# data[].attributes.body
Supervision: the Department is doing very well but supervisors could improve on helping students to identify training and development needs as a researcher.

Support: most PGRs feel they are supported in terms of academic skills, IT; however it is split for health and wellbeing.

# data[].attributes.body
Department could improve in the areas of giving students frequent opportunities to discuss their work with other researchers and better enabling the community to influence their work.

# data[].attributes.body
The institution could improve on responding to students’ feedback. Almost all PGRs in Chem Eng understand their and their supervisor’s responsibilities.

# data[].attributes.body
Most Chem Eng PGRs agree that they have appropriate access to resources.

However, there are some specific comments that:
- The PGR offices were difficult to access and too cold due to COVID restrictions.
- Some software was difficult to access remotely, e.g. Aspen Plus, especially when undergraduate teaching is taking place. Also some specific software, e.g. Origins, is not available to all PGRs.

- One comment mentioned that it would be nice to have Ion Chromatography.

# data[].attributes.body
Most Chem Eng PGRs agree that they were provided appropriate induction and understand requirements and deadlines for monitoring of progress.

A few PGRs commented that the confirmation report requirements could be made clearer.

# data[].attributes.body
Many feel they have opportunities to provide feedback and that the staff value students’ views and opinions about their programme; many neither agree nor disagree about how students’ feedback on the programme has been acted on and that students’ union effectively represents students’ academic interests

# data[].attributes.body
Research skills: most PGRs agree that their skills have developed during their programme, as well as understanding research integrity. However, the department could do better on helping them to be creative and innovative during their programme.

Professional development: mixed response but the Department could improve on helping PGRs to develop contacts or professional networks during their programme and manage their own professional development.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dear Chem Eng PGR students and supervisors

# data[].attributes.subject
Dear Chem Eng PGR students and supervisors

# data[].attributes.body
I hope that you are all well and are looking forward to the Christmas holiday and new year.

During the SSLC this December, the PGR students asked for the PRES 2021 results to be shared and the Doctoral College would like PGRs to be involved in drafting the action plan to address the feedback given in PRES 2021.

I set up this Padlet board (with feedback from Prof John Chew), so that we can discuss ideas and identify actions for students, supervisors and me (as your PGR DoS). On this board, you will find a summary of the PRES results for our department, prioritised as “Priority”, “Could improve” and “Maintain”. In each column are posts for “Actions for students”, “Actions for supervisors” and “Actions for PGR DoS”. Please add comments to these posts with your ideas or feedback. The raw data for PRES 2021 are also available below this post, in case you would like to see the results in full.

I know that we are all winding down for the holidays now, but I hope you will be able to spare a few minutes of your time to look at this board and share with us any ideas that you may have. This will help us to put together an action plan to improve the PGR student experience in our department. The Padlet board will be open until noon 4 January 2022.

Many thanks in advance for your inputs.

Happy Christmas and all the best for the new year!

# data[].attributes.headline
Ensure co-supervisors are fully engaged in PhD projects.

# data[].attributes.subject
Ensure co-supervisors are fully engaged in PhD projects.

# data[].attributes.body
Subject to change depending on additional feedback received on this board