What do biology students need from course and teaching communications?
They need reliable, timely and accessible communications that stabilise timetabling and make assessment expectations unambiguous, anchored in a single source of truth with predictable updates. In the National Student Survey (NSS), the communication about course and teaching comments total 6,214, with a sentiment index of −30.0 and proportions of 24.4% Positive and 72.5% Negative; full-time cohorts are more negative (−32.0) than part-time (−18.0). Across biology (non-specific), the overall tone is warmer, with ≈53.1% Positive, yet the same pressure points recur. In UK HE, this category captures how providers communicate the basics of teaching delivery, while biology as a CAH subject area highlights discipline-specific patterns in assessment and timetabling. Those sector signals guide the improvements set out below.
How should staff enhance communication in biology courses?
Establish one authoritative channel in the VLE as the source of truth, with time-stamped updates and a short “what changed/why/when” note. Publish a predictable weekly summary, specify realistic response times, and minimise last‑minute changes; when unavoidable, explain promptly. Use accessible formats, structured headings and plain language, and default to alternative formats for disabled students. Provide an escalation route for unresolved queries. This model reduces anxiety, improves preparedness for labs and fieldwork, and aligns teams on consistent messaging to the cohort.
How do we streamline course structure and deadlines?
Name a single owner for the timetable and maintain an explicit changes log. Set a short “no‑change window” before assessments and intensive teaching blocks to protect student planning. Release assessment and practical schedules early, integrate them into digital calendars, and align lab, fieldwork and exam timetabling to avoid bunching. Regular reminders via the VLE reinforce the plan without overwhelming students.
How should assessment criteria be communicated?
Publish annotated exemplars, checklist-style rubrics and unambiguous marking criteria alongside the assessment brief. Map each criterion to indicative performance levels, and show how feedback links to future improvement. Track and communicate feedback turnaround times against agreed service levels so students know when to expect comments. Use consistent wording across modules to reduce interpretation gaps for first‑year and international students.
How should teaching styles and engagement evolve?
Protect what students rate highly: structured delivery, visible preparation and access to staff. Provide clear pre‑session guidance and reading, use interactive activities in labs and workshops, and state how each session connects to assessment outcomes. Keep recorded lectures and short recap materials as a baseline for revision and inclusive access, and use simple signposting in the VLE to reduce navigation friction.
What did COVID-19 change, and which adaptations endure?
Recorded lectures, structured discussion forums and virtual office hours now serve as standard complements to in‑person teaching. Retain these where they improve access and pacing, but prioritise clarity about when attendance is expected live, when asynchronous participation is acceptable, and how engagement is recognised. Continue to audit communications for timing and consistency so that students can rely on a stable weekly rhythm.
How can feedback and tutoring support be improved?
Prioritise feedback that is specific, actionable and consistently signposted back to the marking criteria. Use brief feed‑forward notes to indicate the next step before the next assessment. Personal tutors should hold regular check‑ins tied to assessment points, with training in inclusive, strengths‑based conversations. Use simple dashboards to flag missed submissions or wellbeing concerns so tutors can intervene early.
How do we foster interdisciplinary communication and collaboration?
Make cross‑disciplinary opportunities legible by publishing a single calendar for optional seminars, projects and placements, with clear prerequisites and expected outcomes. Co‑design briefs with chemistry, environmental science or computing to show application in context, and debrief explicitly on skills development. Clear communications about scheduling and assessment alignment make these opportunities additive rather than competing for time.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics surfaces where communications fail or succeed, so programme teams can act at the right level. It tracks sentiment and topics over time for communication about course and teaching, benchmarks biology against the sector, and drills from provider to department and module. You can identify high‑need segments, evidence changes to assessment briefs and timetabling practice, and export concise, anonymised summaries for programme boards and quality reviews.
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 communication about course and teaching:
- What improves communication in politics courses?
- What do human geography students need from communication and feedback?
- Does communication in mental health nursing courses meet students’ needs?
- Are communication and course issues holding back music students?