1. G OSIA K ULEJ P ROJECT C O - ORDINATOR (S URVEYS ) T HE H IGHER E DUCATION A CADEMY PTES – The first glance at the interim results from the first Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey

2. Background The one off PGT Survey commissioned with York Consulting in 2007 (survey and focus groups) Summary report available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ou rwork/research/surveys/PGTSurvey.pdf The need to close the gap between NSS and PRES Growing importance of PGT students Specific cohort (large number of international students, OU) Successful PRES methodology

3. Development Objective: Develop an easy-to-use tool for collecting comparative information about the taught postgraduate student experience, to inform enhancement. Steering group (HEIs representatives, UKCGE) Design principles: Student-centred, Voluntary, Useful, Anonymous, Easy to use, Flexible, Cost effective, Secure Based on PRES methodology The questionnaire builds up on the NSS, PRES and PGT surveys Planning: Steering group 2007-09 Pilot: July-Aug 2008; 6 HEIs 2,238 replies (13% response rate) Revised questionnaire and HEIs feedback

4. How does it work? Academy HE Institution BOS Academy Provide core questionnaire Coordinate (the same start/end dates, monthly bulletins) Collaborative agreement Advice on data analysis Collect feedback Sector wide report (anonymised dataset) HE Institution Purchase BOS licence Launch PTES (additional questions) Collect data (emails) Analyse data Institutional report Response to survey results BOS Provide technical support and guidance www.survey.bris.ac.uk

5. Core questions Motivation Quality of teaching and learning Assessment and feedback Dissertation Organisation and management Learning resources Skills and personal development Career and professional development Overall satisfaction

6. Questionnaire Includes many questions from NSS (for comparison) and some from PRES (dissertation, demographics) Questions for particular groups of students: Campus based vs distance learners Student support services International students Demographic questions Degree registered for; age; gender; discipline (41 JACS), department, start date; full/part time; face-to-face/distant learner; domicile; paid employment; source of funding; highest qualification on entry

7. PTES 2009 PTES 1 st national administration advertised beginning of February 2009 HEIs to sign up until end of March 2009 30 HEIs (interim results from 29 HEIs) signed up PTES went live w/c 20 April Currently 9,119 replies (11% response rate) Will remain open until 26 June 2009 Final report Autumn 2009 Interim results – 8,362 replies

8. The cohort 29 HEIs

9. Qualifications 78% are registered on MA courses 9% Postgraduate Certificate 9% Postgraduate Diploma 4% Other

10. Age and gender 42% are female 58% are male

11. Discipline

12. Mode of study and mode of delivery 57% study full time and 43% study part-time 73% are primarily face-to-face learners

13. Domicile 67% Home students 12% Other EU 21% Non EU

14. Employment Just over a half are in paid employment (55%) Out of those: 23% work up to 20 hours per week Only 9% work between 21 and 30 hours per week 68% work over 30 hours per week

15. The main source of funding

16. The highest qualifications on entry 72% undergraduate degree or equivalent 18% Postgraduate degree 5% Other qualifications 4% below undergraduate degree 1% professional experience

17. A. Motivation 1) To progress in my current career path (52%) 2) To improve my employment prospects (49%) 3) For personal interest (44%) 1) The overall reputation of the institution (39%) 2) The location of the institution (37%) 3) The institution's reputation in my chosen subject area (34%)

18. B. Quality of teaching and learning Teaching quality on my programme is consistently good – 39% Teaching quality on my programme is variable but generally good – 52% Only 2% said the teaching quality is consistently poor

19. B. Quality of teaching and learning % Agree The course is intellectually stimulating84% Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching83% Staff are good at explaining things82% The teaching and learning methods are effective for this type of programme80% Staff made the subject interesting77% Staff are available/accessible when I need them72% I am happy with the teaching support I received from staff on my course71% There is sufficient contact time (face to face and/or virtual/online) between staff and students to support effective learning68%

20. C. Assessment and feedback %Agree The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance74% Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair74% I have received detailed comments (written or oral) on my work67% Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand57% Feedback on my work has been prompt57% I received feedback in time to allow me to improve my next assignment57%

21. E. Organisation and management The workload on my programme is more or less as I expected – 52% The workload is higher than I expected – 30% The workload is much higher than I expected – 10% %Agree The timetable fits well with my other commitments80% Any changes in the programme or teaching have been communicated effectively74% The balance of core modules and options is appropriate71% The programme is well organised and is running smoothly70% The balance between scheduled contact time and private study is appropriate69%

22. F. Learning resources %Agree I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to78% The library resources and services are easily accessible77% The library resources and services are good enough for my needs75%

23. G. Skills and personal development %Agree The programme has developed my research skills78% The programme has developed my transferable skills77% As a result of the programme I am more confident about independent learning74% As a result of the programme, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems65% The programme has helped me to present myself with confidence63% As a results of the programme my communication skills have improved60%

24. H. Career and professional development %Agree As a result of this programme, I believe my future employment prospects are better78% I feel better prepared for my future employment71% I am encouraged to reflect on my professional development needs67%

25. I. Overall satisfaction To what extent your expectations were met?

26. I. Overall satisfaction Quality of learning and teaching met or exceeded my expectations – 81% Assessment and feedback met or exceeded my expectations – 73% Overall, experience of my course met of exceeded my expectations – 83%

27. Campus based learners Distance learners Different groups of learners %Agree I have been able to access social learning spaces (e.g. for group working) on campus when I needed to72% I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when I needed them69% %Agree I am satisfied with the quality of learning materials available to me (Print, online material, DVDs etc.)80% I am happy with the proportion of e-learning elements used in the programme (online resources, Virtual Learning Environment)70%

28. Students support services %Agree%Neutral I have received effective support with my study skills (e.g. taking notes, avoiding plagiarism)67%23% The level of careers support was appropriate for my needs54%31% The student support services were effective in addressing my needs58%31% The student support services were readily accessible65%26% I have received adequate support for my general English language needs52%34% I have received adequate support for my discipline/subject specific English language needs48%36%

29. Summary Survey results show generally a positive picture of taught experience Areas for improvement (less than 70% agreement): contact time, promptness and quality of the feedback, transferable skills, professional development needs Challenges for the survey Low response rate Increase number of HEIs Student services/support items

30. Further analysis Scale analysis Multiple regression: what affects the overall experience the most? Experience of different demographic groups Benchmarking: NSS 2007/08 and 2008/09 results PRES 2009 results B-clubs (Russell Group, 1994 Group, Pre-92 Group and Post-92 Group)

31. Future of PTES Dissemination of 2009 results (report) Working with PTES HEIs to share effective practice PTES 2010 as a part of postgraduate surveys package conducted by the Academy More information: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/research/surveys/ptes surveys@heacademy.ac.uk malgorzata.kulej@heacademy.ac.uk