QAA’s Aberdeen review recognises student voice and recommends clearer assessment feedback

Updated Sep 07, 2026

QAA’s 30 April 2026 announcement reports that the University of Aberdeen was judged effective in managing academic standards, enhancing the learning experience and enabling student success. The review identified eight areas of good practice and five recommendations. QAA announcement.

The findings relevant to student feedback

The review visits took place on 9–10 December 2025 and 2–5 February 2026, with five reviewers including a student. QAA recognised Aberdeen’s embedded approach to listening to students, its virtual learning environment and quality oversight.

Recommendations included strengthening the consistency, equity and transparency of assessment feedback; communicating assessment criteria, mark allocation and award calculations more clearly; and reviewing the datasets used in course and programme review, with support for staff to use them consistently. Other recommendations concerned external-examiner oversight of collaborative provision and external input to professional-services review.

These are findings about one institution. The announcement does not establish that every recommendation has since been implemented or that a new UK-wide requirement has been introduced.

TQER reviews Scottish tertiary providers and covers credit-bearing provision, including collaborative delivery. Student partnership and evidence are part of the review framework. QAA TQER overview.

Using the case locally

Our practical suggestion is to examine whether assessment communication and feedback are consistent across a small sample of programmes. Compare what students report with assessment briefs, feedback examples and the relevant local policy. A student’s account can identify an experience worth investigating without independently establishing why it happened.

Keep the positive institutional judgement alongside the recommendations. An enhancement recommendation should not be presented as a finding of regulatory non-compliance, and an effective overall judgement does not make every improvement unnecessary.

For review datasets, record what each source covers: cohort, question wording, collection period and response coverage. Combining comments does not automatically make them comparable. Agree who interprets differences and how decisions will be communicated to students.

The student comment analysis governance checklist can help document this local process. Neither the announcement nor the framework establishes that a particular analytics product delivers fairer assessment or demonstrates implementation of these recommendations.

Review note, 7 September 2026: verified the official announcement, balanced the recommendations with the effective judgement, and removed unsupported claims of a newly changing sector-wide expectation. This summary is based on QAA’s announcement and framework overview, not a full re-audit of the university.