Student Voice Analytics for Molecular Biology Biophysics and Biochemistry — UK student feedback 2018–2025

Scope. UK NSS open-text comments for Molecular Biology Biophysics and Biochemistry (CAH03-01-08) across academic years 2018–2025.
Volume. ≈3,083 comments; 98% successfully categorised to a single primary topic.
Overall mood. Roughly 52.8% Positive, 43.9% Negative, 3.3% Neutral (positive:negative ≈ 1.20:1).

What students are saying

The conversation in this discipline is led by Assessment & Feedback. Feedback is the single largest topic (8.5% of comments) and leans negative (sentiment index −22.6), with students pointing to the usefulness and timeliness of comments as well as consistency between markers. Related categories—Assessment methods (4.1%, −31.0) and Marking criteria (3.6%, −45.5)—reinforce the pattern: expectations, assessment formats and transparent standards matter. Together, Assessment & Feedback topics account for roughly one in six comments, and tone is weaker than sector on average.

Set against this, students are notably positive about the academic core. Type and breadth of course content (7.7%, +31.4) draws strong approval, as do Teaching Staff (6.0%, +37.1) and Delivery of teaching (6.3%, +16.3). Students also value people-centred support: Personal Tutor (3.4%, +32.1) and Career guidance/support (3.2%, +40.5) are clear strengths, with Student life (3.0%, +47.8) and Personal development (2.0%, +60.1) rounding out a positive “people & growth” picture.

Operational delivery features, but less heavily than in some disciplines. Organisation and management of the course (4.4%) is mixed (−7.8) but compares a little better than the sector baseline. However, Scheduling/timetabling (3.0%, −35.0) and Workload (3.0%, −49.9) are consistently negative, and Remote learning (2.3%, −18.2) remains a drag on experience for a subset of students. Communication about course and teaching appears less frequently (1.5%) but is still negative (−29.8).

Some topics are less present here than sector-wide. Placements/fieldwork/trips are rarely mentioned (0.9% vs 3.4% sector), and when they do appear, the tone is positive (+25.2), suggesting this is not a defining feature of the student experience in this discipline.

Top categories by share (discipline vs sector):

Category	Section	Share %	Sector %	Δ pp	Sentiment idx	Δ vs sector
Feedback	Assessment and feedback	8.5	7.3	1.2	−22.6	−7.6
Type and breadth of course content	Learning opportunities	7.7	6.9	0.8	+31.4	+8.8
Delivery of teaching	The teaching on my course	6.3	5.4	0.9	+16.3	+7.5
Teaching Staff	The teaching on my course	6.0	6.7	−0.7	+37.1	+1.6
Student support	Academic support	5.6	6.2	−0.6	+10.0	−3.2
Organisation, management of course	Organisation and management	4.4	3.3	1.1	−7.8	+6.2
Assessment methods	Assessment and feedback	4.1	3.0	1.1	−31.0	−7.2
Module choice / variety	Learning opportunities	3.9	4.2	−0.2	+12.7	−4.7
COVID-19	Others	3.9	3.3	0.5	−25.7	+7.3
Marking criteria	Assessment and feedback	3.6	3.5	0.1	−45.5	+0.2

Most negative categories (share ≥ 2%)

Category	Section	Share %	Sector %	Δ pp	Sentiment idx	Δ vs sector
Workload	Organisation and management	3.0	1.8	1.1	−49.9	−9.9
Marking criteria	Assessment and feedback	3.6	3.5	0.1	−45.5	+0.2
Scheduling/ timetabling	Organisation and management	3.0	2.9	0.1	−35.0	−18.4
Assessment methods	Assessment and feedback	4.1	3.0	1.1	−31.0	−7.2
COVID-19	Others	3.9	3.3	0.5	−25.7	+7.3
Feedback	Assessment and feedback	8.5	7.3	1.2	−22.6	−7.6
Remote learning	The teaching on my course	2.3	3.5	−1.2	−18.2	−9.1

Most positive categories (share ≥ 2%)

Category	Section	Share %	Sector %	Δ pp	Sentiment idx	Δ vs sector
Personal development	Learning community	2.0	2.5	−0.4	+60.1	+0.2
Student life	Learning community	3.0	3.2	−0.1	+47.8	+15.7
Career guidance, support	Learning community	3.2	2.4	0.8	+40.5	+10.4
Teaching Staff	The teaching on my course	6.0	6.7	−0.7	+37.1	+1.6
Personal Tutor	Academic support	3.4	3.2	0.2	+32.1	+13.4
Type and breadth of course content	Learning opportunities	7.7	6.9	0.8	+31.4	+8.8
General facilities	Learning resources	2.6	1.8	0.9	+28.4	+4.9

What this means in practice

Make assessment clarity the first lever. Standardise rubric formats, publish annotated exemplars, and set a realistic service level for feedback return. Calibrate marking across assessors and publish criteria in checklist form so students can see “what good looks like”.
Tackle the operational rhythm. Publish a single source of truth for timetables and changes, with a minimum notice window and a short weekly “what changed and why” digest. Where workload is peaking, re‑sequence deadlines and signpost time estimates per task to help students plan.
Double down on what works. Protect contact quality and variety in content, and keep visibility of Teaching Staff high—office hours, swift responses, and consistent Personal Tutor touchpoints. Maintain momentum in careers support by embedding short, practical activities and signposting next steps clearly.

Data at a glance (2018–2025)

Top topics by share are stable: Feedback (≈8.5%), Type and breadth of course content (≈7.7%), Delivery of teaching (≈6.3%), Teaching Staff (≈6.0%), Student support (≈5.6%). Assessment & Feedback collectively accounts for roughly ≈17.4% of all comments and is the main source of negative tone.
Clusters. Delivery & ops cluster (Placements/fieldwork/trips, Scheduling, Organisation & management of course, Course communications, Remote learning) totals ≈12.1% of comments; People & growth cluster (Personal Tutor, Student support, Teaching Staff, Availability of teaching staff, Delivery of teaching, Personal development, Student life) totals ≈28.2%, with strong positive tone.

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 responses into clear, prioritised actions. It tracks topics, sentiment and movement by year for every CAH discipline, and supports whole‑institution overviews as well as fine‑grained analysis at faculty, school and programme level. The platform produces concise, anonymised theme summaries and representative comments so programme teams and external stakeholders can act without trawling thousands of responses.

It also enables like‑for‑like proof of change. You can benchmark and measure shifts with sector comparisons across CAH codes and by demographics (e.g., year of study, domicile, mode of study, campus/site, commuter status), and segment results by site/provider, cohort and year to target interventions precisely. Export‑ready outputs (web, deck, dashboard) make it straightforward to share priorities and progress across the institution.