Survey of Postgraduate Research Student Opinion

November 2002

Introduction

Methodology

Results

Conclusion

Appendix A - The Questionnaire

Appendix B - Additional tables

1. Introduction

This study was commissioned by the Research and Development Board to collect information from currently enrolled postgraduate research students on how well the university is meeting its objectives in postgraduate education and what the training needs of these students were. A similar survey was undertaken in 2000. With some additions, the same questions were asked in this current survey.

Information was sought on how well the university provides for research students in the following areas -

• intellectual growth, critical thinking, and understanding of the subject;
• support for scholarship, originality and independent thinking;
• freedom of inquiry;
• divergent thinking and the capacity to make links across disciplines;
• links with other scholars in the field, assistance with conference participation;
• access to the literature;
• encouragement to produce outputs, papers etc;
• development of professional skills; and
• training needs.

The 2002 survey also sought to discover how important each of these areas was to postgraduate research students.

The study commenced in September and was completed in November, 2002.

2. Methodology

A questionnaire was constructed in consultation with the Research and Development Board. The questionnaire was based on the one used for the 2000 survey but sought to discover not only how satisfied postgraduate research students were with their experience at Murdoch University, but also how important each aspect was to them. This method allows us to highlights area of dissatisfaction which are particularly important to students. The questions on the original 2000 survey questionnaire were constructed in consultation with previous surveys of postgraduate research students, including the national Postgraduate Research Experience Questionnaire (PREQ).

A list of all currently enrolled postgraduate research students was provided by the Division of Research and Development. Initially the questionnaire was put online and the students contacted by email with the URL for the survey webpage. To encourage online response and the subsequent savings in mailout and data entry costs, the incentive of book token prizes were offered. After two weeks questionnaires were mailed to all non-responders, with another prize offered to ensure equity for students who lack online facilities. A reminder questionnaire was sent to non-responders after a further three weeks.

A total of seven hundred and twenty-nine students were informed about the survey and three hundred and ninety seven completed the questionnaire, giving a response rate of fifty-four per cent. This is at the lower end of the desired range for mailed/online surveys but is reasonable for the population concerned and up two per cent from the 2000 survey (52% response rate). Fifty-two per cent of students who responded (207 students) did so online, in comparison to nine per cent in 2000. This reflects not only the marked increase in the acceptance and usage of the online environment both at Murdoch and in the wider community, but also the greater success rate achieved when email is used for the initial contact.

Given that the data collected is a sample of the total population of postgraduate research students is it useful to examine how representative the sample is of the population and the main demographic characteristics of the sample and population are compared in Table 2.1 and 2.2 below. Table 2.1 shows the match between sample and population across the Divisions is very good.

Table 2.2 provides as comparison of the population and sample on sex, attendance type and citizenship. Population and sample are well matched on citizenship, however Table 2.2 shows both female and full-time students to be over-represented in the sample by three and seven per cent respectively.

Students were also asked to indicate which School they were enrolled in. The numbers for each School are given in Table 2.3.

The postgraduate research students who responded to the survey had been enrolled in their study for an average of 2.5 years full-time equivalent. The maximum length of time enrolled was eleven years, the minimum just two months.

The questionnaire consisted of four sections of closed questions relating to School/Division Environment, Support for Research Activities, Intellectual Freedom and Professional Development. Students were asked to rate their satisfaction with each aspect and its importance to them. At the end of each section there was space for open-ended comments. Students were also asked to list what they thought were the best things about postgraduate study at Murdoch, what changes were most needed to help them and what training they felt was necessary for themselves and their supervisors. Some demographic questions were asked to ensure the sample responding was representative of the population and to allow results to be presented at School and/or Divisional level.

For each of the closed question students were asked to provide a response on a four point 'Satisfaction' scale and a four point 'Importance' scale, with 4 being the most positive (very satisfactory/very important) and 1 the least positive (very unsatisfactory/not at all important). Using a methodology developed for student satisfaction surveys by Lee Harvey at the University of Central England¹ , mean scores are calculated and the results presented in a grid comparing level of satisfaction with level of importance. This allows the issues most important to students to be highlighted.

The key for the grid, giving the Importance and Satisfaction reference points, is outlined below in Table 2.4. As all mean scores on the four point satisfaction and importance scales in this survey fell above the midpoint, ie between 2.75 and 3.82, the items are rated A (very satisfactory) to C (less than satisfactory) with:

• upper case letters depicting where items are also rated very important;
• lower case letters used to depict items that are rated moderately important; and,
• lower case letters in brackets where items are rated as not so important.

Overall, the items included in the survey are generally rated as important by most students.

Table 2.4

The results of the survey are provided in the next section of this report.

3. Results

The results are generally provided for the whole student cohort. Statistical tests were undertaken to examine differences amongst the different sub-groups, ie Divisions, gender, Australian or overseas student, study mainly undertaken on or off campus and whether full-time or part-time student. Some statistically significant differences were found, particularly amongst Divisions and these have been reported in the text. Satisfaction/importance grids are provided for each of the four closed question sections. Tables with full results are given in Appendix B.

School/Division Environment Table 3.1 give the importance/satisfaction grid which maps importance and satisfaction with the School/Division environment according to mean scores for each item on each scale. Overall, the majority of students were satisfied with all aspects and rated each important or very important.. Full results for these questions are given in Appendix B, Table 1.

School/Division Environment Table 3.1 give the importance/satisfaction grid which maps importance and satisfaction with the School/Division environment according to mean scores for each item on each scale. Overall, the majority of students were satisfied with all aspects and rated each important or very important.. Full results for these questions are given in Appendix B, Table 1.

Areas in need of the most intervention are identified in the 'c' sector of the grid - important but less than satisfactory. Table 3.2 shows the percentage satisfaction and importance, ie aggregated percentage of respondents indicating 'very satisfactory' and 'satisfactory', and 'very important' and 'important', by Division. While the grid maps satisfaction and importance ratings according to mean scores, Table 3.2 looks at percentages and provides some comparison across Divisions. In areas where there are differences across the Divisions, students enrolled in BITL are generally less satisfied. For only one item did these students rate the importance lower also - ' the opportunities for discussion with other postgraduate students'.

*Differences are statistically significant at the .05 level.

Students who mainly undertook their study off-campus were more satisfied with the opportunities to interact with other researchers and develop networks, possibly because many of these students are employed in their research area. Overseas students rated the information provided on enrolling more satisfactory than Australian students.

Table 3.3 outlines importance of and satisfaction with support available for research activities. Students rated quality of supervision and feedback from the supervisor very highly with 92 and 86 per cent respectively rating it 'satisfactory' or 'very satisfactory'. These were also the items rated highest in importance. Full results for these questions are given in Appendix B, Table 2.

	Less than Satisfactory	Satisfactory	Very Satisfactory
Very Important	C	B Feedback on your progress from your supervisor	A The quality of supervision you have received so far.
Important	c Financial support for your research activities Financial support for conference attendance	b Encouragement to publish your work The office space provided The computing facilities provided Access to the literature in your subject area.	a
Not very Important	(c) Acknowledgment for any co-authored publications	(b)	(a)

Table 3.4 shows aggregated percentage satisfaction and importance ratings. Students enrolled in BILT were less satisfied with acknowledgment for co-authored publications and funding for conferences. BITL and SSHE students rated research funding as less important than those in the other Divisions, while SSHE and VBS students rated access to literature in their area less important

*Differences are statistically significant at the .05 level.

Part-time students rated conference funding as less important than full-time students, however there was no difference in the satisfaction of the two groups.

The third section of closed questions related to intellectual freedom. Overall students rated all items in this area as satisfactory and either important or very important. These ratings are borne out by the results of the question later in the survey which asked students to list the three best aspects about being a postgraduate research student at Murdoch University. Intellectual/academic freedom was listed by 110 students.

Table 3.5 shows the importance and satisfaction of students on these items. Full results are given in Appendix B, Table 3.

Table 3.6 shows the aggregated percentage satisfaction and importance by Division. Some statistically significant differences were found, however these are hardly of note given the high satisfaction and importance ratings across Divisions on these questions.

*Differences are statistically significant at the .05 level.

The importance/satisfaction grid for the questions relating to Professional Development is shown in Table 3.7. All items in this section were rated satisfactory and either important or very important.

Table 3.8 gives the aggregated percentage for each scale by Division. Differences were found in the importance ratings on two questions, however as ratings are high, apart from those given by students whose Division is unknown, these differences are not particularly worthy of comment.

*Differences are statistically significant at the .05 level.

Students to list the three things they felt were the best things about being a postgraduate research student at Murdoch University and what three things they felt the university could do to help them as a postgraduate research student. Responses to these questions have been categorised under general headings. Overall, students were very positive ­ 836 ‘best things’ were listed, and 690 ‘things the university could do to help me’.

What are the best things about being a postgraduate research student at Murdoch University?
Table 3.9 shows the categories under which students listed aspects of studying at Murdoch University they rated highly. Students were very positive about supervision, both in relation to knowledge and expertise of supervisors and the amount of support and encouragement provided. Issues relating to academic and intellectual freedom, ie the freedom to choose their own research area and follow an independent line of thought were also considered amongst the best aspects of studying here.

Really quite satisfied with the postgraduate studies.

Nothing - I am totally satisfied with the supervision and encouragement received thus far.

A number of other students wanted a continuation or more of something that was currently in existence -

Continue the postgraduate research workshops

Category headings with the number of comments given, are shown in Table 3.10.

Table 3.10

Category	Number of comments
Facilities	143
Funding	131
Issues relating to the networking	68
Administrative issues	61
Library	45
Academic advice and other issues	34
Issues relating to supervision	34
Workshops	31
Issues related to teaching	23
Respecting postgraduates	19
Employment issues	17
Provision of seminars	15
Communication issues	9
Issues relating to the need for information	9
Issues relating to the current government policy	8
Other	33

Training
Postgraduate research students suggested a number of areas in which they thought training would be useful. Writing skills and areas related to computing including software packages was felt to be most required. Table3.11 below shows the number of suggestions for each area.

Twenty-five students indicated that they considered the training currently provided, either by the Teaching and Learning Centre, the Library or their own School/Division, sufficient.

Students were also asked what areas they felt training was required for the supervisors of postgraduate research students. Forty -four respondents felt that no training was needed, with six of these students indicating that they felt the any problems were due to the supervisor's lack of time to supervise and that training would not solve this problem.

The most common suggestion for training was in areas relating to interpersonal skills including cross-cultural awareness and the need to respect postgraduates. Table 3.12 below shows the number of suggestions for each area.

Table 3.12

Areas of training suggested for postgraduate research students

Overall
The final question allowed students space for any other comments. Comments were categorised according to whether they are positive (49 comments), expressing some concern (28 comments), negative (19 comments) or relating to some other issues (17 comments).

4. Conclusion

Overall the postgraduate research students who responded to this survey were positive about all aspects of their study. When interpreting the satisfaction/importance grids provided in this report it must be borne in mind the spread of means on all items was very small. Although some items are classed as ‘less than satisfactory’ the majority of students rated them ‘satisfactory’ or 'very satisfactory'. To quote two students -

So far it has been great being a research student in Murdoch university. I look forward to more challenges ahead and believe that the university will support and encourage student's research interests in many ways.

Overall, I am happy with the situation. Obviously I could wish for a more intellectually stimulating environment, more lavish library resources, a greater critical mass of people working in similar areas, etc. But because of family commitments, the opportunity to work at a distance is more important for me at this stage.

Precise comparisons with the survey undertaken in 2000 cannot be made as the earlier survey used a 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree' scale. However, an examination of the aggregated percentage satisfaction with the average percentage agree on the earlier survey, indicates that students are currently at least equally positive about the aspects of their study covered in the questionnaire. Comments on the best aspects of study at Murdoch and what might be improved are similar. Facilities and funding still rated highest in need of improvement. In 2000 with a smaller survey population (303 students), ninety-eight students commented that facilities were one of the best aspects of studying here, while in the current survey only fifty-three thought so. Supervision was rated as a ‘best aspect’ by most students in the current survey

Suggestions for the training for postgraduate students and their supervisors were very similar in both surveys. Less emphasis was put on computer skills for students and supervisor than in the earlier survey, with teaching skills for students and giving feedback for supervisors increasing in importance. The differences in results from the training section may reflect the increase in postgraduate training workshops since 2000.

Appendices >>