TATIONpRÆSEN 6 May 2013 CENTER FOR UNDERVISNING OG LÆRING SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES...

TATIONpRÆSEN

6 May 2013CENTER FOR UNDERVISNING OG LÆRINGSCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCESAARHUS UNIVERSITET

Factors underlying student satisfactionKim Jesper Herrmann, Msc., PhDCentre for Teaching and Learning, Aarhus [email protected]

Factors underlying student satisfactionKim Jesper Herrmann 6 May 2013

CENTER FOR UNDERVISNING OG LÆRINGSCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCESAARHUS UNIVERSITET

2

Outline

› Aarhus University Student

Survey

› Dimensions

› Predictors of student

satisfaction

› International perspectives

› Conclusion



3

Background

› Elite mass university

› ”[research] suggest that there is something the university teachers can do about learning – not by trying to change the students, but by trying to change the context experienced by the students” (Prosser & Trigwell, 1999:7, emphasis added)

› Which factors are important?



4

Survey

› Aarhus University 2007 and 2011

› Questionnaire:› Surveys of psycho-social work

environment› Study environment surveys› Theories of learning

› n (2011)=11,402

› Response rate = 37 per cent



5

Dimensions

› Methods› Principal Factor Analysis › Varimax rotation› Kaiser’s criterion› n=11,402

› Physical surroundings (a=,823)

› Constructive alignment (a=,861)

› Feedback (a=,871)

› Work load (a=,734)

› Contact with teachers (a=,758)

› Social infrastructure (a=,683)

› Study groups (a=,706)

› Stress (a=,817)

› Self-efficacy (a=,756)

› Social integration (a=,768)

› Academic integration (a=,707)

› Satisfaction (a=,657)



6

Predictors of student satisfaction › What predicts student

satisfaction?

› Methods:› Multiple regression (least square)› n=7,393› Y: student satisfaction and well-being› Xn: perception of learning environment› Adjusted R2 = 0.547› Shown here: Zero-order Pearsons r

correlation coefficients› All correlations are statistically significant

at the 0.05 level

› Social integration (r=,541)

› Academic integration (r=,512)

› Social infrastructure (r=,400)

› Constructive alignment (r=,342)

› Work load (r=-316,)

› Contact with teachers (r=,254)

› Study groups (r=,232)

› Feedback (r=,200)

› Physical surroundings (r=,191)

› Stress (r=-,151)



7

The (statistically) happy student

› ”I feel like being part of an academic community” (academic integration)

› ”The other students are kind and cooperative” (social integration)

› ”There are places for us to meet outside class” (social infrastructure)

› ”It is quite clear what I am expected to learn” (constructive alignment)

› ”I am usually up to speed with set course work” (workload)

› ”Teachers around here seem to care about students” (contact with teachers)

› ”In most semesters, I am part of a study group” (study group)

› ”I can get feedback on assignments” (feedback)



8

The (statistically) unhappy student

› ”Most courses are quite dull” (academic integration)

› ”I often feel lonely at university” (social integration)

› ”There are no opportunities for students to meet outside classes” (social

infrastructure)

› ”What we learn is not reflected in the way we are assessed” (constructive

alignment)

› ”You can’t possibly keep up with assignments” (workload)

› ”You never see teachers around here” (contact with teachers)

› ” Students here don’t help each other out” (study group)

› ”Grades are the only source of feedback in this programme” (feedback)



9

The (statistically) unhappy student

› ”Most courses are quite dull” (academic integration)

› ”I often feel lonely at university” (social integration)

› ”There are no opportunities for students to meet outside classes” (social

infrastructure)

› ”What we learn is not reflected in the way we are assessed” (constructive alignment)

› ”You can’t possibly keep up with assignments” (workload)

› ”You never see teachers around here” (contact with teachers)

› ” Students here don’t help each other out” (study group)

› ”Grades are the only source of feedback in this programme” (feedback)



10

Departmental differences



11

Constructive alignment

› Items:› Clear learning objectives› Clear assesment criteria› Clearly communicated expectations› Provision of appropriate learning

opportunities› Congruence between objectives and

assessment

› Suggestions:› Meaningful and formalised learning

activities› Alignment› Meta-communication

“The intended learning outcomes stated in the curriculum are meaningless. They are abstract descriptions that apply to any course and they say absolutely nothing about what is expected. […] This uncertainty is very stressful” (Psychology student).

“The problem is that it’s unclear what is expected of you at the examination. I think this is because teachers don’t talk about it or – more important – that there is no coherence between how we are taught and how we are assessed. Teaching is good. I just wish that there were some written assignment [as at the examination]. Some teachers [names] experiment with written assignments. I think this it good because it makes it clear what is expected of us students” (Political Science student, emphasis added)



12

Academic integration

› Items› Growing interest in the subject matter› Feeling of belonging to an academic

community

› Results› High in the natural and technical sciences

and in medical science› Lower in social sciences and arts

› Suggestions› Early opportunities to become a

‘scientist’› Authentic problems› Collaboration with faculty on small-scale

research projects

“During my bachelor’s we weren’t assigned to any particular lab and thus you felt as if you didn’t belong anywhere […] This changed once we started to attend the same lab. Now you get in touch with other molecular biologist. (Molecular Biology student, emphasis added).“The good thing [about working in the laboratory] is that you start to bond with the staff.”(Molecular Biology student, emphasis added).



13

Why bother if students are happy?

› Moral imperative?

› Learning environment › Retention› Quality of students approaches to

learning› Amount of effort invested› Learning outcomes

› (see e.g. Parpala et al. [2013])



14

The ETL-project

Source: Entwistle (2009: 180)



15

Conclusion› Student satisfaction depends on …

› … feeling part of a social and academic community which is promoted by a …

› … learning environment supporting› constructive alignment,› frequent and respectful teacher-student

interaction,› students’ academic and social interaction

› These factors relate to high quality learning

› … and they are under our control



16

ReferencesBiggs, J. (2012). What the Student Does: Teaching for Enhanced Learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 31, 39-55.

Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for Understanding at University: Deep Approaches and Distinctive Ways of Thinking (Universities Into the 21st Century). (1 ed.) Palgrave Macmillan.

Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E. & Entwistle N. (2013) Assessing students’ experiences of teaching-learning environment and approaches to learning: Validation of a questionnaire in different countries an varying context, Learning Environment Research,

Prosser, M. T. & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in Higher Education. SRHE and Open University Press.

Online ressources:

Centre for Teaching and Learning: www.cul.au.dk

ETL-project: www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk

Study Environment Survey 2011: www.au.dk/studiemiljo2011

TATIONpRÆSEN 6 May 2013 CENTER FOR UNDERVISNING OG LÆRING SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES...

Documents

Transcript of TATIONpRÆSEN 6 May 2013 CENTER FOR UNDERVISNING OG LÆRING SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES...