Jisc’s Newcastle wellbeing example: analytics as a conversation prompt

Updated Sep 07, 2026

Jisc’s 12 March 2026 podcast features Newcastle University mental health adviser Liam Snaith discussing learning analytics in his work. The example concerns a support workflow, not a validated prediction that a student has a wellbeing problem. Jisc episode and transcript.

What the adviser describes

Snaith says students generally approach the service themselves, with some staff referrals. Before an appointment, he may review attendance and online engagement to help start a conversation. Access in one place reduces the need to request information from separate teams.

He also describes asking students about barriers and, with their consent, involving academic colleagues. The discussion distinguishes existing attendance and VLE information from additional integrations being developed or sought. It supplies practitioner experience, not a controlled evaluation of wellbeing outcomes. Official transcript.

Keep interpretation and access explicit

Jisc’s code of practice, as reviewed on 7 September 2026, recommends clear responsibilities, consultation with student representatives, explanation of data use, restricted access, validation and review of interventions. It also warns about re-identification when sources are combined. These are guidance statements; they do not certify Newcastle’s implementation. Jisc code of practice.

Our recommendation is to make the conversation, rather than an inferred diagnosis, the next step when an indicator warrants attention. Check the teaching calendar and data quality first. A missing record may reflect the way an activity was captured, and an online interaction does not establish that a student is safe or well.

Keep aggregate survey analysis separate from individual support casework unless the institution has established an appropriate purpose, permissions and safeguards. An anonymous comment should not become a route to identifying its author. Cohort themes may inform a service review without being attached to a named student’s record.

For a review of aggregate comments, the governance checklist can help define scope and access responsibilities.

Review note, 7 September 2026: checked the complete transcript, clarified self-referral and development limits, and removed claims that analytics or comment analysis reliably identifies causes, predicts wellbeing or selects the right intervention.