7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

1/18

Wesley&Wells&Student&Engagement&Officer&Academic&Office,&Quality& &Governance&

&

&&MEQ$Analysis$

October$2012$$January$2013$&&&&&&

&&&&&&&&&&&

&&&&&&&&& &&

Produced&July&2013&&

Draft&Versions&seen&by&Quality& &Enhancement&Committee&

Student&Experience&Committee&

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

2/18

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

3/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!(

!

Introduction*

(The(data(from(MEQs(has(previously(been(supplied(locally(to(lecturers(in(order(to(make(improvements(to(their(delivery.(Whilst(this(allowed(local(development(to(be(made,(it(was(restricted(to(only(being(applicable(to(the(lecturers(delivering(a(particular(module.(((This(report(gathers(the(data(across(programmes(and(allows(for(a(deeper(understanding(of(issues(and(highlights(issues(of(parity(for(students.((The(report(has(been(seen(at(Student(Experience(Committee(and(Quality(&(Enhancement(Committee.(A(number(of(recommendations(were(made(!Some(themes(have(been(identified(however(they(are(not(an(exhaustive(list(and(lecturers(are(encouraged(to(discover(their(own(perspective(of(the(data.((

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

4/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!(

!

Contents'

(Introduction( (Actions(from(July(Committees( 1(Themes(Identified( 2(Explanation(of(data( 3(Year(Zero(Summary( 4(Year(Zero(data(comparing(modules( 5(Year(Zero(data(comparing(questions(within(modules( 6(Level(One(Summary( 7(Level(One(data(comparing(modules( 8(

Level(One(data(comparing(questions(within(modules( 9(Level(Two(Summary( 10(Level(Two(data(comparing(modules( 11(Level(Two(data(comparing(questions(within(modules( 12(Level(Three(and(Postgraduate(summaries( 13(Postgraduate(data(comparing(modules( 14((

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

5/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!! Actions!from!July!2013!Committees!

!

ReDevaluate(the(questions(in(the(Module(Evaluation(Questionnaires(( ReDconsider(the(logistical(formatting(of(the(questionnaire(in(order(to(ensure;(high(response(rates,(low(staff(time(taken(during(analysis(and(no(tutor(bias(in(students(responses.(

Student(Engagement(Officer(to(produce(a(surveys(report(for(the(next(Student(Experience(Committee.(

(Year(Zero(Head(of(Year(Zero(and(the(student(engagement(officer(to(work(with(programme(leaders(and(module(leaders(on(discussing(the(following(areas(with(their(students:( Evaluating(Module(Handbooks( to(manage(expectations(and(ensure(all(information(is(included)( Assignment(briefs( to(ensure(they(are(clear(and(managed(effectively)( Learning(resources( Pedagogical(practices(to(determine(what(students(and(tutors(feel(is(most(effective.(Report!back (to(the(next(Student(Experience(Committee(with(updates.((Level(One(Lecturers(and(programme(leaders(to(discuss(with(students(concerning(the(following(areas:( The(expectations(for(lecturers(to(provide(learning(resources( notes(on(the(VLE),(number(and(usefulness(of(handouts(as(well(as(the(appropriateness(of(reading(lists.(

Lecturers(and(programme(leaders(working(more(closely(to(ensure(the(subject(is(being(coherently(delivered.( The(content(of(modules(to(gather(opinion(on(the(delivery(methods(being(used(and(the(relevance(of(the(materials.(Report!back (to(the(Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience((Level(Two(Lecturers(and(programme(leaders(work(together(with(students(to:( Analyse(and(edit(the(programme(handbooks,(where(necessary,(to(ensure(the(information(regarding(the(assessment(is(accessible(and(fit(for(purpose.( Where(necessary,(evaluate(and(revise(the(assessment(criteria.( Evaluate(and(consider(the(utilsation(of(the(handouts(provided(and(identify(areas(for(improvement.(Report!back (to(the(Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience((Level(Three(and(Postgraduate(ue(to(the(low(response(rates(it(was(difficult(to(determine(appropriate(actions(for(these(students.(

Lecturers(and(programme(leaders(to(improve(student(engagement(with(GSM(reporting(procedures(in(future(instances(

(

(

1

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

6/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

(

Themes&identified&&

Although(the(data(is(segmented(by(level(and(programme(there(are(themes(that(present(themselves(throughout(and(are(an(area(of(interest(for(the(school.(( Areas&for&Enhancement:&Students(interest(and(willingness(to(comment(on(the(teaching(practices(being(used.(Lecturer(development(through(sharing(best(practice(Lectures(were(the(highest(scoring(area(on(all(modules,(across(all(years.((

Areas&for&Improvement:&&Assessment(Practices(&(Assignment(briefs(The$quality$of$information$available$to$students,$timeliness$of$information$and$the$support$available.$$Module(Handbooks(The$quality$of$information,$the$amount$of$information$and$the$accessibility$of$the$handbook$itself.$(Learning(Resources(The$type$of$resource$needed$(handouts$vs.$library$books),$the$quality$of$the$information$and$the$accessibility$of$those$resources.$$(

2

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

7/18

3

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

8/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!

(!

Year!Zero!

(Positive(Comments( Presentation,(group(discussions,(interactivity(and(debates(were(all(highlighted(as(areas(

that(students(thought(worked(well.( Many(positive(comments(with(regards(to(the(lecturers(and(their(teaching(styles.( Students(are(making(suggestions(to(improve(pedagogy.(

(Potential(areas(of(Improvement(? More(time(for(learning( Assignments/revision/sessions)(is(consistently(requested.(? Some(suggestions(were(made(around(the(explanation(and(management(of(assignments.(? There(were(negative(comments(towards(other(students(joining(nonLtimetabled(classes(? Few(positive(comments(regarding(resources(in(year(zero.(? Students(asked(to(be(involved(more(in(lessons,(more(interactive(lessons,(more(practice,(

more(support,(more(challenging.(? Students(mentioned(more(learning(resources(are(needed,(more(computers,(better(

internet(and(more(reading(materials.((Recommendations:(By(the(end(of(August,(staff((invite(any(students(from(their(module(to(a(catered(workshop((session.(((In(that(workshop(they(will(have(4x20(minute(discussions.(1. Evaluate(module(handbooks( to(check(expectations(are(clear(and(all(important(

information(is(included).(2. Ensure(assignment(briefs(are(clear,(managed(effectively(and(suitable.(3. Discuss(the(learning(resource(requirements(of(the(class.(4. Discuss(pedagogical(practices(to(determine(where(improvements(could(be(made.((

4

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

9/18

Year ZeroComparison against other

modules

A c a

d e m i c W r i t i n g

A d v a n c e

d C r i t i c a l W r i t i n g

C o m p u t e r L i t e r a c y

M a n a g e m e n t P r i n c i p l e s

P D P

S u p p o r t C l a s s

The Module 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.3

Was effectively designed 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3

Objectives were clear 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4

Was well organized 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4

Handouts were helpful 4.5 4.1 4.5 4.4 4.2 4.4

Reading list was helpful 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.2

Reading material was available 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.0 4.3

The Lectures 4.6 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.4

Were well organized 4.6 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4

Gave sufficient information 4.6 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.3

Were communicated effectively 4.6 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.4

Stimulated my interest 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.6 4.4

The Tutorials 4.5 4.0 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.4

Were well organized 4.5 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4

Stimulating learning environment 4.5 4.0 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.3

Encouraged student participation 4.5 4.1 4.4 4.6 4.8 4.4

The Assessment 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2

Requirements were clearly explained 4.6 4.1 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.3

Helped me feel confident for theexam

4.5 3.9 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2

Coursework was challenging 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.1Sufficient time was available to

complete coursework4.5 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.2

Overall 4.3 4.0 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.2Was an appropriate level for my

current academic needs4.4 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.2

Met my expectations 4.3 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.1

Percentage passed 47% 61% 70% 53% 68%

# of respondents 138 33 100 180 22 95

Totall Number of students 236 225 471 449 175Response Rate 58.5 14.7 21.2 40.1 12.6

5

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

10/18

Year ZeroComparison against the

questions T h e M o d u l e

W a s e f

f e c t i v e l y

d e s i g n e d

O b j e c t i v e s w e r e c l e a r

W a s w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

H a n

d o u t s w e r e

h e l p f u l

R e a d i n g

l i s t w a s

h e l p f u l

R e a d i n g m a t e r i a

l w a s a v a i

l a b l e

T h e L e c t u r e s

W e r e w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

G a v e s u

f f i c i e n t i n

f o r m a t i o n

W e r e c o m m u n i c a t e d e f

f e c t i v e l y

S t i m u l a t e d m y i n t e r e s t

T h e T u t o r i a l s

W e r e w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

S t i m u l a t i n g

l e a r n i n g

e n v i r o n m e n t

E n c o u r a g e d s t u d e n t

p a r t i c i p a t i o n

T h e A s s e s s m e n t

R e q u i r e m e n t s w e r e c l e a r l y

e x p l a i n e

d

H e l p e

d m e

f e e l c o n f i d e n t f o r t h e

e x a m

C o u r s e w o r

k w a s c h a l

l e n g i n g

S u f f i c i e n t t i m e w a s a v a i

l a b l e t o

c o m p l e t e c o u r s e w o r

k

O v e r a

l l

W a s a n a p p r o p r i a t e

l e v e

l f o r m y

c u r r e n t a c a

d e m i c n e e d s

M e t m y e x p e c t a t i o n s

P e r c e n t a g e p a s s e d

# o f r e s p o n

d e n t s

T o t a

l l N u m

b e r o f s t u d e n t s

R e s p o n s e R a t e

Academic Writing 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.3 47% 138 236 58.5

Advanced Critical Writing 4.2 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 3.9 4.3 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 61% 33 225 14.7

Computer Literacy 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 70% 100 471 21.2

Management Principles 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 53% 180 449 40.1

PDP 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.0 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.8 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.3 68% 22 175 12.6

Support Class 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 95

Recommendations 3 4 4 2 2 2 1

Recommendations1. Evaluate module handbooks (to check expectations are clear and all important information is included). Because there is an overall satisfaction issue that needs to be addressed and exploring expectations may help2. Ensure assignment briefs are appropriate, managed effectively and sui table. Because of comments and the numbers of students who do not feel confident before the examinations3. Discuss the learning resource requirements of the class. Because of comments from students about timeliness of notes and quality of handouts.4. Discuss pedagogical practices to determine where improvements could be made. Students were generally positive about tutorials and lectures, best practice should be identified and shared .

6

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

11/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!(

!

Level%1%

Positive(Comments( Very(positive(comments(regarding(lecturers( Some(positive(comments(regards(atmosphere(and(learning(environment( Handouts,(Group(work,(presentations(and(practical(skills(were(

highlighted(as(a(positive((

Potential(areas(of(improvement(? sufficient(time(for(assignments(was(suggested(as(an(improvement(? Difficulties(understanding(lecturers(was(stressed.(? The(suggestion(was(made(for(a(more(coherent(approach(between(

lecturers(and(programme(leaders(? More(real life(examples(and(refreshing(the(content(of(subjects(was(

suggested(? With(regards(to(learning(resources,(comments(were(made(for(internal(

improvements(between(students(and(lecturers.(i.e.(notes(on(portal,(handouts(and(improving(powerpoint(slides.(

? From(the(graphs,(the(reading(materials(and(list(are(seen(as(weak(areas(across(all(modules(and(the(assessment(questions(need(further(investigation.(

(Recommendations:(1. Lecturers(and(programme(leaders(work(together(with(students(on(

creating(module into programme(plans(to(ensure(a(coherent(approach(to(learning.(

2. Lecturers(agree(with(students(on(the(expectations(that(can(be(placed(on(them(for(learning(resources,(specifically(the(notes(on(portal,(number(of(handouts(and(appropriateness(of(reading(lists.(

3. Lecturers(consults(with(reps(prior(to(a(programme(committee,(to(discuss(the(content(of(the(courses(and(ask(them(to(gather(opinion(on(its(relevance(and(delivery.((

(

7

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

12/18

Level 1 Comparison against modules A v e r a g e

M a n a g e m e n t

B u s i n e s s E c o n o m i c s

S t u

d y S k i l l s

P r i n c i p

l e s o

f E c o n o m i c s 2

P r i n c i p

l e s o

f E c o n o m i c s

I n t e r p r e t i n g E c o n o m i c

D a t a

P r o g r a m m i n g

Q u a n t i t a t i v e M e t

h o

d s

C o m p u t e r S y s t e m s

I T & P r o

f e s s i o n a l S k i l l

B u s i n e s s L a w

C o r p o r a t e & B u s i n e s s L a w

I n t r o

d u c t i o n t o A c c o u n t i n g

F i n a n c i a l A c c o u n t i n g

F i n a n c i a l I n

f o r m a t i o n

M a n a g e m e n t

The Module 4.26 4.3 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.3 3.5 4.9 4.0 3.7 3.9 4.6 4.8 3.9 4.4

Was effectively designed 4.34 4.3 4.8 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.4 4.3 5.0 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.6 4.8 3.7 4.4

Objectives were clear 4.29 4.3 4.8 4.3 4.5 4.1 4.4 3.3 4.8 4.1 3.5 4.2 4.6 4.8 3.9 4.6

Was well organized 4.31 4.2 4.7 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 3.5 4.8 4.3 3.9 4.0 4.5 4.9 3.9 4.5

Handouts were helpful 4.24 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.5 3.6 4.8 3.8 3.4 3.7 4.6 4.8 4.2 4.3

Reading list was helpful 4.19 4.3 4.5 4.2 4.7 4.4 4.0 3.4 4.8 3.9 3.5 3.9 4.6 4.7 3.9 4.3

Reading material was available 4.21 4.3 4.5 4.1 4.7 4.4 4.2 3.2 4.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.7 4.8 3.8 4.5

The Lectures 4.36 4.3 4.8 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.4 3.7 4.9 4.4 3.9 4.1 4.6 4.9 4.0 4.3

Were well organized 4.41 4.3 4.9 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.5 3.6 5.0 4.4 4.1 4.2 4.7 4.9 4.1 4.2

Gave sufficient information 4.42 4.2 4.7 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 3.7 4.8 4.5 4.0 4.1 4.7 4.9 4.2 4.3

Were communicated effectively 4.37 4.3 4.9 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.3 3.8 4.8 4.7 3.9 4.1 4.6 4.9 3.9 4.3

Stimulated my interest 4.25 4.3 4.9 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.2 3.7 4.8 4.0 3.6 3.9 4.5 4.8 3.8 4.4

The Tutorials 4.30 4.4 4.8 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.3 3.8 4.8 4.0 3.6 4.1 4.5 4.8 3.9 4.5

Were well organized 4.30 4.4 4.9 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.3 3.9 4.8 4.1 3.7 4.1 4.5 4.9 4.0 4.3

Stimulating learning environment 4.28 4.3 4.9 4.3 4.5 4.2 4.2 3.7 4.8 3.9 3.5 4.1 4.5 4.8 3.9 4.5

Encouraged student participation 4.33 4.4 4.7 4.4 4.3 4.1 4.4 3.9 4.8 4.1 3.5 4.1 4.5 4.9 3.9 4.6

The Assessment 4.24 4.3 4.7 4.1 4.5 4.0 4.1 3.7 4.9 4.1 3.4 4.0 4.5 4.8 4.0 4.4

Requirements were clearly explained 4.31 4.3 4.8 4.2 4.5 4.0 4.4 3.7 4.8 4.5 3.2 4.1 4.3 4.9 4.2 4.5

Helped me feel confident for the exam 4.23 4.3 4.8 4.1 4.5 3.7 4.2 3.8 4.8 4.1 3.3 3.9 4.6 4.8 3.6 4.5

Coursework was challenging 4.20 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.7 4.3 4.2 3.8 5.0 3.7 3.4 3.9 4.4 4.7 3.9 4.4

Sufficient time was available to complete

coursework4.21 4.2 4.8 4.0 4.3 3.9 3.8 3.4 5.0 4.0 3.7 4.0 4.6 4.7 4.1 4.3

Overall 4.17 4.3 4.6 4.2 4.5 4.3 4.2 3.4 4.6 3.7 3.6 4.1 4.4 4.6 3.8 4.4

Was an appropriate level for my currentacademic needs

4.18 4.3 4.6 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.2 3.3 4.6 3.7 3.7 4.1 4.4 4.6 3.9 4.4

Met my expectations 4.16 4.2 4.6 4.2 4.6 4.5 4.1 3.5 4.6 3.6 3.6 4.0 4.4 4.7 3.6 4.4

Percentage passed 67% 35% 59% 55% 65% 67% 67% 58% 50% 92% 78% 37% 53% 63% 51%

# of respondents 290 15 125 22 21 20 12 6 15 11 190 23 55 50 10

Totall Number of students 697 143 721 143 49 39 81 31 86 38 514 119 222 123 49

Response Rate 41.6 10.5 17.3 15.4 42.9 51.3 14.8 19.4 17.4 28.9 37.0 19.3 24.8 40.7 20.4

8

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

13/18

Level 1 Comparison againstquestions

T h e M o

d u l e

W a s e f

f e c t i v e l y

d e s i g n e d

O b j e c t i v e s w e r e c l e a r

W a s w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

H a n

d o u t s w e r e

h e l p f u l

R e a d i n g

l i s t w a s

h e l p f u l

R e a d i n g m a t e r i a

l w a s

a v a i

l a b l e

T h e L e c t u r e s

W e r e w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

G a v e s u

f f i c i e n t i n

f o r m a t i o n

W e r e c o m m u n i c a t e d

e f f e c t i v e l y

S t i m u l a t e d m y i n t e r e s t

T h e T u t o r i a l s

W e r e w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

S t i m u l a t i n g

l e a r n i n g

e n v i r o n m e n t

E n c o u r a g e d s t u d e n t

p a r t i c i p a t i o n

T h e A s s e s s m e n t

R e q u i r e m e n t s w e r e c l e a r l y

e x p l a i n e

d

H e l p e

d m e

f e e l c o n f i d e n t f o r

t h e e x a m

C o u r s e w o r

k w a s c h a l

l e n g i n g

S u f f i c i e n t t i m e w a s a v a i

l a b l e

t o c o m p l e t e c o u r s e w o r

k

O v e r a

l l

W a s a n a p p r o p r i a t e

l e v e

l f o r

m y c u r r e n t a c a

d e m i c n e e d s

M e t m y e x p e c t a t i o n s

P e r c e n t a g e p a s s e d

# o

f r e s p o n

d e n t s

T o t a

l l N u m

b e r o

f s t u d e n t s

R e s p o n s e R a t e

Management 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 67% 290 697 41.6

Business Economics 4.6 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.8 4.9 4.7 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.9 4.9 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.8 4.3 4.8 4.6 4.6 4.6 35%15 143 10.5

Study Skills 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.2 59% 125 721 17.3

Principles of Economics 2 4.5 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.6 55%22 143 15.4

Principles of Economics 4.3 4.4 4.1 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.0 4.0 3.7 4.3 3.9 4.3 4.2 4.5 65%21 49 42.9

Interpreting Economic Data 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.1 4.4 4.2 4.2 3.8 4.2 4.2 4.1 67%

20 39 51.3Programming 1 3.5 4.3 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.4 3.2 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.5 67% 12 81 14.8

Quantitative Methods 4.9 5.0 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.9 5.0 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.0 4.6 4.6 4.6 58%6 31 19.4

Computer Systems 4.0 3.9 4.1 4.3 3.8 3.9 3.8 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 4.1 4.1 4.5 4.1 3.7 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.6 50% 15 86 17.4

IT & Professional Skill 3.7 4.0 3.5 3.9 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.9 4.1 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.6 92%11 38 28.9

Business Law 3.9 4.1 4.2 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.1 3.9 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.1 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.0 78% 190 514 37.0

Corporate & Business Law 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.4 37%23 119 19.3

Introduction to Accounting 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 53%55 222 24.8

Financial Accounting 3.9 3.7 3.9 3.9 4.2 3.9 3.8 4.0 4.1 4.2 3.9 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.2 3.6 3.9 4.1 3.8 3.9 3.6 63% 50 123 40.7Financial Information

Management4.4 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 51%

10 49 20.4

Recommendations 2 3 1

1. Module leaders and programme leaders work together with students on creating module-into-programme plans Because comments received suggest students feel there is a confusion in this area and this may be leading to overall low levels of sa tisfactionto ensure a coherent approach to learning.

2. Lecturers agree with students on the expectations that can be placed on them for learning resource; Because comments received suggest students do not feel the reading lists are appropriate and slides could be put on portal more timely specifically the notes on portal, number of handouts and appropriateness of reading lists.

3. Lecturers consults with reps prior to a programme committee, to discuss the content of t he courses Because evidence suggests that the challenge of coursework and amount of time to complete needs further investigationa nd ask them to gather opinion on its relevance and delivery.

9

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

14/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!(

!

Level%2%

Positive(Comments( Many(positive(comments(relating(to(clarity(from(lecturers(and(their(

determination( The(interactivity(and(group(exercises(are(highlighted(as(positives(for(

students( The(structure(and(organisation(of(modules(is(praised(

(Potential(areas(of(improvement(1. Students(ask(for(more(time,(more(tutorials(and(more(lessons(2. More(time(and(help(with(assignments(3. Students(ask(for(the(work(to(be(broken(down(more,(with(examples(4. Availability(of(learning(resources(online(in(a(timely(manner((Recommendations:(1. Module(leaders(and(programme(leaders(work(together(with(students(on(

analyzing(and(editing(the(programme(handbooks(to(ensure(students(believe(sufficient(information(regarding(the(assessment(is(included.(

2. Where(necessary;(module(leaders(work(with(programme(leaders(and(students(to(evaluate(and(revise(the(assessment(criteria.(

3. Lecturers(will(work(to(improve(the(usefulness(of(the(handouts(provided(or(

explain(why(the(handouts(are(limited(in(their(scope(of(information.(((

10

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

15/18

evel 2 comparison bymodule

A v e r a g e

F i n a n c i a l A c c o u t n i n g &

R e p o r t i n g

M a n a g e m e n t A c c o u n t i n g

F i n a n c e & A c c o u n t i n g

I T

A p p

l i e d E c o n o m i c s

E c o n o m i c s o

f g o v e r n m e n t

P o

l i c y

E c o n o m e t r i c s

M a c r o e c o n o m i c s

M i c r o e c o n o m i c t h e o r y

H R M

The Module 4.41 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.2 3.8 4.8 4.8 4.2 4.7 4.4

Was effectively designed 4.46 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.0 5.0 4.6 4.3 4.7 4.4

Objectives were clear 4.43 4.2 4.5 4.7 4.2 3.6 4.5 4.9 4.3 4.8 4.6

Was well organized 4.48 4.2 4.6 4.5 4.3 3.9 4.8 4.8 4.3 5.0 4.6

Handouts were helpful 4.32 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.1 3.6 4.3 4.6 4.3 4.6 4.3

Reading list was helpful 4.36 4.3 4.4 4.1 4.2 3.9 5.0 4.9 4.0 4.7 4.3Reading material was

available4.39 4.0 4.4 4.4 4.3 3.9 5.0 5.0 4.3 4.5 4.2

The Lectures 4.52 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.4 3.8 4.9 4.5 4.2 4.9 4.7

Were well organized 4.55 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.4 3.9 5.0 4.6 4.3 5.0 4.7

Gave sufficientinformation

4.54 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.4 3.9 4.8 4.5 4.3 4.8 4.7

Were communicatedeffectively

4.59 4.8 4.6 4.8 4.5 3.9 4.8 4.5 4.3 5.0 4.8

Stimulated my interest 4.39 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.3 3.6 5.0 4.3 4.0 4.7 4.7

The Tutorials 4.42 4.8 4.5 4.7 4.2 3.6 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.9 4.6

Were well organized 4.44 4.6 4.5 4.8 4.3 3.7 4.5 4.5 4.0 5.0 4.6

Stimulating learningenvironment

4.37 4.8 4.5 4.7 4.2 3.6 4.3 4.4 4.0 4.8 4.6

Encouraged studentparticipation

4.44 5.0 4.6 4.7 4.3 3.6 4.3 4.1 4.3 5.0 4.5

The Assessment 4.25 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.2 3.6 4.1 4.5 4.1 4.4 4.4

quirements were clearlyexplained

4.39 4.8 4.5 4.4 4.4 3.4 4.5 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.4

elped me feel confidentfor the exam

4.26 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.2 3.7 4.0 4.4 4.0 4.3 4.4

Coursework waschallenging

4.22 4.2 4.7 4.1 4.0 3.3 4.3 4.7 4.0 4.5 4.5

Sufficient time wasavailable to complete 4.13 3.6 4.4 4.5 4.3 3.9 3.5 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.3

Overall 4.27 4.6 4.3 4.4 4.1 3.4 4.5 4.4 3.9 4.8 4.4

Was an appropriate levelor my current academic

4.30 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.3 3.4 4.3 4.5 4.0 4.7 4.4

Met my expectations 4.24 4.6 4.2 4.2 3.9 3.4 4.7 4.4 3.8 4.8 4.4

Percentage passed 29% 52% 71% 93% 83% 70% 85% 50% 69%

# of respondents 5 109 15 24 7 4 8 4 6 41

tall Number of students 14 397 413 15 23 33 20 30 470

Response Rate 35.7 27.5 5.8 46.7 17.4 24.2 20.0 20.0 8.7

11

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

16/18

T h e M o

d u l e

W a s e f

f e c t i v e l y

d e s i g n e d

O b j e c t i v e s w e r e c l e a r

W a s w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

H a n

d o u t s w e r e

h e l p f u l

R e a d i n g

l i s t w a s

h e l p f u l

R e a d i n g m a t e r i a

l w a s a v a i

l a b l e

T h e L e c t u r e s

W e r e w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

G a v e s u

f f i c i e n t i n

f o r m a t i o n

W e r e c o m m u n i c a t e d e f

f e c t i v e l y

S t i m u l a t e d m y i n t e r e s t

T h e T u t o r i a l s

W e r e w e l

l o r g a n i z e d

S t i m u l a t i n g

l e a r n i n g

e n v i r o n m e n t

E n c o u r a g e d s t u d e n t

p a r t i c i p a t i o n

T h e A s s e s s m e n t

R e q u i r e m e n t s w e r e c l e a r l y

e x p l a i n e

d

H e l p e

d m e

f e e l c o n f i d e n t f o r t h e

e x a m

C o u r s e w o r

k w a s c h a l

l e n g i n g

S u f f i c i e n t t i m e w a s a v a i

l a b l e t o

c o m p l e t e c o u r s e w o r

k

O v e r a

l l

W a s a n a p p r o p r i a t e

l e v e

l f o r m y

c u r r e n t a c a

d e m i c n e e d s

M e t m y e x p e c t a t i o n s

P e r c e n t a g e A c h i e v e

d

P e r c e n t a g e p a s s e d

# o

f r e s p o n

d e n t s

T o t a

l l N u m

b e r o

f s t u

d e n t s

inancial Accoutning & Reporting 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.5 4.3 4.0 4.7 4.6 4.8 4.8 4.4 4.8 4.6 4.8 5.0 4.3 4.8 4.6 4.2 3.6 4.6 4.6 4.60.29 5 14 35.7

Management Accounting 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.2 0.52 109 397 27.5

Finance & Accounting 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.1 4.4 4.7 4.5 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.1 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.2 15

IT 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.0 4.3 4.1 4.3 3.9 0.71 24 413 5.8

Applied Economics 3.8 4.0 3.6 3.9 3.6 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.7 3.3 3.9 3.4 3.4 3.4 0.93 7 15 46.7

Economics of government Policy 4.8 5.0 4.5 4.8 4.3 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 4.8 4.8 5.0 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.5 4.0 4.3 3.5 4.5 4.3 4.70.83 4 23 17.4

Econometrics 4.8 4.6 4.9 4.8 4.6 4.9 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.1 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.7 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4 0.7 8 33 24.2

Macroeconomics 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.0 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.0 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.0 4.0 4.3 3.9 4.0 3.8 0.85 4 20 20.0

Microeconomic theory 4.7 4.7 4.8 5.0 4.6 4.7 4.5 4.9 5.0 4.8 5.0 4.7 4.9 5.0 4.8 5.0 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.2 4.8 4.7 4.8 0.5 6 30 20.0

HRM 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 0.69 41 470 8.7

Recommendations 3 1 2

1. Module leaders and programme leaders work together with students on analyzing and editing the programme handbooks Because evidence suggests that the assessment was one of the weakest areas on the MEQ .to ensure students believe sufficient information regarding the assessment is included.

2. Where necessary; module leaders work with programme leaders and students to evaluate and revise the assessment criteria. Because evidence suggests that the assessments were not helpful in making students feel confident for their exams .3. Lecturers will work to improve the usefulness of the handouts provided or explain why the handouts are limited in their scope of information. Because evidence suggests that students do not feel the handouts are a particularly useful l earning resource.

12

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

17/18

Comments(and(Questions:(Simon(Macklin( Pro(Provost(for(Student(Experience,(Chair(of(Student(Experience(Committee)(Wesley(Wells( Student(Engagement(Officer)(

!(

!

Level%3%*only&6&respondents*&&Positive&Comments&

Lectures&were&seen&as&helpful&&Potential&areas&of&improvement&

? More&handouts&&Recommendations:&

1. Improve&levels&of&student&engagement&2. Communicate&the&effectiveness&of&MEQ&analysis&to&students.&

&%%%%%%

Postgraduate%*only&38&respondents*&

&Positive&Comments&

Useful&educational&practices&and&uses&of&alternative&learning&resources& Students&praised&their&courses&for&improving&their&cognitive&ability&

&Potential&areas&of&improvement&

? Timing&of&assignment&? More&tutorials/opportunities&to&learn&

&Recommendations:&

3. Improve&levels&of&student&engagement&4. Communicate&the&effectiveness&of&MEQ&analysis&to&students.&!

13

7/27/2019 MEQ v2 Oct12 Jan13

18/18

PG comparison againstmodules

B u s i n e s s e n v i r o n m e n t

O i l & G a s

M a r

k e t i n g P

l a n n i n g &

P r o m o t i o n

L e a d e r s h i p

M a n a g e m e n t &

S t r a t e g i c C

h a n g e

B u s i n e s s E n v i r o n m e n t

H R P

S t r a t e g i c P

l a n n i n g

The Module 4.5 4.1 4.6 4.7 4.5 5.0 4.2

Was effectively designed 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.3

Objectives were clear 4.5 3.8 4.7 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.7

Was well organized 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.0

Handouts were helpful 4.6 4.3 4.6 4.7 4.5 5.0 4.3

Reading list was helpful 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.7 4.5 5.0 4.0

Reading material was available 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.9 4.5 5.0 4.0

The Lectures 4.6 4.3 4.7 4.8 4.4 4.9 4.3

Were well organized 4.5 4.3 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.3

Gave sufficient information 4.6 4.3 4.8 4.9 4.5 5.0 4.3

Were communicatedeffectively

4.6 4.3 4.8 4.9 4.4 5.0 4.3

Stimulated my interest 4.6 4.3 4.7 4.9 4.3 5.0 4.3

The Tutorials 3.9 4.3 4.7 4.6 4.7 5.0 0.0

Were well organized 3.9 4.3 4.6 4.5 4.8 5.0 0.0

Stimulating learningenvironment

3.9 4.3 4.8 4.7 4.7 5.0 0.0

Encouraged studentparticipation

3.9 4.3 4.7 4.7 4.8 5.0 0.0

The Assessment 4.5 4.3 4.8 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4

Requirements were clearlyexplained

4.7 4.3 4.8 4.4 4.5 5.0 5.0

Helped me feel confident for

the exam 4.3 4.3 4.6 4.8 4.2 4.0 4.0

Coursework was challenging 4.5 4.5 4.9 4.9 4.5 4.0 4.3

Sufficient time was availableto complete coursework

4.4 4.3 4.9 3.8 4.8 4.5 4.3

Overall 4.7 4.4 4.4 4.8 4.6 5.0 4.7

Was an appropriate level formy current academic needs

4.6 4.3 4.4 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.7

Met my expectations 4.7 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.7

Number of Respondents4 14 7 13 2 3

14