Student Satisfaction. Per the 2008 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) as posted by the Common University Data Ontario, 2009, the undergraduate student satisfaction rate (total of excellent and good responses) at your institution for NSSE Question "How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this institution?" for Senior Year respondents = N/A • Per the 2008 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) as posted by the Common University Data Ontario, 2009, the undergraduate student satisfaction rate (total of definitely yes and probably yes responses) at your institution for NSSE Question "If you could start over again, would you go to the same institution you are now attending?" for Senior Year respondents = N/A • Please provide one or more examples in the space provided below of a promising practice that Northern Ontario School of Medicine used during 2009-10 to increase student satisfaction. A promising practice could be a strategy, initiative or program viewed by the institution to be an innovative practice, success story and/or key accomplishment that the institution would like to highlight. NOSM does not conduct a student satisfaction survey per se, at least we have not done so thus far in our brief history. In 2009-10, we began discussions regarding the development of a study to explore students’ experiences with their first year orientation program. The study was developed to the point that by February 2010, we had agreed upon an early stage project charter and a name for the study: Critical Analysis of NOSM Orientation Effectiveness (CANOE). We plan to seek Research Ethics Board approval at Lakehead and Laurentian Universities for implementation in 2010-11. Student satisfaction at NOSM is generally equated with student engagement. In that regard, NOSM learners are very engaged and play active and meaningful roles on many important and varied committees: Academic Council, Undergraduate Medical Education Committee (UMEC), Student Assessment and Promotion Committee (SAPC), Phase 1, 2 and 3 Committees, Awards Committee, Learner Affairs Reference Group (LARG) to name a few.
Student Satisfaction. Per the KPI results reported in 2009-10 the student satisfaction rate at your institution for KPI Question #14 "Overall, your program is giving you knowledge and skills that will be useful in your future career" = 90.1
Student Satisfaction. We continue to treat student satisfaction as an unambiguous priority and are working to ensure that student satisfaction is embedded in all that we do – explicitly recognising that the National Student Survey results should be higher. The 2017 institution National Student Survey results have seen a marked improvement of 3% in overall satisfaction, as well as further improvement of 4% in satisfaction with assessment and feedback. Levels of satisfaction in the Postgraduate Taught and Postgraduate Research Experience surveys have remained broadly stable, but with improvements in some areas. While the 2017 surveys point to progress in various areas, they also highlight the need for the University to continue to address issues regarding aspects of the student experience.
Student Satisfaction. The University will continue to work with the OU Students Association to improve student satisfaction and adopt a student-led approach to student satisfaction planning.
Student Satisfaction. 18. We have made an unequivocal commitment to improve the student experience at the University. Our NSS 2018 were disappointing, and to build on work already in train, we have undertaken in-depth analysis of the results, with some of our key findings (both positive and negative) are noted below.
Student Satisfaction. The University’s performance on the national CEQ administered through the GCA shows a consistent rise in survey scores and national rankings on all scales. For 2011: Good teaching scale—Score 72%, Rank 7th; Generic skills scale—Score 80%, Rank 28th; Overall satisfaction scale—Score 81%; Rank 21st. CEQ goals for the Compact period are to raise the GTS score to 73%; and the GSS to 82% and the OSS score to 83%. The SEQ within the UES introduces new measures. SEQ goals for the Compact period are to achieve ratings of good-excellent by 86% of respondents for Quality of teaching (83% in 2012) and 82% for Quality of the entire educational experience (79% in 2012).
Student Satisfaction. The College uses a range of methods to understand the level of student satisfaction with the delivery of the curriculum and the other services, conducted face-to-face, through representatives or by survey. We operate a complaints handling process for when students and others are not satisfied with the service they receive. We conduct an annual survey of our students, which incorporates the questions from the national student satisfaction and engagement survey. We use this survey to inform areas where satisfaction is lower than targets set. In these cases, the faculty or department involved is required to identify and implement actions to improve the service. The targets themselves are subject to annual review. Outputs for 2019/20
Student Satisfaction. JNCAAM shall endeavor to ensure high-level of student satisfaction with its course delivery and curricula by offering high quality instructional and educational classes that include regular and significant exposure to Juniper’s technologies.
Student Satisfaction. Partner agrees that high student satisfaction is a condition of Partner’s continued authorization by SUSE. To ensure high student satisfaction, Partner agrees to:
Student Satisfaction. The College uses a range of methods to understand the level of student satisfaction with the delivery of the curriculum and the other services it offers. These are conducted face-to-face, through representatives or by survey. It also operates a complaints handling process for when students and others are not happy with the service they receive. The College conducts an annual survey of its students which incorporates the questions from the national student satisfaction survey. It uses this survey to inform areas where satisfaction is low i.e. where the satisfaction level is below 87%. In these cases, the faculty or department involved is required to identify and implement actions to improve the service. The College also operates a programme of detailed internal reviews agreed on an annual basis with the Regional Board. These lead to action plans, the progress of which is monitored by the Regional Board’s Curriculum & Quality Committee. Outputs for 2018/19
