Built Environment Architecture Building Planning and Landscape Design pdf

Built Environment
Architecture
Building
Planning and Landscape Design
National Student Survey
Discipline Report May 2012
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
2
Contents

Foreword ________________________________________________________________ 4
1. How to use this report _________________________________________________ 6
2. Architecture _________________________________________________________ 8
2.1 Comparison with all subjects combined ____________________________________ 8
2.2 Comparison with STEM combined _______________________________________ 9
2.3 Relationships between aspects of the student experience ______________________ 10
2.4 Impact of aspects of the student experience on overall satisfaction _______________ 11
2.5 Range of institutional results for overall satisfaction __________________________ 12
2.6 Comparison by nation _______________________________________________ 13
2.7 Comparison by institution type _________________________________________ 14
2.8 Comparison by full-time/part-time ______________________________________ 16
2.9 Comparison by gender _______________________________________________ 17
2.10 Comparison by domicile ______________________________________________ 18
2.11 Comparison with selected items from the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey ___ 19

3. Building ___________________________________________________________ 21
3.1 Comparison with all subjects combined ___________________________________ 21
3.2 Comparison with STEM combined ______________________________________ 22
3.3 Relationships between aspects of the student experience ______________________ 23

3.4 Impact of aspects of the student experience on overall satisfaction _______________ 24
3.5 Range of institutional results for overall satisfaction __________________________ 25
3.6 Comparison by nation _______________________________________________ 26
3.7 Comparison by institution type _________________________________________ 27
3.8 Comparison by full-time/part-time ______________________________________ 29
3.9 Comparison by gender _______________________________________________ 30
3.10 Comparison by domicile ______________________________________________ 31
3.11 Comparison with selected items from the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey ___ 32

4. Planning and Landscape Design___________________________________________ 34
4.1 Comparison with all subjects combined ___________________________________ 34
4.2 Comparison with STEM combined ______________________________________ 35
4.3 Relationships between aspects of the student experience ______________________ 36
4.4 Impact of aspects of the student experience on overall satisfaction _______________ 37
4.5 Range of institutional results for overall satisfaction __________________________ 38
4.6 Comparison by nation _______________________________________________ 39
4.7 Comparison by institution type _________________________________________ 40
4.8 Comparison by full-time/part-time ______________________________________ 42
4.9 Comparison by gender _______________________________________________ 43
4.10 Comparison by domicile ______________________________________________ 44
4.11 Comparison with selected items from the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey ___ 45

5. Comparison between cognate subjects ______________________________________ 47
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
3
6. Additional HEA resources ________________________________________________ 49
6.1 Research ___________________________________________________________ 49
6.2 Case studies of enhancement activities _____________________________________ 49
6.3 Postgraduate surveys __________________________________________________ 50
6.4 Consultancy and change programmes ______________________________________ 50

7. Further reading _______________________________________________________ 51
Appendix A: Brief description of analyses ________________________________________ 53
Appendix B: Full list of subjects covered in this report ______________________________ 54
Appendix C: Information about the NSS _________________________________________ 56
Appendix D: NSS items _____________________________________________________ 57


NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
4
Foreword

The National Student Survey (NSS) and its role
The National Student Survey (NSS) is an annual survey of all higher education students in their final year of
study in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and for some institutions in Scotland. It was introduced in
2005, and is an important source of information for anyone interested in the quality of an undergraduate
degree programme. It is administered by Ipsos-MORI on behalf of HEFCE, and aims to “gather feedback on
the quality of students‟ courses in order to contribute to public accountability as well as to help inform the
choices of future applicants to higher education”.
1


This report covers the wide-reaching discipline of Built Environment, which the Higher Education Academy
(HEA) defines to cover Architecture, Architectural Technology, Construction, Facilities Management,
Housing, Landscape Architecture, Spatial Planning, Surveying, Real Estate, Transport and Urban Design. It is
one of a series of 28 NSS discipline-based reports that has been initiated, compiled and written by the HEA
and their survey team. This report offers a high-level analysis of the discipline of Built Environment and aims
to provide the higher education sector with a better understanding of the experience of this student
community. Its general findings can be used as a first step into further qualitative investigation, which can lead
ultimately to a genuine quality enhancement of the students‟ learning experience. The importance of using the

NSS scores only as an instigator for further investigation, however, must be stressed; the true worth of the
NSS is only apparent when the data it provides are used as a benchmark, and/or to compare with like
disciplines and institutions across the sector.

The analysis given in this report covers student responses for the JACS codes covering: Architecture – K100;
Building – K200; and Landscape Design and Planning (Landscape Design – K300, Planning – K400 and others in
Architecture and Planning – K900).

The NSS asks participants to rate their level of agreement with 22 positive statements, on a five-point scale (in
addition to „not applicable‟).The statements are grouped into six areas plus an overall statement: teaching;
assessment and feedback; academic support; organisation and management; learning resources; personal
development. In addition to this, the survey also invites free-text comments about particular aspects of their
experience.

This report focuses on the quantitative data for the subjects to enable „like with like‟ comparisons as far as
possible. It is also useful to compare results for departments/faculties with similar students (while at the same
time recognising the breadth of subjects included in Built Environment), and this has been approximated by
comparing with mission groups or institution types. It is important to note that not all differences will be
reliable or statistically significant, and caution must always be taken when interpreting or relying on small
differences. These reports are designed to help subject communities to use the information about the student
experience for the continued enhancement of learning and teaching within the identified areas.

Highlighted features in the Built Environment discipline

It is interesting to note that within all three areas of the Built Environment discipline covered in this report,
the overall satisfaction of the students is most strongly correlated to their satisfaction on the quality of
learning and teaching scale. The results for the Built Environment subjects alone highlight a significant variation
in the overall satisfaction between students studying the same subject grouping at different HEIs, but this
variation is least evident in the Landscape, Design and Planning subject grouping.

1
[Accessed 16 May 2012]
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
5
The Landscape, Design and Planning subject group in this report comprises the highest number of female
students (48%) compared with the other two Built Environment groupings. Initial results from this report
indicate that male students are significantly more satisfied than their female counterparts when studying
Architecture, an area that perhaps requires further analysis.

Overall, the results for the Built Environment subjects show lower levels of satisfaction compared to the
experience of all other students responding to the NSS. Furthermore, Architecture and Building report lower
levels of satisfaction with their experience compared with the experience of all other students in the wider
subject area of STEM responding to the NSS. The report clearly shows differences between the different
cognate degrees, as would be expected, and the diversity between subjects needs further longitudinal
exploration.

Overall the survey suggests that strengths and weaknesses coexist across all subject areas and probably
impact on the 75-81% overall satisfaction with the quality of the course. The strengths are to be commended
in the context of the changes experienced across the sector and the weaker response areas provide the basis
for further consideration in relation to the variables and practices of the local context.

Recommendations

This report, as one of a series of 28 discipline reports by the HEA, is most timely in its recognition of the
importance of enhancing the student learning experience. This will become increasingly significant post-
September 2012, when UK HEIs will feel the full impact of student fee increases, the introduction of Key
Information Sets (KIS) and the ongoing challenges of attracting future students to their HEI in the ever-
changing economic environment within which HE operates.

We are pleased to recommend this report to you covering the NSS from 2010-11. The data as presented in
this report aim to make it easy to compare any local results with comparable degrees elsewhere and to start
to evaluate your own students‟ experience. However, these comparisons must be viewed as only one piece of
the jigsaw to understand and ultimately improve the student experience. We would stress that results from
the NSS and findings from this report for the Built Environment discipline must be included in any quality
assurance discussions and must assimilate, not in isolation but together with, other sources of information.
These should include formal reviews and assessments such as accreditation visit reports, programme reviews,
module evaluations, and university-wide reviews, as well as informal reviews through student-staff panels,
focus groups and other mechanisms where student views are expressed.

In going forward, we would also stress that it is critical for any proposed changes resulting from such an
integrated systematic review to be discussed with students prior to implementation. The best long-term
improvements in the quality of the student experience can only come through integrated student-staff
initiatives, when everyone is engaged with the process.

Jane Kettle and Aled Williams
Discipline Leads for Built Environment at the Higher Education Academy

May 2012

NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
6
1. How to use this report


This report presents data from the 2011 National Student Survey (NSS) for specific subjects, aggregated
across all institutions. By providing information about how subjects are reflected nationally in the NSS, the
charts and tables are designed to help departments, faculties and institutions to contextualise and understand
their own results.

This report includes NSS data for the following subjects, as classified in the Joint Academic Coding System
(JACS) (see Appendix B for a more detailed list)

Architecture (K100)

Building (K200)

Planning and Landscape Design (K300, K400, K900)

Note about students studying multiple subjects
Unless otherwise indicated, all students studying a subject at 50% FPE (full-person equivalent) or more will
have their responses allocated to that subject. Students studying two subjects at 50% FPE may therefore have
their responses allocated twice. In addition, students studying multiple courses, all at less than 50% FPE, will
be excluded from the data. These decisions have been taken to ensure that a response is allocated to a
subject when the student has had a significant experience of that subject.



When used with an awareness of the limitations, NSS data can play a useful role in supporting improvements
in learning and teaching. By allowing comparisons and benchmarking, the data can highlight areas that would
reward further investigation, either as areas of apparent success or challenge. NSS results can be a useful
starting point for discussions about learning and teaching, either with colleagues, senior managers, student
representatives or students themselves. It is also advisable to triangulate the data with quantitative and
qualitative information from other sources in order to effectively target, design and evaluate enhancement
activities.

This report presents a high-level picture of the discipline through the lens of NSS data, broken down and
analysed in a number of different ways. It does not provide a detailed picture of students‟ learning

experiences, nor does it dictate specific areas for intervention. However, it can be used in conjunction with
local NSS data to gain an overview of the views of a group of students, which can provide an excellent starting
point for further investigation and discussion.

As with all uses of quantitative data, caution should be exercised when interpreting small differences between
respondent groups. Small differences may be due to random variations in response, demographic
characteristics of the respondents, method of response and many other factors, and small numerical
differences may not in fact correspond to genuine differences in experience. A further reason for caution is
that for those comparisons involving institutional-level characteristics (UK nation, institution type and mission
group) where small numbers of respondents are reported these may represent a cohort from one single
institution, rather than respondents from a range of institutions.

A standard method of evaluating whether patterns in the survey sample are likely to reflect patterns in the
wider population is to use tests of statistical significance. Methods of analysis used in this report are detailed in
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
7
Appendix A. Significance levels are included in the tables, but for ease of use significance levels of 0.05 or
lower have been highlighted in bold – this is the level at which results are standardly taken to be significant,
and suggests that there is a 95% or greater probability that the patterns found in the survey sample are
reflective of the final-year undergraduate population as a whole. Unless otherwise stated, where differences
are significant (at the 0.05 level) the higher score is in bold text. Where there are more than two scores being
compared and the significance level is 0.05 or lower, the significance level itself is in bold text, and indicates
that there is at least one significant different between two of the scores.

It should be noted, however, that significance testing assumes that the survey has been conducted using a
random sample, or a design that approximates this. In fact, the NSS attempts to survey the whole final-year
undergraduate population and, while all surveys may experience non-response bias, it can be more difficult to
correct for this in a „census‟ type survey. A review by Paula Surridge for the HEA described tests for non-
response bias that found no significant effect
2

and the overall profile of NSS respondents is broadly
representative of the wider student body. However, it is not possible to say whether each subgroup explored
in this report (such as part-time students, or the results for HEI „mission groups‟) is similarly representative.
For this reason, the significance levels included in this report should only be taken as indications of confidence
in the survey results and we recommend that caution be exercised when interpreting, using or relying on
small differences. Similarly, the error bars placed around institutional scores may, if anything, be too narrow
where non-response bias is substantial.

In order to present the data in a more complete manner, tables rather than charts have been used for the
majority of this report
3
. Because there are different response rates for each item in the NSS, no single number
of responses can be included for each group in a table. Instead, the range between the lowest and the highest
number of responses is shown.

The percentage values included in the tables correspond to the proportion of students who agreed with the
relevant statement (survey item), i.e. selected either „definitely agree‟ or „mostly agree‟. The number of
responses to each item includes all of the responses (including those who disagreed).

This report contains high-level analyses involving institutional and demographic characteristics. Other than
The Open University, no institutions are identified anywhere in the report – in the section on part-time
students, the OU‟s results have been separated out as they constitute such a large proportion of the part-time
student responses. No group smaller than 23 students is reported, and every care has been taken to ensure
that no student can be identified either directly or through implication.

The analyses included in this report were carried out by Mrs Gosia Turner. The HEA acknowledges the
assistance of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) in providing the NSS dataset used in
this report.

2
The National Student Survey three years on: What have we learned (Surridge, 2009).
3
The data contained in the tables can be used to create charts, if desired, by copying the entire table into a Microsoft Word
document, and then copying the required data from that document into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
8
2. Architecture

There are 3043 students in the NSS dataset who study Architecture at 50% FPE or more. 40.1% of students
who responded are women, 82.1% are from the UK, and 96.2% study full-time.

2.1 Comparison with all subjects combined

This table compares the experiences of students across the UK responding to the NSS in Architecture with
the experience of all other students responding to the NSS.

These percentages, in this table and all other tables in the report, correspond to the proportion of students
who agreed with the relevant statement, i.e. selected either „definitely agree‟ or „mostly agree‟. The number of
responses to each item includes all of the responses (including those who disagreed).


All (excl.
Architecture)
Architecture
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
88.1%
81.3%
.000

Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
80.9%
82.9%
.007
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
85.4%
84.5%
.262
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
83.7%
85.1%
.067
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
73.2%
61.1%
.000
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
74.6%
62.8%
.000
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
62.6%
61.1%
.000
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
66.9%
65.7%
.025
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
61.4%

63.9%
.004
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
75.0%
72.6%
.011
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
83.0%
78.1%
.000
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
72.1%
70.2%
.000
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
78.5%
71.9%
.000
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated
effectively
73.5%
65.5%
.000
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
72.6%
59.9%
.000
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
81.0%
83.4%

.001
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
83.4%
81.2%
.000
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when
I needed to
75.7%
71.4%
.000
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
79.0%
77.0%
.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
81.9%
83.9%
.002
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
79.2%
79.8%
.204
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
83.1%
78.1%
.000
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
237817 - 261279
2963 - 3043

NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
9
2.2 Comparison with STEM combined

This table compares the experience of students across the UK responding to the NSS in Architecture with
the experience of all other students in the wider subject area of STEM responding to the NSS.


STEM (excl.
Architecture)
Architecture
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
87.9%
81.3%
.000
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
78.4%
82.9%
.000
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
83.7%
84.5%
.311
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
84.2%
85.1%
.448
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance

72.6%
61.1%
.000
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
75.8%
62.8%
.000
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
59.8%
61.1%
.005
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
61.6%
65.7%
.000
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
58.6%
63.9%
.000
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
75.4%
72.6%
.001
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
84.4%
78.1%
.000
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
72.3%
70.2%

.001
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
80.0%
71.9%
.000
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated
effectively
77.2%
65.5%
.000
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
76.3%
59.9%
.000
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
83.3%
83.4%
.561
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
84.6%
81.2%
.000
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when
I needed to
78.5%
71.4%
.000
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
76.0%
77.0%

.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
78.1%
83.9%
.000
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
78.1%
79.8%
.029
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
83.7%
78.1%
.000
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
64464 - 69602
2963 - 3043



NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
10
2.3 Relationships between aspects of the student experience

21 items in the NSS are grouped into 6 scales, each measuring a different aspect of the student experience
(see Appendix D), while item 22 examines overall satisfaction. This table shows the extent to which these
different scales are correlated with one another. In other words, it gives an indication of the strength of the
relationship between different aspects of the student experience. Values nearer 1 indicate a stronger
relationship. However, due to the fact that this analysis shows correlations rather than causal relationships, it
is not possible to conclude that improving one aspect of the student experience will automatically lead to
improvements in another aspect, even where the relationship appears strong.

Q22. Overall,
I am satisfied
with the
quality of the
course
Quality of
Learning
and
Teaching
scale
Assessment
and Feedback
scale
Academic
Support
scale
Organisation
and
Management
scale
Learning
Resources
scale
Personal
Development
scale
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied
with the quality of the course

1
.750
.654
.704
.640
.401
.652
Quality of Learning and
Teaching scale

1
.620
.688
.571
.376
.619
Assessment and Feedback
scale


1
.643
.606
.361
.511
Academic Support scale



1

.603
.405
.586
Organisation and
Management scale




1
.394
.495
Learning resources scale





1
.400
Personal Development scale






1

All correlations are statistically significant at 0.01 level. The strongest relationship appears to be between

overall satisfaction and quality of learning and teaching.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
11
2.4 Impact of aspects of the student experience on overall satisfaction

The different aspects of the student experience, as measured by the 6 item scales in the NSS, are likely to
impact upon students‟ overall satisfaction with their course, as measured by question 22. To test this, a
multiple regression has been performed, examining the extent to which the results for different item scales
explain or predict overall satisfaction. In the table below, the higher the size of the standardised coefficient,
the greater the influence of that aspect of the student experience on overall satisfaction.

All scales combined explain 69% (Adjusted R
2
= 0.694) of the variability of the overall satisfaction item. This is
a strong effect but nevertheless suggests the existence of other factors affecting the overall experience but
not measured by the NSS survey.


Unstandardised
Coefficients
Standardised
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
(Constant)
851
.068

-12.561
.000
Quality of Learning and Teaching scale
.450
.022
.328
20.538
.000
Assessment and Feedback scale
.154
.017
.139
9.284
.000
Academic Support scale
.194
.018
.169
10.504
.000
Organisation and Management scale
.168
.014
.167
11.654
.000
Learning resources scale
.029
.014

.024
2.024
.043
Personal Development scale
.221
.017
.185
13.216
.000

This analysis shows that the quality of learning and teaching is the most important factor affecting the overall
experience while the learning resources have the weakest impact.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
12
2.5 Range of institutional results for overall satisfaction



The points on the graph represent the % agree for overall satisfaction (item 22) among those answering the
survey for this subject. The error bars represent 95% confidents intervals – in other words, there is a 95%
probability that the actual % agree for all students taking this subject at an institution, rather than just those
who responded to the survey, lies within this range. This is important because it is a significant limitation on
any rank ordering of institutions based on NSS scores. Institutions with 22 students or less were removed
from the graph. Institutions have been anonymised and the numbers on the x-axis do not correspond to the
numbers on the x-axis in other graphs in this report.

In general, this analysis is intended to give an indication of the range of overall satisfaction across institutions
offering this subject.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
13

2.6 Comparison by nation

This analysis breaks down the results for the subject by the UK nation in which the institution is located.
Results from The Open University have not been included in this analysis.


England
Scotland
Wales
Northern
Ireland
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
81.6%
76.2%
84.9%
80.9%
.483
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
82.9%
84.5%
83.7%
79.4%
.244
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
84.7%
84.5%
83.7%
79.4%
.614

Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
85.1%
87.6%
80.2%
84.6%
.319
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in
advance
61.2%
46.6%
73.3%
72.1%
.000
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
62.7%
57.5%
74.4%
63.2%
.165
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
62.2%
44.0%
68.6%
58.8%
.000
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
66.3%
54.4%
76.7%
63.2%

.003
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I
did not understand
64.0%
55.2%
76.7%
66.7%
.011
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with
my studies
72.8%
62.7%
82.6%
76.5%
.008
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
78.2%
72.5%
84.9%
80.1%
.211
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make
study choices
70.7%
60.2%
74.1%
71.6%
.064
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my
activities are concerned

72.6%
60.4%
74.4%
72.8%
.017
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been
communicated effectively
65.7%
54.4%
70.6%
73.5%
.004
Q15. The course is well organised and is running
smoothly
60.4%
40.6%
64.0%
73.5%
.000
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough
for my needs
82.7%
87.0%
86.0%
90.4%
.123
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources
when I needed to
80.3%
88.5%

77.6%
90.4%
.005
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment,
facilities, or rooms when I needed to
71.2%
75.3%
66.3%
74.8%
.332
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with
confidence
76.8%
82.2%
77.6%
75.0%
.401
Q20. My communication skills have improved
84.0%
83.3%
83.5%
83.8%
.518
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling
unfamiliar problems
80.2%
78.6%
73.3%
79.4%
.271

Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
78.2%
73.6%
82.6%
79.4%
.528
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
2558 - 2628
186 - 193
85 - 86
134 - 136


Where there are statistically significant differences for an item, this is highlighted in bold in the „Sig.‟ column.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
14
2.7 Comparison by institution type

This analysis categorises the results for the subject according to the institution‟s „mission group‟. Mission
group membership is correct for the time the survey took place (Spring 2011).


Russell
Group
1994
Group
Million+
University
Alliance*
Guild

HE**
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
85.1%
97.6%
81.3%
80.3%
89.0%
.001
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
89.0%
95.3%
80.5%
83.7%
81.3%
.000
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
88.7%
98.8%
81.5%
84.9%
85.3%
.001
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
90.2%
97.6%
83.7%
85.0%
78.7%
.000

Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in
advance
54.8%
78.8%
61.8%
66.3%
69.9%
.000
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
62.3%
80.0%
69.3%
62.0%
69.9%
.002
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
62.0%
80.0%
59.1%
64.1%
57.0%
.015
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
62.8%
71.8%
66.7%
70.7%
69.1%
.002
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did

not understand
60.1%
76.5%
64.0%
68.1%
61.5%
.002
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my
studies
75.7%
94.1%
69.1%
73.2%
80.9%
.000
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
83.5%
97.6%
71.7%
77.3%
84.6%
.000
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study
choices
70.6%
92.9%
66.8%
72.5%
74.3%
.000

Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are
concerned
72.9%
83.5%
72.0%
74.9%
77.9%
.379
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been
communicated effectively
71.8%
84.7%
61.2%
66.8%
73.3%
.000
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
65.0%
85.9%
56.2%
61.6%
69.1%
.000
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for
my needs
84.7%
80.0%
77.6%
87.4%
82.4%

.000
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I
needed to
85.9%
88.2%
73.2%
83.9%
75.7%
.000
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment,
facilities, or rooms when I needed to
73.6%
77.4%
61.3%
77.5%
73.5%
.000
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with
confidence
80.5%
95.3%
73.7%
77.4%
83.7%
.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
88.3%
95.3%
82.3%
84.6%

84.4%
.011
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling
unfamiliar problems
85.1%
97.6%
78.1%
79.9%
81.5%
.001
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
84.0%
94.1%
76.0%
78.0%
79.4%
.001
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
615 -
631
84 - 85
476 - 487
1003 -
1028
132 -
136

*Excluding Bucks New University (included in Million+). **Excluding Kingston University (included in
Million+).

Where there are statistically significant differences for an item, this is highlighted in bold in the „Sig.‟ column.


NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
15
The following table shows comparisons between broader institution type.


Pre-1992
Post-
1992
Small and
specialist
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
83.5%
80.3%
77.7%
.089
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
85.6%
82.0%
74.2%
.001
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
85.6%
84.0%
81.5%
.464
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating

89.0%
83.7%
77.7%
.000
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
57.1%
64.0%
52.9%
.001
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
59.7%
64.9%
56.7%
.004
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
60.4%
62.2%
51.3%
.092
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
61.0%
68.3%
61.8%
.000
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
60.3%
66.6%
53.5%
.000
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies

74.4%
71.7%
69.4%
.035
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
82.5%
75.4%
79.6%
.001
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
70.6%
70.6%
61.5%
.000
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
72.6%
72.2%
63.1%
.140
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated
effectively
68.6%
64.2%
61.5%
.121
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
62.5%
59.2%
51.0%
.002

Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
83.4%
84.0%
76.4%
.151
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
85.6%
79.8%
72.0%
.000
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms
when I needed to
73.9%
70.8%
65.1%
.100
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
79.8%
75.8%
75.6%
.004
Q20. My communication skills have improved
86.7%
82.9%
80.8%
.011
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar
problems
83.7%
78.2%

75.5%
.005
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
81.4%
77.1%
67.5%
.001
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
983 -
1011
1810 -
1861
152 - 157


Where there are statistically significant differences for an item, this is highlighted in bold in the „Sig.‟ column.
FEC institutions were excluded owing to insufficient student population in this subject.


NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
16
2.8 Comparison by full-time/part-time


Full-time
Part-time
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
81.4%
80.2%

.927
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
83.3%
71.6%
.003
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
84.6%
80.2%
.355
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
85.3%
79.3%
.205
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
61.1%
61.2%
.744
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
62.8%
61.2%
.878
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
61.3%
55.2%
.321
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
66.0%
56.9%
.007
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand

64.4%
51.3%
.003
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
72.7%
70.4%
.061
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
78.3%
73.3%
.421
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
70.3%
66.4%
.180
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
72.1%
65.5%
.029
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated effectively
65.8%
57.4%
.174
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
60.2%
52.6%
.181
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
83.4%
84.5%

.219
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
81.3%
79.1%
.740
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when I needed to
71.7%
64.0%
.203
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
77.6%
63.8%
.001
Q20. My communication skills have improved
84.4%
72.2%
.001
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
80.3%
67.0%
.001
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
78.5%
67.2%
.010
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
2853 -
2927
110 - 116

NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
17
2.9 Comparison by gender


Female
Male
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
80.6%
81.8%
.207
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
82.1%
83.4%
.646
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
84.7%
84.3%
.912
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
84.7%
85.4%
.492
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
59.4%

62.3%
.204
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
57.8%
66.0%
.000
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
60.9%
61.2%
.884
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
64.3%
66.6%
.213
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
62.2%
65.1%
.246
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
69.1%
74.9%
.001
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
76.4%
79.2%
.158
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
66.9%
72.3%
.005

Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
71.7%
72.0%
.894
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated effectively
64.0%
66.4%
.356
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
56.8%
61.9%
.011
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
78.4%
86.8%
.000
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
78.9%
82.8%
.028
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when I needed to
67.7%
73.9%
.000
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
73.4%
79.5%
.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
82.0%

85.2%
.064
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
76.6%
82.0%
.002
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
75.0%
80.2%
.001
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
1185 -
1219
1778 -
1824


NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
18
2.10 Comparison by domicile

The following analysis breaks down the NSS results for the subject by students‟ place of residence. Students
are allocated to one category only, so those based in the UK are not included in the EU category for the
purpose of this analysis.


UK
EU
Non-
EU

Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
81.7%
78.1%
80.7%
.404
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
83.4%
82.9%
77.9%
.187
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
85.0%
83.6%
80.4%
.101
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
86.4%
80.7%
77.2%
.000
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
61.1%
60.1%
62.2%
.146
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
62.9%
60.6%
64.0%

.928
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
60.3%
62.5%
67.2%
.000
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
66.1%
61.0%
66.2%
.023
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
64.2%
63.2%
61.8%
.536
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
74.2%
67.9%
62.3%
.000
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
78.7%
76.2%
74.2%
.223
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
71.3%
63.3%
66.3%

.010
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
72.7%
67.9%
68.8%
.267
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated effectively
65.0%
64.6%
70.3%
.003
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
59.7%
57.1%
63.8%
.317
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
84.2%
82.5%
76.8%
.030
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
81.2%
81.7%
81.2%
.016
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when I needed to
71.4%
68.4%
74.6%

.357
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
78.7%
68.9%
69.6%
.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
84.2%
83.6%
81.9%
.620
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
80.7%
77.2%
74.2%
.073
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
78.5%
76.2%
76.1%
.178
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
2431 -
2498
259 -
269
272 -
276

Where there are statistically significant differences for an item, this is highlighted in bold in the „Sig.‟ column.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
19
2.11 Comparison with selected items from the Postgraduate Taught Experience
Survey

The national Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES) is run annually by the Higher Education Academy
in conjunction with institutions. This table shows comparisons between data from NSS items and data from
relevant items in PTES. The PTES data are from the 2011 administration of the survey, and the full report can
be accessed on the HEA‟s website. There are relevant items in PTES for all NSS items except items 10, 11, 12
and 22. For NSS items 7 and 16 there are multiple relevant items in PTES. Unless otherwise stated, the
relevant item wording in PTES is either identical to the NSS item, or contains only insignificant differences.
The relevant PTES item numbers are in square brackets.

Please note that whereas the NSS is compulsory for HE providers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland,
PTES is voluntary. 80 institutions took part in PTES 2011, as opposed to the 253 institutions that took part in
NSS 2011. Differences in results between PTES and the NSS may, therefore, reflect differences between the
institutions taking part. Nonetheless, PTES includes many of the same questions as found in the NSS as well as
some that add further information to the NSS-type questions. The results below compare the experience of
those final-year undergraduates studying Architecture across the UK answering the NSS with the experience
of taught postgraduates studying Architecture, Building and Planning.

NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
20
Please also note that no tests for significance have been undertaken for this table; the differences between
results for NSS and PTES items are provided for interest only, and should only be taken as indicative.


NSS
PTES

Q1. Staff are good at explaining things [PTES Q4a]
81.3%
77.9%
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting [PTES Q4b]
82.9%
75.4%
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching [PTES Q4c]
84.5%
81.5%
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating [PTES Q3d]
85.1%
83.4%
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance [PTES Q11a]
61.1%
68.8%
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair [PTES Q11b]
62.8%
68.2%
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt [PTES Q11c]
61.1%
53.7%
I received feedback in time to allow me to improve my next assignment [PTES Q11d – no
direct NSS equivalent]
N/A
53.0%
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work [PTES Q11e]
65.7%
66.6%
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand [PTES Q11f]
63.9%

56.8%
Q13*. The timetable works efficiently as far as my activities are concerned [PTES Q14a]
71.9%
73.0%
Q14. Any changes in the course of teaching have been communicated effectively [PTES Q14b]
65.5%
70.6%
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly [PTES Q14c]
59.9%
67.3%
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs [PTES Q16a]
83.4%
73.2%
The library resources and services are easily accessible [PTES Q16b – no NSS equivalent]
N/A
77.9%
I am satisfied with the quality of learning materials available to me (Print, online material,
DVDs etc.) [PTES Q16f – no NSS equivalent]
N/A
70.7%
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to [PTES Q16c]
81.2%
75.4%
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities or rooms when I needed to [PTES
Q16e]
71.4%
60.8%
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence [PTES Q17d]
77.0%
66.1%

Q20. My communication skills have improved [PTES Q17e]
83.9%
64.7%
Q21. As a result of my course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems [PTES Q17f]
79.8%
69.4%
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
3005 -
3043
780 - 1027

* PTES Q14a, the equivalent of the NSS item Q13, is slightly differently worded: „The timetable fits well with
my other commitments‟.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
21
3. Building

There are 3669 students in the NSS dataset who study Building at 50% FPE or more. 16.1% of students who
responded are women, 94.8% are from the UK, and 64.7% study full-time.

3.1 Comparison with all subjects combined

This table compares the experiences of students across the UK responding to the NSS in Building with the
experience of all other students responding to the NSS.

These percentages, in this table and all other tables in the report, correspond to the proportion of students
who agreed with the relevant statement, i.e. selected either „definitely agree‟ or „mostly agree‟. The number of
responses to each item includes all of the responses (including those who disagreed).

All (excl. Building)
Building
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
88.1%
81.0%
.000
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
81.1%
68.8%
.000
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
85.5%
75.5%
.000
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
83.8%
72.7%
.000
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
73.1%
70.0%
.000
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
74.5%
67.2%
.000
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
62.8%
47.5%

.000
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
67.1%
53.2%
.000
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
61.6%
47.7%
.000
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
75.0%
69.9%
.000
Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
83.0%
75.8%
.000
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
72.2%
65.9%
.000
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
78.5%
72.4%
.000
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated
effectively
73.5%
68.5%
.000

Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
72.6%
63.4%
.000
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
80.9%
84.7%
.000
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
83.3%
84.7%
.054
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when
I needed to
75.7%
74.8%
.452
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
79.1%
73.7%
.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
82.0%
74.7%
.000
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
79.3%
73.6%
.000
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course

83.2%
75.6%
.000
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
237393 - 260658
3429 - 3665


NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
22
3.2 Comparison with STEM combined

This table compares the experience of students across the UK responding to the NSS in Building with the
experience of all other students in the wider subject area of STEM responding to the NSS.


STEM (excl.
Building)
Building
Sig.
Q1. Staff are good at explaining things
87.9%
81.0%
.000
Q2. Staff have made the subject interesting
79.1%
68.8%
.000
Q3. Staff are enthusiastic about what they are teaching
84.2%

75.5%
.000
Q4. The course is intellectually stimulating
84.9%
72.7%
.000
Q5. The criteria used in marking have been made clear in advance
72.2%
70.0%
.000
Q6. Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair
75.7%
67.2%
.000
Q7. Feedback on my work has been prompt
60.6%
47.5%
.000
Q8. I have received detailed comments on my work
62.2%
53.2%
.000
Q9. Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand
59.4%
47.7%
.000
Q10. I have received sufficient advice and support with my studies
75.5%
69.9%
.000

Q11. I have been able to contact staff when I needed to
84.6%
75.8%
.000
Q12. Good advice was available when I needed to make study choices
72.6%
65.9%
.000
Q13. The timetable works effectively as far as my activities are concerned
80.1%
72.4%
.000
Q14. Any changes in the course or teaching have been communicated
effectively
77.2%
68.5%
.000
Q15. The course is well organised and is running smoothly
76.3%
63.4%
.000
Q16. The library resources and services are good enough for my needs
83.2%
84.7%
.043
Q17. I have been able to access general IT resources when I needed to
84.4%
84.7%
.327
Q18. I have been able to access specialised equipment, facilities, or rooms when

I needed to
78.3%
74.8%
.000
Q19. The course has helped me to present myself with confidence
76.1%
73.7%
.000
Q20. My communication skills have improved
78.5%
74.7%
.000
Q21. As a result of the course, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems
78.4%
73.6%
.000
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course
83.8%
75.6%
.000
Number of responses to each item (range lowest – highest)
64040 - 68981
3429 - 3665



NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
23
3.3 Relationships between aspects of the student experience

21 items in the NSS are grouped into 6 scales, each measuring a different aspect of the student experience
(see Appendix D), while item 22 examines overall satisfaction. This table shows the extent to which these
different scales are correlated with one another. In other words, it gives an indication of the strength of the
relationship between different aspects of the student experience. Values nearer 1 indicate a stronger
relationship. However, due to the fact that this analysis shows correlations rather than causal relationships, it
is not possible to conclude that improving one aspect of the student experience will automatically lead to
improvements in another aspect, even where the relationship appears strong.


Q22. Overall,
I am satisfied
with the
quality of the
course
Quality of
Learning
and
Teaching
scale
Assessment
and Feedback
scale
Academic
Support
scale
Organisation
and
Management
scale
Learning

Resources
scale
Personal
Development
scale
Q22. Overall, I am satisfied
with the quality of the course
1
.730
.592
.631
.612
.322
.624
Quality of Learning and
Teaching scale

1
.593
.635
.553
.287
.585
Assessment and Feedback
scale


1
.598
.507

.303
.455
Academic Support scale



1
.548
.363
.536
Organisation and
Management scale




1
.310
.477
Learning resources scale





1
.343
Personal Development scale

1

All correlations are statistically significant at 0.01 level. The strongest relationship appears to be between
overall satisfaction and quality of learning and teaching.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
24
3.4 Impact of aspects of the student experience on overall satisfaction

The different aspects of the student experience, as measured by the 6 item scales in the NSS, are likely to
impact upon students‟ overall satisfaction with their course, as measured by question 22. To test this, a
multiple regression has been performed, examining the extent to which the results for different item scales
explain or predict overall satisfaction. In the table below, the higher the size of the standardised coefficient,
the greater the influence of that aspect of the student experience on overall satisfaction.

All scales combined explain 65% (Adjusted R
2
= 0.648) of the variability of the overall satisfaction item. This is
a strong effect but nevertheless suggests the existence of other factors affecting the overall experience but
not measured by the NSS survey.


Unstandardised
Coefficients
Standardised
Coefficients
t

Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
(Constant)
810
.069

-11.660
.000
Quality of Learning and Teaching scale
.477
.021
.346
22.477
.000
Assessment and Feedback scale
.123
.016
.109
7.752
.000
Academic Support scale
.160
.018
.134
8.758
.000
Organisation and Management scale
.202

.014
.189
14.015
.000
Learning resources scale
.015
.014
.012
1.075
.282
Personal Development scale
.255
.016
.208
15.446
.000

This analysis shows that the quality of learning and teaching is the most important factor affecting the overall
experience while the assessment and feedback have the weakest impact. The learning resources scale is not
statistically significant.
NSS Discipline Report – Built Environment
25
3.5 Range of institutional results for overall satisfaction



The points on the graph represent the % agree for overall satisfaction (item 22) among those answering the
survey for this subject. The error bars represent 95% confidents intervals – in other words, there is a 95%
probability that the actual % agree for all students taking this subject at an institution, rather than just those
who responded to the survey, lies within this range. This is important because it is a significant limitation on

any rank ordering of institutions based on NSS scores. Institutions with 22 students or less were removed
from the graph. Institutions have been anonymised and the numbers on the x-axis do not correspond to the
numbers on the x-axis in other graphs in this report.

In general, this analysis is intended to give an indication of the range of overall satisfaction across institutions
offering this subject.