Klemenčič, Manja, and Igor Chirikov. 2015. “
How Do We Know How Students Experience Higher Education? On the Use of Student Surveys”. Pp. 361–379 in
The European Higher Education Area. Springer Science $\mathplus$ Business Media.
Publisher's Version Klemenčič, Manja, and Paul Ashwin. 2015. “
Teaching and Learning: An Overview of the Thematic Section [Overview Paper]”. Pp. 315–324 in
The European Higher Education Area. Springer Science $\mathplus$ Business Media.
Publisher's Version Klemencic, Manja. 2015. “
European Students in the Bologna Process”.
International higher education (50).
AbstractOne of the student organizations in Europe has played a particularly visible role in the Bologna process. ESIB (the National Unions of Students in Europe), which has been renamed ESU (European Students' Union [
www.esib.org]), has taken active part in the Bologna process, ensuring that student interests were reflected in its policies. At the same time, ESU used the process to upgrade its visibility and role in European higher education policymaking in general. The Bologna process has thus unexpectedly also created circumstances that led to cooperation among the student unions and strengthened their resolve to empower ESIB to represent them on the European level.
Klemencic, Manja, and Igor Chirikov. 2015. “
How Do We Know How Students Experience Higher Education?: On the Use of Student Surveys”. Pp. S. 361–379 in
The European higher education area. Between critical reflections and future policies. 1.
AbstractHow students experience higher education? What activities they conduct inside and outside classroom? Are they satisfied with teaching, with learning environments and student services? These questions are of central importance for university officials, for prospective students and their families, and for the state as the main funder of higher education in Europe. Student surveys have become one of the largest and most frequently used data source for quality assessment in higher education. The widespread use of student survey data raises questions of reliability and validity of student survey data used as evidence in higher education decision-making. This chapter addresses the development of student survey instruments, and the use of student data analytics for the improvement of teaching and learning practices and learning environments. First, we discuss policy context in which student survey research has proliferated. Next, we offer an overview of the most influential student survey designs and discuss their limitations. Third, we present different institutional approaches to student data analytics as part of institutional research. In conclusion, we offer recommendations to policy-makers regarding quality standards for survey design, and the use of student survey data as evidence in decision-making. Among other things we suggest that the advances in educational technology and students' universal use of technology offer new possibilities for data collection directly from students. Methods, such as digital ethnography, which seeks to adapt qualitative methods to digital use, are particularly promising. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).