Understanding perceptions of the student experience: Dot voting to identify perceived risks to equality of opportunity, a practice-based case study

Authors

  • Zoe Allman De Montfort University

Abstract

“Don’t use focus groups”, advice received from students’ union leaders at an east-Midlands university when considering how best to engage students in the development of the university’s Access and Participation Plan (APP).  The challenge was set, avoid using the same tried and tested method, try something different, be innovative (Galbraith, 2021), if you really want to hear the student voice in an impactful way.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Dalton, J. (2019). Dot Voting. Great Big Agile, pp. 165–166. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-4206-3_27

Fletcher, A.F. (2017). Student voice revolution: The meaningful student involvement handbook. Common Action Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429023033-12

Galbraith, G. (2021). What do students think and how do universities find out?. In M. Natzler (Ed.), What is the student voice? Thirteen essays on how to listen to students and how to act on what they say (pp. 17-23). Higher Education Policy Institute.

Gibbons, S. (2019, July 7). Dot Voting: A Simple Decision-Making and Prioritizing Technique in UX. Nielsen Norman Group. Retrieved September 12, 2024, from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/dot-voting/

Luescher-Mamashela, T.M. (2012). Student representation in university decision making: Good reasons, a new lens? Studies in Higher Education, 38(10),1442-1456. https://doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.625496

Lucidspark. (n.d.). How dot voting helps with group decision-making. https://lucidspark.com/blog/dot-voting

Lord, J. E., Stein, M. A., & Fiala-Butora, J. (2014). Facilitating an Equal Right to Vote for Persons with Disabilities. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 6(1), 115–139. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/hut034

Lowe, T. (2023). The Meaningful Student Involvement Handbook - A Review of the ‘Student Voice Revolution’. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 4(3), 10–13. Retrieved from https://sehej.raise-network.com/raise/article/view/1162

Menon, M.E. (2021). Perceptions of stakeholders on the problems facing higher education: Implications for student engagement and university governance. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 4(1), 70–87. https://sehej.raise-network.com/raise/article/view/1049

Neave, G. (2000). The universities’ responsibilities to society: International perspectives (Issues in Higher Education Series). Oxford: Pergamon.

Office for Students, 2023a. Regulatory notice 1: Access and participation plan guidance. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/media/8927/regulatory_notice-1_access_participation_plan_guidance_december_2023.pdf

Office for Students, 2023b. Equality of Opportunity Risk Register. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/equality-of-opportunity/equality-of-opportunity-risk-register/

Wainwright, E., Chapple, A., & McHugh, E. (2019). Widening participation and a student “success” assemblage: The materialities and mobilities of university. Population, Space and Place, 26(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2291

Downloads

Published

2025-04-03

How to Cite

Allman, Z. (2025). Understanding perceptions of the student experience: Dot voting to identify perceived risks to equality of opportunity, a practice-based case study. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 6(1), 22–28. Retrieved from https://sehej.raise-network.com/raise/article/view/1365

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 1 (2025): Building and valuing relationships

Section

Case studies/Practice Pieces

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a.  Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b.  Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c.  Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).