Do dental students feel heard in higher education?

Published Mar 28, 2024 · Updated Oct 12, 2025

student voiceDentistry

Yes, but unevenly: across the National Student Survey (NSS) student voice comments the balance skews negative (43.4% Positive, 54.2% Negative; sentiment index −6.1), while in dentistry overall students report broadly positive experiences (60.4% Positive) when operations and communication function well. The student voice picture for medicine and dentistry is markedly tougher (−25.5), and communication about course and teaching in dentistry drags tone down further (−40.9). The student voice category collates what students say about being consulted and seeing follow-through across UK providers; the dentistry subject code aligns programmes nationally for like-for-like comparison. These sector signals shape where dental schools should focus: make change predictable, fix comms, and evidence action.

How should dentistry programmes handle student complaints and issues?

Prioritise visibility and timeliness. Students respond when schools publish “you said, we did” updates with owners and due dates, and commit to a response service level for complaints and routine feedback. Analyse recurring issues from text comments to inform decisions, and share progress updates so the loop is demonstrably closed. Avoid defensive replies; show proportionate action and rationale.

What should student–staff partnership forums deliver?

Forums work when they lead to action. Use hybrid/recorded access and asynchronous input so part-time, mature and disabled students can contribute. Set agendas with named owners, decision points and timelines, and track delivery publicly. In disciplines where tone is more negative, schedule more frequent check-ins and invite students to co‑prioritise fixes before the next teaching block.

Where does communication break down and how do we fix it?

Students need a dependable single source of truth for operational updates. Name an owner for course communications, issue a concise weekly “what changed and why” note, and agree freeze windows for major timetable shifts with a visible escalation route when plans must change. Train year reps to broker issues and provide a written route for anonymous input alongside live channels.

How should feedback be collected, responded to, and acted on?

Use structured surveys and open‑text analysis to surface themes, then publish the actions you will take and by when. Track on‑time responses and completion of agreed changes. Monitor sentiment index and the positive:negative ratio by cohort and priority groups each term so programme teams can evidence improvement and intervene early where tone dips.

How should schools consult students on curriculum changes?

Consultation should shape decisions, not just validate them. Share the case for change with options and constraints, test proposals with reps, and pilot changes where possible. For dentistry, involve students in planning clinical time and timetabling, and commit to transparent criteria for trade‑offs between clinic, skills labs and lectures.

What supports and staff attitudes strengthen belonging?

Student narratives in dentistry consistently rate Teaching Staff and Student support positively when staff are available, responsive and proactive about wellbeing. Student life and personal development experiences are also strong; sustain these by connecting support to progression, placements and careers, and by following up on agreed adjustments for disabled students.

How can examination feedback create learning opportunities?

Clarity drives learning gains. Provide checklist‑style rubrics, annotated exemplars and realistic feedback turnaround times, and run light‑touch marking calibrations so criteria are interpreted consistently. Offer structured opportunities to discuss feedback with tutors and focus comments on how to improve in the next assessment, not just why marks were lost.

What does an empowered student voice look like in dentistry?

A visible cycle: inclusive channels to raise issues, disciplined communication, shared ownership of fixes, and measurable follow‑through. When schools organise student voice in this way, students feel consulted, see action, and report stronger belonging and academic development.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

• Tracks topics and sentiment over time from provider to programme, with drill‑downs for dentistry.
• Benchmarks like‑for‑like across subject groups and demographics (age, disability, mode, campus/site) and by cohort/year.
• Produces concise, anonymised “you said, we did” summaries and exportable tables for programme teams and committees.
• Flags when tone shifts negatively for specific groups so leaders can intervene early on communication, timetabling and assessment clarity, and evidence impact.

Request a walkthrough

Book a Student Voice Analytics demo

See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.

• All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
• Versioned outputs with TEF-ready governance packs.
• Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.

Book a demo Prefer email? [email protected]

More posts on student voice:

• Are design studies students being heard by their universities?
• Are medical students’ voices shaping UK medical education?
• Do marketing students’ voices improve university courses?
• Does student feedback improve social work education?

More posts on Dentistry student views:

• Does consistent staff-student communication improve dental education?
• What do dental students say about their teaching staff?
• Does targeted support improve success for dentistry students?
• What do dental students need from course content and structure?