1. Education and Student Experience Update
April McMahon
Deputy Vice-Chancellor – Education
Academic Division 30 November 2017

2. TEF
Didn’t we do well?
Some excellent feedback in our statement of findings:
‘Very high proportions of students from all backgrounds continue with their studies and then progress to employment, notably exceeding the provider benchmarks.’
‘…an outstanding Student Success Project dedicated to closing the attainment gap for students with protected characteristics’.
But even some of the areas identified as positive need further work.
And TEF is linked closely to NSS…though note the recent announcement that TEF3 will half the weight of NSS metrics.

3. TEF (continued)
Far fewer institutions will enter for TEF3 in – our own Gold rating lasts for 3 years.
Two models are being tested for subject-level TEF – A (top down) and B (bottom up).
Kent has not volunteered to participate as a pilot institution for either model.
We can do internal work on the other new component – teaching intensity (= contact hours +).
And we need to look at linking and mainstreaming projects, and at retention (for instance, the Attend and Engage pilot).

4. NSS Our NSS results are not Gold.
It is difficult to compare year on year because of new questions, and because of changes in the institutions listed.
But it is not difficult to see that we have to do better.
We are below our benchmark institutions, and below the sector average, on a range of areas.
Response rate dropped in 2017 by 3% to 74%.

5. NSS (continued)
Kent subjects in the top quartile for more than two thirds of NSS themes account for only 3.6% of our student population.
But Kent subjects in the bottom quartile for more than two thirds account for 21%.
Poor performance on new questions on Student Voice and Learning Community.
Assessment and Feedback holding steady(ish); Organisation and Management, Teaching on my Course, Academic Support falling.
Action needed from Schools – but what is in place centrally?

6. Student comments
Lack of contact time, leading to perceived poor value for money.
Lack of one-to-one time with academic staff, who can be difficult to get hold of.
Lecturers being hard to understand, unengaging. Lectures not being recorded.
Feedback given late; or feedback unconstructive, with lack of guidance on how to improve.
No information provided on how students’ feedback has been acted upon for either courses or module evaluation.

7. ‘Lessons learned’ from the opposition...
High participation rates matter.
Students pay a lot of attention to information that ‘closes the loop’ by telling them about changes inspired by the student voice
This doesn’t necessarily mean what changed was what students had initially asked for.
Students need help to understand what the NSS questions are really asking about.
Partnership with students and effective student representation is key (e.g. involving students in curriculum design and development).
Triangulating NSS with other evidence such as module evaluation to motivate enhancements.

8. Digital and Physical Resources
Lecture Capture policy…
…opening the door to more flexible use of ‘lecture’ time.
This is extremely important to students. They have been asking for more access to recorded lecture material for a long time.
The policy assumes sessions will be recorded unless there is an accepted reason not to.
Students need to be told in Moodle why lectures are not being recorded.

9. Digital and Physical Resources
TEF statement of findings: ‘physical and digital learning resources of the highest quality’.
Are our teaching spaces the best they can be?
Are we creative enough in using flexible furniture for teaching and learning, and new ways of enhancing our teaching (and our assessment and feedback, come to that)?
Timetabling.
New Group for the Enhancement and Management of Space.

10. Academic communities
Kent Union have a focus on students’ sense of belonging to an inter-generational academic community.
As a result of their work, ALL students have free membership of a student-led academic society in
How do we create common ground intellectually? How do we encourage and enable all student cohorts and populations to be involved?
How does this relate to our curriculum and to student choice at different levels?

11. Institutional value of teaching
Are Education / Learning and Teaching and Research valued equally at Kent?
Education and Student Experience Strategy: ‘…whilst research is crucial to our reputation, it is maintaining student numbers and student satisfaction…that will keep Kent sustainable’.
Are recognition and reward structures right for teaching? The REEP project.
The TESSAs – Teaching Enhancement Small Support Awards
Do we tell stories externally and internally about excellence in education, as for research?

12. The student experience?
Is there a core, Kent University experience? Is the student experience something we provide, or something we help students construct?
Project on ‘Developing a Framework for Powerful Student Experiences’ – with Kathleen Quinlan (UELT) and Ruth Wilkinson (Kent Union).
What are students’ goals and sense of purpose when they come to Kent? How does this change?
What opportunities do they or don’t they take up, and why? How does this vary by background, degree programme or campus?
How well do staff understand students’ perspectives? How can we encourage engagement?

13. NSS 2018: Institutional Actions Initiated
Teaching:
Directors of Education Network
Recognising Excellence in Education Project (REEP)
HEA accredited taught and new CPD routes to recognition
Implementation and monitoring of Lecture Capture policy
The TESSAs – see the UELT website for more details!
Assessment and Feedback
Audit, L&T conference
Academic Support
Academic Adviser review
‘Attend and Engage’
Organisation and Management
GEMS
Learning Communities
KU funded/Academic societies
Student voice
Review of student & module surveys
Communications –’closing the loop’

14. Hold the front page! Programme and Module Revisions
Three month intensive project Nov 17 – Feb 18
Crucial issue is achieving a ‘single version of the truth’ for each programme and module specification
Motivations are consistency; student experience; compliance (CMA / QAA)
Linked to Simplifying Kent 1 (Programme Approval and Curriculum Design) and KentVision but independently necessary
Fits our existing timetable for updates, but with additional strands
Resourced by EG – 7 x seconded posts to work with Schools; SITS Curriculum Manager module.

15. Programme and Module Revisions
Single, accurate and consistent version of each programme and module specification.
Removal of unnecessary detail from specs.
‘Assessment amnesty’ – where changes to assessment are being considered following last year’s Audit of Assessment and Feedback, these can be approved and implemented swiftly.
Specifying a retrieval mechanism for every module.
Simplifying and streamlining some programme titles (no more ‘With a term in Paris’).
Withdrawing non-recruiting modules and programmes.

16. What next? How do we encourage sharing of good practice?
Where does consistency fit into our sense of Kent as a devolved world?
Do we duplicate? And if we do, can we afford (money, time, student satisfaction…) to keep on duplicating?
Is just encouraging excellence enough? Is funding (e.g. through the TESSAs) the right kind of incentive?
Future discussions and consultations on the shape of the academic year, the length of the teaching day (including Wednesday afternoon teaching…again…), mid-module evaluations…