LONDON’S GLOBAL UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC COMMITTEE
WORKING GROUP ON STUDENT SUPPORT FEEDBACK
Final Report to Academic Committee on Student Support Feedback
Executive Summary
The Working Group on Student Support Services met twice to consider how UCL could gain an
overview of student feedback on its student support services. This report:
-
presents the background information on the establishment of WGSSF, its remit and
rationale [paragraph 1];
-
outlines the key areas of focus considered by the WGSSF [paragraph 2];
-
outlines the current provision for receiving feedback from students on the UCL student
support services [paragraph 3];
-
reports on the WGSSF discussions on the suggestions and proposals for creating an
overview of the student feedback for the UCL Support Services [paragraph 4];
-
informs the Committee of the conclusions of WGSSF [paragraph 5];
-
reports on further developments of student feedback matters which emerged from the
December meeting of AC and discussions of these matters by Council and Senior
Management Team officers [paragraph 6];
-
asks the Committee to note the future work of the new group which will succeed
WGSSF in considering the Student Barometer and other matters relating to feedback on
the student experience [paragraph 7].
Key to abbreviations:
AC
CERG
DTC
MORI
NSS
QMEC
SEQ
WGSF
WGSSF
Academic Committee
Council Effectiveness Review Group
Departmental Teaching Committee
Market and Opinion Research International
National Student Survey
Quality Management and Enhancement Committee
Student Evaluation Questionnaire
Working Group on Student Feedback
Working Group on Student Support Feedback
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
1
Background and remit of the WGSSF
1.1
The Working Group on Student Support Feedback was commissioned by the
Vice-Provost (Academic and International) in response to two developments:
(i)
In 2005 the QMEC Working Group on Student Feedback, in the
context of a review intended primarily to deal with feedback on
teaching and learning at departmental level, raised questions
regarding the mechanisms by which UCL could gain an overview of
student opinion on its support services. The WGSF was not aware
that there was currently any mechanism in place for such an
overview, although it was clear that the individual services carried out
their own surveys, focus groups etc to receive feedback. It advised
that some thought should be given to how this feedback could be
brought together overall, in order to help UCL identify common
student concerns and share best practice between the support
services.
(ii)
The report of the Council Effectiveness Review Group (approved by
Council at its meeting on 14 June 2006) recommended that Council
should in future receive an annual report on the student experience,
including information about the findings of student evaluation
questionnaires.
1.2
The WGSSF membership included representation from all areas offering
student support in UCL, in addition to the Chair of QMEC, the Dean of
Students and representatives of UCL Union and the University of London
Union. A list of the membership of the WGSSF is at Annex 1.
1.3
The WGSSF agreed that its terms of reference should be as follows:
(i)
to ascertain that feedback mechanisms are in place in all areas
of student support and to ensure fitness for purpose;
(ii)
to explore ways to fill lacunae in existing feedback
mechanisms within the student support services;
(iii)
to identify and share examples of best practice;
(iv)
to determine the need and scope for any adjustment or
addition to existing lines and modes of information gathering
and reporting;
(v)
to make recommendations to Academic Committee on the
above.
2
Introduction
2.1
WGSSF met on two occasions in October 2006. In order to facilitate its
discussions, it considered two main areas of focus:

The current provision made by UCL student support services in order to
receive feedback from students;
2
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007

2.2
Suggestions and proposals for creating the overview of the student
feedback for the UCL support services.
Further to these areas of focus, WGSSF also considered in more detail the
evidence base for an overview of student feedback. It noted that the annual
report on the student experience would need a strong evidential basis, and
considered two main methods of providing this:
(i)
a consolidated report of the existing UCL Services’ surveys and reports
identifying common concerns, good practice and key matters of note;
and/or
(ii)
the introduction of a pan-UCL services questionnaire developed
specifically for the purpose of providing data for the annual report.
2.3
In order to facilitate the above, WGSSF examined in particular the use of data
from already existing surveys of UCL students, such as the MORI Unite Living
survey, as well as the possibility of the introduction of common questions for
existing surveys in order to aid comparison.
3
UCL Student Support Services (and others) – Current Provision for
Student Feedback
3.1
The WGSF report from 2005 collected information from a number of UCL
support services on the mechanisms for receiving feedback from students.
WGSSF members updated this information and gave more details on the
rationale and methodology for the provision, the use made of the data and
the reporting arrangements for discussion of the main findings.
3.2
WGSSF considered that the table provided useful evidence for the measures
currently undertaken by student support services in eliciting feedback from
students. It noted that virtually all the support services sought feedback from
students, although there was much variation in the rationale for doing so, the
methodology employed and the use made of the feedback received. The
updated table is at Annex 2.
4
Suggestions and Proposals for Creating the Overview of the Student
Feedback for the UCL Support Services
4.1
During the discussions of its remit and the matters raised by the WGSF and
the Council Effectiveness Review Group, WGSSF considered the possibility
of the creation of a consolidated report drawn from the various support
services reports and surveys, in order to gain an overview of student opinion
on its support services.
4.2
A number of concerns and objections were raised to this suggestion during
the discussion. Many WGSSF members considered a consolidated report to
be impractical, marrying up too diverse services and feedback mechanisms to
produce meaningful overall information. Questions arose as to how the data
produced by the various support services could be aggregated, with concerns
that this could lead to misleading comparisons from the various student
response data.
3
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
4.3
It was also noted that if a consolidated report were to limit the use of the raw
data from the support services reports (in order for it not to be too unwieldy),
so much detail would be lost that its value would be questionable. A
consolidated report would of necessity create additional reporting lines and
add to the administrative burden without necessarily producing value for
money. In the light of these concerns, WGSSF agreed that an annual report
on the student experience should not be based on the surveys or summaries
of the student support services.
4.4
WGSSF also discussed the possibility of constructing a pan-UCL survey for
all students incorporating questions on all support services, or introducing the
common questions into all existing and future surveys in order to allow
benchmarking of the services and for comparability.
4.5
WGSSF was not convinced that it would be useful to introduce generic
questions, given, the different purposes and rationales of the surveys
conducted within UCL. There was also some reluctance to introduce new
questions to questionnaires which had evolved over a long period of time and
were functioning well and a concern that the integrity of such surveys could
be compromised.
4.6
WGSSF noted already existing surveys, such as the Ipsos MORI Unite living
survey, a wide-ranging questionnaire conducted annually at various UK
universities. The questions were highly detailed and covered wide aspects of
the student experience including views of academic matters, accommodation,
learning resources as well as financial and social matters. Interviews were
conducted at random on campus and the survey, now in its fourth year of
operation, also allowed for comparability within the data between years.
UCL’s sample of 54 students, whilst small, was a significant proportion of the
overall numbers of students completing the survey nationally, which was
1025. UCL was provided with the raw data on its own student responses, as
well as with the overall response data to allow comparison. The survey was
of no cost to UCL and permission was granted by the Dean of Students each
year for Ipsos MORI to interview UCL students, in return for the report and the
results of the data.
4.7
WGSSF agreed that it would be useful for UCL to make more use of the
data provided by the survey and that Ipsos MORI should be approached to
discuss the possibility (and costings) of two alternative options:
(i)
That Ipsos MORI provide an analysis on the UCL respondees to the
already existing survey summarising key findings. Should the analysis
prove useful, the Ipsos MORI information could be presented to
Council and/or AC annually, supplemented with data from the NSS
(especially if the expanded form currently being piloted were to be
adopted) and possibly from other surveys such as the Student
Barometer Survey. Consideration could also be given to presenting
high level outcomes from the academic annual monitoring process in
order to give a more complete picture of feedback on the student
experience.
(ii)
That UCL commission a specially devised survey, incorporating some
elements of the existing Ipsos MORI survey, targeting a cohort of
students over the years of study and after graduation. It was
envisaged that this option would be conducted as a pilot scheme to
4
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
determine whether the quality of the information provided would add to
information already available.
4.8
WGSSF suggested that whilst the second option might be in itself a valuable
exercise which could provide much useful data on changing student
perceptions, it would be more cost-effective in the first instance to attempt to
make use of already existing information.
4.9
In the event, WGSSF made contact with Ipsos MORI and was informed that
it was no longer involved in the 2007 Unite Living Survey. Ipsos MORI
also advised WGSSF that, in their opinion, it was not practical to provide
further analysis of the UCL data from the 2006 Unite Living survey. The
rationale given for this was that the sample size of the students was too low to
safely draw any meaningful conclusions. Statisticians generally accept that
the minimum response figure for feasible analysis of survey data is twenty to
thirty and the UCL data (with only fifty responses overall) would very likely go
under this threshold, should more detailed analysis of the data be conducted.
WGSSF did not pursue this line of enquiry further. Following the discussion
at AC of the Student Barometer and decision for the WGSSF, (or a sub-group
thereof to consider it further), as well as direction given by UCL officers to the
group on student feedback matters (see paragraph 6.2 below), WGSSF also
chose not to pursue further the option of commissioning a specially devised
survey from Ipsos MORI.
5
Conclusions
5.1
WGSSF agreed with Council’s suggestion that the introduction of an annual
report on student experience would be a good investment in principle, provided
that it benefited UCL and its students. However, WGSSF did not believe (due to
the difficulties outlined in paragraph 4.3 above) that it was appropriate to
produce a consolidated report from the existing support services surveys and
reports, nor that it would be practicable to create a pan-UCL survey.
5.2
WGSSF notes that the student support services are only one part the overall
student experience and that students are far more concerned with academic
matters. Any attempt to gain an overview of the student experience should
ideally supplement feedback on support services with feedback on other
aspects of student experience. WGSSF suggests that the evidence for the
annual report should make use of existing data which incorporates the
findings of surveys concerning academic matters, such as SEQ summaries
from DTCs and from other sources (such as the NSS and the Student
Barometer), in order to obtain a broader picture of student views.
5.3
Considerable progress had been made in identifying survey practice in the
support areas. The chair and secretary of WGSSF discussed with each area
the nature of their survey and reporting mechanisms in order to develop and
complete the grid. The completed table is at Annex 2.
5.4
WGSSF suggests that where possible, student surveys should be refined to
take note of different categories of students. This would help to improve the
quality of the data received and allow services to focus on different student
needs and concerns. It would also assist the work of the Graduate School,
which was especially important in the light of the increased emphasis on post
graduate students at UCL.
5
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
6
Further Developments
6.1
Subsequent to the submission of the WGSSF Interim Report to AC, a number
of further developments emerged from the AC meeting and following
additional discussion between UCL officers on student feedback matters
more generally. The December meeting of AC also discussed the Student `
Barometer survey and resolved to accept recommendations which emerged
from the report by the Director of Educational Liaison (at APPENDIX AC 1/06
(06-07). AC agreed that the WGSSF, or a sub-group thereof to be
established, should examine the Student Barometer in depth and undertake
the following:

Consider the Barometer and other similar survey outcomes in detail
and alongside the UCL Corporate Plan 2006-2012, the International
Strategy, the Teaching and Learning Strategy and, as appropriate,
supporting strategies;

Working in consultation and collaboration with service heads, identify
those areas where there is potential for developmental work which
could realise a significant return;

Consider whether there is scope for working with the other Barometer
participants (for example, King’s College London) to address specific
issues;

Review how best to provide faculties with disaggregated Barometer
and other survey data, and advice on how to make best use of it;

Monitor the impact of developmental work undertaken on future
survey performance;

Consider whether the Barometer represents a suitable single tool to
assess those Corporate Support Services that interface with students.
6.2
WGSSF was informed that there had been further discussion by UCL officers
at the Council/Senior Management Team Away Day in January 2007 of the
Council Effectiveness Review Group recommendation to produce an annual
report on the student experience. The Away Day included presentations from
the Vice-Provost (Academic and International) and from the UCL Union
Sabbatical Officers, which included extensive discussion of the Student
Barometer. In the light of this discussion and following the decision of AC to
establish a group to consider the Student Barometer, it was agreed that
WGSSF did not need to produce a first annual report on the student
experience for Council for the time being. The WGSSF Chair also noted that
UCL Union’s decision to participate in the NSS this year also needed to be
factored into the discussions of the new group.
6.3
Preparations for the creation of the new group to discuss the Student
Barometer and other matters of student experience were currently underway.
It is anticipated that the new group will be discrete from WGSSF.
6
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
7
Action required
7.1
AC is asked to note the conclusions of the WGSSF report and comment as
appropriate.
7.2
AC is asked to further note that the work of the WGSSF is now complete and
that the group has stood down, although members understand that it may reconvene in a year’s time to consider the outcomes of its recommendations
should that prove necessary.
7.3
Further consideration of the Student Barometer and other related matters
relating to the student experience will be conducted by the new group as
agreed by AC. This group is expected to report to AC at its May meeting.
Professor Chris Carey and Rob Traynor
28 February 2007
7
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Annex 1
Working Group on Student Support Feedback Membership
Chair
Head of the Department of Greek and
Latin and Chair of QMEC
Professor Chris Carey
Members
Director, Library Services
Education and Welfare Officer,
UCL Union
Information Manager, UCL Careers Service
Property Maintenance and Facilities
Management, Estates and Facilities
Dean of Students
Head of Media Relations,
Development Office
Director of Estates and Facilities
Director of Administration, Estates
and Facilities
Graduate School Administrator
Student Counselling Service
Director, Education and Information
Support Division
Assistant Registrar, Registry
President, University of London Union
Deputy Director of Management
Information and Services, Registry
General Manager, UCL Union
Secretary
Academic Services
Mr Paul Ayris
Mr Edward Bray
Mr Martin Brown
Mr David Coward
Professor John Foreman
Mr Dominique Fourniol
Mr Richard Furter
Mr Raymond Harding
Ms Anne MacDonald
Mrs Fotini Roberts
Professor Roland Rosner
Mr Andy Saffery
Ms Vicki Slater
Mr Gary Smith
Mr Robert Taylor
Mr Rob Traynor
8
WGSSF UCL STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES (AND OTHERS) - CURRENT PROVISION FOR STUDENT FEEDBACK
Library Services
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Student
representatives on
UCL Library
Committee and on
Faculty and
Departmental
Library Committees
Large on-line
surveys
Feedback form
available on Library
web-site.
Once a year – a
major survey into
Library users is
conducted in order
to inform Library
strategy and policy.
Focus Groups of
academic staff and
students help to
prepare for the
detailed questions
in the Survey
The Library intends
to run another
annual online
survey in 2006-07,
the theme of which
will be on users'
priorities in terms of
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
The results from the
Surveys are
discussed in UCL
Library Committee
and elsewhere in
the UCL committee
structure, including
student
representatives.
Senior SubLibrarian has
regular meetings
each term with UCL
Union officers.
Report, resulting
from the Survey is
mounted on the
Library’s webpages
at
http://www.ucl.ac.uk
/Library/.
Annex 2
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
To inform Library
strategy and policy.
Survey results
discussed in UCL
Library Committee
and elsewhere in
the UCL committee
structure.
Each service point
in
UCL
Library
Services acts as an
immediate enquiry
point for students’
questions/feedback.
There
are
also
routes for feedback
by
e-mail
and
through
the
Library’s website.
Subject Librarians
receive
feedback
from
individual
students.
Each
year,
the
Library
takes
snapshots of (inter
alia) the detailed
questions/feedback
received at service
points for a national
survey of academic
library usage by
SCONUL.
The
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
Residential
Services (Student
Accommodation)
No fora, but two
students
representatives on
the Student
Accommodation
Committee and
each hall of
residence has
student reps and
social committees
Student
Counselling
Student Web-site
forum also used to
provide feedback
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
investment work in
improving the
Library's physical
estate.
Annual Paper
survey organised by
UCL union of a
quota of students
from each hall of
residence
Questionnaires sent
to students by email and as hard
copy. This is
on-going throughout year (as
students complete
counselling
sessions)
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Director collates
and analyses
responses to annual
survey into report
which is considered
by the Student
Accommodation
Committee
Director’s report
considered by the
Student
Accommodation
Committee and
results are also fed
into business plans
Considered by the
Student
Accommodation
Committee
Results are
analysed in groups
periodically.
Students do not
receive direct
feedback (due to
matters of
confidentiality).
Student Feedback
goes to the Head of
the Service and is
discussed by the
team. Feedback is
summarised in the
Student Counselling
Service
Annual Report and
is used to inform
service
development, as
well as
reviewing Service
Standards.
Student Feedback
is reported to the
Student Welfare
Co-ordinating
Committee through
the SCS Annual
Report
10
Other
return
is
not
currently
made
public in UCL, but it
could be.
Feedback received
from
students
directly and by email and written
correspondence
The
SCS
also
receives feedback
from
individual
students
to
counsellors/staff
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Education &
Information
Support Division
Education &
Information
Support Division
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
None
Courses: both
electronic and
paper
questionnaires are
used
All IS courses have
questionnaires at
end and CALT
courses run end of
programme
questionnaires.
Response rates are
very high,
approximately 80%.
Student Computing 
Survey: paper
questionnaire,
typically to over
2000 students
Longitudinal
research exercise
since 1999
concerning student
ownership of
computers and
confidence in their
IT skills when they
arrive at UCL
Run annually but

Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Results analysed by
CALT and IS.
Currently different
questionnaires are
used although EISD
is looking at ways to
make this more
consistent and is
considering the
introduction of a
generic (but flexible)
on-line system.
an evidence
base for policy
and planning
relating to
student
computing
resources
reliable data
about student
computing
needs, skills and
patterns of use
including their
own computing
facilities, printing,
laptop provision,
11
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
EISD receives
feedback from
contact in person
with students and
staff, by e-mail and
CALT has an
SSCC.
The feedback
informs the planning
of future provision.
Reports submitted
periodically to
Teaching &
Learning Support
Sub-Committee of
the ISC
Other
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
now sufficient every
two years.
Education &
Information
Support Division
Several other
studies, surveys
and questionnaires.
Projects conducted 
annually (on a
different topic each
year) by
Management
Science students
with advice and
guidance from IS on
various service
areas including: IS
clusters, Remote
Cluster WTS, online learning,
European Computer
Driving Licence
(ECDL) for

students, network
connections in halls
of residence,
Roamnet service, IS
web pages, Satellite
Helpdesk in the
DMS Watson, Print
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
perceived skills/
abilities in IT and
IT training needs.
Students do not
receive direct
feedback
Study on use of
cluster rooms for
teaching - aimed
at understanding
the practice and
needs of
academic users
of IS cluster
rooms
(respondents
drawn from
academics who
book IS cluster
rooms for
teaching).
Halls of
residence
network
connections
study - why some
students pay for
datapoints in
Halls but then
12
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
The feedback
informs the planning
of future provision.
Reports submitted
periodically to
Teaching &
Learning Support
Sub-Committee of
the ISC
Other
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
UCL Careers
Service
Focus groups held
as necessary most
recent on marketing
and branding
strategy
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Charging
don't use them.
 Focus group on
student issues
relating to
implementation
of UCL
Information
Strategy
 User satisfaction
on Halls of
Residence data
connection
service
 User satisfaction
studies on IT
Training.
3 paper feedback
All data collected is
forms covering:
held by The
one-to-one advice;
Careers Group but
information/ library
has an online
provision and group reporting system for
work.
UCL Careers
Service staff to view
All forms are
qualitative and
standard across
quantitative
UoL Careers
feedback.
Services so that
feedback and
This year a network
assessment of
of Student Careers
services can be
Reps - one per
13
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
Results are fed
back via a “You
Said… We did…”
board. Currently
hardcopy at the
Careers Service,
but soon to be
added to our
website.
Feedback is also
raised as a standing
item on our
fortnightly all team
meetings.
Annual report to the
Careers Advisory
Committee.
Also use separate
feedback forms for
special events such
as Careers Fairs
and events aimed at
Research Staff
Separate feedback
is also collected by
the GradSchool for
events run by the
Careers Service
specifically for PhD
students.
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
monitored centrally
by The Careers
Group, University of
London for all
colleges.
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
department – is
being created to
give feedback,
suggestions and act
as contacts in their
departments.
Forms are used ongoing as students
use the Careers
Service
UCL Union
UCL Union has 23
Standing
Committees which
govern the
organisation and
determine policy for
its operations.
Membership of
these Standing
Committees are all
student
representatives. All
but one of these
Standing
Use made of the
feedback
received
A summary of
feedback will also
be included in the
Careers Service
annual report which
is presented to and
discussed by the
Careers Advisory
Committee.
Have Your Say
comments and
suggestions
scheme – available
at all commercial
and membership
service points.
The UCL Union
Promotions &
Marketing
Department collate
all feedback from
the Have Your Say
scheme and reports
findings to relevant
Standing
Committees and
Service Managers.
Input into service
delivery through
Service Managers
and Standing
Committees.
Online surveys –
including surveys
The UCL Union
Promotions &
Input into service
delivery and annual
14
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
Also receive
informal feedback
through contact with
individual students
and our suggestions
box.
See column four.
Indirect feedback
from students also
received for
accreditation
reports of the
Guidance
Accreditation Board
– (the professional
standard body)
Student
Officer
profiles provide for
opportunities
for
student
feedback
and complaints on a
day-to-day
basis
through surgeries,
forums,
appointments and
generally.
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Estates and
Facilities –
Catering contract
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Committees allow
for any student
member to attend
and observe.
on the following
food and drink,
entertainment,
governance and the
environment.
Standing
Committees that
consider student
service provision
include the Services
Committee
(Commercial
Service provision)
and the Student
Affairs Committee
(Membership
Services provision,
including the
welfare services
and student
campaign coordination)
Refectory services
user group meeting
- Quarterly
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Marketing
Department
analysed the online
surveys and reports
findings to the
relevant Union
Officer, Standing
Committee and/or
Service Manager.
Use made of the
feedback
received
In 2006, we
conducted a survey
on student lifestyles
which took into
account the
multifaceted student
experience at UCL.
The UCL Union
Promotions &
Marketing
Department
analysed and
reported to the
Strategic Planning
Committee to inform
the Union Strategic
Plan.
Feeds into Union
Strategic Plan
through Strategic
Planning
Committee.
Annual
Questionnaire to
refectory users
User meetings
UCL/Scolarest
meetings
To consider
improvements to
services offered by
Scolarest at
monthly meetings
Questionnaires with
Hospitality orders
Ongoing
15
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
Refectory services
user group
meetings
Quality control –
“Mystery Guest”,
planning through
Service Managers
and Standing
Committees.
Estates and
Facilities Division
manages the
contract by which
this function is
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
Graduate School
Two graduate
student reps on
Graduate Education
Executive SubCommittee.
One graduate
student rep on
Graduate School
Training Board.
Graduate School
works with Union to
put together an online list of
departmental
graduate reps.
Regular meetings
with UCL Union
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
On-line anonymous
survey every two
years:
Year 1: research
degree graduate
students; Year 2:
taught degree
graduate students.
Electronic feedback
system requests
feedback on Skills
Development
courses
immediately after
each course has
run.
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Survey results were
previously analysed
by a postgraduate
research student.
The 2005/6 survey
is being analysed
by an external
analyst. Results are
posted on the
Graduate School
web site and
students are
advised of this.
16
Use made of the
feedback
received
Questionnaire
results are used by
the Graduate
School to consider
ways in which
graduate students'
experiences at UCL
can be improved.
For example, after
the first such
questionnaire, a
request was made
to the Senior
Management Team
for space and
resources to set up
a Graduate
Common Room and
a separate
Graduate Computer
Cluster area. Both
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Questionnaire
results are
discussed by the
Graduate School
Management
Board, which makes
recommendations
to the Graduate
Education
Executive SubCommittee
(GEESC), as to
whether any action
needs to be taken
on the feedback
received. GEESC
then discusses the
issues and decides
on further action.
The full report is
Other
outsourced.
Other EFD services
are to departments
rather than students
and should be
included in UCLwide feedback
mechanisms/questi
onnaires
The Graduate
School has an
Open Door policy
and receives
considerable
feedback from
research students,
which may be
discussed with Dept
Graduate Tutors.
Informal records are
kept of visits and if
problem areas
emerge several
times from one
department, Head
of Graduate School
will discuss with the
Head of Department
concerned.
Induction events
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Sabbatical Officer
and President of
Postgraduate
Association
Graduate students
represented on
various committees
such as
Departmental Staff
Student
Consultative
Committees and
Dept Teaching
Committees.
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
requests were
approved and
excellent new
facilities are now
available.
posted on the
Graduate School
web site. Also, a
brief report on the
Questionnaire
(including the web
link) is included in
the Graduate
School's Annual
Report which is sent
to Academic Board
and UCLCouncil.
and Graduate
School literature
remind students of
this policy.
Feedback on skills
courses is used by
the Skills
Development
Programme
Administrator;
Course Tutors; and
Training Board; to
inform future course
provision.
Head of Graduate
School plans to
meet research
student leaders of
graduate academic
societies.
17
Feedback on skills
courses is sent to
Course Tutors;
goes to the
Graduate School
Training Board; and
is summarised in
the Graduate
School Annual
Report which is sent
to Academic Board
and UCL Council.
The Graduate
School is
considering ways of
requesting feedback
from individual
students post
graduation on, for
example, the viva
examination
process and
students' overall
experience as UCL
graduate students.
PhD Examiners'
reports are brought
to the attention of
the Head of
Graduate School, if
particular issues are
highlighted.
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
University of
London Union
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Our democratic
structures:
No officially
structured
questionnaires.
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
N/A
ULU Council; the
sovereign decision
making body.
Several subcommittees
including: Sports &
Societies
Committee,
Presidents Network,
Finance Committee,
the Executive
Committee. All of
which Union officers
and individual
students can be
elected to/submit
papers/questions
etc to influence the
direction of ULU.
Also training days
with sabbatical
officers for them to
impact on the
running of ULU
18
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
Constant student
engagement is
taken on board, to
help shape our
priorities and
direction
By official reporting
structures of
committees as laid
down in the
constitution and
regulations. The
output of its officers.
ULU is currently
undertaking a
governance review,
trying to introduce a
new system that will
transform student
engagement. With
more resources put
into wide student
research.
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Registry
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Prospective
students
Online feedback via
web conducted
annually
Focus groups e.g.
design of
prospectuses
Prospective and
current students,
academic and
admin. staff provide
oral feedback
Every 4-5 years
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Considered by
Department of
Educational Liaison
Management team
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
Service Standards
for each Registry
area reviewed
annually in the light
of feedback
The majority of core
Registry activities
have established
lines of report to
UCL’s Standing
Committees/SubCommittees e.g.
Academic
Committee,
Committee for the
Recruitment and
Admission of
Students; UCL
Board of Examiners
Each counter area
in the Registry acts
as an immediate
enquiry point for
students’
questions/feedback.
There are also
routes for feedback
by e-mail and
through the
Registry’s website.
Views passed to
design team
Widening
Participation Unit
Paper
questionnaires sent
to partnership
schools, conference
attendees, student
tutors and mentors
annually
Assessed by WP
team
Informs future
activities
National Bodies
also inform Registry
practices e.g. Office
of the Independent
Adjudicator (in
respect of academic
appeals and
complaints)
Student Barometer
External company
runs online
recruitment and
satisfaction survey
using samples of
home/overseas
students
annually
Assessed externally
against 60+ HEIs,
both UK and
overseas
Informs of student
feedback on UCL
provision and allows
UCL to benchmark
its performance
against the other
subscribing
universities
National statistics
published in OIA
annual
report/internal
review. Procedures
reviewed by WP on
Procedures which
includes UCL Union
19
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
Considered by
Department of
Educational Liaison
Management team
Use made of the
feedback
received
International
Student Orientation
Evaluation
questionnaire to all
new international
students
Socrates
programme
(EU-based student
exchange)
Report compiled by
each participating
student/staff
annually
Considered by
Study Abroad Office
Informs future
provision
Study Abroad Office
Study Abroad
students
Online survey
annually
Considered by
Study Abroad Office
Informs future
provision
Study Abroad Office
Examinations
Paper questionnaire
to assess special
facilites provision
every 2 to 3 years
UCL Board of
Examiners
Informs future
provision
Paper questionnaire
to assess UCL
facilities annually to
asses special
facilities provision
UCL Committee for
People with
Disabilities
Informs future
provision
Pre-paid postal
questionnaire
Biennial
WP on Graduation
Ceremonies
Informs future
activities
Disability provision
Graduands
20
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Informs future
activities
Other
representation
UCL Board of
Examiners
UCL Committee for
People with
Disabilities
WP on Graduation
Ceremonies
WGSSF Final Report to AC 6 March 2007
Finance Division
Fora/ Users
Committees
Questionnaire –
electronic/paper
How often are they
run?
None
N/A
Questionnaire –
how are results
analysed and are
students given
feedback?
N/A
21
Use made of the
feedback
received
Reporting of the
results of the
feedback
Other
Majority of feedback
tends to be verbal
and is used at point
of contact.
N/A
Students are able to
provide feedback in
writing, via the
general fees or
individual staff email
accounts, at the
counter or by
telephone.