FROM
TO
Sonya Clark (Vice President Academic) and Jayendra Chhana
(Education Organiser)
Review Committee: Sociology and Social Policy Programme
Review.
31 October 2013 DATE
SUBJECT Student Submission
Kia ora Members of the Academic Programme Review Panel,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Sociology and Social Policy Programme as offered within the School of Social and Cultural Studies. Over the past month, VUWSA has been surveying Trimester Two Class Representatives from the Sociology and Social Policy Programme, as well as the general student population to gauge feedback on the Programme. The Class
Representative Submission has specifically looked at items on the Review’s Terms of Reference.
We have prepared the following submission from the survey results and subsequent feedback given by 16 respondents. This total includes 4 Class Representatives and 10 students majoring in
Sociology and Social Policy.
It is important to keep in mind that the class representatives who have responded to this survey have been specifically trained to gather informal feedback from class members throughout the trimester. They are also tasked with obtaining a general perspective of student opinion and feeding this back to their co-ordinators, School and the university as a whole. However, given the obvious low response rate, we would ask that the Panel use comments in this submission as a measure of triangulation with the other sources of data gathered.
Quantitatively, representation in the Sociology and Social Policy Programme is progressing well. In
Trimester Two of 2013, all nine undergraduate courses in Sociology and Social Policy have representatives. Consequently, our feedback should be considered to cover the range and depth of undergraduate and postgraduate courses offered within the Programme.
From the feedback received by VUWSA, the Sociology and Social Policy Programme should be commended on the delivery of its courses. In general, students feel that individual courses, as well as the major itself, are clearly articulated, organised and taught, that the Programme successfully
1

combines a research focus into the classroom setting, and that assessment activities are well conceived and applied.
Nevertheless, there are a few areas that may need addressing and improving.
We would suggest the following recommendations to be considered once a triangulation of data has occurred:
 That the School examine the variety and character of topics offered at the honours level.
Such a review might involve the variety of courses on offer or the scope and make up of individual courses.
 That the School examine ways of incorporating more small-group learning in higher level courses.
 That the School have a look at how transparent and accessible the support for struggling students is within this Programme across all years.
The following submission looks specifically at each of the items in the Terms of Reference.
1. To what extent is the design of the overall Programme and its courses comprehensive, current, coherent and clearly communicated to all teaching staff and students?
Over two thirds of respondents agreed that that there is a clear progression of knowledge and skills in the courses offered by this Programme. Similar numbers agreed both that courses offered by the
Programme are comparable to their counterparts at other universities both here and overseas , and that the types of knowledge and skills acquired on the completion of majors in Sociology and Social
Policy had been clearly communicated in their component courses.
On the other hand, just over one half of respondents felt that learning objectives and opportunities for courses within this Programme had been clearly communicated to students.
Comments in this section both praised the attention given to organisation in the programme as a whole, and expressed reservations of the extent that they were really challenged by the
Programme’s offerings:
In all of my courses in Sociology, the course learning objectives and assessments are very clearly related to course content and lectures. By the end of the course, I usually feel like I have developed a general understanding of all parts of the course.
I find the Sociology department better than many other departments in the setting of essay questions. They are clearly set out in the course outline (unlike some departments which tell you only
2 weeks before the deadline) but offer a wide range of options, allowing you to follow your interests but still are applicable to the course learning objectives. The questions are general but ask you to narrow in e.g ‘pick a field of criticism e.g Marxism, feminism, ethnomethodology etc’ and discuss how it applies to one health issue of your choice”
I have been a bit disappointed by Sociology in that I feel it is not as rigorous as my other majors, and it is seen as an ‘easy’ major to do well in. I have not had to write about many core theorists e.g
2

Foucault, and can avoid difficult areas quite easily. I feel like I will graduate with my major and know a bit about some areas, but don’t have a good overview.
2. To what extent does the Programme integrate research into teaching and learning activities?
Nearly all respondents agreed that courses in the Sociology and Social Policy Programme both allowed for the development of basic research skills, and demonstrated how research in these disciplines contributes to the wider development of knowledge.
Otherwise, just over one half of respondents agreed that they had received opportunities to hear of the research interests of staff teaching in Sociology and Social Policy.
Comments here affirmed the importance of engaging with staff research as an important aid to learning, as well noting the breadth of learning opportunities embraced in Sociology in general:
In general, I find many lecturers are excited about what they teach and research, and pass on that enthusiasm to the class. This is done in an anecdotal way – a story about something in the middle of a lecture – it makes me feel that staff care about Sociology.
Sociology has given me a fantastic understanding of past history and current contexts so it has helped my psychology degree immensely .
3. What is the quality of the learning opportunities provided by the Programme?
Nearly three quarters of respondents felt that the learning activities practised in the Programme actively assisted them in meeting the course objectives Otherwise, just over one half of respondents agreed that the facilities made available here were helpful.
Comments here, on the one hand, commended the creativity demonstrated in devising a range of assessment activities:
My favourite part of Sociology is how staff use creative forms of assessment, especially in SOSC314 and SOSC215/315, we were asked to write ‘reflective essays’, reflecting on our own lives, diary entries, and photo journals to link our own experiences with sociological concepts. While it was a challenge, it was good to write something outside the usual academic research essay, and I feel that I really understood the class better.
On the other hand, there was some concern expressed over computer facilities available for students:
Common student facilities are great for all students, however specific focus on a sociology/spol floor level or designated area could be good ( similar to how the science section has a presence of science students )
Lack of computers makes it very difficult to do research/print stuff/etc
3

4. How well does assessment align with Programme learning goals and foster learning?
Nearly three quarters of respondents agreed that assessment in the Programme met the learning objectives for these courses, and that, on the whole, they had received timely, consistent, and effective feedback for assessments and the like. Otherwise, over three quarters of respondents were satisfied with the current moderation of assessment.
Comments here, for the most part, commended the programme for the timeliness and quality of feedback provided:
Essays are usually marked quite quickly, with helpful feedback
Quick return of essays, friendly staff who are passionate about their research areas especially Kevin
Dew (public health) and Rhonda Shaw (gender).
5. To what extent has the Programme developed a learning and teaching environment that effectively promotes engagement in learning and a sense of academic community?
Over three quarters of respondents believed that they belonged to a diverse academic community within the Sociology and Social Policy Programme, while nearly two thirds of respondents agreed that students were actively encouraged to participate in learning activities in and out of class time.
On the other hand, however, when asked if they felt that struggling students were monitored by staff, over a third answered in the negative. A similar negative response also appears on the question as to the extent to which students are encouraged to continue through to postgraduate study.
While a considerable number of students expressed a feeling of community within the programme, the one comment here makes a contrary statement in this respect:
SOSC lacks a sense of student community – maybe coz there aren’t really tuts but it feels like people don’t really know each other. There was one class where I know a lot of us finally met people – and that was because we had proper tutorials with constant interesting groupwork where we were marked on participation .
To note, the reference in the above comment is to a “student community” or internal class dynamic, rather than an “academic community” that might involve a broader Programme dynamic.
On the promotion of further study, there was some concern over the variety of subjects on offer at the honours level:
I have decided not to take SOSC honours next year as the range of options is extremely limited, and seems more like fringe niche areas of sociology e.g sosc of play and humour. Auckland has a much wider range of papers and looks far more exciting. It was cool to see this year that they introduced a paper marketed as ‘getting you ready for honours’ (sosc of knowledge) but in general it is not really talked about in class except for when staff refer to the work their grad students are doing (which is often).
While the active encouragement of further study, as cited in the above comment, is most welcome, we nonetheless suggest that it might be useful for the School to examine the variety and character
4

of topics offered at the honours level. Such a review might involve the variety of courses on offer or the scope and make up of individual courses.
We also suggest that the School have a closer look at support networks for students as well as the general access to support for struggling students.
6. How effectively and efficiently does the Programme manage, explore and reflect on learning and teaching in relation to its learning and teaching goals?
When asked as to whether courses in the Sociology and Social Policy Programme reflected an active engagement with evaluation processes, over one half of respondents answered in the affirmative.
Otherwise, a quarter of respondents here remained unsure. In the absence of specific comments, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions here: for that matter, what are general student expectations in this area?
7. How clearly and effectively is the Programme linked to and responsive to its relevant academic, social and professional communities?
Over one half of respondents were unsure when asked if courses in the Sociology and Social Policy
Programme supported the development of Maori Scholarship within the university.
On the other hand, nearly two thirds of respondents agreed both that courses within the programme incorporated Maori and Pacific perspectives, and that the programme, as a whole, accommodated the needs of international students.
The positive responses on the questions involving Maori and Pacific perspectives, and international students are encouraging, though caution must be exercised here given the small number of respondents. Otherwise, given the lack of comments in this section, it is difficult to come to any definitive conclusions here. It may be useful here to examine the issue of diversity among students in this Programme as well as achievement levels among the various groups. An analysis of the numbers would be needed here first, before any further action is considered.
Otherwise, nearly all respondents agreed that courses in the Programme promoted cultural diversity, while nearly two thirds agreed that the Programme fostered the development of interdisciplinary links.
8. Has the panel identified any examples of good practice in learning and teaching that it feels should be shared more widely?
A number of lecturers and tutors were cited in this section as positive examples of good teaching practice. Positive examples here include effective presentation skills and the availability of class notes:
Sandra, Chamsey and Rhonda are generally amazing.
My favourite course overall I have participated in so far has been reflecting on violence by Carol
Harrington. I have also loved my courses by Rhonda Shaw.
5

Chamsy was an excellent lecturer for Sosc111 and Dylan Taylor although new is developing into a wonderful lecturer also. (For Sosc112)
Everyday life and interpreting society 200 level papers are amazing and are run very very well. The material covered along with the lecture presentation is done in such a way that i feel as though my learning has been thought about and anticipated by the staff seniors. This notion comforts me and as a result will encourage me to enroll into 300 level papers. The experience has been highly professional and reflects the university in a positive light all round.
The online notes are great.. just enough to give some good outlines of each point and easily understandable but not to detailed for people to coast through the course. Some online extra reading might be good such as case studies to reinforce things
On the other hand, one comment also expressed concern at the lack of tutorials beyond the first year:
It sucks that there are no proper tutorials above 100-level, just once a week ‘tuts’ in the lecture time that don’t seem directly relevant or necessary to do well in the class. These are tiny and can be good because you get to work directly with the lecturer, but I definitely feel we miss out by not having proper tuts .
Given the general importance placed on tutorials, most notably in Humanities subjects, by students as whole, we suggest that it would be useful for the School to examine ways of incorporating more small-group learning – where this may or may not specifically involve more tutorials – at higher levels.
Otherwise, it was also expressed of a need to ensure a safe learning environment in cases where topics might touch on sensitive areas:
One recommendation I would have is that there are more guidelines around safety/mental health, for example writing about your mental health experience could be quite triggering for my classmates, even though they had chosen the topic themselves. In one class as well, we were asked to look at anorexia/thinspiration websites, which upset a few people (even though it was optional, it upset those who thought they would be fine). So, definitely keep the reflective stuff, but perhaps more guidelines and safety around them!
Closing Remarks
It is clear from our survey that the Sociology and Social Policy Programme at Victoria is one for which the School of Social and Cultural Studies merits considerable commendation. For VUWSA, it is a pleasure to be able to pass on such praiseworthy student feedback.
This is not, however, to diminish the validity of the small number of issues raised within certain areas of this Programme. We hope that the information and analysis we have provided can be of use for the Committee in determining how to make the Sociology and Social Policy Programme an even better one.
Prepared by Jayendra Chhana (Education Organiser) in consultation with Sonya Clark (Vice President,
Academic) eo@vuwsa.org.nz
6