Agència per a la Qualitat del Sistema Universitari de Catalunya

Access the content (Alt + 1)

Access to the menu section (Alt + 2)

12.12.2011

Levels of satisfaction among university academic staff as assessed by AQU Catalunya

AQU Catalunya's Teaching Staff and Research section has been using a procedure since 2008 to analyse the level of satisfaction of applicants using satisfaction surveys. The results of the surveys are incorporated into the AQU's internal quality assurance system.

The main results of the satisfaction survey of applicants who participated in the first call for applications made in 2010 for junior lecturer assessment reports and the accreditation of research are as follows:

Received information

Every year the Teaching Staff and Research section deals with around 1,200 in-person inquiries, 3,500 telephone calls and over 600 inquiries by e-mail. The figures show that the majority of people contact AQU Catalunya before making their application (67.5% in the case of junior lecturers and 53.7% of senior lecturers).

91.1% of all applicants for the junior lecturer assessment report in the survey were favourably impressed by the attention they received from the Teaching Staff and Research section. In the case of applicants for the accreditation of research, 86% were favourably impressed by the attention they received from AQU Catalunya. This high level of satisfaction with the information received coincides with the level established from the data in the 2008 survey.

Clarity of information on the assessment criteria

48% of the applicants for a junior lecturer assessment report gave either a 4 or 5, with 5 being the highest score, for the clarity of information on the assessment criteria published on the website, while 23% gave this 3 out of 5. Around 30% considered that the information was not very clear.

With regard to applicants for the accreditation of research, the figures were similar, with 42% giving either a 4 or 5 for the clarity of information on the assessment criteria, 30% gave it a 3 and the remaining 28% either a 1 or a 2. These figures are similar to those for 2008, when the overall score for this was 3 for junior lecturers and 2.83 for senior lecturers.

Composition of the review panels

78% of the applicants for a junior lecturer assessment report positively assessed the composition of the review panels. For applicants for the accreditation of research, the percentage was similar (76%). In 2008 the overall level of satisfaction regarding the composition of the review panels was 3 in the case of junior lecturers and 2.8 for senior lecturers.

Barely satisfied with the assessment criteria

One of the key questions in the satisfaction survey referred to the appropriateness and level of requirement of the assessment criteria in relation to the merits associated with each criterion. As in 2008, the criteria were considered to be demanding yet appropriate. On a scale of 1 to 5, the average was 3.16 for junior lecturers (in 2008 it was 3.01) and 3.2 for senior lecturers (in 2008 it ws 2.95). This means that even though there were applicants who were not successful in their application for a report or accreditation, this section was given a pass rating.

The grounds for unfavourable reports

Applicants who were unsuccessful in their application (they were unfavourably assessed) were asked to assess the reasons given, as this is a key element that can be used to guide enhancement strategies.

In the case of applicants for a junior lecturer assessment report, out of the forty-two (42) people who answered this question, 38% considered that the reason/s were clear, whereas slightly more than half were of the opinion that the grounds given were not very clear.

In the case of applicants for the accreditation of research, out of the 12 people who answered this question, one quarter of the total were of the opinion that the grounds given were clear, whereas the rest considered that they were not very clear.

As in the 2008 survey, these results underscore the need for improvements to be made regarding the clarity of reasoning expressed in unfavourable reports and accreditations. A protocol for good practices in giving grounds for unfavourable reports and accreditations has been approved by the CLiC and CAR Commissions this year, which is expected to improve the results in this section in surveys in the future. 

Survey specifications

  JUNIOR LECTURER SENIOR LECTURER
Population 380 173
Responses received 168 (44%) 68 (39,3%)
Margin of error (95% confidence) 5,77% 9,47%
Methodology Questionnaire sent by e-mail
Period of the survey 12 - 25 February, 2011

  • ENQA
  • EQAR
  • ISO

Generalitat de Catalunya

© 2013 AQU Catalunya

C. dels Vergós, 36-42, 08017 Barcelona. Tel: +34 93 268 89 50