- Information
- AI Chat
Studocu Global Student Satisfaction Report
Industry Reports
StuDocu Research
Preview text
Global
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
2022-23 Annual Report
Contents
But there are many differences from country to country. The Netherlands, Spain, and France had the lowest shares of promoters, while Ecuador, Mexico, and Colombia had the greatest shares.
On a regional level, students in North and South America are more promotional of their school as a whole compared with students in Europe, as the below map shows (Table 2). A comprehensive analysis of the survey’s individual metrics are in the following chapters.
Consensus and disagreement The Studocu survey shows that certain parts of university life are universally great while others are universally poor, meaning that no significant country or regional differences existed in the assessment. The chart below illustrates which aspects of university life are most uniform around the world, and which are most polarized (Table 3a and Table 3b). For example, students across nearly every country are in agreement that the dating scene at their school is poor. And students are also in agreement that their university’s location is very good.
But other metrics, including social clubs, sports culture, financial aid, and remote studying have country-level variation. With sports, for instance, the percentage of promoters ranges from the Netherlands (16%) to Ecuador (63%). See below spotlight for more detail on diversity and inclusion. Spog: Gery’s Sig Divt ad Ilu Sco One metric in the Studocu survey that hasn’t seen much global change over time is diversity and inclusion. Survey respondents who graduated in 2021 or earlier (collectively accounting for 20% of the total respondents) consistently rated diversity and inclusion at 8 out of 10. This is in line with 2022 alumni (also 8), 2023 graduates (8), and 2024-26 graduates (each 8). But Germany is one country where students’ perceptions of diversity and inclusion at their universities may be shifting. The older cohorts consistently ranked diversity in the mid-7’s—and lower than the global average. But students in the 2022-26 cohorts have bumped the score above 8 (including the 2025 graduates, with a score of 8). This increase now puts Germany’s diversity and inclusion score in line with the global average. While this does not prove that diversity and inclusion at Germany’s universities are actually in line with those in other nations, it can be suggested that German students now perceive these metrics at their schools much like students across the world. The Studocu survey results contribute to ongoing research of Germany’s shifting demographics, though diversity information isn’t easy to come by. Unlike some countries including the United States and the United Kingdom, the German government does not collect race information, so it is impossible to trace demographic shifts. (Other identities, such as gender identity and sexual orientation, are difficult to measure in most countries, Germany included.) Still, due to large immigration influxes, Germany is experiencing a demographic transformation. While this shift is hard to quantify among university students in particular, there have been some publicly stated initiatives to increase inclusivity at the postsecondary and higher levels of education. Though anecdotal, these public declarations and initiatives—in conjunction with the survey findings—support the idea that university settings in Germany are becoming more diverse and more inclusive. At the same time, however, university leaders tend to be men in their 50s, according to a recent analysis from the CHE Centre for Higher Education. Less than a quarter (23%) of higher education institutions in Germany were headed by women in 2020, the year of the study. The study did not include further demographic breakdowns, such as race or sexual orientation.
Spog: Led in Rem Len In March 2020, universities around the world were thrust into a new reality: In order to continue classes, students and faculty had to adapt to distance learning. For some universities, the pandemic was a jolt into the unknown, while others were able to build upon foundations that had already been established. In the U., for example, 84% of undergraduate students had transitioned some or all of their classes to online-only instruction in the spring of 2020, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. And though campuses have largely reopened since the height of that lockdown period, the trends are lasting—and many colleges worked through 2021 and 2022 to make their online learning platforms higher quality, more durable, and more inclusive. Studocu’s survey shows the lasting power of this virtual shift. Here’s a deeper look at a few countries with the highest remote learning scores among “pandemic students” (graduating between 2022 and 2026). United States With a possible 8 out of 10 among pandemic students, the U. has the highest remote learning score of any other country in the survey. The U. experienced a great leap: The number of undergraduate students taking at least one virtual course was 97% higher in 2020 than in fall of 2019, and the number of those students exclusively enrolled in virtual classes was up 186%. As in most countries, the digital shift wasn’t smooth for everyone; it created digital divides as some students lacked reliable internet or equipment once they could no longer access computer labs on campus. That prompted some colleges and university systems to launch widespread technology loan programs. Additionally, some colleges and education organizations partnered up to launch professional trainings to boost digital literacy among faculty. South Africa The country with the largest score gap between pandemic and pre-pandemic students was in South Africa (8. and 7, respectively). Many South African universities had not embraced virtual learning prior to the pandemic, so the newfound presence of a remote option may have shifted perceptions considerably. But several research studies and expert analyses have noted that the pivot to so-called Emergency Remote Teaching was uneven at best. In particular, already-existing disparities between richer and poorer students, and urban and rural students widened, risking further setbacks for students of lower socio-economic backgrounds. Mexico Mexico is not only highly rated among pandemic students (at 8 out of 10), but also among pre-pandemic students (who retrospectively scored it 8). This suggests that the country was poised to engage in remote learning ahead of the pandemic and that certain Mexican universities capitalized on a learning transformation that was already underway. For decades, the Mexican government and universities have pushed for ways to reach remote students, as evidenced by a 2016 summary of higher education initiatives. While pre-pandemic programs had mixed success—and socio-economic disparities were never holistically resolved—some institutions became exemplary case studies in their rapid transitions to digital learning. One of these schools was the Tecnológico de Monterrey, which had an advantage at the pandemic’s onset thanks in large part due to the school’s emphasis on remote learning in the years prior.
Dorms & Food
If there’s one thing that just about all university students agree upon, it’s that housing and food need improvement—but there are some cultural considerations behind the data. On-campus housing Campus housing is a low-rated metric. Globally, it’s scored just 6 out of 10, which is the worst average score of all the survey metrics with the exception of dating (5 average). While housing is a lowlight for students in all countries, those in Venezuela, Bolivia, and the Netherlands have the greatest percent of detractors—at least 70% in each country. Conversely, South Africa is an outlier, with about half of students being enthusiastic promoters of their housing situation (Table 3a and Table 3b). But on-campus housing is also not a given for all students. Many students commute to their class if it’s local to their home. And there are geographic differences, as well: while dorm life is a central part of the student experience at many American universities, it’s hardly an option at many European institutions because it’s more common for students to commute from their home or seek housing accommodations off campus. Food frenzy When it comes to food, 40% of students are detractors, scoring their food options between 0 and 6 out of 10. The global average food score is 6—the third lowest of all the metrics after dating and housing. While students hate their food choices nearly universally, Venezuela carries the greatest share of detractors (67%) while Belgium has the smallest share of detractors (27%).
Cost
Despite the vigorous debate about whether expensive U. colleges are worth their steep tuition, survey data indicate that students attending less expensive colleges do not believe they are having an inferior experience. College cost and student satisfaction In the U., there is very little difference in any metric when comparing the cost of schools. What’s most telling is that the average score for the “quality of courses” is nearly identical (8 for higher cost schools vs. 8. for lower cost schools). While not an exact proxy for cost, a comparison of U. community colleges versus Ivy League schools sheds some light on students’ perceived value. And like the cost analysis, most metrics are neck and neck (Table 4).
Per the below chart, community colleges in the U. have stronger remote programs (8. average) than Ivy League colleges (6 average). But Ivies have an edge on housing (7 vs. 5) and social clubs (7 vs. 6).
Appendix
Table 1: Survey Responses by Country
Table 2: Overall Satisfaction Score by Country
- Summary and Overall Satisfaction Scores
- The Highs and Lows of Campus Life
- Remote Study Opportunities
- On-Campus Housing and Food
- Quality Perception vs. Cost
- Academic Reputation and Job Opportunities
- Appendix Tables and Methodology
- Italy 9, Country Responses
- Spain 6,
- South Africa 5,
- Germany 4,
- USA 4,
- Netherlands 3,
- Canada 3,
- Peru 3,
- Mexico 3,
- United Kingdom 2,
- Belgium 2,
- Colombia 2,
- France 2,
- Argentina 2,
- Sweden 1,
- Australia 1,
- Brazil 1,
- Norway 1,
- Portugal 1,
- Austria 1,
- Ecuador 1,
- Chile
- Venezuela
- Bolivia
- Dominican Republic
- New Zealand
- Denmark
- Guatemala
- Total 72,
- Argentina 8. Country Overall score
- Australia 8.
- Austria 8.
- Belgium 8.
- Bolivia 7.
- Brazil 8.
- Canada 8.
- Chile 8.
- Colombia 8.
- Denmark 8.
- Dominican Republic 8.
- Ecuador 8.
- France 7.
- Germany 7.
- Guatemala 8.
- Italy 7.
- Mexico 8.
- Netherlands 7.
- New Zealand 8.
- Norway 7.
- Peru 8.
- Portugal 7.
- South Africa 8.
- Spain 7.
- Sweden 8.
- United Kingdom 8.
- USA 8.
- Venezuela 8.
Table 3b: Detractors by Country and Metric On Campus Housing Academic Reputation & Job Opportun- ities Access- ibility for disabled students Dating Scene Diversity & Inclusivity Facilities & common areas Financial Aid Food Location Overall score Quality of courses Quality of life Safety Social Clubs Sports Culture Studying remotely Argentina 60% 17% 23% 68% 17% 25% 40% 40% 16% 12% 17% 20% 23% 35% 33% 30% Australia 39% 20% 25% 57% 16% 24% 34% 40% 16% 16% 20% 21% 17% 29% 35% 19% Austria 63% 32% 21% 70% 15% 32% 47% 43% 8% 15% 27% 20% 12% 45% 44% 50% Belgium 40% 20% 29% 58% 15% 19% 24% 27% 11% 11% 17% 17% 15% 25% 45% 29% Bolivia 70% 27% 41% 69% 29% 42% 45% 56% 21% 23% 31% 37% 34% 45% 37% 40% Brazil 53% 15% 24% 52% 16% 29% 34% 33% 15% 10% 11% 20% 25% 37% 35% 29% Canada 37% 19% 20% 50% 14% 20% 30% 38% 13% 13% 19% 20% 15% 25% 27% 25% Chile 63% 17% 29% 58% 21% 27% 36% 39% 22% 15% 17% 21% 25% 34% 32% 27% Colombia 49% 17% 20% 47% 14% 20% 23% 35% 14% 10% 13% 17% 18% 25% 19% 26% Denmark 64% 24% 34% 57% 20% 19% 64% 43% 19% 17% 25% 30% 17% 34% 57% 51% Dominican Rep. 62% 24% 28% 63% 21% 27% 38% 50% 11% 15% 18% 26% 23% 34% 25% 25% Ecuador 44% 17% 13% 48% 13% 16% 25% 27% 10% 8% 13% 15% 13% 22% 15% 20% France 50% 30% 26% 55% 22% 26% 35% 42% 14% 20% 24% 27% 24% 31% 39% 38% Germany 62% 34% 34% 74% 19% 39% 56% 41% 18% 19% 26% 29% 24% 49% 47% 42% Guatemala 64% 19% 28% 62% 18% 26% 43% 48% 19% 12% 15% 22% 25% 45% 42% 24% Italy 48% 31% 25% 48% 16% 34% 36% 44% 18% 18% 19% 25% 26% 37% 47% 29% Mexico 54% 12% 16% 51% 11% 20% 26% 35% 12% 9% 11% 14% 16% 23% 19% 19% Netherlands 70% 26% 27% 66% 19% 19% 54% 32% 13% 17% 22% 19% 17% 30% 52% 32% New Zealand 27% 16% 21% 49% 15% 20% 37% 42% 10% 9% 13% 19% 16% 19% 30% 17% Norway 56% 30% 34% 68% 25% 20% 52% 37% 14% 21% 29% 30% 16% 27% 40% 49% Peru 55% 21% 26% 59% 22% 27% 36% 40% 20% 17% 21% 23% 22% 32% 27% 30% Portugal 59% 23% 33% 57% 21% 29% 47% 34% 16% 18% 21% 27% 20% 29% 37% 39% South Africa 29% 18% 16% 53% 12% 20% 30% 40% 10% 13% 11% 20% 16% 27% 19% 17% Spain 55% 28% 27% 62% 21% 29% 42% 42% 22% 23% 30% 27% 22% 41% 41% 44% Sweden 49% 19% 27% 60% 18% 24% 55% 42% 12% 14% 22% 23% 19% 27% 54% 41% United Kingdom 33% 22% 23% 49% 16% 24% 35% 40% 15% 15% 19% 21% 19% 25% 28% 25% USA 47% 17% 27% 57% 16% 36% 21% 47% 25% 12% 14% 18% 27% 41% 44% 17% Venezuela 79% 17% 35% 73% 17% 46% 55% 67% 18% 17% 16% 40% 43% 49% 40% 48%
Table 4: Student Satisfaction Scores by School Cost and Type Community College Ivy League Above $15, Below $15, Academic Reputation & Job Opportunities 7 7 8 8. Dating Scene 5 5 6 6. Diversity & Inclusivity 8 8 8 8. Facilities & Common Areas 7 7 7 7. Financial Aid 8 8 7 8. Food 6 6 6 7. Location 8 6 8 8. On-Campus Housing 5 7 7 6. Quality of Courses 8 8 8 8. Quality of Life 8 8 8 8. Safety 8 7 8 8. Social Clubs 6 7 7 7. Sports Culture 6 6 7 7. Studying Remotely 8 6 7 8. METHODOLOGY AND NOTES The Studocu survey polled current and former users of the Studocu web platform about how satisfied they were with their university experience on a scale of 0-10 across 15 different metrics. (See descriptions on page 20.) Between Aug. 31 and Nov. 18, 2022, students with a Studocu account could opt to participate in a web questionnaire about the university they’re registered with on Studocu. Studocu collected 75,585 responses from 2,001 institutions. After cleaning and organizing the data, universities that had fewer than 10 responses were excluded. This ensured a minimum number of responses per school for Studocu’s World University Ranking. The final data set used in that ranking and in this analysis consists of 1,308 universities rated by 72,369 Studocu users. The survey did not collect personal information about the student with the exception of university name and graduation year. In total, 64% of the responses came from current students (graduating 2023-26) and 36% from former students (who graduated in 2022 or earlier). In cases where this analysis broke out the student responses by country, graduation year, or another characteristic, certain thresholds had to be met for inclusion. For example, in considering how remote learning changed from pre-pandemic students (pre-2022 graduates) to pandemic students (2022- graduates), there had to be a minimum of 300 responses in each of those student groups; any countries under that threshold were eliminated. Data collection and aggregation by Studocu staff. Data analytics by Emily Barone and Studocu staff. Research and writing by Emily Barone. Cover photo: iStock by Getty Images
Studocu Global Student Satisfaction Report
Course: Industry Reports
University: StuDocu Research
- Discover more from:Industry ReportsStuDocu Research6 Documents
- More from:Industry ReportsStuDocu Research6 Documents
