Results of the NewcastleUniversity Institutional Student Survey
First year students
April 2008
Page 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART A. ANALYSIS OF THE QUANTITATIVE DATA
1. NUMBER AND DEMOGRAPHY OF RESPONDENTS
2. GENERAL QUANTITATIVE RESULTS
2.1. Overall rating of the University and programme of study
2.2.Overall satisfaction scores in general categories
2.3. Faculty level analysis of satisfaction scores in all general categories
2.4. Satisfaction scores in all general categories for various demographic groups
3.UNIVERSITY LEVEL ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO PARTICULAR QUESTIONS
3.1.Registration and induction
3.1.1.General questions about registration and induction
3.1.2.Questions about central registration event
3.1.3.Questions about Freshers’ week
3.1.4.Questions about support from others
3.2.Aspects of teaching and learning
3.2.1.Questions about contact with staff
3.2.2.Questions about organisation of the degree programme
3.2.3.Questions about assessment and feedback
3.2.4.Agreement with particular statements
3.3.Accommodation
3.4.Union Society
3.5.Safety
3.6.International students
4.FACULTY AND SCHOOL LEVEL ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO PARTICULAR QUESTIONS
4.1.Registration and induction on faculty level
4.2..Registration and induction on school level
4.2.1.HaSS Faculty
4.2.2.SAgE Faculty
4.2.3.Faculty of Medical Sciences
4.3.Contact with staff on faculty level
4.4.Contact with staff on school level
4.4.1.HaSS Faculty
4.4.2.SAgE Faculty
4.4.3.Faculty of Medical Sciences
4.5.Organisation of the degree programme on faculty level
4.6.Organisation of the degree programme on school level
4.6.1.HaSS Faculty
4.6.2.SAgE Faculty
4.6.3.Faculty of Medical Sciences
4.7.Assessment and feedback on faculty level
4.8.Assessment and feedback on school level
4.8.1.HaSS Faculty
4.8.2.SAgE Faculty
4.8.3.Faculty of Medical Sciences
4.9.Agreement with particular statements on faculty level
4.10.Agreement with particular statements on school level
4.10.1.HaSS Faculty
4.10.2.SAgE Faculty
4.10.3.Faculty of Medical Sciences
5. COMPARATIVE ANALSYS OF RESULTS OF 2008, 2007 and 2006 SURVEYS
5.1. Significant improvements
5.2. Significant decreases in levels of satisfaction
PART B. ANALYSIS OF THE QUALITATIVE DATA
1. THEMES FROM THE QUALITATIVE DATA
1.1. Information and Communication
1.2.Academic Life
1.2.1.Teaching and learning
1.2.2.Assessment and feedback
1.3.Social aspects
1.3.1.Freshers’ Week
1.3.2.Accommodation.
1.3.3.The Union Society
1.3.4. Safety
1.4. General comments
1
PART A
ANALYSIS OF THE QUANTITATIVE DATA
1. NUMBER AND DEMOGRAPHY OF RESPONDENTS
1424 first year students responded to the institutional student survey that was carried out in February-March 2008. (Note that a further 25 students enrolled on the INTO programme have attempted to answer the questionnaire but as the majority of the questions were not relevant to them, their responses were excluded from the analysis).
Tables 1.1-1.3 summarise the number of responses as a factor of various demographicaspects.
Table 1.1. Number of first year students who participated in the survey by faculty and school.
Faculty / School / Number of respondents / % of school students / % of all respondentsHASS / D-HSSO / 40 / 24% / 2.8%
D-ECLS / 32 / 33% / 2.2%
D-NUBS / 122 / 24% / 8.6%
D-SACS / 31 / 14% / 2.2%
D-SAPL / 62 / 33% / 4.4%
D-SELS / 88 / 34% / 6.2%
D-SHIS / 88 / 26% / 6.2%
D-SLAW / 117 / 66% / 8.2%
D-SMLS / 63 / 28% / 4.4%
D-SSCI / 109 / 29% / 7.7%
SAGE / D-SFAC / 32 / 31% / 2.2%
D-AFRD / 58 / 26% / 4.1%
D-BIOL / 44 / 34% / 3.1%
D-CEAM / 25 / 27% / 1.8%
D-CIVG / 29 / 23% / 2.0%
D-COMP / 47 / 36% / 3.3%
D-EECE / 19 / 40% / 1.3%
D-MAST / 27 / 17% / 1.9%
D-MATH / 38 / 27% / 2.7%
D-MECH / 20 / 21% / 1.4%
D-NSCI / 26 / 24% / 1.8%
MED / D-FMSO / 130 / 56% / 9.1%
D-CAMB / 96 / 37% / 6.7%
D-DENT / 36 / 40% / 2.5%
D-PSYC / 45 / 35% / 3.2%
Total / 1424 / 100%
Table 1.2. Number of first year students who participated in the survey by gender.
Gender / Number of responses / % of all respondentsMale / 572 / 40.2%
Female / 852 / 59.8%
Total / 1424 / 100%
Tables 1.3. Number of first year students who participated in the survey by fee category.
Fee category / Number of responses / % of all respondentsHome UK / 1246 / 87.5%
International / 92 / 6.5%
Channel Islands / 7 / 0.5%
Home EU / 79 / 5.5%
Total / 1424 / 100%
The majority of the questions asked respondents to rate the degree of their satisfaction or their agreements with particular statement on the scale from 1 to 5, where 1 stood for “very dissatisfied/strongly disagree” and 5 stood for “very satisfied/strongly agree”. All quantitative analyses of responses were carried out using SPSS program.
2. GENERAL QUANTITATIVE RESULTS
2.1. Overall rating of the University and programme of study
Students’ overall satisfaction with the University was quite high with an average score of 4.24. Students’ satisfaction with their programme of study was also reasonably high with the average score of 3.99. Both of these ratings are slightly although not significantly higher than last year’s scores.
The differences in satisfaction with the University overall were found to be significantly different between HaSS and FMS with FMS attaining a higher mean score. Figure 2.1 below illustrates the differences in mean satisfaction rates with the University across the faculties.
Satisfaction rates with the programme of study were significantly different across all three faculties: FMS had higher mean values than either HaSS or SAgE. Figure2.2 below illustrates the differences in mean satisfaction rates with the programme of study across the faculties.
Figure 2.1.Mean satisfaction rates with the University overall by faculty.
Figure 2.2.Mean satisfaction rates with the programme of study by faculty.
Table 2.1 presents the mean values of satisfaction scores for university and programme of study on faculty level.
Table 2.1. Mean satisfaction scores by faculty.
FacultyF-HASS / F-SAGE / F-MED
N / mean / N / mean / N / mean
The University overall / 620 / 4.20 / 279 / 4.25 / 240 / 4.36
Your programme of study / 613 / 3.84 / 278 / 3.95 / 241 / 4.39
The results of one-way ANOVA analysis indicated that satisfaction with the University was also significantly influenced by factors as students’ place of residence and age. Table 2.2 demonstrates that satisfaction rates with the University are significantly higher for the students who live in the University accommodation compared with those who live at home or in private accommodation.
Table 2.2. Mean values of answers to the question “Please indicate your OVERALL satisfaction with the University during your 1st year so far” by students’ place of residence.
Place of residenceUniversity accommodation / At home / Private accommodation
N / mean / N / mean / N / mean
The University overall / 898 / 4.31 / 128 / 3.99 / 101 / 4.00
The differences in satisfaction with the particular programme of study were found to be significantly different depending on gender. As Table 2.3 shows, female students are more satisfied with their degree programmes than male students.
Table 2.3. Mean values of answers to the question “Please indicate your OVERALL satisfaction with your programme of study during your 1st year so far” by gender.
GenderMale / Female
N / mean / N / mean
Your programme of study / 443 / 3.92 / 695 / 4.03
A correlation analysis revealed that every single individual question and issue had an impact on overall satisfaction rates. The 10 most highly correlated influences are listed in Tables 2.4 and 2.5 below in order of importance.
Table 2.4.Issues most highly correlated with the satisfaction with the University overall.
Rank / Issue1 / Freshers’ week as an introduction to life at University
2 / Freshers’ week value for money offered
3 / Range of activities offered during Freshers’ week
4 / Your university accommodation as way of helping you integrate into University life
5 / The lectures and seminars scheduled for my modules provide a good learning experience
6 / The mix of students in your accommodation
7 / Teaching staff or personal tutors are understanding of my personal responsibilities outside University (e.g. part-time work, family or caring responsibilities)
8 / The safety of students is high on the Union Society's agenda
9 / The safety of students is high on the University's agenda
10 / The Union’s sports and societies services
Table 2.5.Issues most highly correlated with the satisfaction with the programme of studies.
Rank / Issue1 / The lectures and seminars scheduled for my modules provide a good learning experience
2 / Teaching staff or personal tutors are understanding of my personal responsibilities outside University (e.g. part-time work, family or caring responsibilities)
3 / Availability of individual academic guidance from staff in your School
4 / Support from School/subject area office staff
5 / The information given to you by your School about your programme during registration and induction period
6 / Your introduction to what is expected of you academically at NewcastleUniversity during registration and induction period
6 / Responsiveness of staff to student input and opinion
6 / Comprehensive, written information about your degree programme
9 / The helpfulness of staff within your School during registration and induction period
10 / There is consistent use of the marking scale across assessments
Students were also asked whether or not they would recommend NewcastleUniversity to a prospective student. The percentage of ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers on both university and faculty level is presented in the Table 2.6. below.
Table 2.6.Percent of yes/no answers to the question “Would you recommend this University to a prospective student?”
Faculty / UniversityF-HAS / F-SAG / F-MED
Yes / No / Yes / No / Yes / No / Yes / No
96.8% / 3.2% / 96.8% / 3.2% / 98.3% / 1.7% / 97.1% / 2.9%
The analysis of qualitative data elaborates further on students’ reasons for their negative or positive answer to this question (see section 1.4 in part B, page63).
2.2.Overall satisfaction scores in general categories
Overall satisfaction scores were calculated to reflect students’ responses in the following general categories:
- Registration and induction
- Central induction event
- Freshers’ week
- Academic matters/Aspects of teaching and learning
- Assessment and feedback
- Accommodation
- Union Society
- Safety
Central registration event was treated as a separate category because responses from the Faculty of Medical Sciences students had to be excluded given that the event was run for HaSS and SAgE students only but a substantial number of medical students attempted to answer the questions relating to that event. It was also deemed necessary to separate Assessment and Feedback from other aspects of teaching and learning because the patterns of responses and qualitative data showed that students treated this issue as different.
The overall scores were obtained by calculating the mean value of each respondent’s answers to all of the questions relating to each of these categories and then calculating the mean for all respondents.
The results of one-way ANOVA showed that satisfaction scores were significantly different across all eight categories. Table 2.7 demonstrates means and standard deviations of satisfaction scores in all categories in order from highest to lowest scores.
Table 2.7.Descriptive statistics for overall satisfaction scores arranged from the highest to the lowest.
Category / Mean / SD / NumberCentral induction event / 3.915 / 0.706 / 884
Academic matters / 3.722 / 0.592 / 1223
Registration and induction / 3.718 / 0.658 / 1302
Safety / 3.622 / 0.663 / 1164
Assessment and feedback / 3.568 / 0.613 / 1192
Accommodation / 3.514 / 0.694 / 931
Freshers’ Week / 3.464 / 0.757 / 1261
Union Society / 3.452 / 0.673 / 1165
These findings seems to indicate that first year students were quite satisfied with the matters relating to registration and induction (especially central induction event) and general academic matters. They were less satisfied with matters relating to safety, assessment and feedback, and accommodation and were least satisfied with matters relating to Freshers’ week and Union Society. It is important to note that various aspects of Freshers’ week were found to be the top 3 issues that most strongly correlated with the students’ overall satisfaction with the University. In this light, it is somewhat alarming to find that overall satisfaction with Freshers’ week is relatively low.
2.3. Faculty level analysis of satisfaction scores in all general categories
Figure 2.3 and Table 2.8below illustrate the overall satisfaction scores for the eight general categories across all faculties.
1
Figure 2.3. Overall satisfaction scores in all general categories by faculty.
NB Overall scores for central induction event for Faculty of Medical Sciences should be disregarded as the registration event was run for HaSS and SAgE students only and medical students were specifically asked not to answer questions about it.
1
Table 2.8. Overall satisfaction scores for all general categories by faculty (scores that are significantly different are in bold, red colour represents significantly higher scores, green colour represents significantly lower scores).
Category / FacultyF-HASS / F-SAGE / F-MED
number / mean / number / mean / number / mean
Registration and induction / 697 / 3.61 / 329 / 3.72 / 276 / 4.00
Central induction event / 601 / 3.94 / 283 / 3.87 / *135 / n/a
Freshers’ week / 679 / 3.45 / 314 / 3.48 / 268 / 3.49
Academic matters / 661 / 3.70 / 302 / 3.65 / 260 / 3.89
Assessment and feedback / 646 / 3.58 / 294 / 3.44 / 252 / 3.68
Accommodation / **515 / 3.48 / **209 / 3.46 / **202 / 3.66
Union Society / 630 / 3.46 / 289 / 3.41 / 246 / 3.48
Safety / 632 / 3.60 / 287 / 3.63 / 245 / 3.67
* These responses were excluded and overall score disregarded for F-MED as the registration event was run for F-HASS and F-SAGE only and medical students were specifically asked not to answer questions about it.
** Only responses from students who live in University accommodation were considered here, hence the number of responses is notably lower.
The results of a one-way ANOVA showed that the satisfaction scores were significantly different between the faculties in the following categories:
- Registration and induction (scores for Medical Faculty were significantly higher than for both HaSS and SAgE).
- Academic matters(scores for Medical Faculty were significantly higher than for both HaSS and SAgE).
- Assessment and feedback (scores for both HaSS and Medical Faculty were significantly higher than for SAgE).
- Accommodation(scores for Medical Faculty were significantly higher than for both HaSS and SAgE).
2.4. Satisfaction scores in all general categories for various demographic groups
It was found that overall satisfaction scores in the following categories differed significantly depending on gender (see Table 2.9):
- Central induction event (female students were more satisfied than male students)
- Freshers’ week (male students were more satisfied than female students)
- Academic matters (female students were more satisfied than male students)
- Union Society (female students were more satisfied than male students)
Table 2.9.Overall satisfaction scores in all general categories by gender.
Category / GenderMale / Female
number / mean / number / mean
Central induction event / 372 / 3.83 / 512 / 3.97
Freshers’ week / 494 / 3.54 / 767 / 3.41
Academic matters / 477 / 3.67 / 746 / 3.75
Union Society / 456 / 3.39 / 709 / 3.49
The analysis also showed that the satisfaction scores in accommodation category differed significantly depending on fee category – international students (mean 3.80) were more satisfied with their university accommodation than Home UK students (mean 3.50).
Satisfaction scores for Freshers’ week were also significantly influenced by the factor of students’ residence. Students living at home (mean 3.31) and in private rented accommodation (mean 3.18) were less satisfied compared to those who live in the University accommodation (mean 3.52).
3.UNIVERSITY LEVEL ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO PARTICULAR QUESTIONS
3.1.Registration and induction
3.1.1.General questions about registration and induction
Most respondents were satisfied with the various aspects of registration and induction. Table 3.1 lists mean scores, standard deviations, and number of respondents to particular questions about registration and induction. The sub-questions are ranked in the descending order of satisfaction scores, so that those aspects that students were most satisfied with appear in the top rows of the table and those that students were least satisfied with appear in the bottom rows of the table.
Table 3.1.Descriptive statistics for answers to the question“When you first arrived at Newcastle University, and during the first 1 or 2 weeks you were here, including registration and induction week, how satisfied were you with the following?”
Mean / SD / NThe helpfulness of staff within your School / 3.94 / 0.823 / 1302
The information given to you by your School about your programme / 3.88 / 0.926 / 1301
The efficiency of registration in your School / 3.82 / 0.937 / 1301
Your introduction to what is expected of you academically at NewcastleUniversity / 3.79 / 0.880 / 1295
The details given on how to understand your timetable / 3.61 / 1.118 / 1293
The help you were given with the University's libraries / 3.60 / 1.072 / 1298
The help you were given with the University’s computing and IT facilities / 3.58 / 1.013 / 1301
The advice given to you about selecting modules (only for those students who have a choice of modules) / 3.33 / 1.056 / 868
As can be observed from the table above, the students are less satisfied with the help they got in understanding their timetables and especially in choosing their modules. This echoes the results of the analysis of the qualitative data, which show that these two aspects represent a substantial concern for students (see section 1.1 in Part B, p.56)
Mean satisfaction scores for the following two aspects of the registration and induction were significantly different depending on the fee category of the respondents:
- The help you were given with the University’s computing and IT facilities
- The help you were given with the University’s libraries
In both cases International students were more satisfied than Home UK students (see Table 3.2 below).
Table 3.2.Mean satisfaction scores for aspects of registration and induction by fee category (scores that are significantly different are in bold, red colour represents significantly higher scores, green colour represents significantly lower scores).
Fee categoryHome UK / International / Channel Islands / Home EU
The help you were given with the University's libraries / 3.55 / 3.87 / 3.43 / 3.79
The help you were given with the University’s computing and IT facilities / 3.57 / 3.93 / 3.57 / 3.81
Respondents were also asked to evaluate the amount of information they received during the induction week by choosing from the following options: too much, just about right, not enough. Table 3.3 shows frequency of particular responses to that question.
Table 3.3.Frequency of responses to the question “Overall, how would you describe the quantity of information provided during your first 1 or 2 weeks here?”
Too much / Just about right / Not enoughN / Percent / N / Percent / N / Percent
140 / 10.8% / 1042 / 80.2% / 117 / 9.0%
Although the majority of the respondents judged the amount of information they received as being right for them, the qualitative data reveals that quantity and quality of information was one of the major over-arching topics that students discussed in the open text questions. In particular, they commented about information during registration and induction week, the analysis of these comments can be found in section 1.1 in Part B, p.55.
3.1.2.Questionsabout central registration event
HaSS and SAgE students appear to be quite satisfied with all aspects of the central induction event that was organised for them in the City Hall. However, the satisfaction scores were fairly low for one particular aspect of this event: