1. UCL Annual Student Experience Review
Using data to measure progress and inform strategic enhancement initiatives

3. Annual Student Experience Review: Purpose
ASER is one of a suite of Quality Review activities by which UCL assures itself and external monitoring bodies (such as the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)) that:
Faculties and Departments have strategic oversight of, and take responsibility for, the academic standards, quality and enhancement of their programmes.
Students have the opportunity to contribute to shaping their learning experience.
Students are properly and actively informed at appropriate times of matters relevant to their programmes of study.
There is sufficient external involvement in the design, approval and review of the curriculum.
Staff are supported to deliver high quality student experiences.
Innovation and creativity in the design and delivery of the curriculum is actively supported.

4. Annual Student Experience Review: Process
The ASER process requires departments to:
review key data about academic standards and the student experience (including the National Student Survey (NSS) results, External Examiners’ reports, data on progression and achievement (by gender, ethnicity etc) and the results of the DLHE).
identify key areas of concern and to agree and take timely actions to address these concerns.
identify areas of strong performance and to identify good practice so that this can be celebrated, maintained and shared with other departments

5. ASER timelines Two iterations of ASER – UG and PGT.
Key data sets are first reviewed at university level.
Any themes emerging from this analysis are discussed and any necessary actions for departments are then mandated by the Quality Review Sub-Committee (QRSC).
UG Departmental data and mandated actions sent to HoDs in September.
November deadline for submission to Faculty Teaching Committees.
Discussion and approval of Development and Enhancement Plans QRSC end of November.
PGT Departmental data and mandated actions sent to HoDs in December and submitted in March.

6. ASER DATA 1 As part of the ASER data package, Departments are given:
ASER Dashboard with headline information about the NSS performance, Average Student Achievement (ASA) and the DLHE;
NSS Departmental reports with a detailed breakdown of subject performance;
ASA, Award and Strategic data broken down by gender, disability, ethnicity, domicile and Polar 3.

7. ASER DATA 2
For ASA and Award, the data helps departments to establish a clearer picture of:
How their departmental data compares to UCL or a Faculty;
How their departmental data varies with demographic measures (eg gender)
How this distribution compares to UCL’s or a Faculty’s distribution.

8. ASER Intensive 1
84% of final year undergraduates were satisfied with their overall experience at UCL – a rise of 1% on last year – according to the 2016 National Student Survey (NSS) results released in August. BUT the headline figures disguised wide variation in performance at a Departmental level.

9. ASER Intensive 2
Departments receiving low student satisfaction scores in the NSS, undergo an extension to the ASER process overseen by the Office of the Vice-Provost (Education and Student Affairs): ASER Intensive Engagement. This consists of key senior management (including the Provost, Vice-Provost, Director of the Arena Centre and Director of Academic Services) meeting with the HoD to review the Department’s ASER Plan and setting priorities for action. A small team of colleagues is identified who will work with the Department to plan these actions and monitor progress over a period of 6-9 months.

10. Successes
Departments participating in the ASER Intensive scheme, now in its second year, have seen significant enhancement in performance:
Chemical Engineering, which improved its overall satisfaction rate by 11%, seeing a rise on every metric of the NSS, with its greatest gains in Academic Support (+18%) and Assessment and Feedback (+17%).
School of Pharmacy made an even greater leap of 16% in overall satisfaction, again improving on every metric, with greatest gains in Organisation and Management (17%) and Assessment and Feedback (12%).

11. ASER Mandated Actions 2016-17
(1) where a student should go to obtain advice and support with their studies (eg: details of the Personal Tutoring scheme in the Department etc), (2) how to contact key staff when they need to and (3) where to obtain advice about study choices.
their personal tutor provision, giving links to the information provided to students, and outline how they are planning to evaluate that provision during the year.
that they have built into every module or seminar series at least two weeks before the first assignment is due, at least one session in which the marking criteria for that module are explained in detail to students in a forum where they have an opportunity to ask questions and seek clarification if required.
a consistent student feedback template for any given assignment which makes appropriate reference to the marking criteria and explains to students how they can improve their work in future.

12. Connected Curriculum
Departments were also asked to make a preliminary assessment of all their taught programmes of study (i.e. benchmark them) against the grid in the Connected Curriculum Enhancement Guide.

13. How are the Development and Enhancement Plans assessed?
Every plan is read and assessed in accordance with the following broad criteria:
Has the Department made good use of the data provided?
Has it addressed the mandated actions?
Are the actions proposed in response appropriate and timely and does the Department propose to evaluate their effectiveness?
Has the Department described how students have been involved in the development of the action plan and how any outcomes will be communicated to them?

14. What happens to the Development and Enhancement Plans?
A paper on themes emerging from the individual DEPs is discussed by the QRSC and any necessary actions agreed.
The Chair of the QRSC writes to every Head of Department with personalised feedback on the DEP. This is copied to Faculty Tutors.
Any issues which reports raise which involve Professional Services, Faculty or any Body outside the Department’s control, the QRSC Chair writes to the Head of that Professional Service (etc.), inviting a response to the Head of Department.
Actions in them are monitored by Faculty Teaching Committees.
They are used as part of the documentary evidence base for the Department’s Internal Quality Review (every sixth year)
They will be used as part of the evidence base for the Teaching Excellence Framework.

15. IMPACT
The impact of the process on student learning and student satisfaction can be identified and built upon over time.
ASER feeds into major strategic enhancement initiatives such as improving NSS scores, improving assessment and feedback, Personal Tutoring and the Connected Curriculum.