Our Sector: NSS 2015 Part 3

In this set of tables I have used the Registered Institution data for 2012 and 2015 building a list of 131 students’ unions/guilds/associations in HEI’s that appeared in the NSS in all four years 2012 to 2015. The data involved is similar to that used in Daniel Palmer’s very clear league tables except I have excluded a few unions that did not have Q23 scores in 2012’s NSS. I used this data to compile the large table of data showing the year on year and cumulative changes in both scores and league table positions. There are many stories in there.

The average change in question 23 Registered scoring was an improvement of just under 3% between 2012 and 2015. That’s clearly about 1% per annum and leaves the union average nearly 20% behind the institution average satisfaction, in fact only a handful of unions are close to their institution’s score. It is also telling that the fairly consistent 3% rise in the scores at the average and quartiles (Daniel’s cut scores) belies much more fluctuation in the score changes in individual unions:

  • Of the 131 unions only 36 or a quarter improved by between 0% and 6% (within the band around the average change of 3%, +/- 3%). A few did better than +6% and their increases appear in green in the cumulative change ∑∆ column.
  • Only 26 or one in five of the unions kept or improved their Q23 score every year.
  • Most unions had a year or more where their score dropped, and 11 (8%) unions’ scores fell every year.

There are some real success stories in here like Falmouth, Keele, London South Bank, Man Met, Nottingham Trent amongst the 10+ % increases for example. There also double figure falls in scoring and unions dropping down the table due to static or slightly reduced scores in 2015.  The 2012 league table on the left is different to that on the right for 2015, three of the top 10 have changed although the top three (Sheffield, Leeds, Loughborough) have not.

The other downnload is a chart showing how a given Q23 % score translates into a league position now in 2015 compared to 2012. The bunching up in the middle two quartiles has pushed the scores up and means a score of 65% is nearly 20 places lower in 2015 than in 2012, for example. Despite the churn in the middle the top and bottom ends are notable as the top 3 scores are the same now as 2012, and the bottom ones are lower now than then (the purple dashes are below the red line).

If your union has gone up please let us know what you did that made the difference. If you’ve gone down, what would you change?

How Q23 scores have changed from 2012 to 2015

NSS SU’s score changes from 2012 to 2015

Posted in Our sector.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *