Co-creation from a student’s perspective
You may also like
Student satisfaction rates have never been more crucial for universities facing financial pressures and heightened scrutiny. Yet many institutions lack co-creative workspaces that genuinely involve both staff and students in curriculum design. The gap between need and satisfaction tells its own story: something is not working.
At my university, the Colloquium, established by vice-chancellor Irene Tracey to foster interdisciplinary problem-solving, has evolved into a powerful model for student-staff partnership. Now in its third year, the programme brings together students and academics across disciplines to tackle complex challenges.
Last year, I joined this working group focused on climate change. Students from STEM and humanities backgrounds collaborated to address pressing environmental issues – not just surface-level concerns like recycling, but complex problems including sea-level rise and fast fashion’s environmental impact. We heard from physicists, mathematicians and humanities scholars in interactive lectures, then worked in interdisciplinary teams to develop solutions. The experience culminated in pitching our ideas, honing presentation skills while contributing meaningfully to university sustainability initiatives.
This model proves particularly valuable at a time when graduates are finding it increasingly difficult to secure internships. Students gain genuine CV experience while collaborating across disciplines on issues that matter. But co-design is not just about career preparation: it transforms how we engage with knowledge itself.
When co-design fails
The potential of student-staff collaboration is clear, but implementation matters enormously. Problems arise when student input is not fully integrated or expectations are not aligned. If an initiative is marketed as student-led but operates with top-down control, trust erodes quickly. While the vice-chancellor’s Colloquium avoided this pitfall, I have witnessed other cases where staff dominate discussions beyond necessity, or where students receive insufficient support because they are left entirely to their own devices. Neither extreme produces satisfactory outcomes.
- How GenAI can amplify co-creation in higher education
- Co-creating with students: practical considerations and approaches
- Embracing co-creation through experiential learning
Successful collaboration requires genuine partnership: not token consultation where decisions have already been made, nor complete abdication of guidance and expertise. The balance is delicate but achievable.
Beyond flagship programmes like the Colloquium, my university has introduced co-creative elements through initiatives like TORCH internships, where students work within university departments to gain practical experience. Of course, funding pressures mean opportunities like these remain unequally distributed across institutions. However, there are cost-effective co-design approaches that don’t require extra resource.
Practical steps for educators
1. Make group work genuinely interactive
University education already incorporates group presentations, but for equal workload distribution and meaningful peer engagement, they have to be designed with intention. Active listening, real-time response and substantive feedback transform presentations from boxes to tick into genuine learning experiences.
2. Prioritise student-staff interface
Whether through active listening exercises, field trips or implemented feedback mechanisms, regular touchpoints between students and lecturers strengthen course design. Collecting student feedback via Google Forms won’t take very long, but actually reading and implementing suggestions demonstrates that student voices matter to you.
3. Create meaningful student representation roles
Many universities have student representatives, but participation remains uneven. Incentivising engagement doesn’t require significant funding – offering students titles such as “feedback coordinator” or “departmental representative” provides CV value while ensuring student needs reach decision-makers. Expanding and standardising these roles across departments would amplify student voices.
4. Design interdisciplinary collaboration opportunities
Modules requiring students from different departments to work together, such as pairing STEM and history students to explore climate change from multiple perspectives, help students develop disciplinary understanding, and create actionable change as a result. These don’t have to be long-running collaborations – even single projects can prove transformative.
5. Simply ask students what they want to see
This sounds obvious, yet remains surprisingly rare in practice. Student satisfaction often corresponds with their perception of how invested lecturers are in student well-being and course development. Having informal conversations consistently about course direction show that – and foster a genuine partnership.
6. Coordinate with career services
Understanding why students choose particular modules, whether for career preparation or intellectual interest, allows educators to design curricula that serve both purposes. Knowing which modules students take for specific career outcomes can help keep the alternative pathways available for students simply pursuing the joy of learning.
The true cost of not listening
Implementing genuine co-design requires time. It can’t be fully captured by university rankings or feedback forms alone. Yet the cost of ignoring student voices is far greater. The value of pairing student perspectives with lecturer expertise is invaluable: countless professionals credit transformative teachers with shaping their careers.
Students do not need to be seen as equals to lecturers in expertise, but as colleagues in the shared project of education. This is not about challenging academic authority; it is about ensuring both parties gain meaningful outcomes from their collaboration. When students help shape their learning experience, engagement deepens, satisfaction rises and education fulfils its transformative potential.
Some institutions have already moved beyond tokenistic consultation to genuine partnership. It’s time others followed suit.
Ava Doherty is an undergraduate student at the University of Oxford.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.
