Hearing the student voice –
students as partners project
Sue Barnes
Senior Lecturer in Computing
Undergraduate Student Liaison and
Student Representation Co-ordinator
John Gardener
Senior Lecturer in Business and Marketing
Admissions Co-ordinator
Worcester Business School
=
+
Why was this research important?
Enhancing the student experience
 Audit current practice
 Uncover good practice
 Students as partners

Our Approach
Informal feedback from staff and students
regarding perceptions of current practice
 Students are active partners in their
learning experience
 Students care about the wider picture

Phase 1: Consultation

Understanding of partner students’
experiences of communication
◦ University managed resources
◦ External resources
Receiving messages
 Communication with university staff
 Staff perceptions of communication with
their students

Phase 2: Involvement
Following informal feedback
 We conducted:

◦ E-survey (targeting all WBS students)
◦ Focus groups (staff and students)
◦ WBS Staff away-day
Students reported these were used
Staff reported these were used
Phase 3: Participation
 Non-university
managed
resources for
communication:
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
Facebook
Text messages
Twitter
Blackberry messenger
Phone calls
Personal email
Online blog
Tumblr
Myspace
LinkedIn
Skype
Phase 3: Participation
 University
managed
resources for
communication:







SOLE
Blackboard
Netmail
ILS resources
Pebble Pad
Face-to-face
G drive /sky drive
Phase 4: Observations
Phase 4: Observations
Successes
Phase 5: Decisions

Too many channels of communication =
too much ‘noise’

Different approaches adopted =
confusion

Students unsure what happens to their
comments = reduced engagement
Suggestions
Student rep system (StARs)
 Central resource (SOLE / BLACKBOARD)
 Induction (USB)

Phase 6: Partner students

Part time students
◦ Longer timeframe for messages

Targeted messages
◦ So they are accessed by the right students

Non-university channels
◦ Confusing or necessary?

Ownership of messages
◦ Dated and ‘signed’
Phase 6: Our perceptions of
students as researchers
Active participation
 Engagement
 Ownership
 Interaction with staff




We strive to ensure that students are given
the best possible experience, but sometimes
it becomes evident that we can’t see the
wood for the trees.
We ask students to ‘commit to their studies’
but if we are asking them to keep in touch via
several channels of communication, is it little
wonder that there might be some loss of
message.
We use electronic, visual, face-to-face and the
written word. All have their place, but we
wanted to explore their appropriateness and
effectiveness.
Future reading
Campbell, F, Beasley L, Eland J and Rumpus A (2007) Hearing the
Student Voice, final report http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/13053/
Kay J, Dunne E and Hutchinson J (2010) Rethinking the values of
higher education – students as change agents
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Do
cuments/StudentsChangeAgents.pdf
Kidd W and Czerniawski Editors (2011) The Student Voice
Handbook: bridging the academic/ practitioner divide (Google
eBook) Emerald Group Publishing
Williams J and Cappuccini-Ansfield G (2007) Fitness for Purpose:
National and Institutional Approaches to Publicising the Student Voice
Quality in Higher Education, vol 13; 2, July 2007, 159-172