Email
The National Student Survey (NSS) is the main vehicle for student feedback in UK universities. It's sent to final-year students to gather views about what they think about the quality of their course and institution. The results are used to compile university league tables, which is a way of making institutions more accountable.
But the NSS has come under criticism from academics and students who feel that it doesn't truly tell us how engaged students feel. It has been called "bland", "methodologically worthless" and a "waste of government money". Some claim that universities have pressurised students into giving positive answers, while others say that the survey questions are too vague to elicit meaningful answers.
As this year marks its 10th anniversary, we ask three people in the sector whether they think the NSS is fit for purpose.
Arti Agrawal, lecturer, City University London
In theory the NSS is a good idea. However, the manner in which it is deployed and increasingly used is a real cause for worry.
A fundamental issue with the NSS is that it reduces very different courses at very different universities to a simple set of metrics, and implies that users can use these metrics to compare and rank courses and universities.
In some cases, NSS data scores for smaller institutions are higher than Russell Group counterparts. Can students really use this as an indicator of which is the better place to study that course?
A BA course in natural philosophy may have different aims from a BSc in forensic investigation. Can the NSS be used to compare them and tell which course is better value?
Another key issue is whether in its current form the NSS adequately measures student satisfaction. Are the standard, multiple-choice questions the NSS asks really able to gauge the student experience in any meaningful way?
The way institutions and government use the NSS is worth scrutinising. With increased tuition fees, students are seen as customers who must be kept happy, and the NSS is now a customer satisfaction survey. It can lead to compromises in the standard of education.
Anecdotally, I am aware of universities that, as a result of NSS findings, decreased turnaround time for feedback on assessments without increasing staff numbers. While timely feedback helps students, the quality of feedback is important, but in these cases staff simply had to do more and do it faster.
The choice in courses being offered and institutions also depends to some extent on NSS results. Can we afford to completely lose the courses or institutions that are deemed unsuccessful by students?
A poorly-implemented NSS is worse than none: it misdirects and has the potential to severely cripple higher education unless we revamp it.
Nona Buckley-Irvine, general secretary, London School of Economics (LSE) students' union
In 2012, the LSE students' union argued for a boycott of the NSS, saying that it was an uninformative tool for measuring university performance. Two years later, I still share those concerns.
The NSS should be a form of empowerment for students, allowing them to have their say. However, the questions are simplistic, and a numbers analysis is hopelessly inadequate for telling us what constitutes good feedback, quality personal development and sufficient contact time. The survey can pinpoint where things go wrong, but gives little direction as to how to improve. What use is that?
In a time when fees have increased far beyond the levels in 2004, the NSS is seriously outdated. Students' fees represent a large proportion of a university's income – in LSE's case, the vast majority. The Higher Education Funding Council for England (Hefce) should be demanding a better analysis of university teaching because in an age where students are paying £9,000 or more, they deserve to engage in a responsive feedback process. Again, numbers aren't good enough – we need a feedback mechanism that is able to communicate the student voice.
That said, the NSS is useful as a benchmarking tool. Vice-chancellors do take note. It affects league table rankings, and we should still use it to hold our universities to account. Boycotting the NSS would leave us without any feedback at all, and we owe it to today's students to get their voice across, regardless of these inadequacies.
The anniversary of the NSS provides an opportunity for a rethink. Universities should have to provide a response to their NSS results, and say how they will act on poor scores. Consultation should go further than just one survey. We need a feedback mechanism for students that means that universities can't get away with short-changing students with a poor quality degree – and the NSS alone isn't enough.
Ellie Clewlow, head of learning and teaching, Hefce
As we celebrate the news that the satisfaction rate for students studying at UK universities and colleges has hit a 10-year high, it's a good time to ask: what difference has the NSS made to learning and teaching in higher education?
The NSS is the only national survey of its kind which captures final-year undergraduate students' feedback on their course. Every university in the UK takes part, as do many colleges. Response rates are consistently high – over 320,000 final year students completed the survey this year. This makes it an invaluable source of intelligence for universities and colleges as well as for prospective students via the Unistats website.
Since 2005, the NSS has helped over two million students make their voices heard about the things that matter to them. These voices have helped to bring about significant and positive change in higher education. The results are used by senior management teams, academics, students' unions and others to drive improvements in curriculum, teaching and learning quality, learning resources and academic support.
What does the survey tell us about longer-term trends? Overall satisfaction levels among students have increased steadily, and satisfaction with assessment and feedback, identified in early surveys as a major concern, has improved markedly.
However, some student groups, including students who declare a disability and Black Caribbean students, are less satisfied. We are exploring with the sector why such differences persist, and what action is needed.
So what's next for the NSS? Recent research commissioned by Hefce and the other UK higher education funding bodies has highlighted its value and reliability. There is strong support for its continuation, as well as recommendations for further improvements. These include a proposal for a set of questions on student engagement – the extent to which students feel they have been academically challenged and encouraged to work collaboratively.
The NSS will continue to enable students' voices to be heard in a fast-moving environment and stimulate innovation and excellence in teaching and learning in our universities and colleges.
Do you have an alternative view? Share your thoughts on the NSS in the comments below.
Join the higher education network for more comment, analysis and job opportunities, direct to your inbox. Follow us on Twitter @gdnhighered.
;