Student Satisfaction Data for Work Based Learners

Authors: Rosie Borup, Hanifa Shah

Abstract:

This paper aims to describe how student satisfaction is measured for work-based learners as these are non-traditional learners, conducting academic learning in the workplace, typically their curricula have a high degree of negotiation, and whose motivations are directly related to their employers- needs, as well as their own career ambitions. We argue that while increasing WBL participation, and use of SSD are both accepted as being of strategic importance to the HE agenda, the use of WBL SSD is rarely examined, and lessons can be learned from the comparison of SSD from a range of WBL programmes, and increased visibility of this type of data will provide insight into ways to improve and develop this type of delivery. The key themes that emerged from the analysis of the interview data were: learners profiles and needs, employers drivers, academic staff drivers, organizational approach, tools for collecting data and visibility of findings. The paper concludes with observations on best practice in the collection, analysis and use of WBL SSD, thus offering recommendations for both academic managers and practitioners.

Keywords: Student satisfaction data, work based learning, employer engagement, NSS.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1076512

References:

[1] ROWLEY, J. (2003b), "Designing student feedback questionnaires", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 142-9.
[2] FISK,P., TEIXEIRA, J., PATRÍCIO, L,, NÓBREGA, L., 2008. Customer experience modeling: from customer experience to service design. Journal of Service Management Volume: 23 Issue: 3 2012
[3] DOUGLAS, J.J., 2006. Measuring student satisfaction at a UK university. Quality assurance in education, 14(3), pp. 251-267.
[4] WANG, Y., 2003. Assessment of learner satisfaction with asynchronous electronic learning systems. Information & Management, 41(1), pp. 75- 86.
[5] ALDERMAN,B., 2005. The Role of Interaction in Enhancing Achievement and Student Satisfaction in an Online Course: A Rubric Analysis. Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2005 (pp. 214-219).
[6] WURST, C., SMARKOLA, C. and GAFFNEY, M.A., 2008. Ubiquitous laptop usage in higher education: Effects on student achievement, student satisfaction, and constructivist measures in honors and traditional classrooms. Computers & Education, 51(4), pp. 1766-1783.
[7] ESPASA, A.A., 2010. Analysing feedback processes in an online teaching and learning environment: an exploratory study. Higher education, 59(3), pp. 277-292.
[8] NAVARRO, M.M.M., 2005. A new management element for universities: satisfaction with the offered courses. International journal of educational management, 19(6), pp. 505-526.
[9] LAWSON, A., LEACH, M. and BURROWS, S., 2012. The implications for learners, teachers and institutions of using student satisfaction as a measure of success: a review of the literature. Education Journal, (138), pp. 7-11.
[10] CLARK, D.J., REDMOND, M.V., 1982 Small group instructional diagnosis: A practical approach to improving teaching AAHE Bulletin 1982, 35
[11] SHERRY, A. C. , FULFORD, C. P. & ZHANG, S . (1998) ÔÇÿAssessing Distance Learners-
[12] ROBINSON, K. (1995) Using Small Group Instructional Feedback as a Formative Feedback Strategyfor Audioconference Sources: Practical Guidelines for Audio Conference Lecturers and Facilitators (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 420347).
[13] DIAMOND, M.M.R., 2004. The usefulness of structured mid-term feedback as a catalyst for change in higher education classes. Active learning in higher education, 5(3), pp. 217-231.