Student Voice Analytics for Classics — UK student feedback 2018–2025
Scope. UK NSS open-text comments for Classics (CAH20-01-05) students across academic years 2018–2025.
Volume. ~1,407 comments; 97% successfully categorised to a single primary topic.
Overall mood. Roughly 54.7% Positive, 42.4% Negative, 2.9% Neutral (positive:negative ≈ 1.29:1).
What students are saying
Classics students focus first on the people who teach them. Comments about Teaching Staff are the largest single topic (≈8.1% share) and are strongly positive (sentiment index ~+48.1), well above the sector tone for the same theme. Students also rate the structure and variety of what they study: Type and breadth of course content (≈6.3%, index ~+31.0) and Module choice/variety (≈5.1%, ~+25.7) are clear positives. Personal Tutor (≈6.2%, ~+29.9) and Student support (≈6.1%, ~+22.1) round out a consistent people-centred strength.
Learning resources are prominent (≈7.3% share, above sector by +3.6 pp) but mixed in tone. Overall sentiment is positive (index ~+15.4), yet subtopics diverge: Library sits near neutral (index ~−1.2, well below sector) while IT Facilities is a notable pain point (index ~−32.9). These patterns suggest the teaching experience is praised, but the digital and physical enablers need attention.
Assessment and feedback is visible and nuanced. Feedback (≈6.2%) leans slightly negative (index ~−9.3) but is less negative than the sector baseline. Marking criteria (≈3.4%) remains a clear weakness (index ~−35.0), signalling that expectations, exemplars and rubrics continue to be the main levers for improvement. Assessment methods (≈2.0%, ~−25.2) also attract criticism for clarity and consistency.
Operational delivery is present but not dominant. Remote learning (≈5.9%) is slightly negative (index ~−3.0, better than sector); Scheduling/timetabling (≈2.0%) trends close to neutral (index ~−2.3, much better than sector); Organisation and management of the course (≈2.1%) is mildly negative (index ~−6.7). Placements/fieldwork/trips are rarely mentioned in Classics (≈0.4% vs sector ≈3.4%). Wider context topics—Strike Action (≈2.3%, ~−69.1) and Costs/Value for money (≈2.0%, ~−44.9)—are strongly negative but largely external to day‑to‑day teaching.
Top categories by share (Classics vs sector):
| Category | Section | Share % | Sector % | Δ pp | Sentiment idx | Δ vs sector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Teaching Staff | The teaching on my course | 8.1 | 6.7 | +1.4 | +48.1 | +12.5 |
| Learning resources | Learning resources | 7.3 | 3.8 | +3.6 | +15.4 | −6.1 |
| Type & breadth of course content | Learning opportunities | 6.3 | 6.9 | −0.6 | +31.0 | +8.4 |
| Personal Tutor | Academic support | 6.2 | 3.2 | +3.1 | +29.9 | +11.2 |
| Feedback | Assessment & feedback | 6.2 | 7.3 | −1.1 | −9.3 | +5.7 |
| Student support | Academic support | 6.1 | 6.2 | −0.1 | +22.1 | +8.9 |
| Remote learning | The teaching on my course | 5.9 | 3.5 | +2.4 | −3.0 | +6.0 |
| Delivery of teaching | The teaching on my course | 5.5 | 5.4 | +0.0 | +11.7 | +2.9 |
| Module choice / variety | Learning opportunities | 5.1 | 4.2 | +0.9 | +25.7 | +8.3 |
| Marking criteria | Assessment & feedback | 3.4 | 3.5 | −0.1 | −35.0 | +10.7 |
Most negative categories (share ≥ 2%)
| Category | Section | Share % | Sector % | Δ pp | Sentiment idx | Δ vs sector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strike Action | Others | 2.3 | 1.7 | +0.5 | −69.1 | −6.1 |
| Costs / Value for money | Others | 2.0 | 1.6 | +0.4 | −44.9 | +7.9 |
| Marking criteria | Assessment & feedback | 3.4 | 3.5 | −0.1 | −35.0 | +10.7 |
| Workload | Organisation and management | 2.1 | 1.8 | +0.2 | −33.3 | +6.7 |
| IT Facilities | Learning resources | 2.4 | 1.2 | +1.2 | −32.9 | −18.9 |
| COVID-19 | Others | 3.2 | 3.3 | −0.1 | −32.7 | +0.2 |
| Assessment methods | Assessment & feedback | 2.0 | 3.0 | −1.0 | −25.2 | −1.5 |
Most positive categories (share ≥ 2%)
| Category | Section | Share % | Sector % | Δ pp | Sentiment idx | Δ vs sector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personal development | Learning community | 2.9 | 2.5 | +0.5 | +55.7 | −4.1 |
| Availability of teaching staff | Academic support | 2.3 | 2.1 | +0.2 | +55.0 | +15.7 |
| Teaching Staff | Teaching | 8.1 | 6.7 | +1.4 | +48.1 | +12.5 |
| Type & breadth of content | Learning opportunities | 6.3 | 6.9 | −0.6 | +31.0 | +8.4 |
| Personal Tutor | Academic support | 6.2 | 3.2 | +3.1 | +29.9 | +11.2 |
| Module choice / variety | Learning opportunities | 5.1 | 4.2 | +0.9 | +25.7 | +8.3 |
| Student support | Academic support | 6.1 | 6.2 | −0.1 | +22.1 | +8.9 |
What this means in practice
-
Consolidate the people strengths. Teaching quality, personal tutoring and staff availability are clear assets. Keep them visible: predictable tutor contact points, transparent office hours and timely acknowledgements help maintain the high bar students recognise.
-
Make resources feel seamless. Address the friction in IT Facilities and Library first: platform stability and access to e‑resources, reliable Wi‑Fi, device availability, and clear guidance on using digital tools. Small fixes (login journeys, reading‑list coverage, seat/space visibility) tend to move sentiment quickly.
-
Clarify assessment. Publish criteria in checklist form, provide annotated exemplars, and signpost what “good” looks like. Commit to realistic feedback turnaround and feed‑forward actions in seminars/workshops.
-
Keep operations steady and simple. Although scheduling and organisation track better than sector, students still value a single source of truth for changes, concise weekly updates, and clear ownership for remote vs in‑person learning decisions.
-
Context items (strike action, value for money) are strongly negative. Where direct control is limited, explain mitigations plainly (extensions, alternative activities, proportionate assessment adjustments) and close the loop on what has changed.
Data at a glance (2018–2025)
- Top topics by share: Teaching Staff (≈8.1%), Learning resources (≈7.3%), Type & breadth of course content (≈6.3%), Personal Tutor (≈6.2%), Feedback (≈6.2%), Student support (≈6.1%), Remote learning (≈5.9%).
- Cluster view:
- Delivery & ops (placements, scheduling, organisation, comms, remote): ≈11.3% of all comments; mixed tone, with scheduling and remote learning closer to neutral.
- People & growth (teaching staff, personal tutor/support, delivery of teaching, personal development, student life): ≈34.3% of comments; consistently positive.
- How to read the numbers. Each comment is assigned one primary topic; share is that topic’s proportion of all comments. Sentiment is calculated per sentence and summarised as an index from −100 (more negative than positive) to +100 (more positive than negative), then averaged at category level.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics turns open‑text survey comments into clear, prioritised actions. It tracks topics and sentiment over time (2018–2025), at whole‑institution level and down to schools and departments, so leaders and programme teams can see where to focus.
It provides concise, anonymised theme summaries and representative comments for quick briefing of academic and professional‑services colleagues and external partners. Crucially, it enables like‑for‑like sector comparisons across CAH codes and by demographics (e.g., year of study, domicile, mode of study, campus/site, commuter status), so you can evidence improvement against the right peer group. You can segment by site/provider, cohort and year to target interventions where they will shift sentiment most. Export‑ready outputs (web, slide deck, dashboard) make it straightforward to share priorities and progress across the institution.
