What are students actually saying about Campus city location (NSS 2018–2025)?

Students are broadly positive about the campus city/location experience. Tone is strongly favourable overall, but less so for part-time and mature cohorts, and lower for some subject areas.

Scope: UK NSS open-text comments tagged to Campus city location across academic years 2018–2025.
Volume: ~2,832 comments; 100% categorised with sentiment.
Overall mood: ≈68.0% Positive, 27.4% Negative, 4.6% Neutral (positive:negative ≈ 2.5:1).
Average sentiment index: +37.9 (−100 to +100 scale).

What students are saying in this category

• Location is a net positive across the dataset: two-thirds of comments are upbeat; full-time students are particularly positive.
• Part-time students are notably more negative on this topic (index −2.5), and mature students are positive but less so than younger students (+18.4 vs +41.9).
• Ethnicity differences are visible: Not UK domiciled students are very positive (+49.5), while Black students are less positive (+17.6).
• By subject area (CAH1), sentiment varies: historical/philosophical/religious studies and law are highly positive; subjects allied to medicine and psychology are lower.

Segments at a glance (2018–2025)

Key cohorts

Subject area (CAH1) — segments with ≥85 comments

Notes:

• Disability status shows no overall gap on this topic (index +38.0 for both disabled and not disabled).
• Small-N subgroups (e.g., apprenticeship, “other sex”) should be interpreted cautiously.

What this means in practice

1. Focus on part-time and mature experiences

   • Run a quick location-access audit for evening/weekend patterns (transport links, parking, lighting, entrance routes, wayfinding).
   • Provide concise “commuter essentials” pages in course handbooks and induction (last-bus times, late-opening spaces, nearest secure study areas).
   • Monitor this segment’s sentiment quarterly to check if changes shift tone.

2. Reduce variation between subject areas

   • Pair lower-scoring areas (e.g., subjects allied to medicine, psychology) with higher-scoring peers (e.g., law, historical studies) to share what works locally (maps, placements/clinic adjacency, city partnerships).
   • Create a standard “city orientation pack” each school can localise: 10-minute walk maps, safe routes, cost/time comparisons for travel modes.

3. Close ethnicity gaps

   • Convene diverse student panels to review location touchpoints (routes, transport hubs, safety, belonging in city spaces) and prioritise fixes.
   • Make reporting/feedback channels easy to find and act on issues promptly; publish “you said, we did” for location topics.

4. Keep strengths visible

   • Where sentiment is already high, capture the enabling practices (clear local information, convenient facilities, community links) and scale them.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

• Track this category’s topic and sentiment over time and by segment (mode, age, ethnicity, subject area, site/campus).
• Drill from provider level to schools/departments; export concise, anonymised summaries for quick briefings.
• Like-for-like comparisons across CAH codes and demographics; segment by cohort or campus to target local improvements.
• Share export-ready tables and charts with programme and professional services teams.