What does student feedback say about delivering teaching in business and management?
Students report broadly positive teaching delivery but with unevenness by cohort and subject. In the delivery of teaching theme of the National Student Survey (NSS), sentiment sits at +23.9 across 20,505 comments, with full‑time students generating 81.0% of feedback. Within business and management (non‑specific), which groups generalist business programmes across the sector, tone is more tempered at ≈52.6% Positive overall, and concerns often centre on assessment standards, with Marking criteria at −46.5. These signals shape the analysis below: prioritise parity by mode, scaffold practical application, and make criteria and exemplars explicit.
How should teaching quality adapt to business and management cohorts?
Teaching that integrates real‑world application and structured clarity lifts engagement and attainment. Programmes benefit from case teaching, simulations and live briefs, but the gains come when delivery reduces cognitive load: standardised slide structure and terminology, short worked examples, and formative checks to pace learning. Where business and management sentiment is more muted than in some health or language areas, borrowing proven techniques matters: light‑touch rubrics for structure, clarity, pacing and interaction; micro‑exemplars of high‑performing sessions for peer learning; and brief peer observations to spread effective habits. Given the category gap for part‑time and mature learners, chunk longer sessions, publish concise summaries after each class, and ensure assessment briefings are accessible asynchronously and easy to reference.
Where do business and management students say delivery falls short?
Assessment clarity dominates student narratives. Students ask what “good” looks like and want consistent application of criteria across modules. Group work also generates friction when roles, expectations and contribution tracking are opaque. Feedback timeliness and usefulness vary by module, undermining students’ ability to improve between assessments. These patterns call for annotated exemplars aligned to criteria, checklist‑style rubrics, clear turnaround standards, and calibrated marking across teams. For collaboration, standardise group formation, surface role clarity in the assessment brief, and make contribution tracking visible. Operationally, students notice parity issues between in‑person and online experiences; providers should guarantee high‑quality recordings, worked examples and timely release of materials in one dependable location.
How should technology support delivery rather than distract from it?
Technology adds value when it raises access, parity and interaction rather than novelty. Prioritise reliable capture of sessions, accessible slide decks and early release of resources to support commuting, part‑time and working students. Use learning platforms to scaffold step‑by‑step tasks and to host micro‑exemplars that students revisit before assessments. Keep remote sessions interactive through short polls, breakout problem‑solving and prompts that mirror in‑room activity. Use short digital pulse checks to gather student views on clarity, pacing and assessment readiness and then act on them within the same module.
What feedback loops actually lead to course improvement?
Run quick pulse checks after each block and track shifts by mode and age so programme teams can see where delivery lands differently for full‑time, part‑time and mature learners. Review results termly with staff, agree one or two actions that will move sentiment, and follow up with students on what changed. Text analytics helps convert large volumes of comments into concise, anonymised summaries that highlight where marking consistency, collaboration design or resource reliability need attention. Share 5–10 minute micro‑exemplars of strong sessions and use a simple delivery rubric to reinforce habits that students say work.
How do student–teacher interactions translate into better outcomes?
Availability and targeted support matter as much as charisma. Students value staff expertise, but they need predictable contact: scheduled drop‑ins, signposted office hours and quick routes to advice ahead of assessments. Personal tutor practice should be consistent and visible, with expectations for proactive check‑ins and signposting to careers and wellbeing. For large cohorts, rotate short small‑group consultations to ensure equitable access, and direct students to the single source of truth for updates so guidance is not fragmented across channels.
How do practical learning and industry input sharpen delivery?
Live projects and case‑based tasks anchor theory in practice, but they work best when assessment alignment is explicit. Before students start, map learning outcomes to the practical task and the marking criteria, and provide brief exemplars of strong submissions. Use industry mentors or guest contributors to validate relevance and to challenge decisions, then close each task with a short retrospective that makes links to next steps in the module. Where group work underpins practical learning, embed role descriptions, contribution logs and a short individual reflection to reduce friction and surface individual learning.
What should programme teams do next?
- Guarantee parity by mode: high‑quality recordings, accessible slides and timely release of materials in one place.
- Make assessment transparent: annotated exemplars, checklist rubrics, calibrated marking and communicated turnaround times.
- Strengthen collaboration design: standardised group formation, role clarity and contribution tracking.
- Reduce cognitive load in delivery: standard templates, worked examples, short formative checks and pacing breaks.
- Support mature and part‑time learners: quick refreshers linking to prior knowledge, concrete examples before abstraction, and explicit “what to do next” signposting after each session.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics turns open‑text feedback into clear actions for business and management delivery. It measures topics and sentiment over time, with drill‑downs from provider to school, department and programme. You can compare like‑for‑like across subject families and student demographics, segment by site or cohort, and spot where mode or age effects are driving the experience. The platform provides concise, anonymised summaries and export‑ready outputs for programme teams and academic boards, so improvements to assessment clarity, collaboration design, resource reliability and delivery parity happen quickly and visibly.
Book a Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and standards and NSS requirements.
More posts on delivery of teaching:
- What do business studies students say about teaching delivery?
- What do drama students say about teaching delivery in UK higher education?
- How do philosophy students want teaching delivered?
- What do students say about teaching delivery in aeronautical and aerospace engineering?