UM Student Monitor Student satisfaction

Transcriptie

1 UM Student Monitor Student satisfaction July 2010 Flycatcher Internet Research, 2004 Dit materiaal is auteursrechtelijk beschermd en kopiëren zonder schriftelijke toestemming van de uitgever is dan ook niet toegestaan.

2 PO Box AJ Maastricht The Netherlands T. +31 (0) F. +31 (0) Flycatcher Internet Research, 2010 This material is copyright-protected. Copying without the publisher's written permission is prohibited.

3 Content Management Summary Introduction Methodological justification Aim Questionnaire Research method and population Response Generalisability Statistical analysis Studying: organisation and logistics of the study programme and exams Logistics Study and traineeship options Study or traineeship abroad Additional facilities and possibilities Study and career guidance Facilities Library facilities ICT facilities Buildings and locations Building-related facilities Information channels Points for improvement... 33

4 Management Summary Maastricht University (UM) wishes to continually improve its services. To adjust and improve its operations, feedback from students is indispensable. In 2001, the UM therefore started the Student Monitor, in order to sound the opinions of students. This monitor consists of an annual general satisfaction survey, complemented by in-depth surveys on specific topics. The monitor is used as a thermometer of the organisation, to map the students expectations, satisfaction and wishes. This summary contains the main results of the general satisfaction survey for the academic year. For the present survey, all students were approached who were registered as UM student in the academic year. The survey was held in June 2010 and the questionnaire was available in both Dutch and English. A total of more than 1600 students took part in the survey. The most positive and negative aspects are listed below for each individual component (provided at least 30 respondents used the component concerned). Positive items are those with which at least 75% of the students were satisfied or very satisfied. Items for improvement are listed if 15% or more of the students were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with these. Logistics Positive aspects: block books (76%) Aspects to improve: (re-)enrolment and deadlines (for study, subjects, tests, resits): 39% is dissatisfied announcement of study and test results: 33% is dissatisfied office hours (e.g. education office, educational institute, front office): 28% is dissatisfied timetables and group compositions: 27% is dissatisfied Study and traineeship options Positive aspects: - Aspects to improve: labour market perspectives / future occupational field: 37% is dissatisfied work placement options / traineeships: 32% is dissatisfied choosing a study (Master's studies, switching studies, choosing a degree programme, etc.): 18% is dissatisfied Study or traineeship abroad Positive aspects: - Aspects to improve: double degree programmes: 36% is dissatisfied traineeship abroad: 29% is dissatisfied exchange programmes with foreign universities: 19% is dissatisfied studying abroad: 19% is dissatisfied Additional facilities and possibilities Positive aspects: Studium Generale: 89% is satisfied student clubs: 87% is satisfied UM Sports: 79% is satisfied study associations: 79% is satisfied Aspects to improve: UM Language Centre: 24% is dissatisfied studying at another UM faculty (e.g. additional or subsidiary subject, minor): 21% is dissatisfied Flycatcher Internet Research 1 UM Student Satisfaction

5 Study and career guidance Positive aspects: student dean: 77% is satisfied counsellor: 79% is satisfied Aspects to improve: other member of staff: 16% is dissatisfied Library facilities Positive aspects: Randwyck Library: 85% is satisfied electronic library (electronic journals, etc.): 83% is satisfied books: 80% is satisfied services of a university library desk at a library location: 81% is satisfied printed journals: 75% is satisfied Inner City Library: 75% is satisfied Aspects to improve: - ICT facilities Positive aspects: remote access (e.g. from home) to network of the UM: 86% is satisfied wireless network and laptop connection points: 83% is satisfied UM facilities (...@student.maastrichtuniversity.nl): 84% is satisfied Aspects to improve: copying, printing and scanning facilities: 23% is dissatisfied ICT Service Desk (phone): 17% is dissatisfied Buildings and locations Positive aspects: lecture halls and colloquium rooms: 91% is satisfied tutorial group rooms: 88% is satisfied relaxation areas (lounge, coffee corner, common room, etc.): 82% is satisfied study places without a computer: 75% is satisfied Visitors' Centre: 75% is satisfied Aspects to improve: test locations: 27% is dissatisfied Building-related facilities Positive aspects: sanitary facilities: 88% is satisfied coffeecorner: 88% is satisfied Aspects to improve: restaurant: 21% is dissatisfied Information channels Positive aspects: EleUM: 80% is satisfied University Library website: 80% is satisfied Aspects to improve: SLM: 53% is dissatisfied My UM (intranet): 31% is dissatisfied esc / Surfyourself: 19% is dissatisfied Flycatcher Internet Research 2 UM Student Satisfaction

6 1. Introduction Maastricht University (UM) is committed to continual improvement of its level of services. Input from students is indispensable to be able to adapt and enhance operations. To measure the opinions of students, the UM launched the Student Monitor in This monitor consists of annual general satisfaction surveys, complemented by in-depth surveys on specific areas. The monitor is used as a thermometer of the organisation, to map the expectations, satisfaction, and wishes of students. Participation in the Student Monitor is open to all UM students. Panel members regularly receive invitations to take part in surveys. Subjects range from computer facilities or library services to RSI and student support. It goes without saying that privacy is protected, and to increase response rates, participation is rewarded. Practical implementation is done by Flycatcher. The present report shows the results of the general satisfaction survey for the academic year. This survey was held in June Flycatcher Internet Research 3 UM Student Satisfaction

7 2. Methodological justification Below is a brief justification of our approach to this survey. In addition to a description of the research framework and an explanation of the methodology and implementation of the survey, we will also discuss the response rate and reliability of the results. 2.1 Aim The aim of the survey is to measure students' level of satisfaction with the various UM facilities over time. 2.2 Questionnaire Satisfaction was measured with regard to a number of facilities that are indicative of the satisfaction level, namely: studying: organisation and logistics of the study programme and exams; o logistics; o study and traineeship options; o o study or traineeship abroad; additional facilities and possibilities (studying at another UM faculty, UM Language Centre, UM Sports, Studium Generale, study associations, student clubs); study and career guidance; facilities; o library facilities; o ICT facilities; o buildings and locations; o building-related facilities; o information channels. Choosing the aspects for each (sub)category, attention was paid to the importance of each aspect for the group of students as a whole. This means that aspects that concerned only students from a certain faculty or only first-year students, were excluded from the questionnaire as much as possible. Such aspects should be dealt with in an in-depth survey. For each of these facilities, satisfaction was measured on the basis of the following: use of the various aspects; importance of the aspects on a 5-point scale; satisfaction with the aspects on a 5-point scale; comments and suggestions for improvements. The first question is used to delimit the results in time, so that the results relate to the last academic year (the survey is always held at the end of the academic year). The third question allows respondents to explain their answers for each aspect in an open text field. This explanation is optional. From the open answers for each aspect, a detailed idea can be obtained of any problem areas. The combination of the satisfaction score and the information from the open answers, may provide an immediate reason for tackling certain problems, but may also give rise to more questions. In the latter case, we offer the possibility of carrying out an in-depth survey. In the report, the importance and the satisfaction for each aspect will be compared in a so-called priorities matrix. The purpose of a priorities matrix is to gain insight, at a glance, in aspects that could be improved. The importance of an aspect is defined as the average importance (question 2: minimum 1, maximum 5) times the percentage of students that used the aspect concerned (question 1: minimum 0, maximum 1). The average satisfaction level is a score between 1 and 5 (based on question 3). The priorities matrix is divided into four quadrants, based on the averages of all aspects measured. Aspects that are important but about which respondents were dissatisfied, may be regarded as the most important areas for improvement. These are the aspects in the red quadrant. Flycatcher Internet Research 4 UM Student Satisfaction

8 2.3 Research method and population Flycatcher Internet Research specialises in online research. This means that questionnaires can be completed and sent via the Internet. Potential respondents receive an with an invitation to take part in a survey. Clicking a hyperlink that is unique for each respondent, takes them to the survey. Questionnaires are available in both Dutch and English. For the present survey, all students were approached who were registered as UM student in the academic year. Students were invited by on Wednesday, 9 June Completed questionnaires could be submitted until Wednesday, 23 June On Monday, 21 June, a reminder was sent to all students who had not completed the questionnaire at that time. 2.4 Response The questionnaire was sent to students. A total of 1658 students completed the questionnaire, which represents a response rate of 13%. The table below shows the response figures. Total response: number of addresses net no. sent* response 1658 (13%) *Incorrectness of some addresses resulted in a smaller net number of invitations being sent than the number of addresses. Below is a breakdown of the total response by faculty and exam type. The distribution of respondents across the various faculties and exam types corresponds reasonably well with the actual distribution. The number of students of is overrepresented, whereas and are underrepresented. Response by faculty: frequency percent UM total 2009 (%) Department of Knowledge Engineering (DKE) 24 1% 1% Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences () % 28% Faculty of Law () % 16% Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences () % 12% Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience () % 11% Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSG) 10 1% 1% School of Business and Economics () % 27% University College Maastricht (UCM) 59 4% 4% total % 100% Response by exam type: frequency percent UM total 2009 (%) Bachelor % 69% Master % 29% Other 48 3% 2% total % 100% 2.5 Generalisability Because only part of the entire population took part in the study, the results that are generated may deviate to some extent from those that would have been obtained if the whole population had responded. It is therefore important to interpret these results observing a certain degree of probability (reliability). Flycatcher Internet Research 5 UM Student Satisfaction

9 Reliability is important because it offers the possibility to use the results from a part of the population in order to make statements about the population as a whole with a certain degree of certainty. Depending on the number of respondents and the answers found in the study, the formula below can be used to determine the margins relating to the population as a whole: When generalisations are made using this formula, statements will have a reliability rate of 95%. The maximum reliability margin of 1658 respondents is 2% in the case of a 95% reliability rate. If the number of respondents is greater, the reliability rate does not change, but the margins decrease, making statements more reliable. Example: 1c. Please state how satisfied you are with the quality of this/these logistic aspect(s). - office hours (e.g. education office, educational institute, front office) frequency percent very satisfied 47 6% satisfied % neutral % dissatisfied % very dissatisfied 47 6% total % In this example, 27% of all respondents is (very) dissatisfied with the office hours. In this case, the margin for the entire population of students is: % 736 Hence, it may be concluded with 95% certainty that the number of students who is (very) dissatisfied with the office hours, will be between 24% and 30% (27% +/- 3%). 2.6 Statistical analysis To gain more insight in the results, further statistical analysis was carried out. The following analyses were completed: comparison between the faculties (see Appendix 25) comparison between Bachelors and Masters students (see Appendix 26) comparison with the results of the satisfaction survey comparison between Bachelors and Masters students per faculty (see Appendix 27) comparison between Dutch and foreign students for FEBA and (see Appendix 28) Comparison between Masters students with or without a Bachelors degree from the UM was not completed, because, due to technical problems, this year the UM wasn't able to provide information about year students started an education at the UM and the year they started their current education. Statistical testing was carried out using the chi-square test or t-test. The Bonferroni method was used to correct for multiple testing. The results are displayed in the tables broken down by faculty, exam type and year where the figures displayed in red are significantly higher than the figures shown in blue within a particular category. Flycatcher Internet Research 6 UM Student Satisfaction

10 The two last comparisons mentioned above were only added to the report as appendices and are not discussed. The reason is that the number of respondents for each group was generally too small to allow reliable statements. The results should therefore be interpreted with some caution. Points of attention: Whenever the term significance is mentioned in the following chapters, this means that there is a statistical significance with a reliability of 95%. In other words, one may conclude with 95% certainty that a difference does actually exist and is not based on coincidence. For the statistical analyses, a number of variables were classified in a limited number of categories. This was necessary because in order to be able to compare groups they should have a sufficient number of respondents to allow a reliable statistical analysis. The nationality of the respondents is not known. The analyses were therefore based on the language selected by the respondents to complete in the questionnaire. Students who selected Dutch, were included in the analysis as Dutch students and students who selected English were included as foreign students. In the results per faculty, DKE and MGSG were not included. The reason is that the number of respondents for each group was generally too small to allow reliable statements. The results of this year compared with the results of the satisfaction survey were only displayed if there is a significant difference. Flycatcher Internet Research 7 UM Student Satisfaction

11 3. Studying: organisation and logistics of the study programme and exams Part 1 of the survey concerned the organisation and logistics of teaching and examinations. This subject consisted of four sub-subjects: logistics, study and traineeship options, study and traineeship abroad and additional facilities and possibilities, such as additional subjects, minors, UM Sports, et cetera. Below you will first find an overview per sub-subject of the results of the total group of respondents, followed by the results per faculty, type of degree (Bachelors or Masters) and year. 3.1 Logistics Results A small majority of the students is satisfied with the information provided on timetables and group composition and literature. Approximately three quarters is satisfied with the block books. They are less satisfied with the office hours, (re-)enrilment and deadlines and announcement of study and test results, more thant one quarter to almost two fifth being dissatisfied with these. The most important points for improvement include the announcement of study and test results, timetables and group composition and (re-)enrolment and deadlines. Often mentioned complaints with regard to enrolment and deadlines concern the lack of clarity concerning deadlines and too short periods to register for resits. Also studens complain about the new systems SAP/SLM and MyUM. A number of students indicate that registration for compulsory parts should be automatic. A frequently made comment about announcement of study and test results and the timetables and group composition is that these should be available earlier. 1a. Which of the logistic aspects relating to the study programme and exams listed below, have you experienced in the past 12 months? (multiple answers possible)* 1b. How important is the quality of this/these logistic aspect(s) for your performance as a student?* * frequencies are presented in appendix 1. 1c. Please state how satisfied you are with the quality of this/these logistic aspect(s).* * frequencies are presented in appendix 2a, answers are specified in appendix 2b timetables and group composition 9% 7% 16% 20% 48% announcement of study and test results 6% 7% 23% 25% 38% office hours (e.g. education office, educational institute, front office) (re-)enrolment and deadlines (for study, subjects, tests, resits) 6% 6% 6% 11% 37% 29% 21% 34% 21% 27% very satisfied satisfied neutral dissatisfied very dissatisfied block books 5% 1% 15% 19% 61% literature (readers, etc.) 1% 11% 8% 21% 59% Flycatcher Internet Research 8 UM Student Satisfaction

12 Priorities matrix: Results per faculty students are clearly less satisfied with announcement of study and test results, office hours and literature (readers, etc.). students are less satisfied about timetables and group composition. With regard to (re- )enrolment and deadlines and students were less satisfied than other students. Percentage of dissatisfied students: UCM timetables t and group composition 20,3% 23,5% 33,7% 46,4% 4% 23,5% 35,1% announcement of study and test results 13,6% 31,7% 57,0% 31,6% 30,4% 39,7% office hours (e.g. education office, educational institute, front office) 26,2% 27,7% 51,7% 19,2% 20,0% 31,9% (re-)enrolment and deadlines (for study, subjects, tests, resits) 23,2% 50,3% 31,2% 53,4% 32,1% 17,3% block books 8,1% 3,4% 5,5% 6,4% 6,6% 2,4% literature (readers, etc.) 13,3% 4,1% 17,2% 3,9% 10,4% 9,3% Flycatcher Internet Research 9 UM Student Satisfaction

13 Results per exam type Very little to no difference can be seen between the Bachelors and Masters students. Percentage of dissatisfied students: timetables and group composition announcement of study and test results office hours (e.g. education office, educational institute, front office) (re-)enrolment and deadlines (for study, subjects, tests, resits) block books literature (readers, etc.) Bachelor 28,1% 33,7% 28,2% 37,7% 5,6% 9,8% Master 26,0% 30,2% 26,2% 40,6% 4,4% 6,5% Results over time Compared with last year, students were less satisfied about timetables and group composition, announcement of study and test results, office hours and (re-)enrolment and deadlines. timetables and group composition announcement of study and test results office hours (e.g. education office, educational institute, t front office) (re-)enrolment and deadlines (for study, subjects, tests, resits) (very) satisfied neutral (very) dissatisfied total 66% 15% 19% 100% 56% 16% 27% 100% (very) satisfied neutral (very) dissatisfied total 56% 22% 22% 100% 44% 23% 33% 100% (very) (very) dissatisfied satisfied neutral total 45% 32% 23% 100% 43% 29% 28% 100% (very) satisfied neutral (very) dissatisfied total 58% 21% 21% 100% 40% 21% 39% 100% 3.2 Study and traineeship options Students were not very satisfied with the supply of information with regard to work placement options / traineeships and labour market perspectives, approximately one third being (very) dissatisfied about these. In addition, almost one fifth was dissatisfied with the information on study options. In this case, the less satisfied they were with the supply of information with regard to a certain aspect, the less important this aspect was for the students. As a result, no aspects can be found in the red quadrant of the priorities matrix. The main focal point concerns the information about work placement options / traineeships: this aspect is slightly less important than average, but relatively many students were not satisfied with this. It should also be mentioned that the students who searched for information about traineeship options or labour market perspectives, usually found these aspects important or very important. The aspects are, however, lower down in the priorities matrix because a relatively small number of students searched for information on these subjects in the past year. Flycatcher Internet Research 10 UM Student Satisfaction

14 2a. Have you searched for information on any of the following subjects in the past 12 months? (multiple answers possible)* 2b. How important is information about this/these subject(s) for your performance as a student?* * frequencies are presented in appendix 3 2c. What is your degree of satisfaction regarding the information about this/these subject(s)? (For example, amount, completeness, clarity, accuracy, etc.)* * frequencies are presented in appendix 4a, answers are specified in appendix 4b choosing a study (Master's studies, switching studies, choosing a degree programme, etc.) 4% 8% 15% 24% 50% very satisfied work placement options / traineeships labour market perspectives / future occupational field 5% 7% 2% 9% 33% 30% 26% 26% 35% 27% satisfied neutral dissatisfied very dissatisfied Priorities matrix: Flycatcher Internet Research 11 UM Student Satisfaction

15 Results per faculty With regard to the information on choosing a study, UCM students were clearly less satisfied than students of other faculties, one third being dissatisfied. Students and were less satisfied with the information on work placement options and traineeships. Percentage of dissatisfied students: UCM choosing a study (Master's s studies, switching studies, choosing a degree 18,4% 19,3% 11,7% 14,3% 20,1% 32,6% programme, etc.) work placement options / traineeships 36,0% 24,1% 25,6% 45,7% 39,0% 39,3% labour market perspectives / future occupational field 44,3% 34,2% 32,8% 37,5% 35,5% 50,0% Results per exam type The table below shows that Bachelors students were less satisfied with the supply of information with regard to work placement options and traineeships than Masters students. Percentage of dissatisfied students: Bachelor Master choosing a study (Master's studies, switching studies, choosing a degree programme, etc.) 18,7% 14,5% work placement options / traineeships 37,6% 25,6% labour market perspectives / future occupational field 39,8% 33,9% Results over time Compared with last year, there are no significant differences with regard to the level of satisfaction with the supply of information about study and traineeship options. 3.3 Study or traineeship abroad More than one third of the students who searched for information on double degree programmes, were dissatisfied with this. More than a quarter was also dissatisfied with the information concerning traineeships abroad. A small majority, however, was satisfied with the information on exchange programmes and studying abroad, although almost one fifth was dissatisfied with these. The main point of attention within this subject is the supply of information with regard to traineeships abroad. This aspect is of almost average importance, but students were not very satisfied with this. In addition, almost all students who sought information on this subject, felt that it was important or very important. The aspect is, however, of average importance because it was relevant for only about one quarter of all respondents last year. 3a. Have you searched for information on any of the following subjects in the past 12 months? (multiple answers possible)* 3b. How important is information about this/these subject(s) for your performance as a student?* * frequencies are presented in appendix 5 Flycatcher Internet Research 12 UM Student Satisfaction

16 3c. What is your degree of satisfaction regarding the information about this/these subject(s)? (For example, amount, completeness, clarity, accuracy, etc.) * frequencies are presented in appendix 6a, answers are specified in appendix 6b exchange programmes with foreign universities 4% 18% 20% 15% 42% studying abroad traineeship abroad 4% 5% 6% 14% 15% 23% 23% 35% 30% 44% very satisfied satisfied neutral dissatisfied very dissatisfied double degree programmes 7% 11% 27% 29% 25% Priorities matrix: Flycatcher Internet Research 13 UM Student Satisfaction

17 Results per faculty In particular students at and were relatively dissatisfied with the supply of information on studying abroad. Students at were also less satisfied with the supply of information on exchange programmes with foreign universities. Percentage of dissatisfied students: UCM exchange programmes with foreign universities 19,6% 25,8% 32,0% 18,4% 13,1% 20,0% studying abroad 16,3% 27,8% 31,0% 11,9% 13,5% 13,9% traineeship abroad 29,6% 22,7% 36,7% 33,3% 38,7% 33,3% double degree programmes 63,2% 20,0% 33,3% - 28,8% 50,0% Results per exam type Bachelors students clearly proved less positive with regard to the supply of information on double degree programmes than Masters students. Percentage of dissatisfied students: Bachelor Master exchange programmes with foreign universities 19,2% 20,0% studying abroad 19,0% 15,2% traineeship abroad 32,6% 23,8% double degree programmes 40,8% 15,8% Results over time Compared with last year, there are no significant differences with regard to the level of satisfaction with the supply of information about study and traineeship abroad. 3.4 Additional facilities and possibilities As for the additional facilities and possibilities, students were generally satisfied. Exceptions were the Language Centre, with which almost a quarter was dissatisfied, and the possibilities of studying at another UM faculty, with which more than one fifth was dissatisfied. Because very few students had anything to do with the Language Centre or studying at another faculty, these aspects do not appear in the red quadrant of the priorities matrix. However, they are important points of attention, because the majority of the students who had something to do with these aspects, felt that they were (very) important. A frequently made comment about the Language Centre is that courses are too expensive. 4a. Which of the facilities/possibilities mentioned below have you used in the past 12 months? (multiple answers possible)* 4b. How important is the quality of these facilities for your performance as a student?* * frequencies are presented in appendix 7 Flycatcher Internet Research 14 UM Student Satisfaction

18 4c. Please indicate how satisfied you are with these facilities.* * frequencies are presented in appendix 8a, answers are specified in appendix 8b studying at another UM faculty (e.g. additional or subsidiary subject, minor) 7% 13% 14% 23% 43% UM Language Centre 6% 16% 16% 18% 43% UM Sports Studium Generale 2% 1% 0% 12% 7% 10% 22% 33% 58% 56% very satisfied satisfied neutral dissatisfied very dissatisfied study associations 4% 2% 15% 21% 57% student clubs 2% 1% 10% 34% 52% Priorities matrix: Flycatcher Internet Research 15 UM Student Satisfaction

19 Results per faculty The table below shows that there are few or no differences between the faculties with regard to the level of satisfaction with additional facilities and possibilities. Percentage of dissatisfied students: UCM studying at another UM faculty (e.g. additional or subsidiary subject, minor) 28,6% 11,1% 16,7% 7,1% 29,4% 38,5% UM Language Centre 26,5% 12,0% 21,1% 19,0% 26,7% 26,9% UM Sports 5,5% 8,4% 7,3% 2,7% 14,4% 14,8% Studium Generale 1,1% 1,6% - 2,9% 2,0% 3,6% study associations 1,6% 6,6% 4,9% 9,8% 7,3% - student clubs 8,0% 2,2% 5,0% 3,8% 1,5% 5,6% Results per exam type Bachelors students proved less positive with regard to the UM Language Centre than Masters students. Percentage of dissatisfied students: Bachelor Master studying at another UM faculty (e.g. additional or subsidiary subject, minor) 22,4% 13,3% UM Language Centre 27,2% 11,8% UM Sports 8,2% 10,7% Studium Generale 1,3% 2,8% study associations 5,0% 8,5% student clubs 3,9% 1,0% Results over time Compared with last year, students were less satisfied with regard to the supply of information about studying at another UM faculty. studying at another UM faculty (e.g. additional or subsidiary subject, minor) (very) satisfied neutral (very) dissatisfied total 69% 16% 14% 100% 56% 23% 21% 100% 4. Study and career guidance Part 2 of the questionnaire concerned study and career guidance. Below you will find first an overview of the results for the group of respondents as a whole, followed by the results per faculty, type of degree (Bachelors or Masters) and year. The majority of the students was satisfied with the services provided by the various advisors within the UM. They were least satisfied with the faculty study advisor and other member of staff, 15 and 16 per cent respectively being dissatisfied. The most important points for improvement also include the faculty study advisor and other member of staff. Often mentioned complaints with regard to the faculty study advisor is that he/she can't answer the questions of the students. Flycatcher Internet Research 16 UM Student Satisfaction

20 5a. Of the people mentioned below, with whom have you had contact in the past 12 months? (multiple answers possible)* 5b. How important is the quality of the services offered by these people for your performance as a student?* * frequencies are presented in appendix 9 5c. Please indicate how satisfied you are with the services offered by these people.* * frequencies are presented in appendix 10a, answers are specified in appendix 10b faculty study advisor/academic advisor 5% 14% 10% 30% 42% student dean 4% 9% 9% 31% 46% counsellor UM Career Services (Quick Career Advisers, career advisors, trainers) 12% 5% 4% 16% 9% 2% 25% 32% 47% 48% very satisfied satisfied neutral dissatisfied very dissatisfied confidential advisor 5% 5% 5% 35% 50% other member of staff 15% 10% 6% 24% 45% Flycatcher Internet Research 17 UM Student Satisfaction