Our Student Voice staff team attended the recent Explorance Conference on Student Voices in Higher Education. They were accompanied by Scarlet James (Student Rep), Harry Jenkins (Student Rep), Michael Jones (Wales Rep) and Aimee Prior (Disabled Students Rep). Scarlet has written an article about her experience about the conference, with contributions from Aimee, Harry and Michael, and why the student voice is so important.
Attending the recent Explorance Conference on Student Voices in Higher Education was a reminder that listening to students is not a one-off exercise, nor something that can be reduced to a set of numbers on a dashboard. Across two insightful, engaging, and thought-provoking days, one message came through clearly: student voice only becomes meaningful when it is rooted in belonging, trust, and action.
With universities from across the sector represented, the event created a space not just to discuss feedback mechanisms, but also to reflect honestly on what it means to hear students properly, particularly those whose voices are too often overlooked.
Beyond data: why student voice is more than numbers
Student surveys, including tools such as the NSS (National Student Survey), play an important role in highlighting patterns and trends. However, as discussed throughout the conference, data alone cannot capture lived experience.
Numbers may tell us what students are feeling, but they rarely explain why. They cannot account for the realities faced by disabled students, distance learners, carers, neurodivergent students, or those balancing study with complex lives. When student voice is treated as a metric rather than a relationship, there is a risk that feedback becomes extractive rather than empowering.
A recurring theme across sessions was the need to move beyond a “data-first” mindset toward context-led listening, where narrative, nuance, and trust are valued as highly as quantitative insights.
Surveys often contain hidden assumptions. At the conference, Michael (Wales Student Rep and a current representative for the School of Engineering and Innovation) noticed that quieter students, minority groups, students studying remotely or in rural areas, and those with additional needs or heavy workloads are often overlooked. High response rates or aggregated scores may create the impression that the student body is fully engaged and satisfied, but this can hide the experiences of many who do not complete surveys or who feel hesitant to give honest feedback without reassurance that their responses are confidential and valued.
He also observed that survey design can reinforce these assumptions. Questions are often focused on what institutions want to know, rather than what students consider important, and the lack of co-design can reduce inclusivity and relevance. Surveys can also feel impersonal and miss nuance, emotion, or the context that human interaction naturally captures.
This experience challenged the assumption that collecting survey data alone is enough. Michael realised that understanding student voices requires more than just numbers. Recognising individual circumstances, building trust, and considering the factors that shape students’ experiences – through personal check-ins, conversations, and visible action on feedback – are far more effective in helping students feel heard and valued. This approach is one he champions in his roles supporting students.
The discussions at the conference also highlighted the value of collaboration across institutions, as sharing best practices can strengthen the collection and utilisation of student feedback.
Engagement is not one-size-fits-all
A particularly important conversation centred on engagement, and how easily it is misunderstood.
Low attendance or quiet spaces do not indicate apathy. For many students, especially those studying with The Open University, engagement looks different. Distance learning, health conditions, caring responsibilities, work commitments, and access barriers all shape how and when students can participate.
The conference reinforced that visibility should not be confused with value. Students can be deeply engaged, reflective and invested without being present in traditional or highly visible ways. Recognising this is not just good practice, it is an inclusion issue.
This conversation prompted Aimee to reflect further on how institutions like The Open University can actively recognise and include invisible or non-traditional forms of engagement. During the conference, she attended a talk by Mark Warner (Senior Lecturer at Nescot College, Surrey) and Jackie O’Connor (Moving and Handling Trainer at GESH). Their discussion about children basing their self-worth on grades, and Jackie's sharing of her personal negative experiences studying with dyslexia, illustrated how traditional metrics can overshadow confidence, participation, and long-term potential. When students internalise the message that lower grades equal lower ability, disengagement can follow – not from lack of interest but from little self-belief.
Within Open SU, engagement is often imagined through invisible roles, attending meetings and drop-ins, and speaking at events. However, for many of us, this may take quieter forms such as contributing to online discussions, chatting with others during drop-ins, sharing lived experiences, participating in surveys, or supporting peers digitally. Creating this space would actively affirm that students don't necessarily need to be highly visible to be impactful.
Shared responsibility, built on encouragement
Another powerful insight was that student voice works best when responsibility is shared, not shifted. Students do have a role to play in engaging with feedback opportunities, but institutions also have a responsibility to ensure those opportunities are accessible, clearly communicated, and genuinely worthwhile. Engagement grows where students feel encouraged rather than pressured, and where contributing does not feel risky or futile.
One analogy offered during the event compared student voice to a gym membership: access alone is not enough.
Closing the loop: trust grows when students see change
A consistent barrier to engagement identified across discussions was a lack of visibility around outcomes. Students are far more likely to contribute when they understand what happens after feedback is given.
Closing the loop – showing students how their voices lead to real change – is fundamental to trust. Without this transparency, silence becomes self-protection rather than disengagement.
This is an area where the work happening behind the scenes is especially important.
Recognising the people behind the practice
The conference offered an opportunity to reflect on the often-unseen labour that sustains meaningful student voice work. The Open SU staff team play a crucial role in ensuring that student perspectives are not only collected but also championed, safeguarded, and acted upon.
The contributions of our Student Voice team (Kate Dungate, Gareth Jones, Jazz Simpson and Sammi Wright) and Freya Morris and Rachel Garnham (from the OU) reflect a deep commitment to inclusion, access, and care. Their work (much of it invisible) underpins students' confidence in speaking honestly and being heard.
This kind of sustained, values-led practice does not happen by accident. It is built through consistency, empathy, and a clear understanding that student voice is about people, not processes.
Any reflection on student voice at The Open University would be incomplete without recognising Natalie Baker, our President.
Natalie leads with a clear and unwavering commitment to underrepresented student voices, working tirelessly to modernise and humanise how students are heard across the University. While completing her own Psychology degree and managing her health conditions, she has helped embed a more interactive, inclusive, and compassionate approach to representation – one that meets students where they are, rather than where systems expect them to be.
Notably, this work is carried out without fanfare or a desire for recognition. Instead, it reflects a leadership style grounded in service, integrity and genuine care for the student community.
Leadership shaped by lived experience
The final keynote speech of the conference, moderated by our very-own Gareth Jones, brought many of these themes together. Gareth’s journey, as a former Open University student, advocate for Wales-based voices, and leader within the student movement, exemplifies the power of lived experience in shaping inclusive leadership.
Leadership rooted in student experience creates spaces where honesty feels safe and representation feels real. It also reminds students that their voices can shape the future direction of their institutions.
An issue raised by Harry was how strong student-led ideas can lose energy as they move through institutional channels. When the original contributor is no longer closely involved, purpose and momentum can fade. Keeping those voices connected helps maintain authenticity and impact.
The keynote also touched on the ongoing shortfall in mental health support, especially for disabled students who often face extra barriers to accessing help. Overstretched services, long waiting times, and one-size-fits-all systems can leave students feeling overlooked. While newer digital and AI-based tools are emerging, they are not always inclusive or appropriate for more complex needs. The point was made that if student voice is to be meaningful, support systems must be shaped with student realities in mind.
Final reflections: belonging is the foundation of voice
Scarlet reflects:
The Explorance Conference reinforced something many students already know intuitively: student voice flourishes when belonging exists.
When students feel safe, valued and represented, they do not need to be chased for feedback; they offer it freely. When institutions listen with intent and act with transparency, trust grows. And when leadership reflects lived experience, student voice becomes a shared endeavour rather than a task or procedure.
For those of us involved in student representation, the message is clear: meaningful change begins not with surveys, but with relationships.
Harry reflects:
Student-centred leadership begins with genuine understanding: taking time to recognise the varied pressures, barriers, and lived realities across the student body, and allowing those realities to shape what is questioned, raised, and prioritised. Leadership driven by student voice is not about visibility or status but about integrity and persistence. When leaders choose to listen deeply and speak with purpose, they help create spaces where fairness is strengthened and belonging becomes more possible. In that way, student voice is not just something to be heard; it becomes something that leads.
Aimee reflects:
I left the conference feeling not only informed but deeply affirmed. The event created space for honesty, where people shared their own experiences of barriers, belonging, and being heard. While the conference explored student voice in a broader, more meaningful way, it prompted me to reflect more personally on my experiences navigating higher education as a disabled student. Discussions around belonging, visibility, and being heard resonated strongly. Although disability was not always central to the conversations, the shared themes made me reflect on moments when access, understanding, and inclusion have shaped my journey. It reinforced how vital it is that disabled students' voices are not only included but actively sought and valued within student representation spaces.
It made me recognise, even more than before, that my role as the Disabled Student Representative is not just about advocacy but also about ensuring that lived experiences inform change. Student voice is most powerful when it makes space for those whose perspectives are often unseen or unheard. Continuing to amplify disabled students' voices and sharing them for those who may not want to or be able to do so remains essential work.
Michael reflects:
The conference highlighted how feedback systems can unintentionally exclude the very students they aim to support. Minority groups, quieter students, those studying in rural areas, and students with additional needs or heavy workloads are often overlooked. Students who are already engaged are more likely to complete surveys, while others may not, leaving some voices underrepresented.
Emotional factors also influence engagement. If surveys feel repetitive, or if students believe previous feedback has little impact, motivation diminishes. Without reassurance about confidentiality and clear follow-up, some may give neutral or overly positive responses to avoid drawing attention. For neurodivergent, disabled, and minority students, standard survey formats may not always seem accessible, further affecting whose voices are captured.
These insights emphasise the responsibility that comes with representation. Ensuring feedback is inclusive, transparent, and truly reflects the student community remains central to how student reps and the Open SU staff team approach their roles – helping every student feel confident that their voice genuinely matters.