How can we measure the impact of student engagement?

Those who follow me on Twitter will know that I have been all over the place recently and this weekend has been the first bit of time I have had to myself for a while. It has given me a chance to stop and reflect on something that has popped up a number of times.

The Quality Assurance Agency, which evaluates whether universities & colleges are meeting the Higher Education community’s expectations or not, are consulting on some brand new expectations that Review Teams will base their judgments on with regards to student engagement.

This is a brand new chapter being developed to reflect how the sector has moved on, but indicator 7 within it has caused plenty of stimulating debate at both the Student Sounding Board (a bunch of SU Officers / #qualitygeeks) and at the formal consultation event in London with mostly university Quality Office staff:

“Higher education providers, in partnership with their student body, monitor and review the effectiveness of student engagement in their quality systems”

The crux of the debate at both events has how been: how do you measure student engagement? In particular, how do you move beyond just noting the processes, e.g. student seats on every committee, and towards understanding the impact of all the effort we put into supporting and development student engagement.

For me this debate has been intensified as I have taken part in a review of a university overseas which takes a different approach to student engagement that suits their needs but is different to what I consider ‘the norm’ based on my UK experience. I foresee this becoming common in the UK as private providers and further education colleges play a much bigger role in providing HE and do student engagement in a way that works for them, not for the traditional public university.

Our challenge is not to expect everybody to go about engaging students in the same way but to work out how to judge the impact and ‘effectiveness’ of what we do because, in my opinion, there are few examples of good practice in this area.

For Students’ Unions, this will soon become crucial because your parent institutions are probably going to be judged against this very soon and if you have taken on part or full responsibility for driving and developing student engagement then they will be looking to you for answers.

For Higher Education Providers, whether you work in partnership with your Students’ Union or not, you are about to become responsible for making sure this happens. A poor result in Institutional Review will no doubt be seriously detrimental for you reputation.

Whilst the consultation on this chapter of the Quality Code is still open I would like to have the debate on the implications of this particular indicator. Following the success of the debate on paying Course Reps on this blog, I would like to invite you to contribute with your thoughts on ‘how can we measure the impact of student engagement?’

———

If you want to contribute, please drop your guest blog post into an email to dderricott@lincoln.ac.uk

Equality4U Campaigning Event (2012) (FREE Event with Travel Bursary

Friday 17 th February 2012, Stafford.

Equality4U 2012 (Campaigning Event) is a chance for young people to explore four key human rights campaigns for groups within society that face discrimination. We will be looking at what equality is and how it affects young people as individuals as well as exploring the history of each campaign and the reasons why the fight for equality goes on.

This is the second Equality4U event and builds on the success of the 2011 event. The event consists of interactive workshops and plenary sessions. This event is also an opportunity for young people’s voices to contribute directly to the shaping of British Youth Council policy on each of these areas.

This event is open to young people (under 25) who self define into one or more of the following groups – as laid out within the BYC rule book:

· Young black and ethnic minority people;
· Young disabled people;
· Young lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people;
· Young women

Please base your ticket selection on the primary campaign that you would like to explore in more detail.

This is a FREE event, however, spaces are limited. BYC will provide a travel bursary of up to £40 for each young person attending. Lunch and light refreshments will also be provided. If you have any questions, please feel free to call Darren on 020 7250 8380 or email darren.matthews@byc.org.uk

To claim your travel bursaries, please invoice BYC. We can also arrange rail travel, please contact for more information.

To register for this event, please visit: http://www.equality4u2012.eventbrite.com

Antony Butcher: Continuing this debate without students is pointless

It’s good to get some insight into this debate from Course Reps themselves, next up we have Antony Butcher from Bangor (who are on a roll with guest contributors):

“So, nothing says relaxing Christmas holiday at home like neglecting my girlfriend’s birthday to throw my twopennies into the course rep payment debate. I’m not an expert (although I am a course rep), and there are lots of things that I have thoughts on but haven’t put down – for reasons that will become clear. Thanks to Dan Derricott for persuading me to put pixel to screen!

Before coming to University, I used to work for a National Organisation working with and for young people, as a “participation team trainer”. This involved travelling around the UK, advising youth organisations – youth services, voluntary organisations and commercial bodies – on why participation was a good thing, and how they could do it. Participation, for us, was based around Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child. This states that Young People have a right to an informed say on all decisions which affect them. Generally, organisations were very receptive to this idea, but the implementation often posed various challenges.

First amongst these was cost – chief executives and the like were often worried about the cost that getting young people involved could entail. This falls into two main categories – the cost of engaging young people, and the cost of implementing any suggested changes. Well, we would argue that if changes were suggested they were obviously what young people wanted – and wasn’t it was better to spend money on what they wanted, rather than what we thought they wanted? In fact, there was a fair whack of research done which showed that getting young people involved would save money, as silly ideas were shaped to what young people wanted, providing a service which was more efficient, and fit for purpose.

The next problem we faced was that the organisation would often then welcome participation, but not actually get young people involved beyond the “photo of an important person with young people”, and a consultation done by the intern, but no-one could tell you what the results were, let alone if anything changed. To measure how participative the actions taken by an organisation were, we utilised “The Participation Ladder”, by Roger Hart (adapted from a similar concept by Shelly Armstrong). The first few rungs aren’t actually participation – they are token gestures, designed to make an organisation look good (most often seen at Council level). Then there is consultation – a valid form of information gathering, but, by its nature, it normally limited the meaningful involvement of young people to giving feedback on ideas conceived by the. At the top of the ladder (it’s worth mentioning that rung 8 and rung 7 are pretty much interchangeable, neither being significantly better than the other) is a system where young people and adults work together to identify what needs to be changed, how it can be changed, and, when it has been changed, evaluating how it’s going. It puts young people at the centre of everything – you cannot profess to be placing young people at the heart of your organisation, and then not involve them across the board.

And now, we, fighting for student involvement, are already falling into the same trap. It appears that we all want students to be at the heart of the system, yet in the discussion around whether course reps should be paid, not once (although I admit, I observe from the fringe) have I heard anyone say “hmm. What do they think?” The irony is that we are discussing what is, in most Universities, the main element of student engagement, yet we are neglecting to engage with students.

When I tweeted about this earlier in the week, someone produced statistics to show that only 1 in 32 course reps wanted payment over resources. If this is accurate across the board… why are we even having this discussion?

So, if you believe, as I do, that every decision a University makes should be made in partnership with students, then continuing this debate without student is pointless. If you believe that student engagement is a lovely buzzword for pushing yourself up the greasy pole, then, by all means, carry on! I’ll be out the back, belatedly wrapping presents for my girlfriends birthday…”

[In his own words] Antony Butcher used to be an expert on participation, before heading to Bangor University to run a comedy society. These days he can be found in the Union, talking about historical governmental motorway policy. He tweets as @antonybutcher

—————————————————————–

Don’t forget to comment with yours thoughts, tweet the links out to Course Reps at your university and vote in the poll. If you would like to offer your opinion in a guest post then just drop me an email: dderricott@lincoln.ac.uk

Jim Dickinson: Inspire students and they will usually find a way around the barriers

The response to the debate on ‘Should we pay Course Reps?‘ has been overwhelming so far and we’re about to notch it up another gear as NUS big name Jim Dickinson gives his thought-provoking opinion. Please do make sure you tweet this out and comment down below:

“In my line of work (I’m the Director of Policy and Delivery at NUS), there’s never a shortage of solutions. “Let’s do X”, says a student officer. “Let’s do Y”, says an enthusiastic Policy wonk. “We need a Demo”, “Let’s try a campaign”, “Launch a toolkit”, “Whittle a charter”. OK, so no-one has ever actually suggesting charter whittling, but you get the point. Our overwhelming desire to leap to solutions and actions, often in the absence of a clearly defined, attached or even related problem, is an interesting feature of the environment that we work in.

This course reps debate is, I think, a useful case in point. What could the question be where the answer is payment? More course reps? Better course reps? Sleeker, chippier, wilder course reps? Whenever the debate about the merits of a solution depends on competing definitions of the problem you’re trying to solve, you know you’re down chip alley without a photographer.

So imagine we start here. Course reps ought to pay for the privilege of being a course rep. They get huge CV brownie points for precious little work, get excellent experience in negotiation and committee skills, and get excellent treatment from academics (one once said to me that Course Reps were like spiders. “We’re more scared of them than they are of us”).

Then imagine that that’s daft, and that instead we pay because some students can’t afford to be a course rep. Yes- but what about the ones that can? If Little Lord Fauntleroy is the best (and elected) rep, should our cash really be going to prop up his champagne lifestyle? Probably not.

Then suppose that being a course rep is a job that attracts a wage. Imagine you dodge the question of worth (resolving instead to pay someone else’s carefully crafted thumb-in-the-air-minimum rate per hour) and even just try to work out how many hours are payable. Too few and all you reward are the hours spent in dull committee meetings, where reps go through the motions of re-presenting the views of learners on issues strictly aligned to the narrow terms of reference of the committee. Too many, and you could end up paying reps to do the extra stuff- the raising of issues outside the structures, the casework, the activism- when you can’t monitor or judge outputs or outcomes effectively.

Of course, listing a myriad of considerations doesn’t mean that the solution can’t be tried. But it does cause us to re-examine the problem. So often, the role of reps is desperately unclear- treated as glorified surveymonkeys by some, asked to be educational activists in a hostile environment by others. Asking critical questions about what we think reps are for- both within ourselves and across institutions- may provide us with inspiration.

And it’s still the case that when it comes to promoting it, be it a gift or a curse, far too few learners are ever presented with the opportunity. There’s still acres of work to do on getting the messages across about “being” a course rep that quick fixes will never solve.

What I do know is this. Removing the barriers to involvement only ever helps when there’s a swell of evidence that if only the barriers were gone, things would improve. When we inspire and motivate involvement- telling stories, building injustice, appealing the emotions and selling the opportunities- people usually find a way through, over or around the barriers.

Can we try that first please?”

Jim is Director of Policy & Delivery at the National Union of Students where he has worked for over 10 years, first as a Regional Officer and then with remits including regions, membership development, democratic services and campaigns. Before that, Jim was Education Officer and then President of the Students’ Union at UWE in Bristol. Jim tweets as @jim_dickinson

—————————————————————–

Don’t forget to comment with yours thoughts, tweet the links out to Course Reps at your university and vote in the poll. If you would like to offer your opinion in a guest post then just drop me an email: dderricott@lincoln.ac.uk

A Selection of Tweets on the Course Rep Pay Debate

Some people have commented on the website, some people have contributed an entire guest post and now I want to bring you a selection of those who have Tweeted as part of engaging in the debate on ‘Should we pay Course Reps?‘:

Will Osborn: ‘Paying Course Reps just isn’t feasible’

Digging around the internet meant I was able to find this post from Will Osborn’s blog; he kindly agreed I could reproduce it as a guest post as part of the ‘Should we pay Course Reps?‘ debate:

Recently, the argument about whether or not course reps should be paid has come to the front of Student Union politics, and I found twitter a bit too limiting to put my thoughts on it together, so here I am.

Firstly, the most basic and boring point. How many Student Unions can really afford, and regulate this? Course reps don’t work set hours and keeping track of when they’re “being a course rep” or being a student would be almost impossible.  Add to that the sheer numbers of course reps that some unions have and it just isn’t feasible to do this on such thin budgets.

Now for the more interesting stuff.

If course reps get paid, not only could that have an impact on how they feedback to the union but, more importantly,  how they’re perceived by the university.

If we pay our course reps, the university may assume there is a sense of bias in what we’re being told by our course reps due to us paying them. This could have a huge impact when we’re trying to change things for the benefit of our students and the university doesn’t take us seriously. If an institution doubts where an SU is getting its facts, it becomes an up hill struggle for change.

Now, I’m not saying that course reps shouldn’t get any sort of recognition or incentives for what they do. Hoodies, socials and events can work well, and can give public recognition for what they do and add a more fun side to their role as course reps. Many Universities and Unions also have an employability scheme of one form or another that allows voluntary work to be counted towards a formal award that can be put on CVs. Course reps need something for the work they do, without them the role of an SU would be a whole lot harder.

I would argue that non-monetary incentives would be better than paying course reps. For a start, social psychology has shown us time and again that paying people to do a job doesn’t work. People feel more engaged and motivated to do things when they feel their work is achieving good and feeling intrinsically motivated. I’m sure course reps feel much better when they can see that their work has made a genuine change for students than when they receive some money in their bank account.

I know that students often need jobs and extra money whilst doing their studies, but there are other ways in which SUs can work to increase student employment and ensure increased participation. I don’t think that paying SU reps and Volunteers is the best way to do so, when we can focus on improving the student experience as a whole without it possibly having a negative impact on the representative role some of our students play.

Will is currently a student at Bangor University, studying for my MSc in Consumer Psychology with Business, as well as Trustee of Bangor Students’ Union. Will tweets as @WillOsborn.

—————————————————————–

Emily Collins: “Reward those striving to improve their academic environment by better equipping them to learn”

I really enjoyed reading this next contribution to the ‘Should we pay Course Reps?’ debate; it’s from Emily Collins – Student Engagement Coordinator at Reading University Students’ Union – who offers a well-rounded analysis of the numerous arguments within this debate and even includes a few handy statistics:

“I have been watching this debate flourishing since I witnessed it start at the NUS’ Course Rep Conference (#repconf11) and after seeing so many excellent points raised I’d like to wade-in with some of mine.

Firstly, many people have raised concerns with the idea of students becoming involved for ‘the wrong reasons’ if payment is on offer. My initial reaction to this line of thought was similar to Sophie Richardson’s: I am yet to see evidence that paid representatives are any less effective than unpaid representatives – in fact, I have several years’ worth of experience of working with very effective and passionate paid sabbatical officers.

In addition to that perspective, I would like to question the view point that there are ‘wrong reasons’ to become a representative; provided there are safeguards in place to ensure reps’ responsibilities are met. In my work, many of the reasons students give for not becoming a representative include a lack of time around work or a lack of interest – a general feeling that the issues don’t affect them. Using payment might ‘risk’ these students becoming involved with different motivations but they also have different experiences and perspectives; surely representation is about striving to hear and involve all of those? I believe that payment would go no way to discourage the students who already volunteer their time out of a desire to better themselves and their academic experience, but it would certainly go some way to enticing those students with differing perspectives.

In the event that those students’ are just doing it for the financial reward and don’t care about the student experience or representing their peers then I would suggest that we are facing no additional obstacles; many students already volunteer in order to get a line on their CV or transcript. According to my research at Reading this year, over 60% of Course Reps ranked ‘for my CV’ or ‘for my volunteering accreditation’ above ‘making a difference’ or ‘improving things’ as a reason for volunteering. However, our training and development for them addresses this by highlighting why representation is important, what differences can be made and what powers they have to ‘be the change’ (to coin a phrase…). The overwhelming feedback after one term in their roles has been that reps feel inspired, like they have an important purpose and want to plan positive changes for the future. The responsibility to inspire positive motivations will lay with Students’ Unions and institutions regardless of whether the reps are receiving payment.

There also seems to be a divide between ‘payroll’ and ‘incentives’ in this discussion, with some very valid points on each side. But no one seems to have addressed the possibility of finding a happy medium of the two that’s relevant to every student. Cash payments might not be the healthiest way of inviting engagement for ‘the right reasons’ but not every student benefits from a hoody or free entry to a nightclub. Similarly, the students who most need cash (no matter how much they care about student representation) are unlikely to have the time to volunteer to be a rep because of part-time work commitments. But, what do all students need? They all need things like books, course materials, printing resources and access to computers. The vast majority of institutions now allow for credit to be allocated in on-campus book stores, printing systems, stationary shops and even computer stores. Why not ‘pay’ Course Reps with money they can spend on these things? The sector seems to shy away from incentivising academic engagement with academic reward; but these are the costs that students’ learning would most benefit from being reduced. Surely it makes sense to reward those striving to improve their academic environment by better equipping them to learn in their academic environment?

Another objection (both within this debate and from many academic staff) to the idea of rewards of any kind is that, in theory, it is easy to volunteer to be a Course Rep and not do much work whilst still having the title and benefits. Administratively, this does present some problems and (whether the reward is a buffet lunch or a cash payment) will probably continue to do so. My approach (and something I have seen emulated across the sector) is to require end-of-term and end-of-year reports from reps before their positions are noted on their degree transcripts and to work with departments to verify claims and track attendance at committee meetings. I do believe that the risk of non-productive reps slipping through the net here is much less than the risk of not attracting valuable volunteers if no reward is offered for their hard work.

Lastly, whether reps are paid, incentivised or just awarded for their hard work, students’ unions cannot continue to afford to foot the bill for it. The pressure of formulating, overseeing, training and supporting an effective representative system is already put almost entirely onto unions across the country in terms of staff and resources, and most are doing it very well. But institutions cannot continue expecting more from reps, placing added pressure on their opinion and using them as a sounding boards for initiatives if they aren’t showing a financial or resource-based dedication to the cause. When systems, initiatives and events (such as teaching awards) are student-led there is too often a hands-off approach from institutions – but these movements need to be fully supported and facilitated by them if the quality of teaching and learning is to be affected in any progressive way. Representation can – and regularly does – make a huge positive difference to an institution’s development, retention rates, reputation and direction – resources should definitely be offered to safeguard that.

So, in summary, I don’t believe that financially rewarding Course Reps will have any negative effect on the quality of a system or team. It might invite differing types of students and perhaps add pressure on administrators to verify a rep’s work, but the crux of the process will still remain in the training and support, as well as the responses to their work from the institution. I do believe, however, that engaging with those students who currently can’t afford to volunteer is important, and that directing any financial assistance at resources that all students can benefit from is essential.”

Emily supports student representation at Reading, having previously worked in a similar role at Aberystwyth and studied at Bangor where she was involved in the Students’ Union. Emily tweets as @emmielouli

—————————————————————–

Don’t forget to comment with yours thoughts, tweet the links out to Course Reps at your university and vote in the poll. If you would like to offer your opinion in a guest post then just drop me an email: dderricott@lincoln.ac.uk

Martin Hughes: Course Reps and Reasonable Recognition

Next up in the ‘Should we pay Course Reps?’ debate I’m pleased to say that we’ve got The University Boy himself, Martin Hughes, who is reflecting on some of the comments in the debate so far and offering his own perspective:

“Much of the debate on whether or not to pay Course Reps revolves around money (surprise, surprise). For the student, an increasing number need part-time employment to help fund their ongoing studies. Getting paid to do something you care about would enable you to concentrate on that. Without pay, you may still require a job, leaving you with less time to concentrate on being the best darn Rep you can be.

However, the lure of cash can bring people over for the wrong reasons. Would they be working for the students, or for the sterling?

Add to that the risk that funding would be removed from the very community you’re representing. If Course Reps started earning a fee, could that money have been put to better use elsewhere? Of course, you can ask that question of anything and everything. The source of the funding does make a difference to outcomes, but that doesn’t remove the question.

Is there a problem with the situation as it currently stands? As Dan Derricott has already mentioned, the question of payment (or lack of) has long been a contentious one.

Course Reps, on the whole, don’t spend insane numbers of hours each week on vast amounts of voluntary work. There are responsibilities, meetings, and issues that do require time and attention. However, we’re not in SU Exec territory here. As important as the role of a Course Rep is, it is not a full-time job encompassing such a broad remit and a full schedule.

It’s hard to disagree with any of the arguments put forward via Dan Derricott’s website so far. Yet the simple debate is based on a yes or no question: Should Course Reps be paid? We fall down as this point. Yes, but no. No, but yes.

Whether or not an individual is passionate about something, that doesn’t mean they should work without any benefit and reasonable recognition. Every argument makes this point loud and clear. The contentious part is understanding exactly how to bring a worthwhile, valuable benefit to each person. Is money the only valid route, or are there other equally effective methods available?

Suggestions so far include free hoodies, free entry to clubs, and receiving formal recognition through awards and other accolades.

Sophie Richardson makes a great point about at least paying expenses. I find this entirely reasonable, especially as expenses shouldn’t run up to much. In some instances, the need may be close to nil. Paid expenses are completely different to a paid role. Far from being an incentive, I’d argue that expenses should be standard.

So we’re back to recognition through free hoodies and awards. One problem, therefore, is that not every course rep will find value in this type of perk. Perhaps it’s enough to be able to boost your CV by stating your were elected a Course Rep. It’s on my CV, and I’m happy about that.

I’m also happy that I did the role without a fee. It wasn’t hard on my time and I enjoyed what time I did spend on the role.

But that was me and that was then and that was under my personal circumstances.

Looking back on the role now, I see where I could have done so much more. Ah, if only for hindsight! Had I known then some of the things I know now, I’d have brought even more to the role and, inevitably, spent a whole lot more of my time working on it.

And you know what? I’d have still done it for free.

Most SUs won’t be in a position to pay Course Reps. That poses a significant problem from the outset. But whatever the case, reasonable recognition is the real discussion point here. If Course Reps are able to deliver value and voice to students, what can we provide them with to show how valuable they are?”

Martin writes about higher education & is a fan of all things student related. He provides study tips & helps students make the most of their time at university at http://theuniversityblog.co.uk/ Martin tweets as @universityboy

—————————————————————–

Don’t forget to comment with yours thoughts, tweet the links out to Course Reps at your university and vote in the poll. If you would like to offer your opinion in a guest post then just drop me an email: dderricott@lincoln.ac.uk

To be honest is to not mislead

The most challenging ethical dilemma for me is the meaning of ‘not to mislead’ and whether partial disclosure is okay and in fact keeps ones honesty intact. I shall not pretend that I have developed a text book framework on how to understand whether only revealing 70% of the trust is justified, but what I will argue is that your conscience is critical here.

We should not naively believe that PR graduates are embarking upon a career in a picturesque society where it isn’t dog-eat-dog so decisions on what is right or wrong are not easy and that is especially applicable in organisational storytelling.

At the start of this series I talked of the Editor’s role in how accurately the reader makes sense of a situation, hopefully I have shown how volatile stories are and demonstrated the importance of selecting which details to include and which to not. I will conclude not with my own words, but with examples of what can happen when you get caught out…

This is part of a series of blog posts on communications ethics in organisational storytelling and organisational narrative for a final year project. Normal HE-geekery service will resume soon.

Sophie Richardson: What about those Course Reps not in the room?

In the debate on ‘Should we pay Course Reps?‘ I am quite excited about this contribution. Perhaps one of the biggest names in the Education Officer network when I was an SU officer last year and even bigger this year, Sophie Richardson always bring something thought-provoking to a conversation:

“I find this debate an extremely interesting one. When the Course Reps at the National Course Rep Conference were asked the question, the overwhelming response was no to being paid. Of course those present would say that, they are currently representing students, and doing it well, so why should we be paid for something we are happy to do voluntarily. However, for those not in the room and present at the conference, perhaps those who cannot afford to give up a part-time job in order to make time for representing their fellow students, or perhaps for those who cannot afford the transport costs of travelling on to campus just for a Course Rep meeting, I imagine the answer would have been very different.

Some seem to have come to the conclusion that paying Course Reps leads to worse representation, because students will become a Course Rep for the money rather than for the role. Admittedly, this may be the driver for some but if they do a good job at representing, then what does it matter? There are no necessary links between a paid rep and bad representation or a voluntary rep and good representation. It seems that some are approaching this as a moral argument, and if we are against paying for representation then why stop at Course Reps? Why do we pay Sabbatical Officers if we are fundamentally against paying people to represent?

My personal view on the issue is that there is no harm in incentivising Course Rep schemes. We should absolutely be rewarding and thanking our fantastic Course Reps for the work they do, whether that is a monetary reward or something more along the lines of a gift. And if we’re looking forward to the new era that the HE sector is entering, I believe students, Students’ Unions and institutions are going to be expecting much more of their Course Reps, in which case we should be looking to make our rep roles as accessible as possible and making sure our reps are appreciated and rewarded for the good hard work that they do. In times when widening participation is high on agendas in the sector we need to be looking at our own Students’ Unions and asking ourselves if we are widening participation within our own activities. If we need to offer monetary incentives, pay Course Reps’ expenses, give out free hoodies or feed our Course Reps then so be it, so long as they do a good job at representing their course mates!”

Sophie Richardson is President at Queen Mary Students’ Union having previously served as Vice-President Education & Welfare there. As the member of NUS’ Higher Education Zone Committee who received the most votes, Sophie is a member NUS’ National Executive Council and has represented NUS on the development of the UK Quality Code; Chairs the Unions94 group; and is a fellow member of QAA’s Student Sounding Board. Sophie tweets as: @Sophie_Richie

—————————————————————–

Don’t forget to comment with yours thoughts, tweet the links out to Course Reps at your university and vote in the poll. If you would like to offer your opinion in a guest post then just drop me an email: dderricott@lincoln.ac.uk