6.4
Academic and Pastoral Support

The NSS results for 2006 and 2007 show that final year students rate academic support highly.

6.4.1

The results are encouraging and demonstrate the University’s ability to provide quality teaching and academic and personal support. There were several departments which did not score highly; most of which are in the Faculty of STMS. Physical Science, Mathematical Science and the Department of Electronics all scored lower than average in relation to satisfaction with teaching and academic support, as did Bioscience and Computer Science in relation to academic support.

6.4.2
Despite the relatively high scores in the NSS related to personal development and academic support, students have raised the issue of variation in the approach to student support by academic departments. Whilst departments are permitted to develop their own PASS* system they have to comply with Annex G of the Code of Practice for Taught Programme Studies.

The code states:
“1.1 Each department will establish and publicise a clear system of academic support and advice on progress for all its students (full- and part-time).
1.2 The arrangements for academic support and guidance provided by each department should be communicated clearly and fully to students and, while reflecting the range and detail of support available, should at a minimum ensure that students can consult named officers in the Department…”
Students present at the focus group regarding student support were not all aware of the system of support in their departments. A representative from Politics and International Relations reported: “I am not sure about the tutor system, there is not enough publicity.”

A representative from the Law School commented on the lack of consistency in the School and noted “some students have never met their tutors.”

6.4.3
Whilst a number of departmental representatives have reported positive PASS system in operation e.g. in Bioscience, SDFVA and History** the main concern is the way in which the department communicates the system with ALL students in the department. From the open comments of the sample of students who completed the Kent Union Satisfaction Survey 2008 there was further evidence to suggest disparity in delivery of student support in, and between, departments. The Faculty of STMS noted in the response to the 2007 NSS that STMS needs to find a way of enhancing the significance of the relationship between tutors and tutee. The Faculty is looking to reduce the variability in the way tutors use PDP and operate PASS.

The Humanities Faculty Representative noted that:
“Throughout the Schools in Humanities the quality of support from the Senior Tutors is excellent; however, not all students are aware of their roles, or how to use the system appropriately. The introduction of a subject specific Education Support Officer in History has appeared to be increasingly successful and both SDFVA and SECL are currently looking to employ similar Officers, using the School of History as a model. Students have received this idea well, and there are hopes that it will extend across all of the Schools… Feedback from the students suggest that they would find the extra officer support useful, so long as roles and profiles were available during the induction period, or upon new appointment. “

It is positive that the Faculties are aware of the requirement to improve the PASS system, however Kent Union has concerns that a large number of students are still not receiving the support that they require. In many cases students lack of awareness of the PASS system is a factor in this.

*Pastoral Academic Support System
** See appendix 10