Engaging student voices via digital feedback platforms: new directions, dilemmas, and affordances


  • Stella Kazamia
  • Helen Treharne
  • Karen Gravett
  • Naomi Winstone


Higher education institutions have adopted multiple tools to engage students’ voices on key areas, including teaching, learning opportunities, assessment, and feedback. Concerns about timeliness have meant that the effectiveness of such methods has been questioned. This has prompted the adoption of alternative approaches that can capture student feedback at earlier points in the degree programme. This paper explores how the adoption of the digital feedback platform Unitu, has impacted students’ experiences and their interactions with the academic staff. This was accomplished through a mixed method approach using surveys, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups with students and staff. This study indicates that Unitu can provide many affordances for staff and institutional leaders in their scope to surface students’ experiences and provide timely responses to students’ feedback. The dilemmas that educators must address if they are to continue promoting effective learning experiences through digital feedback platforms are also discussed in this paper.


Download data is not yet available.


Adams, W. C. (2015). Conducting semi-structured interviews. Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, 492–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171386.ch19

Ahmed, V. and Opoku, A. (2021) ‘Technology supported learning and pedagogy in times of crisis: The case of covid-19 pandemic’, Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), pp. 365–405. doi:10.1007/s10639-021-10706-w.

Ashwin, P. (2021) ‘Developing effective national policy instruments to promote teaching excellence: Evidence from the English case’, Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 6(1), pp. 27–45. doi:10.1080/23322969.2021.1924847.

Benton, S. L., & Cashin, W. E. (2013). Student ratings of instruction in college and University Courses. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 279–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8005-6_7

Bottrell, D. and Manathunga, C. (2019): Resisting Neoliberalism in Higher Education Volume I: Seeing through the cracks. (2019). Higher Education, 79(1), 179–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00384-6

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Chan, Z. C. Y., Stanley, D. J., Meadus, R. J., & Chien, W. T. (2017). A qualitative study on feedback provided by students in Nurse Education. Nurse Education Today, 55, 128–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.05.016

Charmaz, K. (2009). Grounded Theory. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Sage Knowledge. https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/socialscience

Creswell , J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches | Online Resources. https://edge.sagepub.com/creswellrd5e

Christopoulos, A. and Sprangers, P. (2021) ‘Integration of educational technology during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of teacher and student receptions’, Cogent Education, 8(1). doi:10.1080/2331186x.2021.1964690.

Darwin, S. (2021). The changing topography of student evaluation in Higher Education: Mapping the contemporary terrain. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(2), 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1740183

Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings1. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: An Evidence-Based Perspective, 93–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5742-3_5

Fielding , M. (2013). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192042000195236

Freeman, R. (2016). Is student voice necessarily empowering? Problematising student voice as a form of Higher Education Governance. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(4), 859–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1172764

Gravett, K., & Winstone, N. E. (2020). Making connections: Authenticity and alienation within students’ relationships in Higher Education. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(2), 360–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1842335

Gravett, K., Kinchin, I. M., & Winstone, N. E. (2020). ‘more than customers’: Conceptions of students as partners held by students, staff, and institutional leaders. Studies in Higher Education, 45(12), 2574–2587. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1623769

Gravett, K., Yakovchuk, N., & Kinchin, I. M. (2020). Enhancing student-centred teaching in higher education: The landscape of student-staff research partnerships. Palgrave Macmillan.

Harvey, L. (2003). Student feedback [1]. Quality in Higher Education, 9(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320308164

Harvey, L. (2011). The nexus of feedback and improvement. Student Feedback, 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-1-84334-573-2.50001-x

Hayes, A., O’Neill, E., Nemetz, F., & Oliver, L. (2020). Building an enhanced student experience. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Computing Education Practice 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372356.3372363

Kidd, P. S., & Parshall, M. B. (2000). Getting the focus and the group: Enhancing analytical rigor in Focus Group Research. Qualitative Health Research, 10(3), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973200129118453

Lygo-Baker, S., Kinchin, I. M., & Winstone, N. E. (2019). Engaging student voices in higher education diverse perspectives and expectations in partnership. Springer International Publishing.

Mayhew, E. (2019). Hearing everyone in the feedback loop: Using the new discussion platform, Unitu, to enhance the staff and student dialogue. European Political Science, 18(4), 714–728. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-019-00211-7

Medina, M. S., Smith, W. T., Kolluru, S., Sheaffer, E. A., & DiVall, M. (2019). A review of strategies for designing, administering, and using student ratings of instruction. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(5), 7177. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7177

Pitt, E., & Winstone, N. (2020). Towards technology enhanced dialogic feedback. The Enabling Power of Assessment, 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41956-1_7

Sabri, D. (2011). What’s wrong with ‘the student experience’? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(5), 657–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.620750

Scanlon, L., Rowling, L., & Weber, Z. (2007). ‘you don’t have like an identity … you are just lost in a crowd’: Forming a student identity in the first-year transition to University. Journal of Youth Studies, 10(2), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260600983684

Su, F. (2022) ‘The datafication of Higher Education: Examining universities’ conceptions and articulations of “teaching quality”’, Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 28(1), pp. 38–45. doi:10.1080/13603108.2022.2064933.

Warburton, S., Foreword, in Lygo-Baker, S., Kinchin, I. M., & Winstone, N. E. (2019). Engaging student voices in higher education diverse perspectives and expectations in partnership. Springer International Publishing.

Seale, J. (2010). Doing student voice work in Higher Education: An exploration of the value of participatory methods. British Educational Research Journal, 36(6), 995–1015. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920903342038

Unitu - Home. Unitu. (2023). https://unitu.co.uk/

West, D. S., Monroe, C. M., Turner-McGrievy, G., Sundstrom, B., Larsen, C., Magradey, K., Wilcox, S., & Brandt, H. M. (2016). A technology-mediated behavioral weight gain prevention intervention for college students: Controlled, quasi-experimental study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(6). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5474




How to Cite

Kazamia, S., Treharne, H. ., Gravett, K. ., & Winstone, N. . (2024). Engaging student voices via digital feedback platforms: new directions, dilemmas, and affordances. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 5(3), 178–197. Retrieved from https://sehej.raise-network.com/raise/article/view/1220