Input to Impact: A Two-Round Delphi Study to Identify and Rate Student Experience Enhancements

Universities face growing pressure to evidence a high-quality “student experience”, yet institutions often lack systematic ways to convert student voice into institutional actions. Therefore, this study applied a two-round Delphi method at a post-1992 UK university to identify and prioritise student-suggested enhancements, and to evaluate the method’s effectiveness for collecting and prioritising feedback.Using an exploratory mixed-methods design and Jones’s (2017) seven-microsystem student experience framework, Round 1 (n=97) gathered open-ended suggestions across microsystems, and content analysis produced 26 categories to develop specific suggestions for the subsequent round. Round 2 (n=64 valid) converted these categories into 28 importance rating items on a 7-point scale, with a priori consensus criteria of median ≥ 6 and IQR ≤ 1. Overall, 15 items (54%) reached consensus. The strongest agreement concerned clarifying assessments (rubrics and exemplars), providing clear timetables with early access to materials, and offering online teaching options with earlier tutorials. All items concerning the “extracurricular activity” and “preparation for life after graduation” microsystems achieved consensus, signalling support for cohort-building events, integrating extracurricular learning, and early, structured placements and career guidance. Items in the “transition” and “peer/friendship groups” resulted in high medians but wider dispersion, reflecting diverse preferences. Students also reached consensus that the two-round Delphi was effective for collecting and prioritising student feedback (median=6; IQR=1). These findings provide a pragmatic, scalable route for converting student voice into context-sensitive, actionable institutional priorities. The approach is domain-agnostic and offers a blueprint for organisations seeking to involve primary stakeholders in institutional decision-making.