The Study Barometer: Improvements in almost every area

Students are generally more satisfied with student life at NMH compared to the previous survey. Overall satisfaction has improved by an average of 0.2 points since 2024, reaching 4.4. The national average is 4.0. The scale ranges from 1 to 5.

NMH scores significantly above the national average in all areas (ranging from 0.3 to 0.9 points), except for physical learning environment and infrastructure, as well as organisation. In these areas, NMH is on par with the national average at 3.9 and 3.7, respectively.

The COVID-19 period represented a low point for students across the country, but both academic and social levels have steadily improved from 2020 to the present day.

Scores for questions about motivation and personal effort also fell during the COVID-19 period, from 2020 to 2021, but have gradually increased since then. However, this year’s survey reveals a decline in motivation for individual study efforts, down 0.3 points from last year.

Students also report a slight decrease in engagement, with the score dropping from 4.1 to 4.0. Additionally, students are participating slightly less in organised learning activities than they did the previous year.

Bachelor students are more satisfied than master’s students in all areas, except for teaching, where both groups score equally (4.4). In terms of overall satisfaction, however, both groups score well above the national average, with 4.7 for bachelor students and 4.2 for master’s students.

Master’s students are less satisfied with administrative support, scoring 0.6 below the national average.

Master’s students also spend twice as much time on paid work compared to bachelor students, and two hours more per week than the national average.

Students at NMH are highly satisfied with the teaching quality and with how lecturers make lessons engaging. The environment – both among students and between students and lecturers – also receives high scores.

• The academic staff make the teaching engaging (4.5, 0.8 above the national average)
• The teaching encourages active student participation (4.5, 0.9 above the national average)
• Good relationships between students and academic staff in the programme (4.5)

In last year’s survey, students were less satisfied with feedback and guidance. This year, however, there has been a significant improvement. Students gave a score of 4.4 for the statement: “Academic staff are able to provide constructive feedback on work.” This is 0.9 above the national average and 0.6 better than last year.

Collaboration with Working Life

Students are more satisfied with the information they receive about relevant careers and industries. The score for this has increased by 0.5 compared to last year.

Students at NMH had opportunities to work on projects/assignments in collaboration with working life, earning a score of 3.6. At the same time, they scored 0.9 points above the national average when asked if representatives from working life contribute to teaching.

This may seem paradoxical, with both low and high scores on two different questions about contact with working life. One explanation could be that there are fewer written assignments, particularly in performance studies, but students have considerable contact with the professional environment in their lessons through academic staff or guest lecturers who also work actively as musicians externally.

The areas where NMH students are least satisfied are the information about study programmes and the administrative support for study programmes (timetables, study plans, etc.).

Nevertheless, the quality of information about study programmes scores slightly above the national average, and there has been a small improvement since last year.

“There is hope that the development project on service design and further development of service functions will improve the experience of both study information and administrative support in the long term,” says Camilla Sønstabø Thorkildsen, Head of Education and R&D at the Norwegian Academy of Music.

• The quality of information about study programmes (3.7, 0.1 above the national average and 0.2 better than last year)
• The administrative planning of study programmes (3.4, 0.2 below the national average, but 0.2 points better than in 2024)