Teaching staff shine — what 966 veterinary students report
Scope. UK NSS open-text comments for Veterinary Medicine and Dentistry (CAH05-01-01) students across academic years 2018–2025.
Volume. ~966 comments; 96.3% successfully categorised to a single primary topic.
Overall mood. Roughly 57.0% Positive, 40.3% Negative, 2.7% Neutral (positive:negative ≈ 1.41:1).
What students are saying
Students talk most about the quality of teaching and course design. Comments about Teaching Staff (about one in ten, 9.8%) are strongly positive (sentiment index around +56.0) and well above sector. Delivery of teaching (7.7%) also carries a notably positive tone (+36.9, markedly higher than sector), and Type and breadth of course content (9.0%) is viewed positively overall. Community and support aspects are similarly strong: Student life (6.9%, +51.1), Student support (6.8%, +22.5), and Personal development (2.5%, +43.9) are consistent positives. Facilities indicators also stand out: General facilities (2.2%) are exceptionally positive (+74.0).
Balancing those strengths, operational delivery is the main friction. Organisation and management of the course (8.2%) trends negative (−16.9), and Scheduling/timetabling (7.1%) is the lowest-scoring category (−44.5), well below sector. Communication about course and teaching (2.3%, −36.6) and Student voice (4.8%, −31.4) reinforce a clear message: students want predictability, a single source of truth, and visible ownership of decisions.
Assessment and feedback remain challenging. Feedback (5.9%) is negative (−19.1), and Assessment methods (2.6%) also score low (−29.2). Marking criteria is mentioned less often but is sharply negative when it appears (−46.8). Placements/fieldwork/trips feature less frequently than the sector (2.5% vs 3.4%) and sit slightly negative (−8.9). COVID‑19 still appears (3.5%) but is less negative than the sector baseline.
Top categories by share (Veterinary Medicine and Dentistry vs sector)
| Category |
Section |
Share % |
Sector % |
Δ pp |
Sentiment idx |
Δ vs sector |
| Teaching Staff |
The teaching on my course |
9.8 |
6.7 |
3.0 |
56.0 |
20.5 |
| Type and breadth of course content |
Learning opportunities |
9.0 |
6.9 |
2.1 |
27.9 |
5.3 |
| Organisation & management of course |
Organisation and management |
8.2 |
3.3 |
4.8 |
−16.9 |
−2.9 |
| Delivery of teaching |
The teaching on my course |
7.7 |
5.4 |
2.3 |
36.9 |
28.1 |
| Scheduling/timetabling |
Organisation and management |
7.1 |
2.9 |
4.2 |
−44.5 |
−27.9 |
| Student life |
Learning community |
6.9 |
3.2 |
3.7 |
51.1 |
19.0 |
| Student support |
Academic support |
6.8 |
6.2 |
0.6 |
22.5 |
9.3 |
| Feedback |
Assessment and feedback |
5.9 |
7.3 |
−1.4 |
−19.1 |
−4.1 |
| Student voice |
Student voice |
4.8 |
1.8 |
3.1 |
−31.4 |
−12.1 |
| COVID-19 |
Others |
3.5 |
3.3 |
0.2 |
−18.1 |
14.8 |
Most negative categories (share ≥ 2%)
| Category |
Section |
Share % |
Sector % |
Δ pp |
Sentiment idx |
Δ vs sector |
| Scheduling/timetabling |
Organisation and management |
7.1 |
2.9 |
4.2 |
−44.5 |
−27.9 |
| Communication about course and teaching |
Organisation and management |
2.3 |
1.7 |
0.6 |
−36.6 |
−0.8 |
| Student voice |
Student voice |
4.8 |
1.8 |
3.1 |
−31.4 |
−12.1 |
| Assessment methods |
Assessment and feedback |
2.6 |
3.0 |
−0.4 |
−29.2 |
−5.5 |
| Feedback |
Assessment and feedback |
5.9 |
7.3 |
−1.4 |
−19.1 |
−4.1 |
| COVID-19 |
Others |
3.5 |
3.3 |
0.2 |
−18.1 |
14.8 |
| Organisation & management of course |
Organisation and management |
8.2 |
3.3 |
4.8 |
−16.9 |
−2.9 |
Most positive categories (share ≥ 2%)
| Category |
Section |
Share % |
Sector % |
Δ pp |
Sentiment idx |
Δ vs sector |
| General facilities |
Learning resources |
2.2 |
1.8 |
0.4 |
74.0 |
50.5 |
| Teaching Staff |
Teaching |
9.8 |
6.7 |
3.0 |
56.0 |
20.5 |
| Student life |
Learning community |
6.9 |
3.2 |
3.7 |
51.1 |
19.0 |
| Personal development |
Learning community |
2.5 |
2.5 |
0.0 |
43.9 |
−15.9 |
| Career guidance, support |
Learning community |
2.0 |
2.4 |
−0.4 |
43.7 |
13.6 |
| Delivery of teaching |
Teaching |
7.7 |
5.4 |
2.3 |
36.9 |
28.1 |
| Type and breadth of course content |
Learning opportunities |
9.0 |
6.9 |
2.1 |
27.9 |
5.3 |
What this means in practice
First, fix the operational rhythm. Publish timetables early, set a clear “change window,” and keep a single source of truth for updates. Name an owner for scheduling and organisation decisions, and push a short weekly “what changed and why” digest. These steps directly target the lowest‑scoring areas (scheduling, organisation, and comms).
Second, make assessment transparent. Use checklist‑style rubrics, short annotated exemplars, and a realistic service level for feedback turnaround. Clarify the purpose of each assessment and how it maps to learning outcomes. This is the fastest way to lift Feedback and Assessment methods.
Third, close the loop on student voice. Show “you said, we did” outcomes and track response times to queries. Preserve and scale what students rate highly—strong teaching practice, supportive culture, and a vibrant learning community—by sharing concrete examples across modules and teams.
Data at a glance (2018–2025)
- Top topics by share: Teaching Staff (~9.8%), Type and breadth of course content (~9.0%), Organisation & management of course (~8.2%), Delivery of teaching (~7.7%), Scheduling/timetabling (~7.1%), Student life (~6.9%), Student support (~6.8%).
- Delivery & ops cluster (placements, scheduling, organisation, comms, remote) accounts for ~21.0% of comments and is predominantly negative.
- People & growth cluster (teaching staff, delivery of teaching, student support, personal tutor, personal development, student life) holds ~36.5% of comments with strongly 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 thousands of open-text survey comments into clear, prioritised actions. It tracks topics and sentiment, and shows movement by year, so you can see whether changes improve the right categories across 2018–2025.
It works at whole‑institution scale and for fine‑grained views (faculty, school, department, programme). You get concise, anonymised theme summaries and representative comments for partners and programme teams, without trawling raw text.
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 by site/provider, cohort and year to target interventions where they will shift sentiment most. Export‑ready outputs (for web, decks and dashboards) make it straightforward to share priorities and progress across the institution.