Unit Evaluation summary report semester 1 2009
Table 1 below shows the average value of the median for each of the five university-wide questions for each faculty for each of the six Australian and two international
campuses. In general, of the 2090 campus-based units evaluated in first semester 2009, the university’s offerings across the campuses fall into the category meeting
aspirations, with average medians in the range 3.60-4.69. At the Australian campuses, exceptions are the feedback question (UW4) for the Faculties of Engineering, and
Information Technology at Clayton, and the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences at Peninsula, where the 43 units are rated on average as needing improvement.
The units at the South Africa and Sunway campuses are also generally rated as meeting aspirations. Exceptions at South Africa are the units offered by the Faculty of
Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences which are rated as needing improvement on all questions (where closer analysis shows that this overall result is based on two units
regarded as needing critical attention). At Sunway the units offered by Arts are rated as needing improvement in the learning resources question, and for Pharmacy at
Sunway, the feedback and overall satisfaction questions are rated on average as needing improvement.
Table 1: Average UE median & (no. of units evaluated) by faculty and campus - university-wide questions semester 1 2009
Berwick
UW1: The unit
enabled me to
achieve its learning
objectives
UW2: I found the
unit to be
intellectually
stimulating
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
LAW
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
4.11 (23)
4.02 (31)
3.95 (10)
Caulfield
4.03 (87)
4.10 (111)
4.08 (181)
4.05 (62)
4.06 (40)
Clayton
4.12 (401)
4.03 (67)
4.10 (77)
3.96 (122)
3.89 (35)
4.21 (38)
4.05 (70)
Gippsland
Parkville
4.06 (10)
4.07 (68)
3.97 (51)
3.97 (40)
3.83 (13)
3.85 (9)
Peninsula
3.96 (26)
3.97 (45)
3.89 (21)
South Africa
4.18 (24)
4.01 (27)
3.94 (18)
4.03 (57)
3.96 (14)
3.92 (62)
3.94 (17)
3.95 (45)
3.57 (5)
3.96 (116)
4.02 (70)
3.98 (11)
3.79 (4)
3.84 (23)
3.95 (192)
4.21
3.98
3.94
3.96
4.06
3.84
3.84
4.02 (40)
4.04 (64)
4.05
3.88
4.07 (481)
4.07
4.16
4.06
3.86
3.99
4.06
4.02 (89)
4.07 (899)
4.27
4.04
4.17
3.94
3.74
4.32
4.09
4.17 (16)
4.00 (228)
4.18
4.09
3.96
4.01
3.97
3.91
4.02 (40)
3.81
3.96
3.96
3.93
3.57
3.92
4.04
4.01
3.94
4.08
4.09
4.15
4.12
4.03
4.01
Sunway
4.00
3.64
3.74
3.88
1
Berwick
UW3: The learning
resources in this
unit supported my
studies
UW4: The
feedback I received
in this unit was
useful
UW5: Overall I
was satisfied with
the quality of this
unit
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
LAW
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
LAW
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
LAW
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
Caulfield
4.11
3.91
3.75
3.97
4.01
4.02
3.96
3.98
Clayton
3.98
3.93
3.88
3.86
3.79
4.11
3.90
Gippsland
Parkville
3.74
4.03
3.90
3.91
3.72
3.78
Peninsula
3.80
3.94
3.87
South Africa
3.98
3.93
3.56
3.96
3.79
3.85
3.88
3.84
3.60
3.87
3.89
3.92
3.67
3.75
3.85
4.06
3.90
3.83
3.94
3.78
3.79
3.71
3.89
4.00
3.97
3.84
3.94
3.94
3.94
3.89
4.25
3.92
3.70
3.95
3.94
4.03
3.70
3.79
3.57
3.54
3.84
3.73
4.04
3.92
4.00
4.09
3.86
3.71
3.66
3.86
3.89
3.83
3.85
3.64
3.56
3.23
3.73
3.88
3.65
3.42
3.68
3.80
4.01
3.96
3.75
3.99
3.83
3.81
3.84
3.60
3.95
4.06
3.90
3.90
3.96
4.06
4.04
3.83
3.94
3.90
3.85
3.85
4.11
3.99
3.93
3.78
3.73
4.25
3.93
4.06
3.89
3.95
4.02
3.85
3.71
3.80
3.68
3.60
3.93
3.81
3.73
3.75
3.07
3.82
3.89
3.84
3.95
4.01
3.98
4.00
3.91
3.86
3.84
Sunway
3.88
3.65
3.63
3.84
2
Table 2 below shows the average value of the median for each of the five university-wide questions for each faculty offering units at locations other than a campus. In general,
the 84 units of this type evaluated in first semester 2009 are seen to meet aspirations. Exceptions are poor results in Singapore for Arts and Business & Economics, and the
Education unit offered in Hong Kong which was rated as needing improvement on the overall question. Note that Hong Kong and Singapore units are all offered off-campus.
Table 2: Average UE medians & (no. of units evaluated) for other locations by faculty - university-wide questions semester 1 2009
Alfred Hospital
UW1
UW2
UW3
UW4
UW5
Arts
BusEco
Edu
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Arts
BusEco
Edu
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Arts
BusEco
Edu
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Arts
BusEco
Edu
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Arts
BusEco
Edu
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
City Location
MMS - Alfred
4.05 (10)
Prato
Other Aus
4.50 (1)
4.19 (23)
Hong Kong
4.08 (2)
Singapore
3.14 (3)
3.67 (1)
3.83 (1)
4.25 (9)
4.08 (3)
4.18
4.11 (3)
2.97
3.00
4.33
4.08
4.23 (5)
4.10 (23)
3.94
4.50
4.00
4.32
4.52
4.28
3.81
4.50
4.00
3.83
3.91
4.13
3.02
3.25
4.16
4.00
3.90
4.10
3.90
4.40
4.10
3.83
3.87
4.04
3.42
2.75
4.10
4.00
3.82
3.73
3.95
4.40
4.02
3.50
4.19
3.78
3.14
2.67
4.22
3.95
4.30
3.98
3.86
3
Table 3 below shows the average value of the median for the “overall satisfaction” question for units offered in on-campus, off-campus and composite mode by each faculty
(the table omits the Hong Kong and Singapore units as these are all offered in off-campus mode and their results are shown in Table 2 above). In general, the 1607 on-campus
units evaluated in first semester 2009 were perceived to meet aspirations except for on-campus Education units offered in Gippsland which were rated on average as needing
improvement. The 212 off-campus units are also regarded as meeting aspirations apart from the single Business & Economics unit at Berwick. The composite units show
mixed results, with those offered by the Faculty of Arts at Clayton rated outstanding, but the single composite Arts unit at Gippsland seen as needing critical attention, as are
the Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences composite units at Gippsland.
Table 3: Average UE median & (no. of units evaluated) by faculty and mode – “overall satisfaction” question semester 1 2009
Mode
On-campus
Off-campus
Composite
Overall
Berwick
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Overall
Arts
Edu
MNHS
Overall
4.06 (23)
3.94 (30)
Caulfield
3.96 (85)
4.06 (111)
4.05 (170)
3.83 (10)
3.94 (58)
3.82 (22)
Clayton
4.10 (387)
3.99 (66)
3.90 (52)
3.78 (114)
3.73 (35)
4.25 (38)
3.86 (51)
Gippsland
3.93 (9)
4.05 (34)
4.06 (23)
3.58 (22)
3.64 (8)
4.25 (1)
Parkville
Peninsula
3.93 (26)
3.80 (44)
3.74 (16)
3.74 39
3.77 (33)
3.96 (63)
4.01 (446)
3.70 (2)
2.75 (1)
3.95 (11)
4.00 (4)
3.99 (18)
3.98 (89)
4.00 (832)
4.31 (12)
4.17 (1)
4.00 (24)
3.73 (8)
4.13 (19)
3.94 (11)
3.89 (124)
4.13 (1)
4.03 (33)
3.68 (28)
3.87 (18)
4.07 (5)
3.61 (8)
4.21 (3)
3.77 (33)
3.81 (109)
4.19 (1)
3.96 (3)
4.18 (7)
2.75 (1)
3.95 (64)
3.96 (35)
4.01 (481)
4.07 (64)
4.83 (2)
4.17 (1)
4.61 (3)
4.00 (899)
3.86 (5)
3.87 (101)
2.63 (1)
2.97 (2)
2.86 (3)
3.86 (228)
4.18 (7)
4.02 (4)
3.84 (40)
3.76 (3)
3.76 (3)
3.82 (116)
4
Table 4 below shows the average value of the median for the “overall satisfaction” question for each faculty by unit level (however note that given the Callista unit level
descriptors, 179 units do not appear to comply with the new Unit Coding Policy requiring the first numeric character to indicate course level). Units at all levels are evaluated
as meeting aspirations in first semester 2009, with the exception of Education and Pharmacy Level 2 units which are rated as needing improvement.
Table 4: Average UE median & (no. of units evaluated) by faculty and unit level – “overall satisfaction” question semester 1 2009
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Grand Total
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 9
Mixed
3.89 (29)
4.04 (32)
3.82 (23)
4.14 (11)
4.17 (1)
4.18 (1)
4.08 (117)
4.02 (156)
4.09 (150)
4.19 (37)
3.75 (12)
4.07 (186)
3.89 (77)
3.91 (102)
3.98 (126)
4.25 (12)
4.14 (53)
3.84 (8)
4.02 (33)
4.15 (11)
3.72 (18)
3.53 (11)
3.94 (14)
3.76 (79)
4.13 (46)
4.19 (4)
3.84 (24)
3.79 (46)
3.67 (49)
3.88 (62)
3.71 (15)
4.00 (1)
3.73 (27)
3.78 (37)
3.85 (38)
3.72 (4)
4.04 (31)
3.85 (13)
3.86 (1)
4.03 (2)
4.01 (5)
4.34 (33)
4.17 (25)
3.89 (33)
3.66 (48)
3.78 (50)
3.95 (46)
4.02 (37)
3.85 (13)
3.57 (10)
3.76 (10)
3.91 (4)
3.94 (1)
4.22 (6)
3.82 (13)
3.96 (39)
3.93 (55)
3.71 (1)
3.95 (4)
3.92 (368)
3.90 (483)
3.94 (520)
3.97 (289)
4.05 (221)
3.84 (8)
4.02 (57)
4.07 (202)
Table 5 below and Figure 1 on the following page show the distribution of medians for the “overall satisfaction” question for each faculty on a percentage (Table 1) and
frequency (Figure 1) basis respectively. There are variations between faculties, and while the proportion of units classed as outstanding is somewhat higher than the 4%
estimated in the proposal considered by LTQC, if the criterion were made more stringent then some faculties might have no units in this category.
Table 5: Percentage of units falling into each “traffic light” category for each faculty for “overall satisfaction” question, semester 1 2009
≤3.00
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
Grand Total
5.2%
4.1%
3.2%
10.5%
9.1%
12.7%
0.0%
6.4%
9.1%
4.7%
5.7%
3.01-3.59
14.4%
9.4%
12.4%
16.9%
19.8%
12.0%
6.1%
15.1%
13.6%
11.7%
12.6%
3.60-4.69
76.3%
77.1%
79.5%
65.1%
70.1%
72.7%
78.8%
76.6%
75.0%
82.0%
75.9%
≥4.70
4.1%
9.4%
5.0%
7.6%
1.0%
2.7%
15.2%
1.8%
2.3%
1.6%
5.7%
5
Figure 1: Number of units falling into each “traffic light” category for each faculty for “overall satisfaction” question, semester 1 2009
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
ArtDes
Arts
BusEco
Edu
Eng
InfoTech
Law
MNHS
Pharm
Sci
≥4.70
4
62
22
13
2
4
10
4
1
2
3.60-4.69
74
507
353
112
138
109
52
167
33
105
3.01-3.59
14
62
55
29
39
18
4
33
6
15
≤3.00
5
27
14
18
18
19
14
4
6
6