The 2005 and 2006 National Student Survey (NSS) highlighted significant differences in category scores across departments within Nottingham University. Importantly, overall feedback was rated as poor compared with similar institutions.  However, these results were based on 3 very basic questions and in no way were able to describe in detail what was good or bad about feedback given.  The aims of this study were to repeat these questions, with current students, but to explore them in greater detail to understand what students expect from feedback and how they can use it to best effect.

In a more detailed anonymous questionnaire, we repeated the 3 questions from the NSS with more probing questions about feedback students had received, how they used it and if it helped their studies. These were handed out to penultimate or final year students in the five departments studied.

Of the 290 distributed, 219 (76%) completed questionnaires were returned.  Results highlighted:

• Students did not feel feedback was prompt (5 department average = 2.60 on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 = definitely disagree and 5 = definitely agree).  60% of students reported longer than three weeks for receiving assessment feedback and 94% felt it was too long.
• In three of the five departments students disagreed that they had received detailed comments on their work (5 department average = 2.51, range 1.58 to 3.24).
• Further detailed questioning revealed a wide range of feedback methods available and used by students including individual written (60%) and verbal (53%) feedback. These, along with model answers, were the preferred methods of feedback for most students
• Helpfulness of feedback was rated low (5 department average = 2.69, range 1.94 to 3.22) although over 70% of the students agreed that feedback helps them understand where they went wrong, recognise areas of weakness and motivates them to improve.
• More than half of the students reported that feedback can be confusing, leaving them demoralised or unsure how to use it.

The current cohort of students remain dissatisfied with feedback, however, many of the types of feedback they would prefer are already offered and given across the 5 departments.  This disparity between student perceptions of feedback they would like and actually receive requires further investigation. Students can find that feedback impacts on them negatively and even demoralises them.  Clearly departments must work harder to increase awareness of feedback and how best to use it. The results show a clear desire by students for individual feedback.  Methods of delivering this, without being too onerous for low staff to student ratios, need to be developed and disseminated.  Future students may well use results from the NSS to help decide which university they apply to making this work of the utmost importance.