MGMT7250 – Assessment item 5 – STAKEHOLDER EVIDENCE REPORT: u9999999 – 736 words
Introduction
COVID-19 has impacted teaching at ANU and so the Research School of Management (RSM) aims
to address the difficulties students are facing under these new circumstances. The purpose of this
paper is to propose how to document the issues reported by online students. Actions to address them
and changes over the semester are addressed elsewhere.
Problem Definition
Currently, where courses are offered online those are the only classes provided. Online classes are
thus much larger than usual (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Comparison of 2020 enrolments for online classes across semesters (ANU 2020)
This larger number encompasses a very different profile of students. Normally these courses would
be made up of professionals studying while working in Australia or overseas. Now 83% of students
are pre-experience students who would normally study full-time on campus (ANU 2020), and a
higher proportion of them are international students rather than domestic students. The problem is
we do not understand the needs of this mix of students in an online environment.
Stakeholder analysis
Of the 4 significant stakeholder groups, students are critical because their needs shape the actions
required of the other three groups (Table 1).
Table 1: Stakeholder groups impacted by the shift to online classes in RSM
Stakeholder
group
Notes Impact Influence
Students: Many will be studying under very
different conditions than they are
used to. Students outcomes
including student satisfaction, are
key performance indicators for
ANU and they are at risk if
students' needs are not met.
Students' academic
performance will be
impacted by the change in
modality
Students may have little voice to
influence their study
environment, but if sufficiently
aggrieved they may leave ANU.
2
Teaching staff: Teaching staff require
understanding of students needs
in order to plan properly.
Lecturers have a more
complex set of student
needs to address.
Lecturers have significant
capacity to influence the
students' study environment, as
they design the teaching and
assessment structures.
RSM: Requires data to refine future
course offerings to better meet
student needs.
Little or no impact on RSM
operations
RSM can influence the students'
study environment through
resourcing of teaching staff.
IT Services: Requires data to understand
infrastructure needs
May expect an increased
workload from student
requests for assistance
IT Services can influence the
students' study environment
through equipment choices and
resourcing of technical staff that
support teaching staff.
Further analysis of the stakeholders makes clear that there is also an ethical need to address student
needs, as they have little influence in the situation but are disproportionately impacted by it (Figure
2).
Figure 2: Stakeholder groups dissected by impact and influence
Method
A short anonymous survey distributed via Wattle during the first and second week of the semester is
proposed. A key parameter of the situation is the off-campus location of students. Accordingly data
must be sought online. Understanding the lived experience of the students is the goal, so
exploratory and descriptive data is required, and a survey is an appropriate means of obtaining both
qualitative and quantitative data for this purpose. One intention is to resolve any reported problems
as quickly as possible, so waiting until the SELT survey is conducted at the end of semester is
inappropriate. However, the students may be concerned that if they respond negatively then this
may impact their relationship with the University, and accordingly anonymity is required.
Excel is selected for coding and analysis of the data. It is a familiar tool for staff, and the
exploratory and descriptive nature of the evidence to be collected does not require more complex
functions.
Scales and questions
The questionnaire is made up of two parts, addressing different aspects of the problem:
3
Part A: Because of the immediacy and specificity of the problem, 4 questions were tailored to the
circumstances of the problem (Appendix A). These are intended to identify particular issues for
rectification. To ensure maximum usability of results, these questions were designed by a teaching
staff member.
Part B: In addition, a scale for assessing student satisfaction with online learning more broadly is
employed (Arbaugh 2000). This will enable broader assessment of overall satisfaction. It will also
permit some comparison with other institutions and research as well as with subsequent years of the
same courses. The questions are derived from Sun, Tsai, Finger, Chen and Yeh (2008), adapted as
required for this specific learning situation.
Critical appraisal
In previous studies response rates have been below 50%, so sample size could be a concern. A
minimum response rate of 48 across the population of 161 students would be adequate for 90%
confidence and 90% margin of error. Previous similar surveys have generated around 25-26%
response rates, which equates to 40-42 responses for this population. However, for an exploratory
study such as this, 40 responses would be a useful sample size.
There are some other likely sources of bias. There may be sampling bias, as some students may not
find the survey in time to respond to it, particularly late enrolments. There may also be some
selection bias, with confused students over-represented in the sample.
Finally, it is possible that there is an administrative error in questions 1 and 2, which are worded as
they are for consistency with other surveys previously administered locally. It is possible that
students could be confused in the first couple of days, but then growing familiarity with the Wattle
page enables them to find the information they need. This scenario would drive an apparent conflict
in responses; students concerned about quantity of study material also reporting sufficient
information to get started. This issue should be monitored in analysing the survey results.
Conclusions
The purpose of the survey is to identify students' difficulties and proposals for change. Useful data
may be expected from a relatively low number of responses.
4
REFERENCES
ANU 2020. (2020). Wattle [database]. Retrieved 10 August 2020 from
https://wattlecourses.anu.edu.au/.
Arbaugh, J.B. (2000). "Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet-based
MBA courses". Journal of Management Education. 24(1), pp.32-54. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400104
Sun, P., Tsai, R.J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. & Yeh, D. (2008). "What drives a successful e-Learning?
An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction". Computers
& Education, 50(4), pp.1183-1202. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007
5
APPENDIX A: Questionnaire
Part A (binary and textual responses)
1. Have you been able to find sufficient information to get started on your study?
2. What has been the most difficult part of getting started on your study?
3. What changes to the course would make it easier for you to study?
4. Is there anything else you would like to tell us that would assist us to support you at ANU?
Part B ( (Likert scale: 1= strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree)
1. I am satisfied with my decision to take this course via online learning
2. If I had an opportunity to take another course via online learning, I would gladly do so
3. My choice to take this course via online learning was a wise one
4. I was very satisfied with the course
5. I feel that this course served my needs well
6. I will take as many courses via online learning as I can
7. I was disappointed with the way this course worked out*
8. If I had it to do over, I would not take this course via online learning*
9. Conducting the course via online learning is making it more difficult than other courses I
have taken*