National Student Survey 2015: how it affects academics

Some managers take a punitive attitude to academics as a result of the NSS, finds Jo Frankham

August 21, 2015

Everyone knows that universities are taking the National Student Survey more seriously than ever. But much less is known about the effect this is having on higher education.

To address this deficit, in the 10th year of the NSS, I carried out a qualitative study into academics’ views on the impact of the survey. My findings suggest that its effect goes well beyond simply giving students an opportunity to evaluate their programme and identify areas for improvement.

The data suggest that the NSS is encouraging a more instrumental attitude to education among students: the questionnaire itself, institutional responses to concerns, and shifts in curricula are all contributing to this move. An economistic register has been reinforced by the introduction of the £9,000 tuition fee, encouraging students to consider whether they are getting “value for money”.

In such a context, higher education may increasingly be regarded as a transaction where students pay for something that academics “deliver”.

Those involved in my study reported that some senior managers who oversee the survey take a punitive attitude to academics as a result of their NSS evaluations.

This is evident in the ways in which the results are distributed, the public nature of the comparisons that are made, the requirements to respond to issues raised and the combative tone of much of the discussion around the survey results.

Academics are required to respond – and quickly – to concerns that are raised, despite the fact that these concerns may not represent a significant problem. Scholars reported that poor NSS scores are referred to “again and again and again”, emphasising the impact of those scores on the people concerned.

My research suggests that a series of mediations and approximations are represented in survey results resulting in a distinctly muddy picture of how improvements might be made. Low scores may result from the evaluations of a very small number of students, and sometimes the NSS is used to express disgruntlement about something quite outside the remit of the survey.

Where academics explored a problematic score, and tried to address it, it was noticeable that some students who had been “satisfied” then became “dissatisfied” (and vice versa); the NSS is, as many people describe it, a “blunt instrument” that often cannot differentiate between a real problem and a superficial problem.

It highlights only what has gone wrong (or appears to have gone wrong), and offers no insight into the truth that if nothing has gone wrong, it does not necessarily mean that everything has gone right.

The notion of continuous “improvement”, which is now commonplace in academic departments, disregards thinking about the complexity of educational issues.

Jo Frankham is reader in educational research at Liverpool John Moores University. For a copy of her full report, email j.frankham@ljmu.ac.uk.

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Reader's comments (2)

I think the metric system(s), not just the NSS is useful in some contexts but it becomes so wrong when it often becomes the primary driver of University operations, some Universities do whatever to get these scores up for marketing purposes but often having very negative effects elswhere: www.datanotpropaganda.net
The NSS is often used by sociopathic managers as a tool for deliberate oppression of creative staff. It is the ultimate tool of the market economics über alles approach to higher education.

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Most Commented

Daniel Mitchell illustration (29 June 2017)

Academics who think they can do the work of professional staff better than professional staff themselves are not showing the kind of respect they expect from others

celebrate, cheer, tef results

Emilie Murphy calls on those who challenged the teaching excellence framework methodology in the past to stop sharing their university ratings with pride

Sir Christopher Snowden, former Universities UK president, attacks ratings in wake of Southampton’s bronze award

Senior academics at Teesside University put at risk of redundancy as summer break gets under way

Tef, results, gold, silver, bronze, teaching excellence framework

The results of the 2017 teaching excellence framework in full. Find out which universities were awarded gold, silver or bronze