annual report 2015-16

ANNUAL REPORT

2015-16VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS

VOTER TURNOUT3,0991,483

679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470

HUMS FCH INTOCSSISCOLLEGE

556140

KEY ELECTION NUMBERSTOTAL STUDENTS 18,418TOTAL FTE STUDENTS 17,635OVERALL TURNOUT 49.5%

CHANGE POLICY AND RESEARCH

ANNUAL REPORT 2015-16

VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140



2

STUDENT ELECTIONS

STUDENT ELECTION 2015: 588 3.37%SABBATICAL ELECTION: 7,072 40.61%SOCIETIES ELECTIONS: 1,072 6.16%STUDENT ELECTION 2016: 1,608 9.23%

TOTAL STUDENTS 19,825STUDENT FTE 17,314

TOTAL TURNOUT # 8,088TOTAL TURNOUT % 46.45

OUR STRATEGIC TARGET TURN-OUT IN THE THREE YEAR PLANFROM 2012-2015 WAS 40%

WE EXCEEDED IT IN 2014-15,AND AGAIN IN 2015-16.

SECTOR COMPARISON:THE GUILD IS THIRD, BEHIND

LOUGHBOROUGH SU AND IMPERIALCOLLEGE LONDON SU.

THE SECTOR AVERAGE IS NOWDROPPING AT 1% PERYEAR.

SABBATICAL ELECTION 2016

STUDENT ELECTION 2016

STUDENT ELECTION 2015

UNIQUEVOTERS

NON-VOTERS

REPEATVOTERS

3

VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140




100 STUDENTS: COLLEGE DISTRIBUTIONCEMPS

CLES

EMS

BS

HUMS

CSSIS

FCH

INTO

2,352 STUDENTS

3,255 STUDENTS

953 STUDENTS

3,861 STUDENTS

4,027 STUDENTS

4,044 STUDENTS

724 STUDENTS

609 STUDENTS

+1

-1

- 1

- 1

=

- 2

=

- 1

=

=


VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140



4

100 STUDENTS: DEMOGRAPHICS

FEMALE

MALE

UG

PGT

PGR

HOME/EU

INT.

10,905

8,879

15,637

2,512

1,640

15,186

4,283

-3

-3

-3

-1

-1

-4

-2

COMPARISON:THE FALL IN TURNOUT IS

CONSISTENT ACROSS MOSTDEMOGRAPHIC GROUPS.

HOME/EU STUDENTS HAVEFALLEN SLIGHTLY FASTER

AGAINST INTERNATIONAL FEEPAYING STUDENTS.

5

VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140




ELECTION COMPARISON

STUDENT ELECTIONS

SABBATICAL ELECTION

STUDENT ELECTIONS

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

TERM ONE

TERM TWO

TERM TWO

WEEK TWO / THREE

WEEK FIVE

WEEK EIGHT

WEEK THREE

WEEK SIX

WEEK NINE

WEEK TWO

WEEK SIX

WEEK TEN

6

36

14

24

42

11

4

41

10


VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140



6

STUDENT IDEASTOTAL IDEAS: 436

DUPLICATES: 27

UNLAWFUL: 6

IMPOSSIBLE: 3

PROBLEMATIC: 0

COMPLAINTS: 3

CHANGE AGENTS: 21

TOTAL 'LIVE' IDEAS: 390

TOTALVOTES: 23,854

TOTALVOTERS: 1,781

TURNOUT: 10.29%

326

>34VOTERS

>100VOTERS

41

PROPOSERS

227

13617237

AN AMAZINGYEAR FOR PARTICIPATIVE DEMOCRACY – WE DID BETTER THAN WECOULD HAVE PREDICTED ON ALL KEY METRICS FOR STUDENT IDEAS.

THE FINAL CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE AND THE SYSTEM IS NOW FULLYOPERATIONAL AS ORIGINALLY INTENDED,WITH CLEAR AND AUTOMATICGRADING AND PASSING.

7

VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140




STUDENT IDEAS: COMPARISONENTIRE SECTOR (EXCLUDING EXETER & PORTSMOUTH): 794

THE “ENTIRE SECTOR” IS THOSE UNIONS WHO DO NOT PUT AN IDEAS SYSTEMBEHIND A LOGIN, AND THUS REPORT TOTALS IN PUBLIC OR HAVE ALL ITEMS ONDISPLAY.

FOR MOST OF THOSE SYSTEMS, THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS IN ANYIDEA IS LOWER THAN OUR MEDIAN 2005-2014 ENGAGEMENT FIGURE OF 34; ANDMUCH LOWER THAN OUR MEAN AVERAGE OF 61

2005-14

308 MORE IDEAS

86 MOREVOTERS

2014-15

276 MORE IDEAS

136 MORE PROPOSERS

19 MOREVOTERS

SECTOR TOP 10 20151. EXETER: 4362. PORTSMOUTH: 2063. ANGLIA RUSKIN: 864. HUDDERSFIELD: 835. LEEDS BECKETT: 716. UCLAN: 707. NOTTINGHAM TRENT: 608. LIVERPOOL GUILD: 459. UEA: 4110. SALFORD: 35


VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140



8

STUDENT IDEAS: DEVELOPMENT

LARGE IDEAS – REPLACES STUDENTVOTES WITHIN THE IDEAS SYSTEM; BRINGING IN AQUALIFIED MAJORITY REQUIREMENT FOR 450-899 VOTERS AND A SIMPLE MAJORITY OF900+ VOTERS, USING THE SAME SCORING METHOD AS STUDENT IDEAS TO GET FIRSTCLASS PASSING GRADES AS DEMOCRATIC ‘MUST DO’ VOTES.

FAST IDEAS – IN ADDITION TO STUDENT IDEAS, BUT FASTER – TAKES LESS THAN 7DAYS FROM START TO FINISH AND MUST HAVE 25 MORE POSITIVE VOTES THANNEGATIVE IN ORDER TO PASS.

CHANGE AGENTS – SEPARATE FORM WHICH CAN ASK FOR AN IDEA FIRST(DEMOCRATIC EVIDENCE) AND ALL THIRD-CLASS PASSES WILL BE CHANGE AGENTPROJECTS. CHANGE AGENT PROJECTS WHICH ARE NON-ACADEMIC CAN ALSO BESTARTED WITHOUT DEMOCRATIC EVIDENCE.

SCORING AND PASSAGE – AFTER 18 MONTHS TESTING GRADING AND COUNCILBEHAVIOUR IN THE FIELD, THE SCORING SYSTEM HAS UNDERGONE THREE FINALTWEAKS (5 POINTS DEDUCTED FROM PASSING GRADES ON THE LOWEST VOTERS,AND MEAN AVERAGE SCORES) TO BETTER REFLECT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATHIRD CLASS AND LOWER SECOND CLASS PASSING SCORE.

THE SYSTEM IS NOW FULLY AUTOMATIC ON SCORING, AND COUNCIL MOVES TOSCRUTINY AND THE USE OF VETO POWER OVER PASSING IDEAS.

NEW

LARGE IDEAS

FAST IDEAS

CHANGE AGENTS

SCORING

9

VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140




GUILD COUNCIL: FINAL DEVELOPMENTROLES – APTITUDES, SKILLS AND PERFORMANCEEXECUTIVE ROLES – SABBATICAL OFFICERS AND DEPUTYVICE PRESIDENTS. GUILD CHAIRLEGISLATIVE ROLES – GUILD COUNCILLORS IN THE MINI COUNCILSJUDICIAL ROLES – SHADOW COUNCILLORS, ELECTIONS AND IDEAS OFFICERS WHENINTERPRETING RULES, GUILD PRESIDENT WHEN INTERPRETING LEGAL MATTERS OF THECONSTITUTION.

HOW MEETINGS ARE HELDCHAIRING AND PROCEDURESUPPORT FROM STAFFALWAYS OPEN MEETINGSRECORDING OF MEETINGS - GOPRO CAMERA; AS PER STUDENT IDEARECORDING OF VOTES/ATTENDANCE AND ACTIONS

FOCUS FOR EACH COUNCIL GROUPHOW DO YOU REPRESENT STUDENTS?HOW DO YOU SUPPORT STUDENTS?HOW DO YOU CAMPAIGN ON BEHALF OF STUDENTS?WHAT CARE, RESPITE OR SOCIAL DUTIES DO YOU HAVE?

WWW.EXETERGUILD.COM/CHANGE/THEYREPRESENTYOU/DUPLICATES THE MOST POPULAR FEATURES OF HANSARDS ONLINE (THEY WORK FORYOU.)

2014 REVIEW

UNCLEAR STRUCTURE

CONFUSING EXECUTIVE

NO OWNERSHIP

2015

WORKING GROUPS

SHADOW COUNCIL

2016

SEPARATION OF POWERS


VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140



10

OUTSTANDING CHANGES

TRAINING, HELP AND SUPPORT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED CONTINUOUSLY FROM THE2014 DEMOCRATIC REVIEW...

THE EASE-OF-USE AND UTILITY OF THE ELECTION SYSTEM HAS FALLEN INTOQUESTION AFTER 3 YEARS OF CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT ON THE PARTICIPATIVEDEMOCRACY SYSTEMS.THE IMPROVEMENTS WE HAVE MADE HAVE BEEN BASED ONBETTER TRAINING AND SUPPORT, ALONGSIDE CONSISTENT BRANDING ANDPUBLICITY.

WE NOW HAVE THE BEST STUDENT IDEAS SYSTEM IN THE SECTOR - WE OWE IT TOOUR MEMBERS TO DEVELOP THE BEST REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY TOO.THIRDPLACE IS NO LONGER GOOD ENOUGH.

AS STATED LAST YEAR, EVEN 60% DEMOCRATIC ENGAGEMENT IS NOT ENOUGH -EVERY SINGLE STUDENT AT EXETER HAS A VOICE, AND AT LEAST ONE THING THATTHEY WANT HEARD. OUR SYSTEMS MUST REFLECT ALL OUR STUDENTS, NOT JUSTSOME OF THEM.

2014 DEMOCRATIC REVIEW

HARD TO USE

HARD TO NAVIGATE

PROBLEMS

WITHDRAWALS

LACK OF MANIFESTO

11

VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140




WELCOME TEAM: STATISTICSWELCOME TEAM 2015…

23 SENIORS.

47 INTERNATIONAL

WELCOME TEAM MEMBERS.

150 STUDENTS ON THE

GUILD WELCOME TEAM.

197 STUDENT MEMBERS OF

WELCOME TEAM.

TOTAL HOURSVOLUNTEERED: 4,580AVERAGE HOURS/STUDENT: 30.5


VOTED

DID NOT VOTE

1,9861,054

POTENTIAL VOTERS


679279

CEMPS CLES EMS BS

3,7061,728

3,7132,057

3,7511,476

763470


556140



12

VERIFIED IMPACTSWE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING TOIMPROVE,AND NOW HAVE GAMEDESIGN COUNCIL TO GET DIRECTFUN ENGAGEMENT IDEAS DIRECTFROM ELECTED STUDENTS.

MOST KEY METRICS ARE UP, WE'RELOOKING TO MAKE FURTHERCHANGES TO INCREASEPARTICIPATION.

@EXETERVOTE

MORE FOLLOWERS

MORE INTERACTION

NEW: @EXETERSHADOW

COUNCIL'S OWN TWITTER

SLIDESHAREVIEWS UP

NEW:VIDEO TO COME

BETTER TRAINING

IMPROVED CANDIDATE TO

VOTER RATIO

annual report 2015-16

Education