Page 17 - UNAM Annual Report 2017

financial management and quality of academic About 37% of students and 48% of staff were not
support services, expanded academic and satisfied with the provision of ICT services by the
administrative facilities, as well as the improved University. Variables tested were effectiveness
provision and utilisation of ICT. of bandwidth, provision of student laptops, Wi-Fi
services and the provision of online registration
Overall, stakeholder satisfaction was very high, services. Based on this finding, it is fair to assume
at 78%, against the expected target of 61%. that UNAM should allocate more funds to
Customer satisfaction, in turn, had five different improve ICT facilities at all campuses.
measures. On average, there was 62% student
and staff satisfaction, and student progression Service Delivery Excellence
rates. UNAM recorded less than adequate Service delivery was measured largely on the
under and postgraduate completion rates, basis of staff and student welfare, capacity
with performance of 31% and 21% respectively. building for staff, and work culture. Other
The institutional performance on improved variables included research and innovation
commercialisation of University assets, facilities outputs, programme development, the quality
and research outputs was measured in terms of teaching and learning, and improvements
of the percentage of income derived from made to the open and distance learning
second and third-stream income sources. Low mode.
performance targets of 31% and 2% were set
for these income streams, respectively. Income Considering that staff and students recorded
from the second stream, which includes tuition, satisfaction rates of 45% and 55%, respectively, for
hostel and rental fees, amounted to only 33%, general welfare across campuses, greater effort
while the percentage of total income derived needs to be expended on improvements in the
from third-stream income amounted to only 9%.
coming years. About 72% of staff who benefitted
from the University’s staff development
The University’s growth in terms of its student programme competed their studies during 2007.
population is not commensurate with the UNAM staff were generally very satisfied with the
physical expansion of its physical facilities. work culture of the institution.
UNAM had anticipated building 31 new facilities
in 2017, and did not achieve this goal; most
projects are ongoing and others did not receive The majority of students, 65%, were satisfied
funding. Only 12 of the 17 facilities planned were with improvements in the quality of teaching
upgraded during the review period. UNAM also and learning across the entire university system.
recorded an unfavourable budget variance of Teaching and learning were rated in terms of
11% due to the untimely disbursement of the course pass and success rates, and completion
government subsidy during the period under rates for both under and postgraduate
review. programmes. Lecturers also received good
evaluation ratings. Students studying through
the open and distance mode, however, gave
Certain factors, such as shortage of resources for
research and innovation, and for maintaining average customer satisfaction ratings for the
teaching facilities, as well as perceived low course, and for success rates.
intake of the winter and summer schools,
lead to the quality of academic support Research and Innovation Excellence
services receiving an overall low score from A total of 300 research outputs were
both staff and students. One area that had a published in refereed journals, against the
satisfactory performance score is moderation expected target of 273. The University also
of examination and tests, with 67%, whilst the commercialised six innovative research
other areas were all scored under 64%, as outputs against a zero target for the review
shown in Appendices 2 and 4. period.

1414