Evaluation of MSc programmes: MSc in Healthcare Management ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

to strongly agree) have been recoded from -100 to +100. Positive values indicate degrees of agreement and negative values indicate degrees of disagreement with each of the items. For further ease of interpretation, overall agreement on each item is reported by combining agree and strongly agree categories. 1.3.1.1 Graduates’ Overall Evaluation of their Programme of Study– Item Scores on the CEQ Graduates rated the development of generic capabilities as the greatest impact and outcome of their master’s degree. Graduates reported that they had attained a number of generic capabilities including the ability to communicate in writing, the development of analytical skills, problem-solving, the ability to tackle unfamiliar problems and their ability to work as a member of a team (table 5). Students also reported that they attained relatively high levels of ability in relation to their ability to plan their own work. Graduates also highly rated the majority of their experiences of teaching, with the vast majority in agreement that lecturers made their subjects interesting, were good at explaining subjects; graduates also perceived that lecturers motivated students to do their best work. Graduates were positive regarding the feedback received from teaching staff on how they were doing on the programme with the majority agreeing that staff made a real effort to understand the difficulties they might be having with their work. Students also reported that they were appropriately assessed and that the programme did not emphasise lower order assessment skills such as factual recall and a reliance on memory. The item ‘the sheer volume of work to be got through in this course meant it couldn’t be thoroughly comprehended’ was the only negatively rated item on the scale. This indicated there was variability in the extent to which graduates perceived they had the time to assimilate the content of the course. In addition the item ‘the workload was too heavy’, although positively rated, was rated relatively lower than other aspects of the programme. However, in relation to workload, graduates did perceive that they were given time to understand the content of the course. Graduates also highly rated the organisation of the course 10
and all items related to the measurement of clear gals and expectations were positively rated. Percentage agreement was also used to summarise item responses by combining agree and strongly agree categories into one overall agreement category (table 5). The highest level of agreement (86.7%) was related to the item: ‘The course sharpened my analytical skills’. High levels of agreement were also associated with other generic skill items including development of problem-solving skills (82.2%), the development of capabilities in written communication (80.0%) and the ability to tackle unfamiliar problems (68.8%). The quality of teaching was also highly rated. Over eighty per cent of graduates reported that lecturers were ‘extremely good at explaining things’ and that they were motivated to do their best work. Graduates were also in agreement that teaching staff made a real effort to understand the difficulties they may having with their work (68.9%) and that lecturers worked hard to make their subjects interesting (69.0%). Graduates agreed or strongly agreed (63.8%) that teaching staff normally gave helpful feedback on the work submitted. Graduates strongly agreed that they were provided with clear goals and expectations. In particular 82.3% of graduates were of the opinion that ‘the staff made it clear what they expected from students’. Two thirds were also in agreement that they had a clear idea where they were going and what was expected from them on the course with approximately half of the respondents reporting that they knew the standard of work expected. Responses to the level of workload expected were variable. Generally, the majority of students were happy with elements that measured workload throughout the programme with over sixty per cent reporting that they were provided with enough time to understand the things they had to learn. However, seventy-five per cent reported that the volume of work meant it could not be thoroughly comprehended. However, the vast majority of graduates did not perceive that the ‘the workload was too heavy’. One item was used to measure overall satisfaction with the quality of the programme of study; the vast majority 11
Page 1 and 2: Evaluation of MSc programmes: MSc i
Page 3 and 4: 1.1 Introduction This report outlin
Page 5 and 6: Graduates’ experiences of their m
Page 7 and 8: Students were asked to rate their l
Page 9: 1.3 Results The demographic profile
Page 13 and 14: Table 5 Item Scores* and Percentage
Page 15 and 16: postgraduate students to acquire kn
Page 17 and 18: appropriate assessment scales were
Page 19: References Ainley J., Johnson T. (2

Evaluation of MSc programmes: MSc in Healthcare Management ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?