7.1
Undergraduate Course Representatives
Of the respondents in the Kent Union Satisfaction Survey 2007, over 77% were aware that Course Reps could raise an issue on their behalf at an SSLC meeting. A slightly lower percentage (67%) said that they receive feedback from their Course Reps regarding matters raised at SSLC meetings. Furthermore, the survey of Course Reps found that 85% of reps were either very or fairly satisfied that their views are taken on board by staff during meetings*. These figures are all encouraging and suggest that academic departments have successfully introduced the model of representation at UG level.
There have been several examples over the last 12 months where academic departments have listened to the voice of student representatives, including:
Staff in Politics and International Relations wanted to introduce multiple choice examinations for 1st year examinations. Students where consulted in this decision making process and many staff members did not know how to teach for this assessment method. Following discussions between representatives and staff it was agreed not to change the method of assessment.
And
Representatives from STMS drew attention to the fact that laboratory manuals for foundation year students were vague and it was agreed that the manuals would be redesigned over the summer with input from students.
The Kent Union Satisfaction Survey 2007 identified that 57% of students knew who there Course Rep was, which is the same statistic as in the previous year. Publicity for the Course Rep system seems to be an area of concern; comments from the Course Rep survey include:
“More publicity for students to get in touch” and “You should promote the names of the Course Reps more widely”
Academic departments are largely supportive of the undergraduate representative system; however, there are a number of concerns within Kent Union regarding the disparity of the organisation and management of the system. The Education Officer commented that:
“We strive to create and maintain a Course Rep system that can fit the structures of all the University’s Departments. The system works particularly well where departments engage fully with Kent Union and recognise Course Reps as an invaluable source of feedback and information. Without this engagement and recognition however, the system often proves redundant with harmful consequences for the learner voice. Unfortunately there are still departments in the University where this is occurring.”
At the beginning of each academic year, Kent Union offers to organise the publicity for student representative elections and administer the elections in order to promote a fair and consistent process. Whilst this works extremely well for two thirds of the academic departments, there are still a number of departments that insist on running the elections themselves. This results in some student representatives who are elected, some who are appointed by staff members and others who volunteer. The elections do not all take place at the same time, which means a number of representatives miss out on training opportunities (which Kent Union also delivers) and representatives’ contact details are not always passed onto Kent Union meaning student representatives miss out on briefings from the Education Officer and invitations to Education Forum.
In the 2007/08 academic year, student representatives from academic departments which ran their own elections have had limited contact with Kent Union in comparisons with their counter-parts. This limits the Education Officer’s ability to represent the voice of all students adequately at University level.