#RateMySabbs: End of year review

As the academic year draws to a close, Boar News have conducted their annual review of the Sabbatical Officers.

Firstly, a recent survey conducted by the Boar questioned students on their views towards this year’s Sabbatical Team.

The average ranking overall was 6/10 for the Sabbatical Team’s performance this year, however, the most frequently selected result was 1/10, with 17.7% believing they had not performed very well. On the other end of the spectrum, 9.2% ranked the team 10/10.

The question of whether the team represented student views and opinions this year was split: 39.7% believing “very” or “somewhat”, and 45.4% of selecting “not very” or “not at all”. A further 14.9% were unsure.

Another question asked respondents to name SU policies or campaigns. Some of the most frequently remembered ones included the campaign for a 24-hour library, Rate My Module and I Heart Consent.

The average ranking overall was 6/10 for how well the Sabbatical Team have performed this year.

Isaac Leigh was the most recognisable Sabbatical Officer this year, with 91.5% of respondents correctly naming him as President. The least correctly assigned officer was Olly Rice, with 75% labelling him as DDO. The answers for the rest of the team ranged between 79% and 87%.

The survey also asked about the SU’s impact on student experiences at Warwick this year. A total of 39% said they felt the SU had a positive impact on their experience; 25.5% said there was no impact; and 19.9% felt a negative impact.

The second part of the review comes in the form of analysing the success of the Sabbatical Team in terms of their manifesto aims.

To do this, pledges made by the officers at the start of the academic year were reviewed. For each officer, an overall percentage of success was calculated based on the completion status of their pledges, giving an approximation/indication of how successful each officer has been in completing their stated aims.

The sabbatical team still have until the end of July in office, and a proportion of each of their ongoing pledges are set to be completed by the end of this time. Another review will be conducted at the full end of each officer’s term in office.

These evaluations are solely based on whether or not each officer achieved their pledged aims, not a holistic view of their contribution to the SU, or their ability to overcome challenges.

The officers have also worked outside of their pledges, and may have contributed to other campaigns outside of their stated aims.

It is important to remember that these evaluations are solely based on whether or not each officer achieved their pledged aims, not a holistic view of their contribution to the SU, or their ability to overcome challenges, which would be wholly more difficult to gauge.

The review has also given the officers a chance to defend why they haven’t been able to fulfill certain pledges, by explaining to the student body the difficulties they encountered while trying to implement them.

You can see the results in the infographic below.

Image: Lily Pickard