How can psychology programmes improve teaching and learning?
Protect high-trust teaching behaviours and make assessment criteria unambiguous. Across the National Student Survey (NSS), the Teaching Staff category summarises student sentiment about staff interactions across the sector and shows a strong baseline: 78.3% Positive with a sentiment index of +52.8. Within psychology (non-specific), ≈23,488 comments indicate that students value people and resources (Teaching Staff at +35.2) but remain frustrated by assessment clarity (marking criteria at −45.0). These patterns set a practical agenda: keep staff behaviours visible and predictable, and standardise assessment briefs, exemplars and feed-forward so students know exactly how to succeed.
What is the impact of engaging teaching methods?
Interactive seminars and dynamic lectures increase engagement and deepen understanding of complex psychological concepts. Staff who sustain a lively, participatory environment see higher attendance and participation. Discussions and case studies connect theory to practice, moving learning from memorisation to application. Pairing these approaches with predictable “what to expect this week” updates helps students prepare and sustains the positive tone students already report around staff.
What challenges do psychology programmes face?
Large cohorts limit individual attention, while staff balance research with teaching and adapt to central digital tools. Students can feel disconnected when guidance becomes generic or inconsistent across modules. Psychology’s rapid knowledge growth adds workload for programme design and recalibration. Addressing these constraints requires visible ownership of organisation and timetabling, coherent module communication, and time for staff to prepare and engage with students, including those studying part-time or commuting.
Which assessment practices improve learning?
Make assessment clarity non-negotiable. Publish plain-English marking criteria with annotated exemplars that show progression from pass to distinction, and calibrate standards across modules. Use small, frequent formative tasks so students practise against the criteria and can act on feed-forward before summative points. Structured peer review builds critical judgement and distributes feedback, while staff moderation and sample marking maintain standards. Commit to predictable turnaround times and ensure every response includes what to do next.
How should programmes adopt flexible learning options?
A blended offer supports diverse cohorts and reflects working practices. Keep remote materials tidy, searchable and aligned with live teaching, then mirror support options with out-of-hours contact windows and short asynchronous Q&A summaries. Weekly brief updates that summarise changes and what is coming next reduce uncertainty and reinforce the programme rhythm.
What professional development do teaching staff need?
Target CPD at assessment literacy, inclusive pedagogy and online or hybrid design. Workshops that use real assessment briefs, exemplars and marking criteria help teams calibrate expectations and feedback. Student comments and outcomes should shape priorities for development each term, with quick pulse checks after key teaching moments.
How can we cultivate an inclusive and supportive environment?
Design for inclusion from the outset. Use varied teaching methods and accessible materials, build in opportunities for students to raise concerns, and signpost support consistently. Monitor differential experiences across cohorts and segments and check for consistency of interactions across teaching teams. Training in mental health awareness and culturally responsive teaching strengthens the learning community for both students and staff.
How should student feedback inform policy?
Treat comments as operational intelligence. Analyse patterns by module and cohort, act on what students can immediately use, and close the loop by telling students what changed and why. Simple service standards sustain trust: timely responses to queries, predictable office hours, and weekly “what to expect” updates. Keep a single source of truth for course communications and review outliers monthly.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
- Continuous visibility of Teaching Staff comments and sentiment over time, with drill-downs from provider to subject family and cohort.
- Like-for-like comparisons for psychology by CAH code and demographics (mode, campus, year), plus segmentation by programme.
- Rapid surfacing of assessment pain points (e.g., marking criteria) and evidence of improvement with before-and-after sentiment.
- Concise, anonymised summaries and export-ready tables for programme and quality boards to close the loop with students.
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 teaching staff:
- Theological education: student perspectives on teaching staff
- What do UK social work students say about teaching staff?
- Are medical technology students satisfied with their teaching staff?
- What are tourism, transport and travel students saying about teaching staff?