Student Voice Analytics for Philosophy — UK student feedback 2018–2025

Scope. UK NSS open-text comments for Philosophy (CAH20-02-01) students across academic years 2018–2025.
Volume. ~2,686 comments; 97% successfully categorised to a single primary topic.
Overall mood. Roughly 51.4% Positive, 45.0% Negative, 3.6% Neutral (positive:negative ≈ 1.14:1).

What students are saying

Philosophy students most often talk about the structure and choice of their studies. Module choice/variety is the single largest topic (10.3% share), with a clearly positive tone (sentiment index +26.9) and significantly above sector by volume and sentiment. Comments about the type and breadth of course content (7.7%) follow the same pattern (+24.9). Teaching Staff is also a strength (8.0%; +42.1), outscoring the sector on tone.

Assessment and feedback is a sizeable part of the narrative (≈14–15% across feedback, marking criteria, assessment methods, dissertation). Feedback appears frequently (7.4%) and trends negative (−15.3), close to sector. Marking criteria attracts fewer comments (3.9%) but remains strongly negative (−42.7), indicating students still want clearer expectations and standards.

Operational delivery features, but occupies a comparatively smaller share of the Philosophy conversation (~8.2% across scheduling, organisation, comms and remote learning). Where it does appear, tone is lukewarm to negative: remote learning (2.5%; −19.0) and organisation/management of course (2.9%; −16.2) sit below sector benchmarks. Placements/fieldwork barely register in this discipline (≈0.0% vs 3.4% in sector), which is consistent with the nature of study.

Contextual factors remain salient. Strike Action is over-represented versus sector (4.0% vs 1.7%) and very negative (−69.0). COVID-19 comments persist (3.5%; −45.8), below sector on tone. In support and community, Availability of teaching staff is a bright spot (2.5%; +43.8). Student support is present (5.9%) but has a muted tone (+3.8) compared with sector, and the Library draws typical volumes (2.0%) with notably lower sentiment than sector (+2.8 vs +26.7).

Top categories by share (Philosophy vs sector)

Category Section Share % Sector % Δ pp Sentiment idx Δ vs sector
Module choice / variety Learning opportunities 10.3 4.2 +6.2 +26.9 +9.5
Teaching Staff The teaching on my course 8.0 6.7 +1.3 +42.1 +6.6
Type and breadth of course content Learning opportunities 7.7 6.9 +0.7 +24.9 +2.3
Feedback Assessment & feedback 7.4 7.3 +0.1 −15.3 −0.3
Student support Academic support 5.9 6.2 −0.3 +3.8 −9.4
Delivery of teaching The teaching on my course 5.8 5.4 +0.4 +11.0 +2.2
Strike Action Others 4.0 1.7 +2.3 −69.0 −5.9
Marking criteria Assessment & feedback 3.9 3.5 +0.4 −42.7 +3.0
COVID-19 Others 3.5 3.3 +0.1 −45.8 −12.8
Student life Learning community 3.5 3.2 +0.3 +20.0 −12.1

Most negative categories (share ≥ 2%)

Category Section Share % Sector % Δ pp Sentiment idx Δ vs sector
Strike Action Others 4.0 1.7 +2.3 −69.0 −5.9
COVID-19 Others 3.5 3.3 +0.1 −45.8 −12.8
Marking criteria Assessment & feedback 3.9 3.5 +0.4 −42.7 +3.0
Remote learning The teaching on my course 2.5 3.5 −1.0 −19.0 −9.9
Organisation, management of course Organisation & management 2.9 3.3 −0.5 −16.2 −2.3
Feedback Assessment & feedback 7.4 7.3 +0.1 −15.3 −0.3

Most positive categories (share ≥ 2%)

Category Section Share % Sector % Δ pp Sentiment idx Δ vs sector
Personal development Learning community 2.7 2.5 +0.2 +55.7 −4.1
Availability of teaching staff Academic support 2.5 2.1 +0.4 +43.8 +4.4
Teaching Staff The teaching on my course 8.0 6.7 +1.3 +42.1 +6.6
Module choice / variety Learning opportunities 10.3 4.2 +6.2 +26.9 +9.5
Type and breadth of content Learning opportunities 7.7 6.9 +0.7 +24.9 +2.3
Student life Learning community 3.5 3.2 +0.3 +20.0 −12.1
Learning resources Learning resources 2.6 3.8 −1.1 +19.8 −1.6

What this means in practice

  • Preserve and make the most of choice. Students value module variety and the breadth of content. Keep the offer broad, but make pathways and pre‑requisites explicit, and show how modules connect to programme outcomes. Short “why this matters” descriptors and term-by-term maps help students navigate choice with confidence.

  • Lift assessment clarity. The volume and tone around feedback and marking criteria point to a familiar fix: publish annotated exemplars; use concise, checklist-style rubrics tied to learning outcomes; and agree feedback turnaround expectations that are visible and monitored. Marker calibration sessions and short “what excellent looks like” notes reduce ambiguity fast.

  • Tighten the operational rhythm, even if it is a smaller driver here. Students respond well to predictable timetables, transparent change logs, and a single source of truth for course communications. Where remote learning is used, define the minimum viable structure (materials posted by X date, recording standards, interaction norms).

  • Acknowledge context. Strike action and pandemic disruption still colour perceptions. Clear contingency plans, timely updates, and signposting to mitigations (extensions, alternative activities) matter for trust. Student support sentiment trails sector: a straightforward “start here” support page, named contacts, and proactive check‑ins can improve perceived accessibility. Library tone also lags sector—quick wins include ensuring reading list coverage and consistent e‑access to core texts.

Data at a glance (2018–2025)

  • Top topics by share: Module choice/variety (≈10.3%), Teaching Staff (≈8.0%), Type & breadth of course content (≈7.7%), Feedback (≈7.4%), Student support (≈5.9%).
  • Clusters:
    • Delivery & ops (placements, scheduling, organisation, comms, remote): ≈8.2% of all comments, generally negative in tone.
    • People & growth (personal tutor, student support, teaching staff, availability of staff, delivery of teaching, personal development, student life): ≈31.0%, predominantly positive.
    • Assessment & feedback (feedback, marking criteria, assessment methods, dissertation): ≈14.4%, mixed and often critical where criteria are unclear.
  • 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, sentiment and movement by year for every discipline, and supports whole‑institution views as well as fine‑grained analysis for schools and departments.

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). You can segment results by site/provider, cohort and year to target interventions where they will shift sentiment most. Concise, anonymised summaries and representative comments make it easy to brief programme teams and external stakeholders without wading through thousands of responses, and export‑ready outputs (web, deck, dashboard) help you share priorities and progress across the institution.

How to use this subject hub

This page groups Student Voice blog case studies tagged to philosophy (CAH3). Use it to see which themes students raise most often in this subject area and what actions tend to follow.

  • Start with the most-read posts to understand the common issues.
  • Use theme links to jump to category hubs (e.g., workload, feedback, teaching).
  • Translate insights into governed evidence via Student Voice Analytics.

Common themes in this subject area (on our blog)

Most-read posts in this subject area

Recommended next steps

  1. Look for repeatability: which themes recur across years and modules?
  2. Check whether issues are structural (resources/staffing) or local (one module/team).
  3. Define what “good” looks like for the subject (examples, rubrics, assessment clarity).
  4. Track movement: do actions reduce volume/negativity for key themes next cycle?

Insights into specific areas of philosophy education