Students’ Union Teaching Awards Report June 2014

Introduction

This section should include an overall outline of your project timeline from the planning stage right through to executing the project. The following questions may help shape your write up:

Which awards were chosen and why? What responses were you looking for from those awards?

Who was involved in the project? How did you promote the project?

2013-2014 was the third year that we have been involved in the Student-Led Teaching Awards – ours being branded as the Students’ Union Teaching Awards. The two years previous, the awards had very much been a success, but this year we wanted to ensure that the data set we’d acquire could be utilised for other projects that we are involved in.

We began planning the awards on the 4th November with a project team led by our Deputy CEO, Academic Vice President and Student Experience Vice President. We also had staff representation on the group from Student Engagement, Marketing and Business Development.

We had Faculty Reps involved in setting the categories and criteria, which was facilitated by the Academic Vice President. We decided that we wanted to continue with the awards we had used in previous years, but to ensure that they were kept relevant we tweaked the criteria to suit. The awards were as follows:

  • Inspirational Lecturer Award
  • Cutting Edge Teaching Style
  • Outstanding Personal Tutor Award
  • Dr Nicholas Musgrove Award for Exceptional Support Staff
  • DVC Award for Outstanding Achievement

In addition to this, we decided to introduce three new awards that we felt students receive support in other areas aside from teaching and learning that can really enhance their student experience.

  • International Support Award
  • Placement Support Award
  • Employability Enhancement Award

Go into reasons for the new awards here…..

Our marketing department developed an excellent campaign which not only aimed to raise the profile of the awards, but encouraged students to nominate. In an attempt to get real buy in from the University, the Academic VP gave a presentation the Deans of Faculties. This outlined the rationale for the awards, how they differed from the University’s awards, and how their involvement and support would be invaluable. We hoped that the information would pass through the appropriate channels to other members of staff and equally get them on board. The Academic VP briefed all Faculty Councils about the awards that students could nominate for and what constituted good reason for their nominations based on the categories and criteria. A good communication channel was also created between the Academic VP and Student Experience leads of faculties, namely Associate Deans and/or Principal Lecturers, which gave them an insight into the progress we were making, and also the progress that their respective faculties were making in regards to the amount of nominations they had received. Reps of the Students’ Union were also encouraged to promote the Students’ Union Teaching Awards to their individual network of students.

Results

The SU was delighted to receive 651 nominations in total. This was treble the number of nominations received in 2012 and 2013 and, indeed, more than those two years’ nominations combined.

Award / Number of nominations / Number of staff nominated
Inspirational Lecturer Award / 321 / 161
Cutting Edge Teaching Style / 87 / 59
Outstanding Personal Tutor Award / 132 / 95
Dr Nicholas Musgrove Award for Exceptional Support Staff / 68 / 47
International Support Award / 12 / 7
Placement Support Award / 19 / 19
Employability Enhancement Award / 12 / 11
DVC Award for Outstanding Achievement / N/A / N/A
Total / 651 / 399

Evaluation:

What do your nominations tell you?

What did your results show? Were any themes particularly prominent?

We analysed our data in two ways. The first was by taking a cross section sample of all of the nominations consisting of 50 nominations in total. We used thematic analysis to code our data, so we initially pulled out the themes in each nomination and then coded these themes into categories. From this cross sample students nominated their lecturers for being the following:

  • Interesting
  • Inspirational
  • Passionate and knowledgeable about their subject
  • Creative Teaching
  • Helpful
  • Accessible and approachable
  • Empathetic and supportive
  • Give advice and guidance

We also coded our data, again using thematic analysis, but instead looked at all the nominations for each award and looked at the trends that students had used in their nominations.

For our International Support Award, students nominated members of staff who had helped them settle in, provided them with advice both academic and personal, and were generally a friendly face to them in their time of need. Members of staff were nominated for our Employability Enhancement award for building students’ confidence in their subject area and skills, helped them to get the most out of their course and instilled the importance of volunteering. They were supportive, knowledgeable and motivating. Our Placement Support award was open to members of staff who may not necessarily be academic teaching staff, but who supported students on their placements, for example, staff nurses in hospitals. Nominees in this category provided support before students’ placements as well as throughout, they had passion and real enthusiasm for what they do, and they provided help, advice and guidance while remaining professional throughout. Our Support Staff award, this year, was kept in honour of a member of staff who tragically died a few years ago, but is still remembered for the outstanding support they provided to students. The trends that appeared out of these nominations were that staff were accessible and approachable, they were proactive and engaging, played a pastoral role to students in providing advice and guidance, and positively influenced the student experience. Lecturers nominated for the Cutting Edge Teaching Style award demonstrated real enthusiasm for their subject that keeps students engaged in one session to the next. They are able to make difficult/detailed subject areas clear and understandable, and encouraged open debate and discussion in their lectures for students to get openly involved. Our Personal Tutor award always remains an interesting one because, although we encourage personal tutors to be nominated, students repeatedly nominate members of staff who are not their allocated personal tutor, but have still played that role to students. Staff nominated for this award kept students on track, preventing students from dropping out (whether they knew it or not!). They acted with discretion, kindness and friendliness when responding to students’ needs, and treated students as individuals and kept their best interests at heart. For our Inspirational Lecturer Award, staff were a role model who students aspire to – both academically and personally. They were motivating, enthusiastic and inspiring. Interestingly, students had nominated members of staff for being ‘firm but fair’. Students seemingly respected that these members of staff weren’t the soft touch and actively encouraged students to achieve better by improving themselves and their work.

We recently asked the winners of our awards to come and have an informal chat with us about how it felt to win their award, and what they feel they do that warranted them winning their awards. Karen Green, the winner of the Inspirational Lecturer award, stated that she arrives to her lectures early and will put music on in the background. She said that this helps relieve the stresses that students encounter before they come to the lectures. Gradually, she can see the change in students and within 5-10 minutes they are ready to learn. Karen explained that she has to learn from her students, and the hypothetical moment she declares that she’s superior to her students is the moment she sets them up to fail. She knows that her students are the most current in their subject field as they’re the ones out on practice – something Karen hasn’t done for 6 years. Another of our winners Thaisa Whistance, stated that she always ensures that she explains to her students why they need to know what they’re learning. Karen also agreed with this point – particularly as her discipline is nursing.

This year we wanted to make sure that there was recognition from the University for our winners. At our meeting, we were able to discuss personal development opportunities. The Centre for Academic Practice has agreed to provide support to winners to gain their fellowships with the HEA. They will be paying for their application fees and mentoring them through the application process.

What have you gained from being part of this NUS/HEA Project?

Being involved in the NUS/HEA project this year allowed us to look at different ways to utilise our data post awards ceremony. It has also helped us to gain a greater buy in from different key players of the University to shed the cynicism that has always been associated with the awards.

How has this year being involved in the project been different to if you had not been a part of the cohort? How have you gained from being part of this group? Would you encourage other SUs to be part of this cohort?

Sustainability and Recommendations for next year

This section of your report will allow reflection of your work to be considered whilst looking at improvements in the execution of the project to maximise impact. The following questions should be explored:

What does the HEA mean to you and your students’ union/institution?

What would your project have looked like without funding?

Where does this project fit with your strategic plans?

How will you improve your project to increase impact?

What will this project look like in 1 year, 3 years or 10 years’ time?

1 | Page