HALLS OF RESIDENCE

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMME

RESEARCH FINDINGS 12 May 2006

Whittaker House 2 Whittaker Avenue Richmond-upon-Thames Surrey TW9 IEH t: 020-8822 6870 m: 07843 010228

OBJECTIVES

Establish rationales for university choice Define role of halls of residence in university choice Assess importance of halls of residence Explore attitudes to current provision Investigate future requirements/expectations

METHOD

4 standard group discussions 1 x City undergraduates living in hall 1 x City overseas postgraduates living in hall 1 x students at other London universities living in hall 1 x parents of likely London university students

c o

RATIONALES FOR UNIVERSITY CHOICE

) .

i ( e . L o n d o n l o c a i t o n location (i.e. London) course reputation/only course available university/department reputation job prospects (esp. postgraduates) league tables (esp. Times) open days web-site/prospectus availability of halls of residence family/friend experience

NON-ESSENTIAL/IRRELEVANT FACTORS

chat rooms family tradition careers advisors individual reputation of academic (except postgraduates) recommendation by peer group

PARENTAL ROLE

no parents had own University experience (some had older children currently at or graduated) motivation derives from school/college not at home perceived benefits = general/personal NOT academic fears = debt environmental distractions/freedom loss of focus/failure inability to cope post-home London = safety issues and expense input tends to be negative veto, approval of final shortlist NB no halls, no go esp. London

“moving out of home is a big thing…the halls break them in”

ROLE OF HALLS IN CHOICE

not a primary factor in choice however, top of the list of secondary factors

“I’ve got my place, now where do I live?”

where considerable academic choice available, then can be a make-or-break decision-influencer

“I wouldn’t consider it, if there weren’t any halls” “you do feel you’ve got to have a chance of getting into halls”

particularly true for London particularly true for overseas/EU postgraduates

do not underestimate importance of halls availability

PERCEIVED BENEFITS OF HALLS

overall convenience/reduced anxiety (all-in package) insurance against isolation social interaction (and bonding through sharing) proximity to campus good value/less expensive than private sector develop sense of independence with safety-net physical security (relatively) peace of mind (parents)

“it’s a big step leaving home..to go self-catering with strangers is hard”

bed window desk sockets

BASIC REQUIREMENTS

mattress carpet heating lighting shelving curtains wardrobe drawers toilet chair lamp internet hot water waste-bin shower mirror pinboard tv connection sink

BASIC REQUIREMENTS

PARENTS smoke alarm cctv panic button peep-hole warden handbook mailbox

toaster

BASIC REQUIREMENTS

KITCHEN kettle microwave fridge-freezer oven & hob sink indiv cupboards fire alarm/ extinguisher table/chairs bin

OTHER ESSENTIALS

(PROMPTED) 24-hour security (friendly!) proximity to campus common parts cleaning appropriate licence periods common-room + satellite/cable flat size 6-8 beds maximum

mini-fridge

IDEAL ADD-ONS

double-bed larger room bath sitting-room/couch in kitchen balcony double-glazing (more) lifts room cleaning coffee-machine bar garden gym bike-sheds games-room parking pool music-room wide-screen TV TV licence

NON-ESSENTIAL/IRRELEVANT

en-suite kitchen - inhibits communing/odours bedding (except overseas) - use of own = lower-cost bedlinen (except overseas) - ownership/no sharing quiet room - but okay if study room lap-top - have own = lower cost

PRICE SENSITIVITY

CITY STUDENTS OTHER LONDON STUDENTS PARENTS

ALL

BASIC PACKAGE

£101 £91 £102

£100

IDEAL PACKAGE

£130 £116 £125

£125

no clear preference for all-in package over basic fee + options

ATTITUDES TO CURRENT CITY PROVISION

POSITIVES social interaction proximity to campus cleaners - presence & empathy central location transport links good value for location

ATTITUDES TO CURRENT CITY PROVISION

NEGATIVES harshness and complexity of visitor/overnight guest rules rudeness of security/hall staff noise (other students, fire alarms, workmen) lack of social/games/common room/study areas inability to control heating lack of control over windows

ATTITUDES TO CURRENT CITY PROVISION

SPECIFIC NEGATIVES poor decorative condition (Finsbury) no lamp (Alliance) no satellite/cable provision no individual mailbox en- suite shower units small and tacky cleaning inspections lack rigour room size (F Rowley) ill-fitting curtains permit daylight

OTHER SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS

guest rules

“they treat us like children” “the midday sign-out on a Saturday is far too early” “it’s ridiculous that you have to give two days notice for an overnight” “the 24-hr security is good but it’s too strict” “you can only get 2 or 3 guest passes a week” “the only time they do ID checks is at night, so you feel they’re monitoring your sex-life” “and they don’t tell you about the rules till you’ve signed up for the halls when you get the hand-book”

lack of common room/adequate common room

“you need a common space; you can eat, sleep, shower and study in your room, you need to get out” “Walter Sickert is all en-suite, it’s beautiful, but there’s no common room”

OTHER SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS

licence period (undergraduates)

“you only get a couple of days at the end of your exams and you have to go” “it feels like you’re being kicked out”

broadband access as optional extra

“it feels like they’re just trying to get money out of us” “we have to pay till August but we’re only here till May” “it’s not fair having to pay £50 charge if there’s a problem” “we have to accept the university anti-virus” “it’s often slow, there’s limited downloads and you can’t get Skype”

issues of space (F Rowley)

“with the en-suite, the rooms become tiny so it’s less value for money”

décor/lay-out of halls

“Finsbury is like a prison…except the first floor where it’s good” “the showers are all down one side, and nobody ever takes a bath ‘cos they’re so dirty”

ATTITUDES TO CITY UNIVERSITY

POSITIVES (Central) London location friendliness

“it’s more like a college, everyone knows each other”

access to entertainment/activity/shopping/excitement cosmopolitan access to home/transport links course reputation canteen food

ATTITUDES TO CITY UNIVERSITY

NEGATIVES

sense of disorganisation/poor communications poor student union/lack of activities, societies strictness of residential rules relative expense of London living condition of estate (cramped/tatty/poor temp. control) fragmentation of schools/lack of integration busy, hectic city with emotional frigidity

APPENDIX

GROUP PROFILES City undergraduates living in hall 18-24 2 x London, 4 x UK, 3 x overseas 5 x Finsbury, 2 x WSickert, 1 x Heyworth, 1 x Peartree City overseas postgraduates living in hall 5 x EU, 2 x overseas 5 x FRowley, 2 x Alliance 22-26 students at other London universities living in hall 5 x UK, 2 x EU 3 x King’s, 2 x SOAS, 2 x London South Bank 18-24 parents of likely London university students 45-55 Kenilworth/Warwick/Leamington Spa 4 x no experience, 3 x children already at/been to university