Feature

Keep humans in control of student feedback analysis

Combine deterministic ML with human review so student comment analysis remains fast, traceable, and governed.

Student Voice Analytics combines trained models with human review points. Teams can inspect categories, sentiment, and comments before outputs are finalised or circulated.

Discuss your survey

Discuss the source data, reporting question, outputs and delivery window.

Who this is for

Quality teams, governance leads, survey teams, and data protection stakeholders.

Why it matters

Institutions need speed, but they also need confidence. A black-box summary is not enough when outputs may inform TEF evidence, quality enhancement, service investment, or public-facing action plans.

What teams get

Review the evidence before it leaves the analysis team

Human review points let teams check sensitive comments, category fit, and interpretation before wider reporting.

Improve confidence without returning to manual coding

The model handles scale while staff focus their expertise on review, exceptions, and interpretation.

Create a defensible method

Versioned analysis and review notes give teams a clearer basis for explaining how student comments were interpreted.

How it works

Run deterministic classification and sentence-level sentiment.
Review comments, labels, and summaries where teams need additional assurance.
Correct categories or redactions before final outputs are regenerated.
Use the final version in reporting with a clear review trail.

Outputs

Reviewed category and sentiment outputs.
Correction-ready comment records.
Governance notes for internal assurance.
Final reports based on the reviewed dataset.

Governance and evidence quality

Agree the survey, questions, reporting populations and intended audience before analysis.
Keep category definitions, analysis versions and denominators with the output.
Review relevant comments and ambiguous cases alongside the summary.
Agree data handling, access and the level of detail appropriate for each audience.

FAQs

Does human-in-the-loop analysis slow the process down?

It adds review where it matters without asking teams to code every comment manually. The analysis remains scalable.

Can staff correct categories?

Yes. Review workflows can support correction of category and sentiment labels before regenerated outputs are used.

Why not rely on automatic summaries alone?

Student feedback often contains sensitive, mixed, or context-dependent comments. Human review gives institutions more control over interpretation and sharing.

See the workflow with your team

Discuss the source data, reporting question and outputs your team needs. Explore the worked example before agreeing the scope and delivery window.