D REPORT TO SENATE FROM UNIVERSITY EDUCATION COMMITTEE

25 SEPTEMBER 2019

National Student Survey - Quantitative and Qualitative Results, 2019

Summary: The documents present the results (quantitative and qualitative) of the NSS 2019.

Background: NSS is an important annual UG student experience survey. Results from the survey are used in TEF and newspaper league tables.

Relation to Strategy:

Results from the NSS provide important indicators of the health of our educational provision at institutional, subject and programme level and as such an indication of the effectiveness of the previous and current Education Strategies.

Resource Implications: None at present

Issues:

Results of the NSS 2019 demonstrate a continued (since 2017) downward trend in institutional NSS outcomes in absolute and relative (compared to Full Service Universities and Russell Group) terms and compared to our OfS benchmarks.

Governance Trajectory to date:

Early version of quantitative analysis paper considered at UEC in July 2019; Current version of qualitative analysis paper and quantitative analysis considered at UEC Away Day 11 September 2019 and Executive Board on 17 September 2019.

Governance Trajectory after EB: Faculty Education Committees, Faculty Executive Boards and Senate 25 September 2019.

Resolution Required: That these documents are provided to Senate as background to aid discussion the meeting on 25 September 2019.

Approval ☐ Endorsement/ Recommendation

☐ Discussion ☒ Information ☒

Enclosures/Attachments: National Student Survey Quantitative Results 2019

National Student Survey 2019 - Free Text Analysis

Risks and Implications Included Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Analysis undertaken

Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐

Executive Board Sponsor: Suzanne Cholerton, PVC E Authors: Gilly Box, Jolein De Ridder and

Danny Homer (LTDS)

Primary contact: PVC E Date: 12 September 2019

Confidentiality:

Strictly Confidential** ☐ Confidential* ☐ Not Confidential* ☒

** Documents will only be made available to members of Executive Board * Report will be made available to Executive Board members, Deans and Senior Officers. Wider circulation can be requested via the Secretary with permission of the Chair.

National Student Survey Quantitative Results 2019

Background and Context

1. The National Student Survey (NSS) surveys final year undergraduate degree students. This report provides an overview of Newcastle University’s institutional performance in NSS 2019.

2. The 2019 Survey covered 451 Higher Education Providers (HEPs). Newcastle’s overall response rate in 2019 was 66.47%, slightly above the 2018 response rate of 64.74% and broadly in line with our response rate in recent years. The national average response rate was 64.7%.

3. This paper builds on the NSS Headlines Report considered by UEC in July, providing a full University report including subject level analysis and initial analysis of free text comments.

Results – Institution Level

4. The University’s overall satisfaction (Question 27) was 85.39% in 2019. This is a decline of 0.75% from the 86.14% that Newcastle achieved in 2018 (87.52% in 2017). The sector as a whole remained largely static with an overall satisfaction score of 83.49% (83.39% in 2018). Newcastle’s score of 85.39% remains slightly above our HEFCE-defined benchmark for this measure of 85.02%.

5. Of the eight NSS question areas covered, the University’s % score has declined in four, and stayed the same in two. Two areas saw an increase from 2018 to 2019, Organisation and Management and Student Voice.

6. There is a visible drop in 2017 in response to the Students’ Union question (from 80% in 2016 to 52% in 2017). This aligned with a change in the question to ‘The students’ union (association or guild) effectively represents students’ academic interests’. Prior to 2017 the question was ‘I am satisfied with the Students’ Union (Association or Guild) at my institution’, and this question was prefaced by the following: ‘Thinking of all the services, including support, activities and academic representation provided by the Students’ Union (Association or Guild) at your institution, to what extent do you agree with the following statement’.

Table 1: University of Newcastle NSS results by questionnaire section 2009-2019

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Teaching on my course 87 87 89 89 89 90 89 90 85 84 84

*Learning opportunities n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 83 82 81

Assessment and feedback 62 63 66 67 70 71 71 73 71 69 67

Academic support 78 79 82 83 84 86 86 86 82 80 79

Organisation and management 81 83 86 84 85 86 86 87 80 76 77

Learning resources 85 83 82 86 91 90 91 91 90 89 89

*Learning community n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 80 77 75

*Student Voice n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 68 67 73

Overall satisfaction 87 87 89 89 90 91 91 90 88 86 85

**Students’ Union 76 78 82 81 80 52 51 51

* new section for 2017 onwards

** The SU question falls within the Student Voice section, but is shown here for comparison

Chart 1: 2019 University-level results - agree, neutral and disagree percentages per question domain

7. Chart 1 shows how the neutral and disagree responses are split. The question area related to the Students’ Union shows a significant percentage of neutral responses (33.62%). This is similar to 2018 and 2017. In the other question areas there are also marginal changes compared to 2018 and 2017. In areas that score low, such as Assessment and Feedback and Learning Communities, the percentage of disagreement has slightly increased (while neutral decreased) over the last three years. In 2019, only two areas score 85% or above. Encouragingly, if neutral responses could be reduced and transformed into positive ones, seven areas could count 85% agreement and above.

8. Of the 27 questions within the main data set, only one achieved a score of 90% (‘Staff are good at explaining things’) and none exceeded 90% (compared to two >90% in 2018 and three in 2017). 17 of the 27 questions have seen a decline in satisfaction since 2018. When comparing 2019 data with 2017, 25 of the 27 questions have experienced a decline.

9. 12 questions had institutional satisfaction rates exceeding or matching the average for full service providers (see Annex 1). This equates to fewer than half of the 27 questions and represents an annual decline, as 13 questions fell into this category in 2018 and 19 in 2017. One question was in the top quartile with a score of 89.58% (‘The library resources (e.g. books, online services and learning spaces) have supported my learning well’). 16 of the 27 questions had institutional satisfaction scores higher than the Russell Group average.

10. The three question areas included in the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) are Teaching on my Course, Assessment & Feedback and Academic Support. The University did not achieve top quartile scores in any of these areas, but scored slightly higher than the full service average for Teaching, and more than 2% higher than the Russell Group average for Academic Support. Assessment and Feedback scored 1.5% below the Russell Group average and 5.3% below the full service average.

Results – Subject Level

11. Of the 52 subject areas, 25 had overall satisfaction rates of 90% or higher. This compares favourably to 21/52 subjects having satisfaction of 90 and above in 2018 and 2017. Of the remaining subjects, 14 scored 80-89 (compared to 20 in 2018 and 16 in 2017) and nine scored 70-79 (six in 2018 and 2017). Three subject areas scored below 70: Journalism (68%), Music (66%), and Chemical, Process and Energy Engineering (62%). These results mean that 16 subjects are in the top quartile for the sector, 13 are in the second quartile, 11 are in the third quartile and 11 in the fourth quartile (see Annex 2). In 2018

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00

The teaching on my course

Learning opportunities

Assessment and feedback

Academic support

Organisation and management

Learning resources

Learning community

Student Voice

The students’ union

Overall satisfaction

2019 Area Results - Agree, Neutral, Disagree

% Agree % Neutral % Disagree

there were slightly more subjects at the top (17), three more in the second (13), just one more in the third (12) and only seven in the fourth.

12. Ten subjects had overall dissatisfaction rates of above 10%, a decrease from the 14 subjects in 2018 (and 13 in 2017). Those with the highest rates of dissatisfaction were: Chemical, Process and Energy Engineering (26%), and Music (20%). Some positive changes to note are the results for Zoology (from 15% dissatisfaction in 2018 to 2% in 2019), and Physics and Astronomy (from 40% in 2018 to 5% in 2019) (see Annex 3). It should be noted that these subjects have small target groups.

13. In relation to the three areas included in the TEF (Teaching; Assessment and Feedback; Academic Support), 19 subjects achieved scores of 90% or higher for Teaching, a slight increase on 2018 when 18 subjects achieved 90 or more. Four subjects achieved scores of more than 90% for Academic Support, a decrease from seven in 2018.. No subject achieved a 90% or higher satisfaction score for Assessment and Feedback, with the highest scorers being Aural and Oral Sciences (88%), Anatomy, Physiology and Pathology (86%) and Dentistry (84%). In 2018, eight subjects achieved scores at this level or higher, including two at 90% or above.

14. The lowest score for Teaching was in Chemical, Process and Energy Engineering (66%), and there were nine subjects with scores of less than 80% in this area in 2019 (compared to 11 in 2018). For Academic Support, the lowest score was in Management Studies (66%), and 20 subjects scored less than 80% in this area in 2019 (compared to 23 in 2018). The lowest score for Assessment and Feedback was in Mechanical, Production and Manufacturing Engineering (35%), and 43 subjects scored less than 80% (compared to 39 in 2018).

Comparative Performance - Institution Level

15. The most helpful measure of comparative performance is how the University performed across all sections of the Survey, in relation to other full service universities. This is set out for all question areas for 2019 in Annex 4 and summarised below:

Table 2: Newcastle’s NSS 2019 results by questionnaire section, compared to full service universities (plus LSE)

13. Chart 2 demonstrates an accelerating decline over the last three years in comparative performance relative to 2018. In 2018, the University achieved a top quartile score for only one question area (Learning Resources) and received a score in the fourth quartile for only one area (Assessment and Feedback). In 2019, the University again achieved a top quartile score for Learning Resources, but three question areas appeared in the fourth quartile (Learning Opportunities; Assessment and Feedback; Learning Community).

2019Count of

Institutions114 2018

Count of

Institutions114 2017

Count of

Institutions108

% Agree Rank Quartile % Agree Rank Quartile % Agree Rank Quartile

The teaching on my course 84 57 2 84 64 3 85 45 2

Learning opportunities 81 88 4 82 70 3 83 67 3

Assessment and feedback 67 105 4 69 89 4 71 77 3

Academic support 79 65 3 80 54 2 82 26 1

Organisation and management 77 32 2 76 51 2 80 17 1

Learning resources 89 27 1 89 19 1 90 10 1

Learning community 75 87 4 77 69 3 80 44 2

Student Voice 73 79 3 67 79 3 68 76 3

Overall satisfaction 85 34 2 86 28 1 88 26 1

Key: increase since 2018

same as 2018

decrease since 2018

Chart 2: Comparative NSS results by question domain (Full Service Universities), 2015 - 2019

Table 3: Newcastle’s NSS 2019 results by questionnaire section, compared to Russell Group

14. In relation to the Russell Group, the picture is less worrying whilst still indicating a slight decline in performance. Table 3 shows that the University has retained its quartile position in four of the nine question areas (Teaching; Academic Support; Organisation and Management; Student Voice) but dropped down a quartile in the other five. Chart 3 highlights an increase in question areas achieving the top quartile in 2018, but a significant decrease in 2019 with only one area (Academic Support, one of the areas covered by TEF) achieving a top quartile score this year. No question areas received scores in the fourth quartile, and the number of question areas in the third quartile returned to the same level as in 2017.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

No

. of

do

mai

ns

Survey year

NSS results by question domain, 2015-19

1st quartile 2nd quartile 3rd quartile 4th quartile

2019 Count of

Institutions22 2018 Count of

Institutions22 2017 Count of

Institutions16

% Agree Rank Quartile % Agree Rank Quartile % Agree Rank Quartile

The teaching on my course 84 13 3 84 12 3 85 9 3

Learning opportunities 81 13 3 82 8 2 83 6 2

Assessment and feedback 67 16 3 69 10 2 71 9 3

Academic support 79 4 1 80 3 1 82 2 1

Organisation and management 77 10 2 76 10 2 80 5 2

Learning resources 89 6 2 89 3 1 90 2 1

Learning community 75 10 2 77 4 1 80 1 1

Student Voice 73 10 2 67 11 2 73 10 3

Overall satisfaction 85 8 2 86 4 1 88 7 2

Key: increase since 2018

same as 2018

decrease since 2018

Chart 3: Comparative NSS results by question domain (Russell Group), 2015 - 2019

15. In five of the eight question areas (Learning Opportunities; Assessment and Feedback; Academic Support; Learning Community; Student Voice) we achieved scores below the full service average. Assessment and Feedback is of particular concern, with our score of 67.1% falling 5.31% below the full service average. Two individual questions in this area received significantly poor scores: ‘Feedback on my work has been timely’ (66.98%, 5.87% below full service average) and ‘I have received helpful comments on my work’ (65.82%, 6.71% below full service).

16. Results compared to the benchmarks show that the University is performing below benchmark in six of the eight question areas (Teaching on my Course; Learning Opportunities; Assessment and Feedback; Academic Support; Learning Community; Student Voice). This includes all three of the areas included in the TEF. The question on marking criteria (‘The criteria used in marking have been clear in advance’) saw the biggest deviation from the benchmark (65.02%, 6.5% below the benchmark). Two question areas performed above the benchmark, Organisation and Management (77.4%, 1.19% above the benchmark) and Learning Resources (88.61%, 1.64% above the benchmark).

Chart 4: NSS results in comparison to benchmarks, 2019 and 2018

Comparative Performance - Subject Level

17. Table 4 provides the number of subjects out of the 52 by sector quartile for each NSS question area (for full details see Annex 5), normalising to a certain extent for the recognised and strong subject effects on NSS results:

Table 4 Newcastle University subject areas in each sector quartile for 2017-2019

1 2 3 4

2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019

Teaching on my course 11 15 13 15 12 18 11 7 8 9 18 11

Learning Opportunities 6 15 5 12 10 16 19 15 13 8 12 16

Assessment&Feedback 4 12 6 13 8 4 16 14 15 13 18 25

Academic support 11 9 8 19 15 15 10 18 15 6 10 12

Organisation&Management 14 13 13 17 14 10 6 11 16 8 14 11

Learning resources 20 20 18 20 20 17 5 9 10 1 3 5

Learning Community 13 16 10 16 13 8 9 12 14 8 11 18

Student Voice 7 9 5 12 15 16 12 16 16 15 12 13

Overall satisfaction 9 17 16 18 16 13 14 12 10 5 7 11

Key: increase in quartiles 1 and 2, and decrease in areas 3 and 4

relatively stable

decrease in quartiles one and two, but increase in quartiles 3 and 4

18. Eight of the nine question areas have seen a decrease in the number of subjects within the top quartile since 2018, some quite significant such as Learning Opportunities. In this area the number in the first quartile has reduced by a factor of three since last year, returning to a similar level as in 2017. The number in the lowest quartile indicates a steady increase, doubling since 2017. With regard to Overall Satisfaction, the number has stayed almost the same (after having almost doubled in 2018). The contrast between the apparent continued strength of scores at subject level for Overall Satisfaction, with declines in all but one of the other question areas, is noticeable, and is likely to reflect the different nature of Question 27 from the rest of the Survey. Question 27 is a simple satisfaction question, while the other question in the NSS are experience questions.

19. In relation to the question areas included in the TEF, 13 subjects achieved scores in the top quartile for Teaching (compared to 14 in 2018), eight achieved scores in the top quartile for Academic Support (the same number as in 2018) and six achieved scores in the top quartile for Assessment and Feedback (compared to 11 in 2018). At the lower end, 11 subjects were in the bottom quartile for Teaching in 2019, which represents an improvement on 2018 when 18 subjects were in the bottom quartile. However a significant decline can be identified in the other two areas. 12 subjects were in the bottom quartile for Academic Support in 2019 (nine in 2018), and 25 (almost half of the subjects) were in the bottom quartile for Assessment and Feedback (18 in 2018).

Free text comments

20. Free text comments have been analysed in conjunction with the quantitative data, in an attempt to identify whether any common themes are emerging. A detailed analysis of the free text comments using Nvivo is provided as a separate paper.

21. University-wide, Learning Resources scored well and remained in the first quartile. Positive comments included comments on the Library as a ‘great space’, and having good opening times. Specific resources in the Library are also referenced in a positive way. Access to (online) learning resources, the campus, and services such as Careers, Maths-Aid and the Writing Development Centre are commended.

22. A number of students commented negatively on feedback (lacking in detail, provided too late). Vague marking criteria and inconsistent approaches to marking are also commented upon. This is similar to last year’s comments, where students commented on inconsistent and/or ill-timed feedback.

23. In terms of students commenting on Learning Community (another area where the University scored in the fourth quartile and went down in the ranking since 2018), students mention a lack of support and communication, limited feedback, and unresponsive staff. Subject areas that scored well in this area received positive comments on approachable staff, feedback listened and acted upon, and students being well-integrated.

Action Requested

24. University Executive Board is asked to consider the NSS 2019 results, in order to contribute to

discussion and action planning.

National Student Survey 2019 - Free Text Analysis

Background and Context

16. The National Student Survey (NSS) surveys final year undergraduate degree students. This report provides a summary of free text comment provided by students as part of their response.

17. A total of 2100 entries were submitted through the NSS free text responses. The comments were graded into Positive and Negative comments and further sub-categorised under the question group headings in accordance with the NSS survey. Where comments mentioned multiple areas these were cross-allocated and counted in both categories.

18. Most comments were allocated to School and Programme, however approximately 500 comments had been stripped of this information when the data was supplied to the University by Ipso MORI to protect students’ anonymity.

19. When reading this report, it should be remembered that the free text comments provide a rich source of data on students’ views of their educational experience. While they are therefore valuable in considering where and how the University might wish to change and enhance its undergraduate provision, they also need to be considered alongside the quantitative data from the 27 Likert scale questions contained in the NSS.

Results – Institution Level

20. When comparing the number of comments categorised under each heading to the NSS question groups the following comparison can be seen:

402

98

195

245

527

158

85

694

327

508

195

147

256

436

79

390

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

AcademicSupport

Assessment &Feedback

Facilities andResources

LearningCommunity

LearningOpportunities

Organisationand

Management

Student Voice Teaching onCourse

Comments Count Analysis

Positive Comments Negative Comments

21. This initial analysis shows clearly areas that students felt the need to comment on both positively and negatively. Subsequently this allowed for a more detailed analysis in key areas, and by school, to highlight overall patterns.

22. Particular areas for concern are identified as both “Assessment & Feedback” and “Organisation & Management”. Areas of positive feedback that were identified as both “Learning Opportunities” and Teaching on the Course”. From the Quantitative results of the NSS, “Learning Communities” was identified as an area for concern that should be further investigated.

Results – Question Groups

Academic Support

23. 19% of positive comments mentioned Academic Support against 16% of negative comments. Biomedical Sciences (+21), Geography, Politics and Sociology (+21), Newcastle Business School (+20) and the Dental School (+18) were identified as having the greatest positive difference between the number of positive and negative comments. The School of Medical Education were identified as having the largest negative difference.

24. In schools that were mentioned more prominently, staff are praised for being approachable and demonstrating availability to help students, offering additional support via email and office hours.

“Fantastic staff who show so much willingness and enthusiasm! Always there to help!” – Student

“My ??? tutor and ??? have been absolutely amazing! Working with them and getting their advice and guidance has been a highlight of my course! Working with people who are passionate about their field as well as passionate about seeing students do well really made the experience even better!” – Student

25. In schools that were mentioned negatively, students comment on the lack of pastoral support received and issues surrounding Personal Extenuating Circumstances and how these were handled by staff.

“Student support is almost non-existent… The PEC system is a complete joke. The staff in the ??? are rude and unhelpful, and there is a constant turnover of staff so you never know who you are going to be speaking to. Things you ask for support on are used against you. You are reminded that there is support available despite trying to say that you aren't receiving any” – Student

“There is an overarching feeling that the ??? sees students as inconveniences. Pastoral support if not great and when problems arise, the ??? have not helped but actually made people feel worse.” – Student

26. A number of general comments mention a mixed response to support from Students Services and Student Wellbeing. Some praised the services but many found the support particularly around Mental

Health to be lacking both at school and institutional level. A small number of students commented on a lack of support for Special Educational Provisions, and a lack of staff awareness to these. Some cited a lack of support surrounding placements and more should be considered in supporting students returning from placement.

Assessment & Feedback

27. This is a notable area for improvement within the University with 24% of all negative comments relating to assessment and feedback, with only 5% of positive comments by comparison. All schools with the exception of History, Classics and Archaeology were mentioned in more negative comments that positive.

28. Students particularly highlighted a lack of diversity in assessment types, inconsistent or unhelpful feedback. Many students noted that feedback was often late and not of a quality that would help them improve. Students have criticised the guidance on assessments as being unhelpful or unclear.

“Absolutely 0 helpful guidelines on how to write a good assignment, no mark schemes, no past examples, feedback from previous assignments takes so long that can't use the very limited feedback to improve the next assignment. Amount of feedback has poor correlation to marks, for example getting 40% and the level of feedback is no difference to an essay where I got 70%.” – Student

“The final year lab project is not standardised and the level of support students receive varies dramatically. One student may receive weeks of feedback, with advice on structure for the oral presentation and the write up itself. Meanwhile, another student may not have seen their official supervisor for weeks and may only receive one limited piece of feedback at the set deadline. With this making up 40% of the final year mark, it seems like a lot of 'pot-luck' comes into play with the level of support you receive and thus the likelihood of reaching the top marks available.” – Student

29. Peer marking, particularly in relation to group work, was heavily criticised for a lack of consistency in marking and a poor reflection of student overall effort. The penalty system for late submission was noted as being unfair by several students, and it was suggested that reductions in marks should moderated or adjusted against the degree of lateness. Many suggested that they would benefit from the opportunity to receive ‘feed forward’ during modules to allow improvement or to be able to review exam scripts to understand areas of weakness. A large number of students highlighted the pressure of poorly scheduled exams causing additional stress.

30. School of Geography, Politics and Sociology received a notable number of positive comment although less than negative which praised a number of different assessment opportunities and feedback sessions. Also notably staff were praised for their support through the dissertation process.

Facilities & Resources

31. Results from ‘Facilities & Resources’ are equally balanced overall, although it should be noted that this is the only question area where the University was placed in the top quartile of full service universities in respect of the quantitative NSS 2019 results.

32. Negative comments are focussed on a lack of space in library facilities and the cost of library services or catering. Many students mentioned a lack suitable software available for specialised courses. Students were unhappy about a lack of course materials available through the library or available electronically. Several mentioned staff not making materials available online or producing ReCap materials which was seen as a valuable revision resource. Many students suggested that longer or even 24Hr access should be made available especially at peak times.

“I think the facilities available at Newcastle University, for example catering and study facilities, are pretty poor really. There aren't sufficient study spaces so during busy periods it's often difficult to find somewhere to study, the library isn't a great environment, and the cafes are expensive (with no discount for students), the food served isn't good quality or that nice, and there isn't really places you can go with your own food (you can't eat in the cafes with your own food, but then you're not supposed to eat in study spaces either).” – Student

33. Programmes that appeared to be particularly resource heavy were criticised as providing poor working spaces and a lack of materials which students are required to self-fund.

“The cost of the course is high in tuition fees. The cost of materials on the course is also high; students need to be given more financial assistance. The library seems to be lacking in a variety of ??? books.” – Student

34. Positive comments more generally praised library and campus facilities with little specifics. In particular the Business School was praised for its study spaces and good quality facilities.

“Newcastle University is clean and well maintained, lecture halls are spacious and well lit with technology that never falters. The campus is attractive, I really like the gardens, and there are often stalls and activities happening, including brands giving out free produce, which I love!” – Student

Learning Community

35. Fewer comments were categorised as relating to Learning Community, with 12% of positive comments and 7% of negative comments. Schools that were mentioned favourably in comments were Geography, Politics and Sociology (+22), the Dental School (+16) and the Newcastle University Business School (+14).

36. Most comments are vague regarding what makes them feel as if there is a positive sense of community. Many Geography students stated a sense of positive relationships between staff and students. These comments were also combined with comments around field trips which may indicate that these activities have helped to foster a sense of community amongst this cohort. In the Dental School praise was given for the use of societies, and the work of the Schoolpart to foster good relationships. In particular integration between different year groups was cited as having a positive impact as well as staff referring to students as “junior colleagues”.

“The integration between year groups and within year groups on this course allows you to make friends with anybody and everybody! I have made friends in all 9 year groups that I have come into contact with (my own, and the 4 above and 4 below me). I also feel that all the clinical teachers and staff that spend a lot of time with us are not just my teachers, but are my colleagues and my friends. Newcastle Dental School really does feel like one very extended family! The Dental Student Society is just fantastic. Overall, I cannot express how happy I am to have chosen Newcastle Dental School, and I would recommend it to anybody who has the chance to be a part of it.” – Student

“Within my course, staff refer to the students as 'junior colleagues' which is something I think is really positive and fuels the community atmosphere in which every person is valued.” – Student

“The second year field course was a spectacular part of my degree and the lecturers that ran it inspired interest and enthusiasm in the assessment. The Physical Geography Department were magnificent in their sense of community and their ability to make students comfortable to talk about all issues that they have with the course or life at university. I would also like to say thank you to the lecturers that continue to inspire my love for Geography into the future” – Student

37. Combined Honours students gave mixed comments regarding a sense of community. Many of the students on Combined Honours praised the staff within Combined for creating a sense of community and putting students at the centre of this. Conversely many commented that they felt ostracised among the Schools of their combined programme as they did not feel part of the cohorts and felt that staff often focussed teaching on those completing single honours leaving combined students feeling left out.

“As a Joint Honours student, this was sometimes overlooked in modules where Single Honours were present e.g., some lecturers assumed all students knew the basics or that all students had done complimentary modules beforehand.” – Student

38. In general negative comments suggested that students were made to feel that there was an ‘us and them’ feeling between staff and students. Some students suggested that they felt a lack of diversity and several felt that there could be more done by the University and individual schools to better integrate

students and acclimatise them to university life. More opportunities to socialise within cohorts and with staff may help to remedy this.

“Social engagement, the only event organized in which school staff are invited is the ball, students don't get the chance to interact with staff outside lecturing hours. Social cohesion within the school could be improved through having more talks and events organized outside teaching hours.” – Student

Learning Opportunities

39. There was a largely positive reaction to Learning Opportunity, with 25% of positive comments compared to 12% of negative comments. Schools that were mentioned favourably in comments were the Medical Education (+32), Natural and Environmental Sciences (+25) and Geography, Politics and Sociology (+25).

40. In Medical Education many students mentioned positively the opportunity of placements and practicing their learning in a real life and having interactions with real patients. Politics were credited for having a broad choice of modules and a flexible approach that allow students more breadth in their learning. Geography and Biology were praised for their mixture of field work and modules and in particular modules designed to support students’ academic skills.

“I like the way you can overlap subject and it bring in different perspectives, it's not just a Politics course. The modules are very wide ranging. If you want to specify in a specific aspect of politics, there's a range of modules you can access.” – Student

“I would recommend the course to anybody interested in doing Social Sciences because there is a breadth of module choices. The course challenges you as much as you want to challenge yourself and the support the staff give you is the best you can imagine. The university provides you with ample career and research opportunities.” – Student

“The depth of knowledge I have acquired on my course, which has led to confident application in real life practice and a confidence that I have gained everything I can from university.” – Student

“Student Selected Components which allow us to pursue a particular area of interest in depth, are invaluable and provide a unique opportunity to work with a particular team or in a particular environment for an extended period of time, something that are not always available in other areas of the course. It also gives a chance to experience specialisms, which was not covered by the core curriculum. Elective was an incredible experience and privilege to be able to experience another healthcare system, culture and approach to both medicine and life. I really feel it helped and make us more rounded individuals.” – Student

41. In general students who commented negatively regarding their learning opportunities suggested that they were either unhappy with the range or restricted nature of their course, course material failed to relate or prepare for post academic life or that there was a lack of opportunity to link with external employers and careers. Those who spoke positively often mentioned a range of module types and a breadth of choice, the opportunity to work with or hear from external speakers or organisations and the opportunity to put learning into practice.

Organisation & Management

42. There seems to have been a more negative response with only 8% of positive comments compared to 21% of negative comments relating to Organisation & Management, when considering this against qualitative data where the University scored well This may indicate some negative bias in this area. All schools with the exception of History, Classics and Archaeology were mentioned in more negative comments that positive. Biomedical Sciences and the Newcastle University Business School were notably mentioned in many more negative comments than positive.

43. The majority of negative comments relate to a combination of poor communication from schools in relation to changes or absences, poor timetabling or scheduling of coursework, length of lectures/seminars and the impact of strikes. Generally strike action was seen as being handled poorly

by the University and they felt poorly compensated for the disruption to their learning and the impact it had on their learning and subsequent examinations.

“The timetable is a very important issue. It is very hard to plan anything, work or extracurricular, around our current timetable, which is never the same from week to week. That would be the biggest criticism” – Student

“Timetable is impossible. Lecture 4 hours long on Wednesday is too long need at least an hour break and sometimes lecturers need to be more like aware of what they are teaching. Need to make it more stimulating to keep people coming right now it's quite boring.” – Student

“The strike action (2018), particularly the way it was communicated and handled by the University had a serious impact on my overall experience.” – Student

44. Positive comments are more general in their relation to the organisation and refer to good organisation or well-structured courses.

Student Voice

45. Very few comments related directly to student voice or students union, with only 4% of overall positive and negative comments relating to this. Where schools were mentioned negatively comments focussed on the lack of perceived ability for the school to act on feedback that was provided.

“There always seems like a huge pressure to give feedback but they don't act on it and get defensive. So, you feel like giving up on giving feedback but then you get penalised if you don't fill it out. Therefore, it feels like they only want positive feedback” – Student

“We are required to give feedback but not often well received by staff and they will give reasons as to why your feedback is invalid and take it personally, dealing with ??? as a whole or central university organisation as a whole then things become less well organised and less helpful when we have problems” – Student

“Student feedback is never acted on. When a lecturer is reported for malpractice/incompetence, nothing occurs” – Student

46. The Students’ Union is criticised for not being representative of student opinion and having limited authority to make change based on student feedback. More generally they are criticised for not providing more social aspects to the student experience.

47. Conversely some students reported positive interactions with the students’ union and student staff committee. In Particular the Dental School and Architecture Planning & Landscaping were praised for listening to and responding to student feedback.

“The school is making a concerted effort to rethink the way that architecture is taught and assessed in the March, towards a more heavily student led course (including the review system) and encouraging more experimental practices and representations. Whilst this is still in its infancy it's been great to be a part of this, and I feel that staff are genuinely invested in this.” – Student

“Student Voice - Staff-Student Committees brilliant. Every concern or item mentioned by students was given consideration and accommodated if at all possible. Countless opportunities for students to provide feedback, which was considered and acted upon if necessary.” – Student

48. Certainly it appears that students respond more favourably to questions on student voice where schools have been open and transparent regarding the processing of feedback. Where schools have tried to justify their currently position and marginalise feedback from students, this has left students feeling unappreciated or disrespected. This too may have a negative effect on a sense of community within the school.

Teaching on the Course

49. In general the majority of comments that related to Teaching were positive with 33% of all positive comments made. However in comparison 19% of all negative comments related to Teaching. Schools

who were mentioned more positively than negatively include Geography, Politics and Sociology (+55) and History, Classics and Archaeology (+32).

50. In these schools positives mentioned related to the general level of engagement from staff and the quality of the teaching students received. Students also praised staff who were knowledgeable or well respected in their field, although this is countered by some comments suggesting that staff who were knowledgeable in their field sometimes lacked in their ability to teach this material.

“Getting taught by experts in their field created a very stimulating environment to learn. Some modules flowed perfectly into each other making the learning experience even better.” – Student

“A minority group of the staff members are distinguished academics, but need to improve their teaching style so as to provide the students with clear basic knowledge and thus give them the time and the basic understanding of the module to conduct further research and study on their own. Some teachers truly struggle to engage the class which usually results in bad grades, lack of interest, etc.” – Student

“During third year, many of the lecturers that cover the in-depth and niche topics are very smart but very bad at lecturing; they are far better researchers than presenters.” – Student

51. In general most positive comment praised the nature of the teaching and the mixture of lecture, seminars and workshops. It would seem that in the majority of cases students reported a positive experience of teaching at the University but where they experienced what they felt as poor teaching they felt the need to comment on this. Having teaching staff with relevant experience was praised as this allowed students to see real world applications to their degree. Often language or understanding the lecturer was mentioned as a negative, however this is a sensitive issue which is difficult to control.

“Teachers with relative to course professional experience are diamonds among rocks, they deliver in-depth explanation for each part of the subject and even beyond, which is clear that they know what they are teaching (I down suggest it's a potentially compulsory criteria, but when you see a person who has mastered your future profession, its valuable and enjoyable experience to learn from them). Another joyful moment is when a theoretical statement was spotted in real life and analysed in-depth, putting an idea in every students head that what they do is actually applicable (not water), and does matter, thus making them feel that each one of them can make a difference (which is obviously main driver factor for choosing employment option in future).” – Student

“Some lecturers are stuck in the past and need to update the way they teach, as they aren't engaging within their lectures.” – Student

“Most of my lecturers and seminar leaders have no professional experience in the field that they are teaching.” – Student

“Also, some lectures are outdated, it is important to follow new approaches in learning, more teamwork practice + have more relevant modules that could be useful for your professional life after graduation.” – Student

Additional Findings

52. Many student discussed feeling as though they had not received ‘value for money’ from their course. Through reading the context of these comments it would appear that there is a possible misconception or mismatch of expectation vs reality.

53. This issue is an issue for not only the University but the HE sector as a whole. Many students mentioned ‘paying £9000 per year’ which is their perception of the situation given the documentation provided and government and media commentary. In reality students have not had to ‘pay’ and recent research suggests that approx. 85% of students will not pay back loans and fees in full. Under this rationale students need to be educated better in terms of how tuition fees are paid and recouped in order to better mitigate student opinion.

54. Conversely students will be expected to repay tuition fees once they have met the minimum salary threshold and they are fully aware the University receives the full tuition fee amount for their

attendance. Therefore it seems clear that students want to know or see what their money is being spent on. Many student comments suggested that they felt contact hours were a reflection of ‘value’ therefore students on courses with low contact hours felt they were not getting the same level of service as those with a greater amount of contact or staff support. Many students also commented on a lack of resources, be that books, e-books, software or more general catering as being the source of frustration. The negative feelings towards ‘value’ may also have been influenced by staff strike action as some students mentioned not receiving any ‘reimbursement’ for loss of teaching provision during this time. And that the university was perceived to not provide adequate compensation.

55. In relation to key areas of development resulting from NSS survey such as Learning Community and Assessment & Feedback; it is clear that students feel there needs to be better clarity in assessment expectations and marking criteria. Many of the students commented on a perceived feeling of favouritism or inconsistency in marks with little feedback to suggest how to improve. Schools should be encouraged to review their internal consistency checks with the possibility of making these more transparent to students. Allowing students the opportunity to review exams and assignments with an unbiased staff member may help with the perception of inconsistency.

56. Learning communities are a difficult concept to make solid recommendations on but it does appear that students within smaller cohorts appear to experience a greater sense of community. However larger cohorts also reported positively on their experience.

Action Requested

25. University Executive Board is asked to consider the NSS 2019 results, in order to contribute to

discussion and action planning.

Appendix 1: School level comment results

Positive Comments Negative Comments Difference in Comments