AUT Responses to Student Feedback – 2024
Student Experience Survey – Focus Area Scores
The focus area with the lowest satisfaction is Peer Engagement – this is an acknowledged phenomenon across the higher education sector due to the particular questions in this area. These questions relate to class discussion and interaction with other students. Due to the large proportion of AUT students that study part time there is less opportunity for students to interact with each other. The contribution to class discussion question is the highest scoring in this domain. In 2023 the Peer Engagement focus area was changed therefore historical analysis is not meaningful.
While most Affiliated Colleges meet AUT’s established benchmarks in SES data, in recent times the University’s Academic Quality Committee (AQC) has requested two Affiliated Colleges respond to below internally established benchmark scores in the Peer Engagement area, which are set much higher than external benchmarks.
Graduate Outcomes Survey – Graduate Attributes Scale Scores
The Social Research Centre does not provide National benchmark data on the Graduate Attributes Scale Scores, however for the Course Experience Questionnaire – Overall Satisfaction, AUT scored 95.1% compared to the National average of 78.6%.
Moderation
The University conducts a process of using external moderators to review samples of assessment from units across the Consortium in each of its unit fields within the three main departments of Bible and Languages, Christian Thought and History, and Ministry and Practice.
For Semester 1 2024 there were 400 units in scope for moderation. There were no issues of concern raised for a significant majority of the units moderated. Of issues raised, the main concern of moderators was “Feedback to students” (75 units, 18.75%) and this issue continues to be addressed at the levels of marker, college, and consortium.
In the Bible and Languages department, moderators provided comments and feedback to the relevant markers, where units were flagged, on how they may improve provision of timely and constructive feedback to students. This is a consortium-wide issue, which continues to be addressed through professional development and forms the basis of a unit in our new Graduate Certificate of Theological Education (a learning and teaching award for academic and professional staff). Moderators have noted that some students struggle to apply their exegesis to their ministry context (Learning Outcome C).
Similarly, in the Christian Thought and History department, moderators have noted that students tend to struggle with integration, particularly as it relates to both Learning Outcome C and capstone units. These issues were also recently addressed through a workshop at the Professional Development Conference.
In the Ministry and Practice department, across the fields of Developmental and Educational Ministry, Evangelism and Missiology, and Pastoral and Church-focused Ministry, moderators have also noted – in addition to a common concern for the quality of feedback students receive – some confusion over the process of ethics clearance for coursework units, particularly as it pertains to units which include observation. This process has been made clearer in moderator feedback to lecturers and in policy and other information.
Moderators have expressed that the above issues are present in a minority of units and that the quality of the work by staff and students is pleasing overall, which bodes well for the future ministry of AUT graduates.