Report on College-level findings from the 2013 King s Experience Survey May 2013 King s Learning Institute The King s Experience Survey aims to provide information and assistance to the College, Schools, Departments, students and others, to improve student learning and the student experience. The survey documents dimensions of quality in undergraduate education, inviting students to assess the extent to which they engage in educational practices associated with high levels of learning and development. 1
Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 ABOUT THE SURVEY 3 BENCHMARKS 3 QUICK FACTS 4 RESPONDENTS 5 SOME KEY FINDINGS 5 SELECTED RESULTS 6 ENGAGEMENT AND SATISFACTION 7 ACTIVITIES AND SUPPORT 8 BENCHMARK DATA 9 National comparative benchmarks 9 King s curriculum characteristics 10 Indicators of engagement 11 King s priority areas 12 QUALITATIVE COMMENTS 14 APPENDIX: BENCHMARK SURVEY DATA 15 2
Executive summary The King s Experience Survey (KES) was sent to all non-final year undergraduate students during March 2013. It asked 71 questions about students experiences inside and outside of the classroom, how they spend their time and their perspective on the learning environment. Questions are grouped into Benchmarks of related activities. Students at King s reported the highest levels of engagement in areas of Academic Challenge, Critical Thinking and Course Challenge. Lower levels of engagement were reported for Global Connectedness and Cocurricular Engagement. Students who report higher levels of engagement, measured across 17 Engagement Benchmarks, also report significantly higher levels of Overall Satisfaction. The strongest correlation with Overall Satisfaction was Feedback, particularly whether students felt they had opportunities to provide feedback on their course, that it was listened to and valued and that it was clear how it was acted upon. Other strong correlations with satisfaction included Academic Support and Student-Academic Relationships. About the survey The Benchmarks were drawn from a number of sources. They were created through scales of 55 out of the 71 questions on the survey. Another 10 questions asked students how they spent their time during term. Four questions asked students about feedback and satisfaction, and the final two were open-comment questions on what King s does well and what King s could do to improve. The last two questions, along with two other open-ended comment questions in the survey, provided nearly 2000 qualitative comments from students. These are explored in more depth in the customised School and Department reports. Benchmarks Each benchmark summarises students responses on a set of related questions. They concisely distil important aspects of the student experience inside and outside of the classroom. Each benchmark is expressed on a 100-point scale. Benchmarks were computed by rescaling responses to each component question from 0 to 100, then taking the average of the survey items. National comparative benchmarks Critical Thinking Course Challenge Academic Integration Collaborative Learning Engagement indicators Academic Challenge Learning with Peers Student-Academic Relationships King s curriculum characteristics Research-rich Environment Interdisciplinarity Academic Literacy Community Engagement Global Connectedness King s priority areas Feedback Assessment Academic Support Co-curricular Engagement 3
Quick facts Over half of the 71 KES questions are derived from the North American-based National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), which has been running for over a decade and has been used by over 1,400 institutions in the US with over 4 million students participating in the survey. The King s Experience survey itself is available at www.kcl.ac.uk/kes and takes about 10-15 minutes to complete. Population The survey was sent to all non-final year undergraduate students at King s, 9051 in total. Final year undergraduate students have the opportunity to complete the National Student Survey (NSS). Objectives To provide data to the College and Schools to use to enhance the undergraduate student experience, inform accountability efforts, and facilitate national benchmarking efforts. Audiences College management, academic staff, personal tutors, professional staff, students, governing boards, institutional researchers, government agencies, prospective students and their families, school counsellors. Administration and Analysis The survey was administered through the Bristol On-line Survey system (BOS) in coordination with the Quality & Academic Support Office. It was open from 27 February - 2 April 2013. Analysis was conducted by researchers in King s Learning Institute. Partners King s has joined the Student Engagement Surveys Working Group, facilitated through the Higher Education Academy (HEA), to pilot engagement survey questions nationally. The group includes the Universities of Oxford, Bath and Warwick, amongst others. The data will be analysed anonymously and nationally benchmarked data will be available on 14 questions, organised through four scales, covering 20 per cent of the survey. Response Rate There were 1480 respondents (1373 fully completed). The institutional response rate was 16.4%. This is in line with similar survey response rates at KCL. Validity & Reliability The NSSE survey was designed by experts and extensively tested to ensure validity and reliability and to minimize non-response bias and mode effects. Further validity and cognitive testing was done on the KES survey questions with students and staff. Management The King s Experience Survey is part of the King s Experience Project, coordinated through King s Learning Institute. The survey was approved by Academic Board in December 2012. Further information More information, and a copy of the survey, is available at www.kcl.ac.uk/kes. Please contact Dr Camille B. Kandiko with any queries at camille.kandiko@kcl.ac.uk 4
Respondents There were 1480 respondents (1373 fully completed). The institutional response rate was 16.4%, in line with the first year of running similar surveys at KCL. Of the respondents, 42% were firstyear students, 40% second-year students and the rest third- and fourth-year students. In common with national survey responses, two-thirds of respondents were female. Three-quarters of the respondents were Home students, the remainder split between international and EU students. Some key findings There was minimal variation in responses by gender and domicile. Greater differences were seen across areas of study and year of study. Engagement levels were higher for second-year students compared with first-year students in: Collaborative Learning, Co-Curricular Engagement, Global Connectedness, Research-Rich Environment and Learning with Peers. Engagement levels were lower for second-year students compared to first-years in: Course Challenge, Community Engagement, Academic Support, and Course Feedback. The survey asked students how they spend their time inside and outside of the classroom, preparing for formal study and how they spent their time beyond the College. 18.0 How students spend their time 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 Table 1. Average student hours per week during term time 5
Selected Results Students at King s are prepared for life after College: 99% of students feel their programme has emphasised them becoming independent learners and 95% of students report teaching that draws on real world and local examples Students learn in a research environment, with 94% of students looking beyond their reading lists and 89% reading research publications as part of their coursework and 85% have been exposed to academic staff s own research Furthermore, 29% of students have worked with academic staff on a research project, and another 29% plan to do this during their time at King s 62% of all students at King s have done or plan to do an internship KCL students average 16 timetabled contact hours a week, and spend another 20 hours a week preparing for lectures and working on coursework Four out of five students at King s spend fewer than 5 hours a week participating in co-curricular activities, with over a third reporting no participation One-third of King s students is in paid employment, and work on average 10 hours per week. Interestingly, students who work also report higher levels of engagement across all Benchmarks and slightly higher levels of satisfaction International and EU students report less peer interaction and collaborative learning compared with home students Encouraging findings Most students (95%) report at least sometimes asking a question in class 83% of second-year students have given a presentation in class, up to 88% for thirdyear students About half of all students often have indepth conversations with students who are different from them in terms of religious beliefs, political opinions or personal values Regarding feedback, 83% of students report adequate opportunities to give feedback on their course Opportunities for improvement Half of all students have not participated in co-curricular activities 88% of students have not worked with academic staff on activities other than coursework 86% of students have not talked about their career plans with teaching staff, advisors or tutors Only 44% of students have often explained course material to other students, and only 38% have regularly worked with other students on projects or assignments Only 27% of students report volunteering, but those who do volunteer do so about 6.5 hours per week. 92% of students spend fewer than 5 hours a week participating in co-curricular activities associated with their studies, with 55% not doing so at all 6
Engagement and satisfaction The relationship between engagement and satisfaction is shown in Table 2. As an example, the Benchmark Feedback on the Course is a composite score of questions about whether students felt they had opportunities to provide feedback on their course, that it was listened to and valued and that it was clear how students comments was acted upon, put on a 100-point scale. For students who were unsatisfied with their experience at King s, they reported an average of 29.03 on Feedback on the Course, meaning most disagreed they had opportunities to feedback on their course. The average moved to 45.19 for students who said they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with their course. However, students who were satisfied with their experience at King s had an average of 63.08, indicating they were much more satisfied with the feedback opportunities they had. Overall Satisfaction Benchmark Unsatisfied Neutral Satisfied Average Mean Mean Mean Mean Academic Challenge 52.51 57.04 68.91 64.87 Critical Thinking 50.36 54.79 65.61 61.90 Feedback on the Course 29.03 45.19 63.08 55.79 Course Challenge 40.98 46.69 58.14 54.09 Interdisciplinarity 43.90 48.00 57.96 54.54 Peer Interaction 46.54 51.40 56.63 54.47 Academic Literacy 43.54 46.64 53.36 51.02 Collaborative Learning 44.73 47.48 50.39 49.18 Academic Support 29.45 39.32 51.26 46.50 Community Engagement 32.14 39.99 49.47 45.71 Feedback Overall 24.40 33.44 46.85 41.80 Research Rich Environments 35.88 37.28 40.74 39.53 Academic Integration 31.22 34.06 41.30 38.82 Assessment 22.30 27.44 39.03 35.00 Student-Academic Relationships 23.16 27.86 38.50 34.80 Global Connectedness 29.82 31.39 35.24 33.93 Co-curricular Engagement 24.20 22.72 24.95 24.48 Table 2. Relationship between Satisfaction and Engagement Benchmarks 7
Activities and support Students reported high levels of independent learning, spending large portions of their time on higher-order thinking, coursework and revision. Students reported reading research materials and developing skills to think and learn in a research-like way. Students reported lower levels of engagement with academic staff, particularly outside of coursework, and reported lower levels of holistic support and development opportunities. However, even minimal exposure to activities such as fieldstrips and talking about career plans can have beneficial outcomes for students. Most Frequent Activities Least Frequent Activities Applying facts, theories or methods to practical problems or new situations Analysing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in depth Looked beyond your reading list when researching for coursework Read research publications as part of your course 70.5% Worked with academic staff on activities other than coursework (for example staff/student committees, student representation, etc) 67.9% Discussed ideas from your course with teaching staff outside taught sessions 66.8% Participated in fieldtrips, visits and offsite activities related to one or more of your programme 60.4% Talked about your career plans with teaching staff, advisors or tutors Table 3. Most and least frequent activities; Percentage responding Very often or often 12.2% 13.7% 15.8% 17.4% Most Emphasis and Support Least Emphasis and Support Becoming an independent learner Spending significant amounts of time studying and on academic work Using e-resources for learning, including study skills, data collection and information retrieval Challenging you to do your best work 83.5% Encouraging you to become a better informed and active citizen 81.4% Providing support for students' overall well-being (recreation, health care, counselling, etc.) 78.2% Incorporating international perspectives 58.8% Providing support preparing students for employment 30.4% 32.6% 34.3% 37.5% Table 4. Most and least frequent emphasis and support; Percentage responding Very much or Quite a bit 8
Benchmark data Results were grouped into Benchmarks. National comparative data will be available for four Benchmarks (Critical Thinking; Course Challenge; Academic Integration and Collaborative Learning) from a pilot run through the Higher Education Academy (HEA) in late summer. Other Benchmarks include five derived from the King s Curriculum Characteristics, another three drawing on Indicators of Engagement from the US-based National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), and four other related to areas of priority at King s: Assessment, Feedback, Academic Support and Co-curricular Engagement. Table 2 above shows the average level of engagement for each Benchmark. National comparative benchmarks These benchmarks were chosen because the US-based National Survey of Student Engagement and subsequent research has shown that these most strongly predict student success, broadly defined as retention, progression and positive learning outcomes. On Critical Thinking, King s students fare well in all the items, with over two-thirds regularly applying facts and theories to practical situations and analysing an idea in depth. However, almost 10% of respondents stated their programme does not emphasise the importance of forming a new idea or understanding from various pieces of information. 70 Predictors of student success 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Critical Thinking Course Challenge Academic Integration Collaborative Learning Table 5. Average engagement on national comparative benchmarks (on 100-point scale) For Course Challenge, student responses indicate that 40% state that they felt their course was often or very often challenging, 42% felt their course was sometimes challenging and the rest claim it has not challenged them. For the Academic Integration Benchmark, the responses for the 9
different items vary. Items which relate to contact with teaching staff and academics score considerably lower, such as discussing ideas from the course with academic staff outside of class. Results suggest that students feel that contact with academic staff outside class, be it relating to performance in the course or to career development, rarely happens outside taught sessions. However, over half of all students regularly asked questions in class and discussed ideas outside of class with others. Similarly, regarding Collaborative Learning, it is not a common practice for the majority of respondents, but most students have at least some experience of it. King s curriculum characteristics The King s curriculum characteristics are part of the King s Experience Project, an initiative to enhance the student learning experience at King s. Presently, students have mixed engagement with the various characteristics. Results for the Research-rich Environment Benchmark indicate that perhaps students do not make the most of the resources available to them at King s in terms of attending talks and presentations which are not part of their curriculum. More engagement was seen in the items relating to looking beyond the reading lists for their courses and assessing research publications to prepare for their courses. King's Curriculum Characteristics 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 Benchmark Mean Table 6. Average benchmark score for Curriculum Characteristics Interdisciplinarity was the highest-scoring benchmark, with 85% of students reporting at least some interdisciplinary engagement. This includes combining ideas from different courses and having exposure to real-world and local examples in teaching sessions. For Academic Literacy, items varied greatly, from a rather high 70% of students stating they have regularly applied facts, theories and methods to practical problems or new situations to only 28% of students who often 10
or very often made significant changes to their work based on feedback, with nearly a quarter stating they had never made significant changes based on feedback. Students at King s report lower levels of Community Engagement and Global Connectedness. A quarter of students reported that their teaching never incorporated international perspectives and only a third of students included diverse and global perspectives in course discussions or assignments. However, even minimal exposure to some activities may have a substantial impact on students: 75% of students report at least some teaching done by community-based experts, and 85% of students report having had at least some conversations with students who were very different from them in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions or personal values. Indicators of engagement Students reported the highest levels of engagement on Academic Challenge, indicating that King s provides a rigorous learning environment, with 95% of students reporting their course has emphasised them becoming independent learners. Students also reported high levels of Peer Interaction, with 95% explaining course material to other students and 75% reporting positive relationships with other students on their course, however, fewer than half reported positive experiences with other students at King s. This signals another area for improvement at King s: Student-Academic Relationships. Fewer than one-fifth of students reported regularly interacting with academic staff, including working on committees, discussing ideas outside of class or talking about career plans. Disappointingly, fewer than half of students reported positive interactions with academic staff and their personal tutor. Relationship with personal tutor Relationship with academic staff Poor Neutral Positive Poor Neutral Positive Figure 1. Quality of relationship with tutor Figure 2. Quality of relationship with staff 11
King s priority areas These benchmarks cover areas of the student experience that King s is investing in improving, including Assessment, Feedback, Academic Support and Co-curricular Engagement. As noted above in Table 1, Feedback on the Course was the strongest predictor of student satisfaction. Less than a third of students agreed that it was clear how students comments on their course had been acted upon. 70.0% Feedback on the course: percentage that agree 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Adequate opportunity to feedback Feedback listened to and valued Feedback acted upon Table 7. Satisfaction with feedback On Assessment, the feedback loop is not as effective as it could be. Only 36% of students report receiving written feedback on their work often, and one-fifth of students report regularly being provided with oral feedback on their work. This is likely related to only 20% of students regularly discussing their academic performance and feedback with an academic member of staff. Inconsequence, a quarter of students report never making significant changes to their work based on feedback. Students appear to have mixed views on the support King s provides. Areas of particular concern are students overall well-being, learning support services, and careers advice. Although 95% of students report using e-resources for learning, only 40% regularly use learning support services. Regarding career development, a quarter of students feels King s provides very little emphasis on preparing students for employment or opportunities for professional development. 12
Participation in co-curricular activities Not decided Do not plan to do Plan to do Done Figure 3. Participation in co-curricular activities Finally, in contrast to high levels of academic engagement, students report lower levels of Cocurricular Engagement. Only half of all students have participated in co-curricular activities. Only 10% of students have volunteered through KCLSU, and a quarter report volunteering through other organisations. However, another quarter of students plan on volunteering. Internships provide a huge opportunity to enhance the student experience, with only 13% of students reporting having done an internship, but over 50% of students plan to do one. Participation in an Internship Not decided Do not plan to do Plan to do Done Figure 4. Participation in an internship 13
Qualitative comments After initial analysis, several key themes emerged from the qualitative comments. The most common theme was feedback, which is noted above as an integral part of the student experience. Recurring themes included relationships with staff particularly with students personal tutor programme organisation and the availability and suitability of study areas. Further themes emerged around quality of lectures, frequency of events and the availability of resources across the different campuses. The positive comments featured students who were engaged with life at King s and had productive relationships with academic staff. Many of the suggestions for improvement were about the lack of community students felt at King s, in relation to the London setting, a lack of connection with other students and relationships with staff and their personal tutor, and problems with communication with administrative staff. Some typical examples follow: What King s does well: Attracts academics whose work is highly valued and interesting, thus providing students with inspiring and insightful lectures which are conducive to more fruitful seminar discussions. Gives a well-rounded curriculum that is not strictly problem-based but encourages participation outside of the course. This builds independence that will be needed in our future careers. It is very laissez-faire about how you run your day-to-day life but always has facilities that can provide you with guidance on how to get back on the right track should you need to. It acknowledges that as students we are adults but in return we have to accept responsibility and the consequences for whatever decisions we make. King's is nurturing, welcoming, and engaging - it all makes me want to get up in the morning and go to lectures. Suggestions for improvement: Basic administration e.g. Clearer, more efficient timetabling, informed scheduled changes in advanced. Probably too much work but marked exam practice to inform students if their essays are correctly structured and have the right content that will be necessary in the exams. Employment focus, highlighted internships available to kings students, how to secure placements, planning for future careers etc. Main criticism: THERE NEEDS TO BE A LOT MORE STUDENT CONTACT WITH STAFF My year group is massive and I understand that university is all about independent learning, however I still feel that there are too many lectures and too little tutorials/ time allowed to talk to academic staff. 14
Appendix: Benchmark survey data Data is presented for all students on each of the items, organised into the Benchmarks National comparative benchmarks Critical Thinking Very often/often Sometimes Never Analysing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in 67.1% 26.0% 5.7% depth Forming a new idea or understanding from various 57.3% 32.0% 9.5% pieces of information Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information 60.3% 30.2% 7.1% source Applying facts, theories or methods to practical 70.0% 24.3% 5.0% problems or new situations Critical Thinking Benchmark 63.7% 28.1% 6.8% Course Challenge Very often/often Sometimes Never Worked harder than you thought you could to meet 36.8% 43.0% 17.2% standards or expectations Come to class/seminar/lecture without completing reading 23.2% 56.4% 18.1% or assignments Challenging you to do your best work 58.6% 27.7% 13.4% Course Challenge Benchmark 40.0% 42.4% 16.2% Academic Integration Very often/often Sometimes Never Asked questions or contributed to class discussions 53.8% 40.3% 5.3% in other ways Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with 52.3% 39.3% 7.4% others outside of class Talked about your career plans with teaching staff, 17.2% 37.4% 44.3% advisors or tutors Discussed ideas from your course with teaching staff 13.6% 39.3% 46.3% outside taught sessions Discussed your academic performance and/or 20.9% 53.6% 24.8% feedback with an academic member of staff Academic Integration Benchmark 25.9% 42.0% 25.6% Collaborative Learning Very Sometimes Never often/often Explained course material to one or more students 43.7% 50.0% 5.8% Worked with other students on projects or 37.3% 45.2% 15.4% assignments Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with 52.3% 39.3% 7.4% others outside of class Collaborative Learning Benchmark 44.4% 44.8% 9.5% 15
King s curriculum characteristics benchmarks Research-Rich Environment Very Sometimes Never often/often Looked beyond your reading list when researching 63.7% 25.8% 5.8% for coursework Attended talks, presentations, seminars that are not 23.5% 46.1% 29.4% part of your formal curriculum Read research publications as part of your course 59.0% 26.7% 11.9% Participated in fieldtrips, visits and offsite activities 13.1% 24.0% 45.5% related to one or more of your programme Made explicit where an academic member of staff's 39.7% 42.5% 15.3% research has been used in teaching Done Plan to do Not decided/ Do not plan to do Work with academic staff on a research project 8.3% 33.5% 58.2% Research-rich Environment Benchmark 39.8% 33.0% 21.6% Academic Literacy Very Sometimes Never often/often Explained course material to one or more students 43.7% 50.0% 5.8% Worked with other students on projects or 37.3% 45.2% 15.4% assignments Given a class presentation 27.1% 52.7% 17.6% Worked harder than you thought you could to meet a 36.6% 43.0% 17.2% teacher/lecturer/tutor's standards or expectations Made significant changes to your work based on 28.0% 43.1% 23.7% feedback Applying facts, theories or methods to practical 70.0% 24.3% 5.0% problems or new situations Analysing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning in 67.1% 26.0% 5.7% depth Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information 60.3% 30.2% 7.1% source Academic Literacy Benchmark 46.3% 34.0% 12.2% Global Connectedness Had in-depth conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values Included diverse and global perspectives in course Very Sometimes Never often/often 44.8% 40.1% 14.0% 36.6% 35.7% 17.7% discussions or assignments Incorporating international perspectives 32.0% 37.7% 23.7% Done Plan to do Not decided/ Do not plan to do Participate in a study abroad programme 6.5% 29.2% 64.3% Study a foreign language 29.7% 27.2% 43.1% Global Connectedness Benchmark 37.8% 37.8% 18.5% Interdisciplinarity Very often/often Sometimes Never 16
Combined ideas from different courses when 49.1% 34.5% 10.8% completing assignments, or during class discussions Connected your learning to social problems or issues 41.3% 37.9% 16.1% Forming a new idea or understanding from various 57.3% 32.0% 9.5% pieces of information Encouraged you to approach a topic from an 28.3% 45.1% 23.4% alternative disciplinary perspective Interdisciplinarity Benchmark 44.0% 37.4% 14.9% Community Engagement Drawn on community-based experts for teaching (e.g. service users, professionals and others from outside academia) Drawn upon real world and local examples in teaching content To what extent has King's emphasised attending College events (in addition to your regular timetabled lectures and seminars) To what extent has King's emphasised encouraging you to become a better informed and active citizen Very often/often Sometimes Never 31.3% 37.3% 27.4% 62.8% 29.9% 5.3% 45.8% 33.6% 18.9% 29.8% 34.7% 33.6% Community Engagement Benchmark 42.4% 33.9% 21.3% King s priority areas Feedback Overall Agree Neutral Disagree Talked about your career plans with teaching staff, 17.2% 37.4% 44.3% advisors or tutors Discussed your academic performance and/or 20.9% 53.6% 24.8% feedback with an academic member of staff Made significant changes to your work based on 28.0% 43.1% 23.7% feedback Provided detailed oral feedback on your work 19.6% 38.1% 39.5% Provided detailed written feedback on your work 34.8% 43.0% 19.7% I have adequate opportunities to give feedback on all 63.9% 19.0% 17.2% elements of my course My feedback on the course is listened to and valued 36.6% 38.8% 24.5% It is clear to me how students' comments on the 32.0% 34.5% 33.4% degree programme have been acted upon Feedback Overall Benchmark 31.6% 38.4% 28.4% Feedback Agree Neutral Disagree I have adequate opportunities to give feedback on all 63.9% 19.0% 17.2% elements of my course My feedback on the course is listened to and valued 36.6% 38.8% 24.5% It is clear to me how students' comments on the 32.0% 34.5% 33.4% degree programme have been acted upon Feedback Benchmark 31.6% 38.4% 28.4% Assessment Very often/often Sometimes Never 17
Discussed your academic performance and/or 20.9% 53.6% 24.8% feedback with an academic member of staff Made significant changes to your work based on 28.0% 43.1% 23.7% feedback Provided detailed oral feedback on your work 19.6% 38.1% 39.5% Provided detailed written feedback on your work 34.8% 43.0% 19.7% Assessment Benchmark 31.6% 38.4% 28.4% Co-curricular Engagement Participation in an internship, field experience, or placement in addition to your programme requirements Done Plan to do Not decided/ Do not plan to do 12.7% 49.2% 31.7% Participation in co-curricular activities 49.2% 23.2% 26.8% Volunteering through KCLSU 9.5% 20.1% 41.4% Volunteering through other organisations 23.8% 24.9% 50.1% Co-curricular Engagement Benchmark 23.8% 29.4% 44.5% Academic Support Very much/quite a Some Very little bit Using e-resources for learning, including study skills, 48.0% 16.5% 5.3% data collection and information retrieval Using learning support services (tutoring services, 40.0% 31.7% 26.4% writing centre, specialist librarians, etc.) Providing support for students' overall well-being 31.9% 37.0% 28.9% (recreation, health care, counselling, etc.) Providing support preparing students for 34.6% 33.4% 24.3% employment Providing opportunities for professional development 38.0% 35.9% 22.7% (communication, management, leadership skills) Excellent (5-7) Neutral Poor (1-2) (3-4) Quality of your interactions with: Administrative and 33.6% 39.7% 26.7% support staff Academic Support Benchmark 38.5% 30.9% 21.5% Engagement indicators Academic Challenge Very Sometimes/ Never/ Very 18
often/often Some little Very much/ Quite a bit Analysing an idea, experience, or line of reasoning 67.1% 26.0% 5.7% in depth Applying facts, theories or methods to practical 70.0% 24.3% 5.0% problems or new situations Evaluating a point of view, decision, or information 60.3% 30.2% 7.1% source Forming a new idea or understanding from various 57.3% 32.0% 9.5% pieces of information Becoming an independent learner 83.1% 14.9% 1.5% Spending significant amounts of time studying and 81.4% 14.6% 4.0% on academic work Challenging you to do your best work 58.7% 27.8% 13.5% Academic Challenge Benchmark 67.6% 25.5% 5.8% Student Academic Relationships Very often/often Sometimes Never Talked about your career plans with teaching staff, 17.2% 37.4% 44.3% advisors or tutors Worked with academic staff on activities other than 12.1% 19.2% 67.2% coursework (for example staff/student committees, student representation, etc) Discussed ideas from your course with teaching staff 13.6% 39.2% 46.3% outside taught sessions Discussed your academic performance and/or 20.9% 53.6% 24.8% feedback with an academic member of staff Provided detailed oral feedback on your work 19.6% 38.1% 39.5% Provided detailed written feedback on your work 34.8% 43.0% 19.7% Excellent (5-7) Neutral (3-4) Poor (1-2) Quality of your interactions with: Teaching/academic 45.6% 38.3% 16.0% staff Quality of your interactions with: Your personal 48.7% 30.6% 9.9% tutor Student-Academic Relationships Benchmark 19.7% 38.4% 40.3% Learning with Peers Very often/often Sometimes Never Explained course material to one or more students 43.7% 50.0% 5.8% Worked with other students on projects or 37.3% 45.2% 15.4% assignments Excellent (5-7) Neutral (3-4) Poor (1-2) Quality of your interactions with: other students on 74.4% 19.4% 6.3% your course Quality of your interactions with: other students at 43.4% 33.3% 22.8% King s Learning with Peers Benchmark 49.7% 36.9% 12.5% 19