Are pharmacy students getting feedback that helps them learn?
Mostly not yet: students describe feedback as late, generic and hard to use, mirroring the National Student Survey (NSS) Feedback theme where 57.3% of comments are negative (sentiment index −10.2). Within pharmacy in the national subject coding used across UK higher education, students praise teaching and support but identify gaps in assessment guidance; feedback accounts for 6.8% of pharmacy comments with net negative tone, and marking criteria is the lowest‑rated assessment topic (−45.7). Tightening turnaround, criteria‑referenced comments and exemplars shifts performance and confidence.
How should coursework feedback connect with student support?
In pharmacy education, the intersection of coursework and support hinges on feedback that students can use at pace. Many report that feedback on assignments perceived as low‑value lacks specificity, leaving them without a sense of progress. Staff act as the link between theory and practice, so programmes should equip colleagues to provide concise, tailored comments that acknowledge student effort and map next steps against the assessment brief and marking criteria.
Prioritising structured feed‑forward and annotated exemplars turns feedback into a learning resource students return to in later modules. Where practice varies by module, schools should standardise minimum expectations and communicate them to cohorts, then review with students to refine what works.
How does assessment difficulty link to feedback practice?
Assessment feels harder when students cannot see how to improve before the next submission. Late or sparse comments on lab reports constrain learning, especially when students submit new work without knowing what to change. In pharmacy, the most negative assessment theme is marking criteria (−45.7), so share checklists and exemplars upfront and reference them explicitly in feedback. Staff can then focus on targeted commentary that explains how a student’s work meets, falls short of or exceeds the criteria, and what to do in the next assessment cycle.
What does staff responsiveness look like when it works?
Students value responsive lecturers who provide realistic advice and timely replies. Yet inconsistency in availability and feedback quality creates uneven experiences across modules. Programme teams can set visible norms for response times, schedule short dialogic feedback slots in high‑credit modules, and run brief calibration sessions so comments align to the criteria. This improves both the perceived usefulness of feedback and students’ confidence in acting on it.
Why does feedback timeliness matter, and how do we improve it?
Delays block learning. Students need marks and comments soon enough to address misunderstandings before the next topic. Publish a turnaround service level by assessment type, track performance, and make on‑time rates visible to students. Use digital tools to streamline common comments and free staff time for individualised notes on higher‑impact pieces. The sector evidence from the NSS Feedback theme, where the overall tone is negative (index −10.2), reinforces the need to reset basics: timeliness and usefulness.
How should student–lecturer communication shape feedback tone?
Students often say they never receive positive feedback on coursework. Balanced comments that identify strengths and specify one or two substantive improvements sustain engagement. Brief “how to use your feedback” guidance within modules, plus short follow‑ups that show changes made (“you said, we did”), maintain momentum. Real‑time tools for quick check‑ins help staff close gaps between intention and reception.
What fixes address the lack of individual feedback?
Generic notes miss individual learning gaps. Group feedback has a place, but programmes should pair it with light‑touch individual pointers so each student knows what to change next. A practical approach is to batch common issues, then add one or two lines specific to the student’s work, linked to the rubric and an exemplar. Teams can triage effort towards capstone tasks and lab work, where personalised feedback has the greatest impact on professional readiness.
How does an overloaded curriculum interact with feedback and timetabling?
Curriculum density can drive superficial learning when pace crowds out reflection. Pharmacy students frequently cite scheduling and timetabling as a pressure point, and the sentiment on timetabling trends negative in the discipline (−35.1). Stabilise the timetable, name a point of contact for changes, and publish weekly “what changed and why” updates. Align assessment spacing with feedback turnaround so students have time to apply comments before the next submission; discussion‑based sessions can consolidate understanding without adding volume.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
- Surfaces where feedback lands poorly and why, turning NSS open‑text into trackable metrics for Feedback by cohort, mode and subject.
- Benchmarks pharmacy against the wider discipline set, so you can prioritise negative topics like marking criteria and timetabling while preserving strengths in teaching and support.
- Enables drill‑downs from provider to school, programme and module, with concise summaries teams can act on within assessment cycles.
- Shows change over time and evidences improvement with publishable on‑time rates, quality checks on specificity and actionability, and “you said, we did” outputs.
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 feedback:
- What do mental health nursing students need from feedback?
- Are politics students getting the feedback they need?
- What do nursing students need from feedback?
- Are aeronautical and aerospace engineering students getting feedback they can use?