What UK Combined, General Or Negotiated Studies Students Say: NSS Feedback Analysis (9,902 Comments, 2018–2025)
Key findings
- 9,902 comments analysed across UK combined, general or negotiated studies programmes (2018–2025); 54% positive overall
- Type and breadth of course content is the most-discussed topic (9.5% of comments, sentiment index +25.9)
- Marking criteria is the biggest pain point (sentiment −41.9, +3.8 vs sector)
- Personal development is a clear strength (sentiment +54.8)
What students are saying
Students in Combined General or Negotiated Studies emphasise the shape and resourcing of their programmes. The single largest topic is the type and breadth of course content (≈9.5% share), which is viewed positively (index ~+25.9) and appears more frequently here than across the sector. Closely behind are comments on learning resources (≈8.5%) and personal tutoring (≈7.5%). Resources are praised for availability and usefulness (index ~+26.9, above sector), while personal tutoring is a clear presence in the narrative, albeit slightly below sector on tone.
Assessment and feedback are central and mixed. Feedback accounts for around 7.5% of all comments and sits near neutral on tone (index ~+0.6), but notably better than sector. The sharper pain points are clarity-oriented: marking criteria (index ~−41.9) and assessment methods (index ~−27.1) attract sustained criticism when expectations or formats are unclear.
Delivery mechanics matter, though less than in some disciplines. Remote learning draws a comparatively high share (≈6.8%) with a slightly negative but better-than-sector tone. Scheduling and general course organisation are mentioned at moderate levels (≈3–4%) and trend positive versus sector, suggesting students notice and value predictability and clear ownership. By contrast, opportunities to work with other students are discussed less positively (index ~−12.4), pointing to the value of more structured groupwork and clearer accountability.
Some topics are under-represented relative to sector norms. Placements/fieldwork are scarcely mentioned (≈0.1% vs 3.4% sector), which fits the delivery model of many programmes in this CAH. Teaching Staff sentiment is strong (index ~+36.7) even though the topic appears less often than sector, while Student life and Personal development are both consistently positive.
Top categories by share (discipline vs sector):
| Category |
Section |
Share % |
Sector % |
Δ pp |
Sentiment idx |
Δ vs sector |
| Type and breadth of course content |
Learning opportunities |
9.5 |
6.9 |
2.6 |
+25.9 |
+3.3 |
| Learning resources |
Learning resources |
8.5 |
3.8 |
4.7 |
+26.9 |
+5.4 |
| Personal Tutor |
Academic support |
7.5 |
3.2 |
4.3 |
+16.9 |
−1.8 |
| Feedback |
Assessment and feedback |
7.5 |
7.3 |
0.2 |
+0.6 |
+15.6 |
| Student support |
Academic support |
7.1 |
6.2 |
0.9 |
+16.4 |
+3.2 |
| Remote learning |
The teaching on my course |
6.8 |
3.5 |
3.3 |
−2.5 |
+6.6 |
| Teaching Staff |
The teaching on my course |
4.4 |
6.7 |
−2.4 |
+36.7 |
+1.2 |
| Delivery of teaching |
The teaching on my course |
4.1 |
5.4 |
−1.4 |
+4.0 |
−4.8 |
| Module choice / variety |
Learning opportunities |
4.0 |
4.2 |
−0.2 |
+16.8 |
−0.5 |
| Scheduling/ timetabling |
Organisation and management |
3.5 |
2.9 |
0.7 |
+18.4 |
+34.9 |
Most negative categories (share ≥ 2%)
| Category |
Section |
Share % |
Sector % |
Δ pp |
Sentiment idx |
Δ vs sector |
| Marking criteria |
Assessment and feedback |
3.3 |
3.5 |
−0.3 |
−41.9 |
+3.8 |
| Costs / Value for money |
Others |
2.2 |
1.6 |
0.6 |
−41.7 |
+11.0 |
| COVID-19 |
Others |
2.2 |
3.3 |
−1.1 |
−33.9 |
−1.0 |
| Assessment methods |
Assessment and feedback |
2.7 |
3.0 |
−0.3 |
−27.1 |
−3.3 |
| IT Facilities |
Learning resources |
2.2 |
1.2 |
1.0 |
−20.5 |
−6.5 |
| Opportunities to work with other students |
Learning community |
2.2 |
2.0 |
0.2 |
−12.4 |
−13.5 |
| Remote learning |
The teaching on my course |
6.8 |
3.5 |
3.3 |
−2.5 |
+6.6 |
Most positive categories (share ≥ 2%)
| Category |
Section |
Share % |
Sector % |
Δ pp |
Sentiment idx |
Δ vs sector |
| Personal development |
Learning community |
2.8 |
2.5 |
0.3 |
+54.8 |
−5.0 |
| Teaching Staff |
The teaching on my course |
4.4 |
6.7 |
−2.4 |
+36.7 |
+1.2 |
| Student life |
Learning community |
3.2 |
3.2 |
0.0 |
+31.4 |
−0.7 |
| Learning resources |
Learning resources |
8.5 |
3.8 |
4.7 |
+26.9 |
+5.4 |
| Type and breadth of course content |
Learning opportunities |
9.5 |
6.9 |
2.6 |
+25.9 |
+3.3 |
| Scheduling/ timetabling |
Organisation and management |
3.5 |
2.9 |
0.7 |
+18.4 |
+34.9 |
| Personal Tutor |
Academic support |
7.5 |
3.2 |
4.3 |
+16.9 |
−1.8 |
What this means in practice
-
Double-down on clarity in assessment. Publish annotated exemplars and checklist-style rubrics; host short calibration/Q&A sessions before submissions; and set realistic, communicated feedback SLAs. These moves directly address the most negative topics—marking criteria and assessment methods—while lifting the usefulness of feedback.
-
Preserve the strengths that students notice. Keep the breadth of content and access to learning resources visible and easy to navigate. Where “IT Facilities” are the weak link, address reliability first (logins, VLE stability, lab/software availability) and provide simple fallbacks when systems degrade.
-
Keep delivery predictable. The data suggest scheduling and course organisation are working relatively well compared with sector. Name owners for comms and timetables, maintain a single source of truth, and share brief weekly updates to prevent drift.
-
Make peer work safer and more structured. Where collaboration is necessary, specify roles, milestones and peer‑assessment mechanisms so individual effort is visible and group work feels fair.
Data at a glance (2018–2025)
- Most-discussed topics by share: Type & breadth of course content (≈9.5%), Learning resources (≈8.5%), Personal Tutor (≈7.5%), Feedback (≈7.5%), Student support (≈7.1%), Remote learning (≈6.8%).
- Delivery & ops cluster (remote learning, scheduling, organisation, course comms, placements): ~14.8% of all comments, generally above sector on tone (especially scheduling/organisation).
- People & growth cluster (personal tutor, student support, teaching staff, delivery of teaching, personal development, student life): ~30.8% of comments, with consistently positive sentiment.
- Topics under-weight vs sector: Teaching Staff (by share), Career guidance/support, Student voice, Placements/fieldwork. Over-weight vs sector: Learning resources, Personal Tutor, Remote learning.
- 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 priorities you can act on. It tracks topics, sentiment and movement by year across the whole institution and at fine‑grained levels (college, school, department, programme), so teams can see exactly where to focus—assessment clarity, scheduling/organisation, resources, or student support.
It also 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), so you can evidence whether Combined General or Negotiated Studies is improving relative to the right peer group. You can segment by site/provider, cohort and year, and generate concise, anonymised summaries for programme teams and external stakeholders without trawling thousands of comments. Export‑ready outputs (web, deck, dashboard) make it straightforward to share priorities and progress across the institution.