How can economics programmes improve communication between students and staff?
Establish one authoritative channel for course information, align communications to assessment, and publish a predictable weekly digest: these changes lift the quality and reliability of staff–student communication in economics. In the National Student Survey (NSS) open-text analysis for communication about course and teaching, the sentiment index sits at −30.0, with full-time cohorts more negative (−32.0) than part-time (−18.0). Within economics as defined for sector comparison in the Common Aggregation Hierarchy, students report a similarly negative tone for course communications (−28.0), so departments prioritise clarity, timing and a single source of truth.
Effective communication is immensely important in higher education, particularly within economics courses where the complexity of concepts demands precise staff–student interaction. Economics students must grasp intricate theories and apply them to real situations, which stretches beyond lecture delivery. Initial communications about module content, learning objectives and teaching approaches should prepare students for the programme and invite dialogue. Student surveys and text analysis surface where communication works and where it confuses; using student voice to refine practice supports academic success and a responsive learning environment.
What communication practices are used now?
Lectures, seminars and digital platforms structure economics teaching in UK universities, with blended learning now routine. Seminars offer discursive space to work with theory; digital channels extend dialogue beyond timetabled sessions. The issue is less the toolset and more predictability and coherence: one authoritative VLE area with time‑stamped updates, a brief “what changed/why/when it takes effect” note, and realistic response times. This approach supports varied learning styles while reducing noise from parallel channels.
What is the communication impact of remote versus classroom teaching?
Face‑to‑face teaching supports immediate feedback and a sense of cohort, but remote elements can widen access and time for reflection. Communication quality hinges on how well each mode enables interaction and timely clarification. Synchronous sessions sustain immediacy; asynchronous discussion boards and short, structured announcements enable thoughtful responses and reduce pressure points around assessments. Departments benefit when every remote or in‑person session shows how content connects to the assessment brief and when to seek help.
How does communication shape performance and engagement?
Students engage more when they understand expectations and how learning activities link to assessed outcomes. In economics, sentiment around marking criteria is strongly negative (−48.1), signalling a need for explicit, checklist‑style rubrics, calibrated exemplars and clear moderation notes. Mapping teaching activities to learning outcomes and assessment, closing each session with “what to do next”, and making turnaround times visible increases trust in the process and improves participation in seminars and problem‑solving tasks.
How does communication affect mental health and wellbeing?
Predictable, empathetic communication reduces anxiety and supports students facing uncertainty. Clear information on workload, timetabling, assessment timelines and support routes helps students plan and ask for help earlier. Training staff in mental health awareness and practical communication skills, and using routine check‑ins around assessment points, promotes an environment where students feel able to disclose challenges and access support without stigma.
How should staff use feedback loops and personalised communication?
Personalised feedback that addresses specific misunderstandings helps students correct course quickly, particularly in quantitative modules where misconceptions can calcify. Closing the loop by showing how student feedback changes module delivery builds credibility and encourages further engagement. Programme teams can prioritise issues surfaced repeatedly in student comments, signal changes promptly, and use short polls to test whether new approaches are understood.
Which technologies strengthen two-way communication?
VLE announcements, structured discussion forums and interactive e‑portfolios support ongoing dialogue and targeted feedback. Technology works best when expectations are explicit: which channel to use for what, expected response times, and how urgent issues are escalated. Departments should ensure equitable access and offer alternatives where digital access or literacy varies, enhancing rather than replacing face‑to‑face contact.
Who is most affected by poor communication, and why?
Sentiment data show variation by mode and need, with full‑time cohorts typically more negative than part‑time and disabled students frequently highlighting access and predictability gaps. Targeting earlier notice of key dates, minimising last‑minute changes before assessments, and providing alternative formats by default addresses these disparities. Using consistent language and structured headings aids comprehension for all students.
What should economics departments do next?
- Establish a single source of truth for programme and module information with time‑stamped updates and a weekly “what changed” digest.
- Align communications to assessment: publish annotated exemplars, checklist‑style rubrics and clear marking criteria; make moderation and calibration visible.
- Set and publish realistic service levels for queries and feedback; create a short no‑change window before assessment deadlines.
- Use session templates that signpost aims, worked examples and “how this will be assessed”; close each session with next steps.
- Monitor high‑need segments and modules with recurring issues; run a monthly comms audit on clarity, consistency and timing; ensure accessibility by default.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics turns open‑text comments into targeted actions for economics. It tracks communication sentiment over time, compares full‑time and part‑time cohorts, and highlights where disabled students encounter avoidable barriers so teams can prioritise fixes with the greatest impact. For economics specifically, it surfaces assessment‑related risks (e.g., marking criteria and feedback), links them to delivery and timetabling issues, and provides export‑ready insights for programme teams, departmental boards and quality review.
Request a walkthrough
Book a Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.
- All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
- Versioned outputs with TEF-ready governance packs.
- Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.
More posts on communication about course and teaching:
- Does communication in mental health nursing courses meet students’ needs?
- Are communication and course structure working in teacher training?
- Are nursing students getting the course and teaching communication they need?
- What do human geography students need from communication and feedback?