level of importance on this employment of graduates than any other campus, Farnham students in comparison to the other campuses place less importance on this factor.
9 Â Â
Location is slightly less important for Farnham students, but most important to Rochester students than other campuses. Nightlife is more important for Canterbury students, the other campuses record similar levels of importance for this category. Profile of Academics is more important for Rochester and Canterbury students, the other three campuses record a similar level of importance for this category. Provision of other facilities is slightly less important for Epsom students and marginally more important at Rochester. Reputation of course and university is more important for students at Rochester, and slightly less important for Farnham students than the other campuses. Study Abroad opportunities are less important for Farnham and Maidstone students. Satisfaction By isolating the categories which recorded the highest importance levels overall (course and course content, course facilities, links with employers and industry, quality of teaching and tuition, we can see that all campuses recorded broadly similar satisfaction levels. Epsom and Rochester students are significantly less satisfied with additional opportunities than other campuses. Maidstone students are the most satisfied students in this area. Rochester students are the most satisfied with links with employers and industry, Epsom students are the least satisfied in comparison to the other campuses. Canterbury, Farnham and Maidstone record similar satisfaction levels in this area. Students at Rochester are the least satisfied with location whereas Canterbury students are the most satisfied campus in this category. Canterbury students are also the most satisfied with nightlife; conversely Epsom students are significantly less satisfied than the other campuses. All campuses scored similar satisfaction levels for profile of academics; Epsom recorded a marginally less satisfied result. Students at Epsom are significantly less satisfied than students at other campuses with the provision of other facilities. Farnham students are the most satisfied. Reputation of Course and University – All campuses scored similar satisfaction levels with the reputation of course and university; however, Canterbury and Maidstone have recorded slightly less satisfaction. Safety and Security – All campuses score a similar satisfaction level in this category, Epsom students recorded a marginally smaller satisfaction score.
10
Epsom students are significantly less satisfied than students at any other campus with the community and interaction on campus. Canterbury and Maidstone students are the most satisfied. Study Abroad – Canterbury and Maidstone students are more satisfied than the other campus in this area, Farnham students are the least satisfied. Canterbury students are significantly more satisfied than other campuses with tuition, whereas the other four campuses record similar satisfaction levels.
Types of study The table below shows the weighted mean of the importance and satisfaction that students from the three different types of study place on the categories. Once again the figures stated in the table are the percentage weighted mean. Category Additional Opportunities Course and Course Content Course facilities Employment of Graduates Links with employers/industry Location Nightlife Profile of Academics Provision of other facilities Quality of Teaching Reputation of Course and University Safety and Security Community and Interaction on Campus Study Abroad Tuition
Further Education Import Satis 60.5 57.7
Undergraduate Import Satis 69.4 54
Postgraduate Import Satis 55.3 60
91.6
77.7
94.1
74.3
95.4
73.9
91 57.5
73.5 63.3
93.7 87.2
75.3 61.3
93.9 78.3
72.3 48.3
78.9
61.1
88.8
63.4
81.5
55.3
79.2 66.5 71
64.1 50 63.2
77.4 67.2 75.4
66.5 52.3 67
67.7 56.9 72.3
66.1 60 70.8
71.9
63.7
77.6
65
64.6
60
92.5
77.5
94.9
76.7
93.9
65
83.1
75.9
84
72
86.1
66
85.6
80
83.5
79.7
73.9
81.5
80.5
65.9
81.5
63.9
69.2
66.1
63.9 80.6
52.1 64.4
69.3 88.6
63.1 68.4
38.5 86.1
54.5 66.2
11
The above results group together students specified years of study into Further Education, Undergraduate and Postgraduate in order to analyse any differences and similarities between students studying a different levels. Importance The five categories which students overall placed as the most important do not differ significantly when analysing the importance that students from different types of study place on the factors. For course and course content, course facilities, quality of teaching and tuition FE, UG and PG students record similar levels of importance. The anomaly is with links with employers and industry, which UG students place as significantly more important than FE and PG students. UG students place more importance on additional opportunities, employment of graduates, links with employers and industry and provision of other facilities than FE and PG students. PG students record additional opportunities, location, nightlife, social community and interaction on campus and study abroad as the least important. On all other categories PG importance is relatively equal to that of FE and UG students. This is indicative of PG students’ emphasis on academic areas as opposed to social. FE students place less importance on employment of graduates than UG and PG students which is perhaps indicative that FE are traditionally further away from employment than UG and PG students. Satisfaction As with the importance of the five most important categories overall students from different types of study are similarly satisfied with the academic factors. However, PG students are significantly less satisfied with links with employers and industry and quality of teaching. PG students are also less satisfied with employment of graduates, provision of other facilities and reputation of course and university than FE and UG students. However, PG students are more satisfied with nightlife and profile of academics than FE and UG students. UG students are marginally less satisfied than FE and PG students with additional opportunities, but more satisfied with study abroad opportunities than the other types of study. FE students are less satisfied with nightlife and profile of academics. FE students are more satisfied with the provision of other facilities and the reputation of the course and university than UG and PG students. All types of study record location, safety and security and community and interaction on campus with similar levels of satisfaction.
12 Â Â
Comment Overall, students’ satisfaction with their student experience at UCA never exceeds their expectations. UCA should be seeking to meet expectations, not manage them. The Students’ Union is disappointed in the limited number of recommendations which have been acted upon from the 2011 Student Voice report. This lack of action is reflected in the largely stagnant progress and improvement made in each particular area. Actions designed to improve satisfaction with the categories should be displayed in prominent places across campus, the University rely too heavily on myUCA as an effective tool of communication to students.
Course and Course Content Satisfaction with course and course content can be improved through the effective utilisation of student feedback. The issue of student feedback was explored in the 2011 Student Voice report and the University’s response committed to introducing a model for student feedback through the Student Experience Group for implementation in 2012/13. The issue of student feedback with recommendations is discussed in chapter 5, specifically 5.1. Tuition The introduction of the KIS from 2012 will detail the staff/student ratios and contact hours so that prospective students will know what to expect when they start. The new Unit Descriptor which was committed to in the Universities response to the 2011 Student Voice report is a positive step. Employment of Graduates The employment of graduates will become an increasingly important issue, it is important that the results of the DLHE survey are communicated to students. UCA records good results on the employment of graduates and this success should be communicated more effectively to students. The results of DLHE will also help inspire current students as to their future careers post-graduation. Study Abroad The relocation of the Study Abroad department into the newly created International Department is a positive step following the publication of the Universities response to the 2011 Student Voice report. The benefits of this relocation on the communication of study abroad opportunities to students are yet to be seen, but we will monitor students’ satisfaction with these opportunities in the next academic year and through the next Student Voice report. 13
Additional Opportunities The continuation of Glue Media creates tangible benefits to both students and applicants and we are committed to its continuation and enhancement. The opportunities that student ambassadors, entrepreneurial societies, widening participation and outreach activities provide for students has the ability to be extended and promoted through the Student Engagement project group.
3.2. Has your current student experience fulfilled your expectations which were advertised to you such as on the UCA website/prospectus/interview? The table below shows the comparison from the 2011 Student Voice survey. 2011 58.6% 25.2% 16.2%
Yes No Don’t Know
2012 58% 22.9% 19.2%
There are no significant differences from last year’s Student Voice survey. The percentage of students who responded ‘no’ to this question has decreased slightly by 2.3% to 22.9%. However, this is still a significant proportion of students who believe that their current experience does not meet their expectations. Below, the table shows the breakdown of each campus for this question. Yes No Don’t Know
Canterbury 57.2% 19.6% 23.2%
Epsom 53.1% 22.7% 24.2%
Farnham 64.1% 17.6% 18.3%
Maidstone 63% 22.8% 14.2%
Rochester 53.4% 29.6% 16.9%
Farnham and Maidstone students believe that their student experience fulfills their expectations significantly more than at the other campuses. Rochester students more often feel that their experience does not fulfill their expectations, in relation to other campuses. The table below shows the breakdown of each type of study Yes No Don’t Know
FE 63.6% 13.6% 22.7%
UG 55.1% 25.9% 19%
PG 69.2% 15.4% 15.4%
PG students more often feel that their experience does fulfill their expectations in comparison to the other types of study, 69.2% of PG students compared to 55.1% of UG students.
14
25.9% of UG students believe that their experience does not fulfill their expectations compared with just 13.6% and 15.4% of FE and PG students respectively. However, a higher number of FE students answered ‘don’t know’ to this question than UG and PG students did suggesting that FE students are less aware of their expectations before attending UCA. Comment In our Student Written Submission for the QAA Institutional Review we stated ‘we understand that the institution must do the best it can to promote UCA to prospective students; however, we have concerns that over-exaggeration in recruitment information could lead to false expectations which could then damage the student experience.’ This statement was based on evidence from the Student Voice of 2011 and the data gained from Student Voice 2012 continues to support this recommendation, and the institution commits to delivering accurate information about courses, University life, and potential practice in the Student Charter. Further to this we have concerns over the lack of upfront information for prospective students when it comes to the ‘hidden’ costs of study, i.e. for materials, printing and other expenses. We have received a commitment from the University to conduct research on these costs and properly identify and advertise them for prospective students. The Student Charter also references a commitment to giving clear financial guidance on ‘course costs’ a commitment we would like the institutions to reaffirm as part of their response to this report.
3.3. Are you proud to study at UCA? We continued to ask this question in 2012, but amended the range of responses that students were able to give. In 2011 students were able to answer ‘proud of my course, but not proud of UCA’, ‘proud of UCA, but not of my course’ along with ‘yes’, ‘no’ and ‘don’t know’. For comparative purposes from last year’s survey we have totaled the answers for ‘proud of my course, but not proud of UCA’ and ‘proud of UCA, but not proud of my course’ to count as a ‘yes’ response. Yes No Don’t Know
2011 76.6% 7.1% 16.2%
2012 73.3% 10% 16.6%
From the table above we can see that there is a small decrease of 3.3% from 2011 of students who are proud to study at UCA. The percentage of students who answered ‘no’ to this question has increased by 2.9% demonstrating a conversion of students who previously answered ‘yes’ changing to answer ‘no’. The percentage of students who responded ‘don’t know’ has increased slightly by 0.4%.
15
The table below details each campus response to the question: Yes No Don’t Know
Canterbury 71.4% 7.9% 20.7%
Epsom 76.3% 6.1% 17.6%
Farnham 77.3% 8.4% 14.3%
Maidstone 65.1% 19.8% 15.1%
Rochester 75% 9% 16%
A significant amount of Maidstone students are not proud to study at UCA than students at the other campuses; we believe this is due to the cohabitation with MidKent College and the sale of the campus in 2012. Epsom, Farnham and Rochester students are broadly similarly proud to study at UCA. 20.7% of Canterbury students do not know if they are proud to study at UCA which is a higher percentage than any other campus. The table below shows the results by type of study: Yes No Don’t Know
FE 81.2% 8.4% 10.4%
UG 70.7% 10.4% 18.9%
PG 61.5% 15.4% 23.1%
FE students are significantly more proud to study at UCA than UG and PG students. A significantly larger number of PG students are not proud to study at UCA than students in other types of study. Comment In Maidstone we would highlight the ‘Celebration’ event as good practice. Student-focused events and programs may improve institutional pride, i.e. further, open-to-all guest lecture programs by prestigious alumni, or more lectures and workshops delivered by successful alumni at the course level. We believe the continuation of the £5,000 fund for Maidstone students to deliver such events will go some way to improving the level of pride in UCA for Maidstone students. We believe that Glue Media has the ability to create a stronger cross campus community by showcasing students work from across all campuses which could, in turn allow students to feel proud to study at UCA. As a result of this belief the Students’ Union are committed to continuing and enhancing the scope of Glue Media over the next academic year. The Academic Board response to the first Student Voice report noted that the Internal Communications Group (Students) would be monitoring the implementation of a ‘University newspaper’ (i.e Glue) alongside the idea of a “students award day” and “wall of fame” on each campus. We recommend the introduction of a student’s award event; we envisage that this would be integrated with an SU Awards ceremony aimed at rewarding students that have worked closely with the Union to improve the lives of UCA students. This would include course representatives, student council members and active participants of clubs and societies. 16
4. Academic: Timetabling, Course Organisation and Communication 4.1. On average, between Sept 11-Feb 12 how many of your timetabled sessions were cancelled? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11+
2011 18.1% 25.5% 15.4% 16.6% 10.5% 6.8% 3% 0.5% 1.2% 0.8% 0.5% 1%
2012 25.3% 20.7% 18.7% 12.4% 9.9% 4.9% 3.9% 1.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.9% 1.1%
There are some improvements from last year in the number of timetabled sessions that students reported as being cancelled in semester one of this academic year. There was a 7.2% increase in the number of students who stated that no timetabled sessions were cancelled. In the 2011 Student Voice report we outlined 4 or more cancelled sessions as an unacceptable threshold, we maintain this standard in this year’s report. In 2011 24.3% of students reported that 4 or more timetabled sessions were cancelled in the first semester of the academic year. In 2012 this figure is 23% showing a slight decrease in the percentage of students whose courses cancel an unacceptable number of sessions.
4.2. Are you satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations? Yes No Don’t Know
2011 46.9% 28.6% 24.5%
2012 50.2% 32.1% 17.7%
There is a 3.3% increase in the percentage of students who are satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations from 2011. However, there is a similar increase (3.5%) in the percentage of students who are not satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations. Students who in 2011 did not know if they were satisfied have moved into the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response.
17
32.1% of students are not satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations, this demonstrates that there has not been a significant improvement in the notice period students are given to inform them of timetable alterations. The table below shows the breakdown for this question by campus: Yes No Don’t Know
Canterbury 51.8% 28.8% 19.4%
Epsom 59.4% 28.1% 12.5%
Farnham 42.2% 32.7% 25.2%
Maidstone 48.8% 36.8% 14.4%
Rochester 50% 33.9% 16.1%
Farnham students are the least satisfied by the notice period given for timetable alterations, while Epsom students are the most satisfied. The other campus’ results for this question fall broadly in line with that of the overall results for this question. The table below shows the breakdown by mode of study: Yes No Don’t Know
FE 62.9% 11.9% 25.2%
UG 45.8% 38.6% 15.6%
PG 61.5% 38.5% 0%
FE students are more satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations; however, FE students are required to be on campus 5 days a week and therefore the amount of timetable alterations which take place are less. Only 10.9% of FE students reported that 4 or more timetabled sessions had been cancelled in semester 1 of this academic year compared to 23% of students overall who had 4 or more sessions cancelled. PG students are significantly more satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations than UG students.
4.3. What form of communication is used to communicate timetable alterations and which form of communication would you prefer? We continued to ask these two questions in 2012, but changed the format of the questions so that both were incorporated into one question. Students were given the chance to write their response to this question, from the responses we have grouped answers together for analysis. The table below shows a comparison between how timetable alterations are currently communicated and which form of communication students would prefer.
18
Announcement in class Course blog Email MyUCA Note on the door Noticeboard Phone Social Media Text Word of mouth
How currently communicated 6% 7% 34% 39% 2% 12% 1% 1% 12% 4%
Preferred form of communication 4% 4% 37% 21% 0% 5% 1% 3% 33% 0%
Note: The percentage of students who answered email in how currently communicated includes 2% of students who specified UCA email. The percentage of students who stated email as their preferred form of communication includes 4% who specified personal email, because these samples are so small they have been combined into the email category. As with the 2011 student voice survey students would prefer for timetable alterations to be communicated via text and email. However, in 2011 only 8% of students stated that would prefer for MyUCA to be used, in 2012 these has increased to 21%, which perhaps reflects the improvements made to MyUCA before this academic year and the growing utilization of myUCA by course terms which increases familiarity with myUCA and ultimately student satisfaction.
4.4. Are you satisfied with how timetable alterations are communicated? To follow on from the previous question we asked students if they were satisfied with how timetable alterations are communicated. The table below shows the results in comparison to 2011. Yes No Don’t Know
2011 67.9% 18.4% 13.7%
2012 57.9% 25.9% 16.1%
Satisfaction with the form of communication used to tell students about timetable alterations has fallen by 10% from 2011. There is a significant increase of 7.5% in the percentage of students who respond ‘no’ to this question. Recommendation We understand that the cancellation of some timetabled sessions is unavoidable; however, we are concerned that 23% of students have 4 or more sessions cancelled in a single semester. In last year’s Student Voice report we recommended that ‘explicit procedures are implemented for all courses on cancelled sessions including ensuring that all cancelled sessions and fully 19
rescheduled and delivered.’ The evidence from the 2012 Student Voice continues to support this recommendation. In addition, in the University’s response to the 2011 Student Voice report it was stated, ‘The
University recognises this as a major issue that could lead to an improvement in overall student satisfaction in the NSS. In response to this, a major project will be carried out in the second semester 2011/12, the Course organisation and Management Project Group (chaired by the Deputy Vice Chancellor and commissioned by APQS and LTA). Once the academic re-structure is announced, this Group will carry out a series of focus groups with students to determine specific issues to be addressed. It will bring together best practice from Course Leaders for courses achieving high scores in this category of the NSS (some achieve 100% satisfaction) with lessons learnt from those areas struggling with course organisation and management issues. It will consider the work of the Timetabling Project Group and will devise University-wide procedures and protocols for course organisation and management, including communication mechanisms where sessions have to be unavoidably cancelled. These procedures will be applied consistently across all courses and campuses from the start of academic year 2012/13.’
We continue to underline the necessity for the procedures to be developed in line with the commitment from the institution to have these implemented for the academic year 2012/13. In addition, a significant percentage of students remain unsatisfied at the notice period given for timetable alterations. The first Student Voice report recommended that procedures are introduced to ensure that cancelled sessions are rescheduled and delivered. We continue to make the recommendation that guidance is published detailing the expected procedure to follow should a timetabled session need amending. This procedure should include a commitment to inform students as soon as possible. It was also recommended in the 2011 Student Voice report that a text system should be considered. The results from the 2012 Student Voice continue to support this recommendation. The institution should commit to communicating to students using the forms in which students have stated they prefer including a review of using text to communicate timetable alterations which occur at very short notice. The Students’ Union awaits the start of the Course Organisation and Management Project and its proposals for implementation for 2012/13 start, as outlined in the Academic Board response to the initial Student Voice.
20
5. Student Engagement: Delivering on student feedback 5.1. Are you given the opportunity to feedback on your course and on individual units? This question was introduced for the 2012 Student Voice survey. Increasing and improving the level of student engagement is a priority for both UCA and for UCA Students’ Union. We would like to empower students to affect and have a say in the content of their education as partners, as outlined in the Student Charter. This question allows us to track the stage we are currently at and hope to track improvement in future. The table below shows the overall feedback from this question and the breakdown by campus. Yes No Don’t Know
Overall 69.4% 18.8% 11.8%
Canterbury 63.6% 22.9% 13.6%
Epsom 74.8% 16.8% 8.4%
Farnham 65.1% 18.8% 16.1%
Maidstone 84.3% 7.9% 7.9%
Rochester 63.5% 24.3% 12.2%
The large majority of students at Maidstone are given the opportunity to feedback on their course; this is a figure we would like to emulate across all campuses. The table below shows the breakdown for each type of study: Yes No Don’t Know
FE 61.8% 25% 13.2%
UG 71.5% 17.7% 10.8%
PG 53.8% 23.1% 23.1%
PG students are more unlikely to have the opportunity to feedback on their course and on individual units than FE and UG students. However, a low number of FE students are also given the opportunity to feedback. Recommendation Although students are able to feedback on their course through the ISS, NSS and PTES, we would like to introduce a formalised and anonymous feedback system for individual units throughout the year so that students can understand the difference their feedback has made directly onto their course and learning experience. The University’s response from Academic Board on the 2011 Student Voice report states that: ‘Mechanisms giving students the opportunity to provide feedback on their courses exist within the University, but need pulling together into a holistic model that can be applied consistently across all campuses. The Student Experience Group will be developing a policy to provide this model for implementation in 2012/13. This model will include mechanisms; • For students to feedback on unit and course content and delivery;
21
• • • •
For input into course development through annual monitoring and periodic review; To monitor the changes introduced as a result of student feedback, to ensure that the intended course improvements are being achieved; and To communicate to students about responses to their feedback, including changes introduced and reference to feedback that has not been acted on, and why To communicate Annual Monitoring action plans to students on myUCA.’
This holistic model and the supporting policies have been discussed, but not been acted upon through the Student Experience Group and has subsequently been assigned to the newly formed Student Engagement project group. Developing and implementing robust policies and procedures to ensure that students are given the opportunity to feedback on their courses and that student opinion is responded to is imperative. Recommendations for this to happen have featured in both the 2011 Student Voice and 2012 Student Voice. UCA have stated the importance of student engagement, but as yet are not serious about developing the mechanisms to allow this to happen. All efforts should be renewed to ensure the policies and procedures are in place for the academic year 2012/13.
5.2. If you have voiced an opinion or concern have they been listened to and acted upon? We asked this question again in 2012, however, the structure of the question was amended slightly from 2011. Improved communication by the institution to students is imperative and the comparative analysis between 2011 and 2012 will be a useful tool for guiding future recommendations. 2011 39.9% 36.5% 23.6%
Yes No Don’t Know
2012 39.2% 27.4% 33.4%
The 2012 results show a 9.8% increase in the number of students who responded ‘don’t know’ to this question. This significant increase demonstrates that the communication loop remains uncompleted in many cases so that students are unaware if their opinions have been listened to and acted upon. Yes No Don’t Know
Canterbury 43.9% 28.6% 27.6%
Epsom 42.2% 32.2% 25.6%
Farnham 31.9% 25% 43.1%
Maidstone 50.6% 28.7% 20.7%
Rochester 34.8% 25.2% 40%
A larger percentage of Maidstone students believe that their opinions and concerns are listened to and acted upon than the other campuses. Maidstone is also the campus where the highest percentages of students are able to give feedback on their course and on individual units.
22
Farnham and Rochester record similar percentages of students who believe that opinions or concerns they raise are listened to and acted upon. Canterbury and Epsom record similar percentages in response to this question. The table below shows the breakdown of responses by the type of study. Yes No Don’t Know
FE 38.1% 23% 38.9%
UG 37.5% 29.6% 33%
PG 33.3% 44% 22%
The responses for this question when we view the breakdown by type of study are broadly similar for FE and UG students. However, a significantly higher percentage of PG students do not believe that their opinions or concerns are listened to and acted upon.
5.3 If you haven’t voiced an opinion or concern, do you believe they would be listened to and acted upon? This question was asked in the 2011 Student Voice report and is asked again in 2012 in order to develop a comparative analysis between the two years. The table below shows the comparison to 2011. 2011 36.1% 22.5% 41.4%
Yes No Don’t Know
2012 45.2% 21% 33.8%
There is a significant improvement from 2011 in students who are confident that should they raise an opinion or concern that they would be listened to and acted upon. The table below shows the breakdown by campus: Yes No Don’t Know
Canterbury 42.7% 21.4% 35.9%
Epsom 44.3% 20.5% 35.2%
Farnham 51.3% 12% 36.7%
Maidstone 49.6% 21.6% 28.8%
Rochester 39.3% 28.3% 32.4%
Farnham students are the most confident that their opinions and concerns would be listened to and acted upon, however in the previous question Farnham students were the least confident of all campuses that their opinion or concern had been listened to and acted upon. There is a perception by Farnham students that student feedback would be listened to and acted upon. Conversely, at the other campuses the results of this question broadly reflect the results of the previous question demonstrating that students are aware of the reality of raising an opinion or concern at their campus. 23
The table below shows the breakdown by each type of study. Yes No Don’t Know
FE 53% 17.4% 29.5%
UG 41.8% 23.3% 34.9%
PG 45.5% 27.3% 27.3%
A larger percentage of FE students are confident that their opinions or concerns would be listened to and acted upon than UG and PG students. However, this does not reflect the view of FE students in the previous question which suggests within FE there is a perception that opinions and concerns will be acted upon. UG and PG students have recorded similar results which are also statistically in line with the overall results. Recommendation A successful course representative system is crucial to ensuring that students opinions and concerns are listened to and acted upon and that students have the confidence in the mechanisms to share their opinion and concerns if they arise. The Students’ Union and the University have been working in a partnership approach during academic year 2011/12 to implement an ‘interim course rep system’ which has had some success in ensuring the system is a robust mechanism for allowing students to report opinions and concerns. However, to ensure the continued development of the course rep system for future years it is imperative that the rep system is embraced universally across the institution with recognition that the system is a joint venture by the University and Students’ Union, not solely a Students’ Union effort. Secondly, it is important that the work undertaken to empower course representatives is supported and enhanced by ensuring that the opinions and concerns shared by reps are acted upon at each level from Course upward. This links to the model of student engagement discussed previously in gaining student feedback on their courses and ensuring that students are informed of any response.
24
6. The Students’ Union 6.1 Do you think the Students’ Union contributes positively to your experience at University? This is a new question introduced to the Student Voice survey for 2012. A similar question to this was asked for the first time in the NSS in 2012; as a result we wanted to gain an understanding of the overall student opinion of the Students’ Union so we can make improvements. The table below shows the overall results and the breakdown of each campus. Yes No Don’t Know
Overall 58.3% 14.7% 27%
Canterbury 60.7% 14.3% 25%
Epsom 36.6% 35.9% 27.5%
Farnham 62.3% 7.9% 29.8%
Maidstone 84.3% 1.6% 14.2%
Rochester 50.8% 14.4% 34.8%
Epsom is the campus which is the least satisfied with the Students’ Union; we have identified this area and have made Epsom a strategic priority for the next academic year. There are a percentage of students who responded ‘don’t know’ to this question which is also an area that needs addressing. The table below outlines the results for the different types of study. Yes No Don’t Know
FE 59.1% 13% 27.9%
UG 58.5% 15.2% 26.3%
PG 53.8% 30.8% 15.4%
The figures in the table above from the different types of study are similar to that of the overall figures in the first table. However, a greater percentage of PG students answered ‘no’ as opposed to ‘don’t know’ suggesting that we need to target PG students more actively. Our Commitments •
We are committed to targeting students who do not currently engage with the Students’ Union, we are currently undertaking the Students’ Union Evaluation Initiative (SUEI) which we will use as a mechanism to self-evaluate and improve our engagement levels.
•
We are committed to ensuring the sustainable continuation and growth of Glue Media; we have set ambitious targets to engage more students.
•
A key priority for the Students’ Union in 2012/13 is the continued development of the course representative system. We will continue to work with the institution to ensure that 25
the University has a robust representative system in place for students to positive enhance their learning experience. •
As always we affirm our commitment to acting as a robust voice for students on the national stage to lobby for continued investment and growth in creative arts education, and employment in the creative industries.
•
The Union has affirmed their commitment to engaging with the institution on Widening Participation. The Students’ Union is widening its democratic structures to include voluntary Executive Committee members.
•
•
We are committed to continuing the Student Voice project and will be working on the third annual Student Voice report throughout 2012/13.
7. Conclusion There has been a disappointing lack of action on the recommendations from the 2011 Student Voice report since its publication in June 2011 despite the report being very well received by the institution. We believe that the data captured in this 2012 Student Voice report demonstrates the need for the recommendations to be implemented across the institution in a timely manner. The key issues for students at UCA remain a lack of satisfaction with their student experience, communication and having their opinions and concerns acted upon to positively impact their learning experience. Following our analysis of these key issues we have highlighted our crucial recommendations for the institution which we believe, if successfully implemented will have the largest impact on the student body. Our four key recommendations are: • • •
•
The importance of conducting thorough research and fully communicating additional course costs to students. The implementation of guidance for communicating timetable alterations with a commitment to review to provision of a text system to communicate to students. To ensure the continued development of the course rep system for future years ensuring that the rep system is embraced universally across the institution with recognition that the system is a joint venture by the University and Students’ Union. Develop and implement robust policies and procedures to ensure that students are given the opportunity to feedback on their courses and that student opinion is responded to.
As in 2011 our recommendations to the university can be summarised using five words; communication, parity, ownership, accountability and action.
26
Appendix 1: Questionnaire
What year are you in? Please tick Further Education Year 1 [ ] Year 3 [ ] Further Education Year 2 [ ] ]
Undergraduate Year 1 [ ]
Undergraduate
Undergraduate Year 2 [ ]
Postgraduate [
For the following, please state: a. how important you feel each factor is to your student experience 1=Not Very Important 5=Very Important b. currently how satisfied are you with what UCA offers 1=Not Very Satisfied 5=Very Satisfied Important to my student How satisfied I am with what experience (scale 1-5) UCA offers (scale 1-5) Additional Opportunities (Glue Media, Clubs & Socs etc) Course and Course Content Course Facilities Employment of Graduates Links with Employers and Industry Location Night Life (bars and clubs) Profile of Academics (If they are well known in their field) Provision of Other Facilities (accommodation, catering etc) Quality of Teaching Reputation of Course and University Safety and Security Social Community and Interaction on Campus Study Abroad Opportunities Tuition (class sizes and contact hours) Has your current student experience fulfilled your expectations which were advertised to you such as on the UCA website/prospectus/interview? Please tick Yes [ ] No [ ] Don’t Know [ ] Are you proud to study at UCA? Please tick Yes [ ] No [ ] Don’t Know [ ] On average, between Sept 11- Feb 12 how many of your timetabled sessions were cancelled? Please circle 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11+
Other (Please state)
Are you satisfied with the notice period for timetable alterations? Please tick
27
Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Don’t Know [ ]
What form of communication is used to communicate timetable alterations and which form of communication would you prefer? Please state Currently:
Prefer:
Are you satisfied with how timetable alterations are communicated? Please tick Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Don’t Know [ ]
Are you given the opportunity to give feedback on your course and on individual units? Please tick Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Don’t Know [ ]
If you have voiced an opinion or concern within the University have they been listened to and acted upon? Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Don’t Know [ ]
N/A [ ]
If you haven’t voiced an opinion or concern do you believe that they would be listened to and acted upon? Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Don’t Know [ ]
Do you think the Students’ Union contributes positively to your experience at University? Yes [ ] No [ ] Don’t Know [ ]
28
Appendix 2: Results
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36