Middlesex student charter commits to visible action on feedback

Updated Nov 06, 2026

Middlesex University’s student charter connects participation with responsibilities for the university, students and MDXSU. Adopted on 16 September 2026, it identifies spring 2027 as the next review point.

What the charter commits to

The university’s commitments include partnership in course development, clear communication, accessible support and visible responses to feedback. Students are asked to participate in representation, feedback and co-creation. MDXSU’s role includes independent advice, representation and holding the university to its commitments.

The charter also commits to regular review in partnership. That creates a useful connection between a public statement and a process for examining how it works in practice.

Turn one commitment into a review question

Our suggestion is to choose a commitment that students can recognise in an everyday experience. For clear communication, ask students to find an assessment change and explain what they need to do. For accessible support, follow a question from its first contact to a useful response.

Agree who will review the evidence and which decision the group can influence. Bring relevant feedback into the discussion and invite students to explain where the written commitment matches or differs from their experience.

Keep a decision record people can revisit

Use a short record linking the commitment, experience described, action owner and review date. Include the reason for a decision, especially when the proposed response differs from the original request.

Make the student-facing update easy to find. It should explain the change or investigation and point to the relevant service, guidance or next discussion. Keep the more detailed review record available to the group responsible for following it through.

Connect the charter to existing feedback work

A programme review, representative meeting or service discussion can provide an occasion to test a commitment. Use the same terms and action record across those settings so that issues do not lose their history as they move between teams.

The student partnership pathway offers related reading. The King’s module feedback example shows a different way to make response expectations explicit, and the closing the loop pathway connects both examples to practical follow-up.