Advance HE's inclusive assessment tool shows how student feedback can sharpen assessment design
Updated Jun 10, 2026
assessment methodsfeedbackAssessment comments are most useful when they change design, not just reporting. On 2 June 2026, Advance HE published From overload to action: a dialogic tool for inclusive assessment, in which University of Portsmouth staff explain how student feedback on unclear expectations, cultural exclusion, and undermining feedback practices helped shape a new inclusive assessment tool. For institutions collecting student voice on assessment, this is a practical example of turning recurring concerns into something course teams can use in module review, validation, and curriculum redesign.
What has changed in Advance HE's inclusive assessment tool
This is not a regulatory change. It is a sector-facing Advance HE practice article built around current work at the University of Portsmouth and shared for wider UK higher education use. The authors say the work grew out of staff development on inclusive assessment and a wider problem of overload: there was plenty of guidance, but not enough that felt practical for time-pressured staff.
"student feedback ... described unclear assessment expectations, feelings of cultural exclusion, and feedback practices that unintentionally undermined confidence."
That insight became the rationale for a co-created inclusive assessment tool. Advance HE says the tool organises discussion into five domains: overall design, guidance materials, student preparation, marking and feedback, and evaluation and review. The aim is not a compliance checklist, but a prompt that can be used quickly and still support deeper conversations when teams have more time.
The article also explains how the tool was iterated. Portsmouth involved senior academic managers, academics, and academic support colleagues through CPD workshops and focus groups. Advance HE says the tool is now encouraged across module review, validation, curriculum redesign, and staff development, with further work planned on accessibility, wording, format, and more student voice. The practical takeaway is that the development is already live in institutional processes rather than sitting as a one-off conference idea.
What this means for institutions
First, institutions should treat assessment comments as design evidence, not only as satisfaction data. Complaints that an assessment was "unclear" can point to different failures: the task format, briefing materials, preparation, marking expectations, or the way feedback lands. The five-domain structure is useful because it gives teams a more disciplined way to read assessment concerns than a single generic theme. That fits the broader direction in QAA's assessment and feedback roadshow outcomes, where clarity, partnership, and feedback usefulness are all treated as design questions.
Second, staff engagement is part of the student feedback problem. The article is clear that non-attendance at CPD should not be read as indifference. If universities want more inclusive assessment practice, they need routes that fit real workloads and planning cycles. For Student Experience teams and PVCs, the practical takeaway is to place assessment-feedback evidence inside routine academic processes, not in a separate enhancement silo. Portsmouth's earlier assessment regulation changes shaped by student feedback show the same pattern: institutions act faster when assessment concerns already have a route into operational change.
Third, the story raises the bar for visible follow-through. One of the tool's reflective prompts asks whether students were involved in assessment design. That matters because student feedback on assessment is strongest when students can see how their evidence informed the redesign, not just that a survey was run. Institutions planning changes for 2026/27 should therefore decide in advance who reviews assessment comments, how they will separate different issue types, and how students will be told what changed.
How student feedback analysis connects
This is where open-text analysis matters. A single student comment can combine unclear briefs, weak preparation, confusing criteria, unsupportive feedback, and broader feelings about fairness or belonging. If those comments are collapsed into one headline theme, course teams can end up fixing the wrong thing or treating a design problem as a communications problem.
A structured approach such as our NSS open-text analysis methodology helps teams compare these themes across module evaluations, annual surveys, and postgraduate feedback without losing the specifics that matter for redesign. Where institutions need to do that at scale, Student Voice Analytics can help organise the evidence. The key point is simpler than the tooling: assessment redesign is easier to defend when comment themes are consistent enough to show exactly what students were struggling with.
FAQ
Q: What should institutions do now if they want to use student feedback to improve assessment design?
A: Start with the last full cycle of module evaluation, programme survey, and representative evidence on assessment. Separate comments into a small number of design questions, such as task format, guidance, preparation, marking, and feedback, then test those patterns in one review or validation cycle before widening the approach.
Q: What is the timeline and scope of Advance HE's inclusive assessment tool?
A: Advance HE published the article on 2 June 2026. The tool is presented through current work at the University of Portsmouth and is already being used across module review, validation, curriculum redesign, and staff development. It is relevant across UK higher education, but it is not a mandatory national change and has no formal sector implementation date.
Q: What is the broader implication for student voice?
A: The broader implication is that student voice on assessment becomes more useful when it informs design early, rather than only recording dissatisfaction afterwards. Universities that can move comments into redesign decisions, ownership, and visible follow-up will get more value from the feedback they already collect.
References
[Advance HE]: "From overload to action: a dialogic tool for inclusive assessment" Published: 2026-06-02
Request a walkthrough
Book a free Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and reporting designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.
- All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
- Versioned outputs with TEF-ready reporting.
- Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.
UK-hosted · No public LLM APIs · Same-day turnaround