1

Contents
I. Introduction: The purpose of these consultations........................................... 3 i. Who are our members? ..................................................................................... 4 ii. Who took part?................................................................................................... 5 iii. Key findings from the report ............................................................................... 6 II. Section One: Quantitative findings from 'group' and 'street' consultations with LSE students................................................................................................ 7 i. Question 1: 'What, if any, involvement have you or do you have with the Students Union?................................................................................................ 7 ii. Summary of findings .......................................................................................... 7 iii. Group consultation findings ............................................................................... 8 iv. Street consultation findings ................................................................................ 9 v. Question 2: What's the purpose of the Students' Union? ................................ 10 vi. Summary of findings ........................................................................................ 10 vii. Group consultation findings ............................................................................. 11 viii. Street consultation findings .............................................................................. 12 ix. Question 3: "What should the Students' Union do More of?"........................... 12 x. Summary of findings ........................................................................................ 12 xi. Group consultation findings ............................................................................. 14 xii. Street consultation findings .............................................................................. 15 xiii. Question 4: "What should the Students' Union do Less of?............................. 16 xiv. Summary of findings ........................................................................................ 16 xv. Group consultation findings ............................................................................. 16 xvi. Street consultation findings .............................................................................. 17 xvii. Question 5: "What should the Students' Union campaign on? ........................ 17 xviii. Summary of findings ........................................................................................ 17 xix. Group consultation findings ............................................................................. 18 xx. Street consultation findings .............................................................................. 19 III. Section Two: Qualitative findings from group consultations with internal and external stakeholders ................................................................................ 20 i. Summary of findings ........................................................................................ 20 ii. Areas that would benefit from reform, enabling all LSE students to access the Union................................................................................................................ 21 IV. Appendix ............................................................................................................ 26

Introduction: The purpose of these consultations

We, like many other Students' Unions are reviewing our structures and their effectiveness in delivering what students want. As part of this review and reform, we continued the consultation begun in previous years to discover what our members need and how we can change to deliver this. The recent consultations aimed to consult LSE students face to face (some difficult to reach groups were given the added option of completing an online consultation, Living at Home and PhD students) but to also include other important stakeholders. The method used to consult was a series of generic questions with some targeted questions for specific stakeholder groups. From this a mix of qualitative and quantitative findings could be found. Limitations of the Data It is important to bear in mind that the findings of this report should be read with the following limitations: 1. The samples were all self selecting (within the groups). This could mean that the data is limited by the fact that people who opted to be part of the consultation share characteristics, experiences, or intentions. There were two controls on this; a) that we chose specific groups identified as under-represented, and b) that we incentivised attendance of some consultations. 2. There were some online consultations, running alongside the face to face consultations. Having different methods of collecting the data could have had a small affect on the data itself, however looking at the feedback any difference does not appear to be notable. 3. We asked the main five questions in two different formats which were face to face group consultations and street consultations. Again, having different methods of collecting data could have had an affect on the data itself, however looking at the feedback any difference does not appear to be notable.

Who are our members?

A remarkable fact about the LSE is a very high proportion of postgraduate students 55.9%.(The UK average is 21%)

Another striking fact about the LSE is the exceptionally high number of overseas students 67.8% in 2008/09 (The national average for this year was 15%)

In particular, the number of International Postgraduate Students at the LSE is uniquely high in relation to Home Postgraduate Students.

Who took part?

496 people engaged with these consultations. 116 students from specific groups took part in 9 face-to-face (plus 2 online) in-depth consultations (on average lasting 45mins). These groups included The Athletics Union (AU), Chinese Students, Disabled Students, Open UGM Students (students who attended a UGM), Open to All LSE Students, Halls Reps, Living at Home Students, PhD Students and Societies. 333* students from the wider student body took part in consultations on Houghton Street over 5 days. (*this figure is based on the answers given by students over a 5 day period, please note that some students may have taken part more than once). 47 other Students' Union stakeholders took part in 4 face-to-face in-depth consultations (on average lasting 45mins). These groups included Former LSE Sabbatical Officers and Alumni, National Union of Students (NUS) Staff and Officers, Other London Sabbatical Officers, LSE Students' Union Staff and University Staff.

Key findings from the report

Students (Section One) LSE students believe the purpose of the Students' Union should be 'Campaigns, Representation' and 'Community' (including activities). Students want their Union to do more in terms of 'Campaigns', 'Communication' and 'Diverse Events'. 1% of students interviewed in a street consultation said their involvement with the Union was through a campaign. Students want their Union to do less in terms of 'Global Politics' (e.g. issues that do not affect students as students at LSE). Students at LSE want 'local' (not global) campaigns on 'Quality of Teaching', 'Resource' issues and 'Tuition Fees'. Societies and representation play a key role in how students are currently involved with LSE Students' Union. Two of the largest student groups 'Athletics Union' and 'Societies' feel that the current representational structures do not meet their members needs. That their voice is not heard at the highest levels of student representation (The Executive). Several Groups (Section Two) Several groups consulted think that the Unions current structures are not enabling the wider student body to engage through representation. Evidence suggests that large groups of students feel powerless. Several groups want changes to be made to the UGM that will involve all students at LSE to access the UGM. The AU, Societies, Open UGM, NUS & Other UK Sabbs groups all thought the idea of a sabbatical role that represents 'Activities and or/Societies' was a good idea. Some Groups (Section Two) Open UGM students and Ex Sabbs & Alumni groups specifically spoke of the need to define sabbatical roles. By 'scrapping' some of the current ones and making ones which are more relevant to today's Students' Union and students at LSE. NUS & Other UK Sabbs group said that a "Trustee Board must have requisite skills whether or not there are all student or external trustees". Two student groups (Disabled & Living at Home) made a point of saying how they appreciated that the Students' Union was consulting students face to face. This highlights the importance of how (not just what) the Union communicates. The relationship between the Media Group and the Executive was raised by three groups consulted. The "animosity" between the Beaver and the Sabbaticals/Executive has a potentially damaging effect on not just how the Students' Union communicates but also on how it functions as an organisation.

Section One: Quantitative findings from 'group' and 'street' consultations with LSE students
This section asks five questions to students to determine quantitative data on how students are experiencing and perceiving the Students' Union. It also aims to find out what students want from their experience as students at LSE. Definitions of the consultations 'Group' consultations were with 9 specific groups of students at LSE (AU, Chinese, Disabled, Halls Reps, Living at Home, Open, Open UGM, PhD, Societies). 'Street' consultations were with random LSE students on Houghton Street.

Question 1: 'What, if any, involvement have you or do you have with the Students Union?
To find out how students are currently involved in the Students' Union their answers were divided into 12 areas; Representation, Societies, UGM, Commercial Services, Media Group, Elections, Sports, Services, Campaigns, Events, Student Staff, Communication.

Summary of findings
Societies and Representation From both consultations it is fair to say that 'societies' play a key role in how students are involved with LSE Students' Union. 'Representation' is equally as important in terms of how students are involved with the Union. All nine groups identified it as an area of involvement and when you take into account the two areas identified from the street consultation 'UGM' and 'Democracy Representation' you could say that combined they would figure as the second highest area. With regards to the street consultation it is important to understand why 'Crush' was the second highest area of involvement identified by students. The fact that the street stall was in close proximity to the bar (where Crush is held) and that several student staff (e.g. bar staff) took part in the this consultation one could argue that their answers were out of loyalty to Crush! Therefore weakening it's importance as an area of importance for the wider student body, as you will see later on in the report that students are asking for a wider diversity of events. Perhaps the most significant part of the findings from asking students this question is the lack of students answering that they are involved in their Union through campaigns. Just 1% of students from the street consultation gave campaigns as an answer and only 2 of the none groups said they were involved through campaigns.

Group consultation findings

High Involvement Areas Areas of the Students' Union with most involvement from the consulted student groups Representation; All 9 groups answered that they were involved in a form of student representation. Examples of this are; Leaders of Societies, as a Governor, C&S(committee & Steering), Former Sabbatical Officer, Halls Rep. Societies; 8 of the 9 groups (AU, Chinese, Disabled, Halls Reps, Living at Home, Open UGM, PHD, Societies) answered they were members of societies or had taken part in society related events. UGM (Union General Meeting); 7 of the 9 groups (AU, Disabled, Halls Reps, Open, Open UGM, PHD, Societies) said they had been to a UGM. Medium Involvement Areas Commercial Services - 5 of 9 groups (AU, Chinese, Open, PHD, Societies) said the most popular services were the bars (e.g. 3 Tuns), Shop & Copy Shop (now SU Print Shop). Media Group; 5 Groups (AU, Chinese, Open UGM, PHD, Societies) said they were involved with the Students' Union through student media as either members and/or consumers of things like The Beaver or Pulse Radio. Elections; 4 groups (Chinese, Halls Reps, Open, Societies) gave this answer. Sports; 4 groups (AU, Open, PHD, Societies) gave this answer. Low Involvement Areas Services (Advice); 3 of the groups answered advice (ACC). Campaigns; 2 groups (Chinese, Open) Events; 2 Groups (Chinese, Open) Student Staff; 2 Groups (AU, Disabled) Communication - 1 Group (Open)

The graph shows that the Open (these are random LSE students) group is engaging in the 8

most areas of the Students' Union. Followed closely by Societies, AU, Chinese and PHD student groups. The groups engaging with the least amount of Students' Union areas are Living at Home, followed by Disabled, Halls Reps and Open UGM (these are students who attended a UGM) Perceptions of Involvement and Contrasts with Face to Face and Online Consultations It is important to note that the PHD consultation was in two parts, a face to face and an online consultation. In the face to face consultation students said this about their involvement: "[we have] Zero [involvement with the Students' Union]. The department [Sociology] has never mentioned it to us or given us any information about it." The online consultation showed that PHD students were involved. The Living at Home students who also had 2 types of consultation had the opposite effect. The face to face consultation showed they were involved but the online version showed they were not involved.

Street consultation findings

25% said they were involved in a society 14% said they had gone to Crush 13% had been to a UGM 12% said they were student staff 10% were either a representative of students or had been democratically involved 6% answered they had never been involved 1% of students said they were involved through a campaign

Question 2: What's the purpose of the Students' Union?

The student groups asked this question gave answers that were categorised into the seven following areas; Campaigns and Representation,Community and Events, Activities, Societies and Sports, Advice and Welfare, Commercial Services, Communication, Resources and Space

Summary of findings
LSE students believe the Unions purpose should be Campaigns, Representation and Community (including activities). Students from all nine groups and the street consultations all agree that the purpose of the Students' Union is 'Campaigns, Representation' and 'Community' (including activities). It is important to say that 'Advice and Welfare (Student Support)' was also an important area identified through both consultations, although not as widely felt as the areas mentioned above. The areas least identified as being the Students' Unions purpose are important to recognise too. Chinese students thought that 'Resources and Space' were the Unions purpose. This may be a cultural perception, but it may also be that the students who made up the group were heavily involved in societies and felt that they should be provided with more space by the organisation that supports their activities. 'Commercial Services' and 'Communication' may have been least identified as they may be the product of success in the top three areas. If the organisation is successful in those then it will be communicating and providing services for its community.

10

Group consultation findings

Areas of purpose identified by most groups Campaigns and Representation: All 9 groups agree that this was it's purpose. "Represent students' interests towards the school...enabling progressive forms of "politics" to emerge, trying out new forms of campaigning" - PHD Community and Events: All 9 groups thought this was also it's purpose. "Create student community spirit and create a united union, one community" - Open UGM Activities, Societies and Sports: 8 of 9 groups (AU, Chinese, Disabled, Halls Reps, Open, Open UGM, PHD, Societies) thought this was also it's purpose. Advice and Welfare: 6 of 9 groups (Chinese, Disabled, Living at Home, Open, PHD, Societies) thought this was also it's purpose. Areas of purpose identified by least amount of groups Commercial Services: 4 groups (Chinese, Halls Reps, Open, PHD) thought this was it's purpose. Communication: 2 groups (Disabled, Societies) thought this was it's purpose. Resources and Space: 1 group (Chinese) thought this was it's purpose.

11

Street consultation findings

80% said it's purpose was Campaigns & Representation 28% thought Community (including events, entertainment, integration, societies) 10% thought to Support Students was it's purpose For representation one student said; "To make the student voice more important"

Question 3: "What should the Students' Union do More of?"

The student groups asked this question gave answers that were categorised into the following nine areas; Communication, Events (Diversity), Societies & Sports, UGM, Campaigns & Representation,
External Partnerships, Community & Integration, Engagement, Develop Skills

Summary of findings
More campaigns and more diverse events Contrasting Results - Campaigns and Communication On first glance the findings from this question appear contrasting, however when one looks closer you can attempt to answer why. The findings from the targeted group consultations show that these groups overwhelmingly want more from the Students' Union in 'communication'. This can be interpreted as wanting to be informed by an organisation that they as groups feel has value for them (e.g. campaigns), whether heavily involved (societies) or marginally so (PHD). 12

Campaigns were identified as the second highest answer from the street. Communicating the participation, progress and outcomes of campaigns is vital. One might say that there is a link between the two, which would show a link to the group consultations top answer of Communication, the AU group said "Updates on Campaigns - ability to sign up to specific campaigns". The Street Consultations brought about a different top answer, 'More Diverse Events'. With 'Communication' at 8%. This contrast might be best understood by the difference in these two types of consultation. Answering this question may depend on how you define yourself as a participant, if you fit in to a group category as opposed to being an individual student on the street. The Group values the needs of the wider group as opposed to the individuals needs. Marginalised Groups? Groups who answered the most in terms of wanting more may be marginalised in some way from the wider Students' Union (e.g. Open, Chinese, PHD). There may be a counter argument to this however in that groups answering the least might be insular groups, who thrive in their group but fail to integrate with the wider community. What Students Want The groups want more Communication and Diverse Events. Students from the street want more Diverse Events and Campaigns Current representational structures working for everyone? Could the Union be doing more in this area, specifically relationships between elected representatives and large student groups? This came from the AU consultation; "Accept the AU! - There's a feeling that the AU is unwanted in the SU and LSE in general, that its a hassle" - AU And this from the Societies consultation; "[The Students' Union should do more] Stronger links between SU Exec and related societies" It may be that these large student groups who are supported by the Students' Union operationally speaking, are not satisfactorily supported when it comes their representation at a higher level. That their voice is not being heard when it comes to campaigns and representation and the needs of their members.

13

Group consultation findings

Most groups want more... Communication: (8 groups - AU, Chinese, Disabled, Living at Home, Open, Open UGM, PHD, Societies) "Updates on Campaigns - ability to sign up to specific campaigns" - AU "SU Reps / Staff should come to soc meetings & say what the SU does" - Societies "One student said that all they saw from the SU was comms from the Beaver, they didn't know what the SU does." - AU "The SU needs to communicate the outcomes and results of its campaigns better." - PHD "Try having a stall on Houghton Street once a week with Sabbs and Helpdesk" - Open Events (Diversity): (5 groups - Chinese, Halls Reps, Living at Home, Open, PHD) "Bigger China Week events" - Chinese "Involve older students! There was an informal meeting at the George for older students (over 25) and that was really good!" - Living at Home "...parties for postgrad and PhD students." - PHD "Different and Better Social events - for a wider/ different crowd... MORE diverse nights out", "...students vote for Crush themes" - Open Societies & Sports: (5 groups - Chinese, Open, Open UGM, PHD, Societies) "Better union support for events" - Chinese "Open up the Beaver to more society adverts - Could be more society input into the paper in general" - Societies "Better links between societies (SU) & LSE, for events, business ideas." - Open UGM "forging stronger links between them [societies]" - Open UGM: (5 groups - Chinese, Disabled, Open, Open UGM, PHD) "Advertise whats happening at UGM, make it clear!" - Open UGM "Encourage elected people from societies and clubs to go to UGMs more often" - Disabled 14

"Formal induction to the UGM" - Chinese Least groups want more... Campaigns & Representation: (3 groups - Halls Reps, PHD, Societies) "The SU should do more of working to improve the conditions of all LSE students and stop pursuing petty political projects." - PHD External Partnerships: (3 groups - Chinese, Open, PHD) "Reaching out to other universities" - Chinese "Collective bargaining for transport discounts, etc." - PHD "Establish a counselling network" - Open Community & Integration: (2 groups - Chinese, Open) "Promote further integration on campus" - Chinese "[why not have] New Sabbatical Roles - [such as a] Community Sabb Role" - Open Engagement: (2 groups - Open, Societies) "more engagement with non-political students and the wider student body" - Open Develop Skills: (2 groups - Halls Reps, Open UGM) "Support career ambitions of students" - Open UGM

Street consultation findings

21% want more in terms of events. Such as more themed day and night events and events which reflect the diversity of students at LSE 13% want more in terms of Campaigns. On issues like cheaper halls, Tuition Fees and Resources for students at LSE. 10% want the Students' Union make life cheaper for them at LSE (food, events, drink etc) 10% want more support for societies. Mainly financial support. 8% want more communication from the SU

15

From the 100 students who answered this question 92% want more from their Students' Union

Question 4: "What should the Students' Union do Less of?

The student groups asked this question gave answers that were categorised into the following six main areas; Global Issues, Bureaucracy, Traditional Events, Exclusivity, Media Group, InFighting.

Summary of findings
Less global politics Both the group and street consultations came out with the top answer being 'less global (or politics) issues'. Students have expressed their frustration at being able to access the Unions democratic structures. From their experience they seem to have had opportunities to do this, but when they have they have been faced with highly politicised global issues that they have struggled to relate to or engage with. This has turned off students from things like the UGM or getting involved in campaigns. From what students are saying less to it would seem that they want more accessible ways of engaging with the Students' Union which reflect the diversity of students at LSE. Straightforward ways of accessing the democracy of not just the UGM but the wider Students' Union and ways of engaging with the community at LSE. By countering exclusivity, traditional events and bureaucracy in the Students' Union it will allow more students the chance to access their Union.

Group consultation findings

Most groups want less... Global Issues (Politics): (6 from 9 groups - AU, Chinese, Disabled, Open, Open UGM, PHD) 16

"less of a global focus (UGM) - more student issues please" - AU "Less time at UGM for non-relevant issues." - Open UGM "Non student issues - less global issues (e.g. Israel Palestine)" - Open "Less politics on the stuff the SU cannot influence" - Disabled Bureaucracy: (3 from 9 groups - Open, Open UGM, Societies) "Bureaucracy at UGM - Make it more accessible to more students" - Open "Slow reimbursements (be less restrictive)" - Societies Traditional Events: (3 from 9 groups - Living at Home, Open, PHD) "Drink related AU events - Disassociate the AU and Drinking" - Open "Fewer alcohol drink related events (e.g. CRUSH)" - Living at Home Least amount of groups want less... Exclusivity: (2 from 9 groups - AU, Open) "Exclusivity in the AU" - Open Media Group: (2 from 9 groups - Chinese, Open) "Beaver - its wasteful - far too much printed" - Open In-Fighting: (2 from 9 groups - Open, Open UGM) "Less in-fighting in the Students' Union" - Open

Street consultation findings

Of the 9 students who said they wanted their students' union to do less of something; 3 said they wanted less 'politics' and 2 said stop spamming us

Question 5: "What should the Students' Union campaign on?

The student groups asked this question gave answers that were categorised into the following ten areas; Teaching Quality, Resources, Tuition Fees, Cost of Living, Local (NOT Global), Resits, Space, Environment, Health, Liberation

Summary of findings
Local issues on teaching, resources and fees. Both consultations show that students at LSE would value campaigns on 'Quality of Teaching' (or 'Academic Issues') followed by campaigns on 'Resource' issues at LSE and 'Tuition Fees'. It's important to to note that a third of the groups consulted specifically stated they would like more 'local' campaigns as opposed to global issues, the latter have tendency to dominate UGMs in the more recent past.

17

Group consultation findings

Most groups want campaigns on:

Teaching Quality (6 groups - AU, Chinese, Living at Home, Open, PHD, Societies) "Vetting Teachers (quality) - poor english - better training - increase office hours" - Societies Resources (5 groups - AU, Chinese, Open, Open UGM, Societies) "Computers - more access and more machines" - Open Tuition Fees (4 groups - Halls Reps, Open, Open UGM, Societies) "lower fees needed, especially postgraduates and international students" - Open Cost of Living (3 groups - Living at Home, Open, Open UGM) "Cheaper student travel" & "Further Study Discounts - bigger discounts, incentives to stay at LSE" - Living at Home Local (NOT Global) (3 groups - Disabled, Living at Home, Societies) "Many postgrads believe the student union campaigns on issues [Israel-Palestine] that are more relevant/interesting to the undergraduate demographic" - PHD "Focus on students as students at LSE - less of global stuff (where SU cannot make a difference)" - Societies "Real world issues that affect students here" - Disabled Resits (3 groups - AU, Living at Home, Open) Space (3 groups - Living at Home, Open, PHD) "Multi-purpose Sports Hall" - AU "informal easy spaces, informal social spaces, have a coffee and read/ study" - Open

18

Least amount of the groups want campaigns: Environment (2 groups - Halls Reps, Open) Health (2 groups - Halls Reps, Open UGM) Liberation (2 groups - Disabled, Open) "Campaign to help those that are disadvantaged i.e. liberation" - Disabled

Street consultation findings

32% of students wanted campaigns on academic issues (such as Quality of Teaching, Contact Time, Re-sits) 24% wanted campaigns on resources, wanting things like; An improved Library, More Computers & improved IT, & more common space) 23% of students want reduced or no tuition fees. Both International fees and Home fees were seen as too high 11% of students wanted campaigns on reducing the cost of student living; Cheaper Printing, Food & Financial Support were the main issues. 11% of students wanted specific things in the Students' Union changed with campaigns on things like; A more representative student media and support for societies.

19

Section Two: Qualitative findings from group consultations with internal and external stakeholders
Section One showed how students want a Union which focuses on 'Campaigns, Representation and Community' and that they want easy ways in which all students at LSE can engage with these areas. It also showed that two of the largest groups actively engaged with the Union do not feel represented by the Union, Societies and the Athletics Union. This section concentrates on the answers to specific questions relative to the groups who took part in group face to face consultations. It gathers qualitative data into areas which the groups have highlighted as important. As well as student groups we included some relevant external groups to gather broad ranging views and opinions on LSE Students' Union. Definition of stakeholder groups; 'Internal': AU, Chinese, Disabled, Living at Home, Open UGM, PHD, Societies 'External' (to LSE students): NUS & Other London Sabbatical Officers, LSE Senior Staff Members, Former LSE Students' Union Officers & LSE Alumni, Students' Union Staff

Summary of findings Strengths of the Union

Several groups consulted spoke about the positive aspects of LSE Students' Union and it's important to recognise these. Here are the main areas that groups spoke about; Societies, AU, Representation and UGM
Halls Reps said that being a representative was "positive", one said "It's enabled me to make a difference". Living at Home students spoke about the positive aspects of the AU, one said "Rugby has been positive, socially speaking. Negative academically!". LSE Senior Staff think that there is "some value for money in areas" such as "societies (should make more of this area)", "AU" and "representation". But questioned whether things like "services / activities" added value. An international student from one of the Open groups spoke about how societies were a positive aspect of the Union. From being involved in societies how they have made "lots of friends". Living at Home students said "Being part of them is very positive - subject is interesting, meet new people, socialise, student discounts". NUS & Other UK Sabbs - thought that the UGM was one of the Unions strengths but could be improved (See UGM section below).

20

General barriers to student involvement in the Students' Union

A few points to consider that were raised through the consultations by students; "Academic - time pressures" and "Not being on Campus" were barriers that Living at Home students experienced. A PHD student said "I associate the SU with the "younger set". And another said "I am unsure what the role of the Student Union is with regard to assisting research students with funding opportunities".

Areas that would benefit from reform, enabling all LSE students to access the Union
Despite the strengths mentioned in areas like representation there is evidence that large groups of students feel powerless to engage the Union in this way. This report has shown how LSE students want a Union that focuses on representation, campaigns and community. The following section shows how several groups feel about the current structures highlighting a need for better representation that meets current needs. It not only gives strong criticisms but also gives ideas for reforming structures to enable all LSE students to engage with the Union.

Structures
"PhD students feel they have no power. PhD students are split off from their colleagues in other departments." "In my former university, Phd-ers had their own ""union"" to capture precisely these specific situations and provide political representation and support (for instance, when Uni bodies foresaw student representatives, there would in addition be an equal number of PhD representatives. This empowered not just the PhD-ers, but also gave increased weight to nonfaculty positions in those bodies). Something like that would be much appreciated!" - PHD students group. The NUS & Other UK Sabbs group expressed the need for a "more layered structure, with reporting up and down - assemblies, debate and action at different and appropriate levels". They also thought that LSE Students' Union "need[s] course/programme reps [to be] at the heart of the structure". "International students - pay loads, need representation and are likely to be angry, looking for an SU to represent them" and " Huge numbers of students in halls". In relation to the current forms of representation the Open UGM students group said this; "reduce power / decision making ability of the executive by introducing a balance of power political leaders (sabbs), Judicial (scrutiny), Admin oversight (no overlap between groups). They also had this idea "[why not] have more committees and chairs as opposed to single representatives? (e.g. instead of a woman's officer you have a womans group/ committee and chair)... Have groups [as an alternative to a part-time executive] (with leaders & groups/ committees), more accessible to part-time involvement and free to join. "Course Rep stuff!!!! There are NO systems and that should change... " "Force the whole of the schools committees to focus on and deal with student issues. Using University committees to create change even the ones that seem pointless e.g. Health and Safety - Ex Sabbs & Alumni The current structures are a democratic merry go round, caught in a vicious weekly cycle where we have little opportunity to think beyond the next UGM, or how we can actually get more students involved in actually delivering our objectives as an organisation. The purpose of our structures should be to encourage participation from the entire membership, providing opportunities for different types of students with completely different interests to shape our 21

campaigns, activities and direction. - Students' Union Staff

Representative roles
Students at the Open UGM group thought it was important look at "defining sabbatical roles making them relevant to [the] student body". They also said to "scrap treasurer and communications sabbaticals - Sabbs are too functional. The Ex Sabbs & Alumni group agreed that it would be of benefit to "scrap the Comms Sabb position pointless. It was a mistake". Another role they thought could be reformed was 'Education & Welfare Officer'. For this they said its ridiculous that the two main things the Union is supposed to do are crammed into one Sabb role!, "we cant do more of this until you split [Education and Welfare]". Two groups reminded us that Postgraduates make up a large amount of students at LSE and that they should be engaging with the Union. The Students' Union Staff group said the Union should "take into consideration the interests of the PG (Postgraduate) population (which is believed to be the biggest group) in designing activities/events. While the Ex Sabbs & Alumni group went further by saying that there should be "2 PG officers at least!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [but said] No to a PG sabb."

Activities/Sports and Societies - Sabbatical Officer

The question of having a sabbatical role to represent the interests of two of the largest groups involved in the Union was put to those groups. The AU and Societies groups thought that idea of having an 'Activities/Sports and Societies' sabbatical officer was a positive one. The AU said that "it would mean support for the AU over the long term" and Societies said "[it would] give a voice to societies". There was support for this idea from other groups too; the Open UGM students group thought it best to 'scrap' some of the more current 'functional' sabbatical roles and "introduce a Campaigns Sabb, [and/or] an Activities Sabb" NUS & Other UK Sabbs agreed that "Sabb roles should reflect the activity of students in societies/sports" Considering that the School has such a high level of International students it is important to consider how they are engaging with the Union currently and how we might encourage wider engagement, specifically in the area of representation. Chinese students, when asked how they felt about participating in elections, UGM, campaigns and activities answered " [it] depends on candidates" and "would consider sports [activities]". Looking at Chinese students experience at other UK universities take for example 'The Warwick Students Union report Internationalising the Student Experience (2008)', in it a Chinese student (Vice President of the Chinese Society) says "[Chinese students] bring a dour view of student politics. Theyve grown up without a democratic environment, so they are passive in the political sense. They are surprised by elections and [the] tell us what you think mentality. They see this and think, Well, I have nothing to say. They dont understand it, theyve never been encouraged to change things, and they dont bring a motivation to have an impact." This report shows that Chinese students as a group are involved through activities more so than other areas, so it may improve their experience and increase their involvement in the Students' Union by introducing a high level representative that speaks on behalf of students involved in activities.

22

Activities/Sports and Societies - The Athletics Union (AU)

Societies highlighted some areas of best practice that the AU could adopt. These were "Joint Society Night Outs", "Similar structures to the AU? - groupings e.g. Arts, Cultural", " Charity" and "Informal contact with executive committee of societies + SU". Some changes that the AU would like from reform were "Wednesday Afternoons Free for PostGrads", "Tuns & Crush discounts for AU members", "Faster reimbursement for expenditure", "Handover advice (for Presidents and Leaders, and or job roles/specs)" and "Support on the distribution of funds in LSE".

Activities/Sports and Societies - Societies

The AU highlighted some areas of best practice that societies could adopt. These were "Regular president meetings (Like the AU captains meetings)", "Election process - elect leaders at the end of the year for the next academic year" and "Weekly Event - AU Wednesday Nights good social event that other societies could copy". Societies spoke about want should be changed about rules and regulations (Societies, Media Group & RAG), they said "make the rules more transparent", "Ensure membership lists work", "Clearer, faster procedure for reclaiming money.

Activities
"I've come across very little PhD student activities. Doesn't matter a great deal because this is London and there's plenty else to do, but maybe interdisciplinary fora, or something, would be good." - PHD "I used to feel a need for more networking and social activities, but the new LSE PhD Steering Group has addressed this, and I think things are better now. I'm also looking forward to the opening of the new PhD social space." - PHD Events that offer networking and cosial opportunities. (e.g. CRUSH does not offer a chance to meet new people) - Living at Home

Trustees
The importance of reforming a trustee structure was raised by two groups. The NUS & Other UK Sabbs group said that a "Trustee Board must have requisite skills - whether or not there are all student or external trustees". While the Ex Sabbs & Alumni group spoke of the need for "External Trustees"

Relationship between the Media Group and the Executive

The relationship between the Media Group (specifically The Beaver) and the Sabbatical Officers / Executive was highlighted as an cause for concern by some groups. It is important to understand why this issue was raised, how the current relationship impacts on the Union and how reform can improve this relationship and ultimately students experience. Students at the Open UGM group wanted "less animosity between Beaver and the SU (Sabbs). "For the sake of the whole student body they [The Beaver] should recognise that they are a service to students and part of the students union and that when they diminish the Unions status, they damage the Unions ability to advocate on behalf of students which in turn damages students." The group also "objected to [a] cross campus elected Beaver Editor." - Ex Sabbs & Alumni group 23

Finally the School itself (represented by the LSE Senior Staff group) questioned the Beavers use of "effective methods" when "communicating with students" by raising the issue of "standards & controls".

UGM (Union General Meeting)

The Open UGM students group thought that the UGM is "unique [and] just needs to be fixed". Suggestions they came up with were having "direct democracy - online voting - record motions". They also questioned the need for a weekly UGM. NUS & Other UK Sabbs thought that the UGM was one of the Unions strengths but could be improved by having "fewer procedures ... the rules shouldn't be longer than a page". That UGMs "shouldn't be just formal motions, but proposals from the floor, reports and freer debate". "Votes not [always] necessary at UGM - debate and discussion is worthwhile ". They also raised the "possibility of theming UGMs by issues" as a good idea. Disabled students group raised the point of the "accessibility of [the] UGM: non-automatic doors; officers not at UGM to answer questions; deaf people cannot participate; paper throwing is scary". Chinese students said they were interested in "C+S [Committee & Steering: UGM]", "What the union is doing", "UGM Motions" and "Key events". However it is important to be mindful that interest does always equate to involvement. A recent poll of attendance from a UGM in November 2009 showed that 30.9% of students attending were International Students. The total amount of International students at LSE is 67.8%. One could say that the UGM is not engaging enough with International students. "We spend far too long worrying about the need to submit motions to the UGM and get people along, than we do delivering campaign actions or planned objectives."- Students' Union Staff Finally LSE Senior Staff said the Union should "represent students - All students (Not just to serve its own ends / one political view)" and that there is currently a "disconnect: regarding issues at UGM and the issues relating to student experience. Also with the governance of the Students' Union. It's purpose should have both connected."

Elections
Living at Home students say "elections seem a lot more competitive than they should be thus intimidating possible candidates for SU". Regarding elections the Disabled students group said that "[the] Quad should be more accessible; crowds were stressful; naming issues on ballot paper for trans students as changing LSE names is difficult; physically gruelling". Societies thought that the "Elections funding model can be offputting - [that] Better oversight [was required]". They questioned if it was "unfair for societies to endorse candidates - But, depends on what election it is - should candidates be allowed to ask for endorsement if they are not a member of that society?"

24

Campaigns
Living at Home students thought that campaigns were linked to "poor communications from the SU - e.g. if there were more online petitions and options to 'take action' then there might be more involvement. The PHD group wanted the Union to "lobby for PhDs, get more funding, provide networking opportunities, communal areas etc". But one student said this "I never got any indication from the SU that they would be open for campaigning on specific PhD students' issues." Students' Union Staff has this to say; "We need to get the right balance between smaller campaigns and longer term campaigning. LSE Senior Staff said it was important to "encourage feedback and other processes / complaints process (not necessarily automatic campaigning mode)".

Communication
Two student groups made a point of saying how they appreciated that the Students' Union was consulting students face to face. The Disabled students group said "more consultation forums, more often would be great". While the Living at Home students group said "they were happy that this consultation was taking place and valued that they were being listened too". PHD students had a different experience saying that "there was no handbook provided to students about the SU. They were given no information about the SU and what it does." "Communicate the problem solving bits of the Union to students more!" - Ex Sabbs & Alumni The LSE Senior Staff group said that the Union should work on "communication with the School regarding Students' Union priorities. Clarity of organisational view". They also though that "Student Representatives [could improve the] communicat[ion] to students regarding outcome of committee meetings". The Students' Union Staff group was critical saying "our communication with the membership is unbelievably poor. Its scattergun, infrequent and relies too much on luck".

25

Appendix
Sources
"LSE Students Union Who are our members? The facts", October 2009. Dr. Patricia Kaszynska - Policy & Research Coordinator, LSE Students' Union. "Internationalising students' unions in higher education", March 2009. NUS. Available to download from http://resource.nusonline.co.uk/media/resource/NUS_InterReport_1Page.pdf "UGM answers Nov09", LSE Students' Union. Available from the Activities Resource Centre, East Building, Houghton Street.

Consultations Timeline
Group Athletics Union Chinese Disabled Open UGM (open to students at UGM) Halls Reps Living at Home PhD Societies Ex-Sabbatical Officers & LSE Alumni NUS & Other UK Sabbatical Officers Students' Union Staff Senior University Staff Open Consultation 1 Open Consultation 2 Open Consultation 3 Open Consultation 4 Open Consultation 5 Street Consultation 1 Street Consultation 2 Street Consultation 3 Street Consultation 4 Street Consultation 5 Attendees 37 Students 5 Students 3 Students 3 Students 6 students 4 Students (+6 online) 4 Students (+13 online) 22 students 3 Ex-Sabbs 4 people 35 staff members 8 LSE Staff Members 1 student 4 students 1 student 3 students 1 student 90 students 56 students 75 students 100 students 12 students When Tues 3rd Nov Tues 3rd Nov Wed 28th Oct Thurs 12th Nov Wed 23rd Sep Mon 2nd Nov Tues 20th Oct Tues10th & 13th Nov Wed 28th Oct Fri 20th Nov Deadline 6th Nov 18th Nov 4.30pm Mon 16th Nov Tues 17th Nov Wed 18th Nov Thurs 19th Nov Fri 20th Nov Mon 16th Nov Tues 17th Nov Wed 18th Nov Thurs 19th Nov Mon 23rd Nov

Complete data set

For complete notes from all of the consultations visit www.changeyourunion.co.uk

Research and report by Ronan Haughton, Projects Coordinator, LSE Students' Union.

26