Hi there, 

Welcome to the March edition of our Student Voice Bulletin! Each month, we’ll share key student insights and feedback, aiming to improve how we communicate and work together to enhance the student experience. In this month's bulletin, you'll find:

-an update on the RHSU Priority 8 results

-initial findings on the international student experience survey

-a report from the Advice Centre on their experiences with AI Misconduct

We hope you find this useful!

Student Voice Team @ RHSU

Update on RHSU Priority 8

This year's Student Leadership Elections included the launch of the RHSU Priority 8, where students voted for 8 out of 20 key themes or issues students wanted to see the Student Union work on. These Priorities have been collated from Rate Your Union, Speak Week, NSS Student Executives groups, and various surveys across the academic year, and highlight what students are most concerned about on campus. 

The RHSU Priority 8 for the 2025/26 academic year is: 

1. More affordable food options on campus
2. Reduce deadline stacking for assessments and coursework
3. More financial support for students
4. Increase social and study spaces
5. More student friendly timetables
6. Cheaper and more frequent local transport
7. Make SU events more affordable
8. Improve parking on the Egham campus

You will be able to find more information about these Priorities, as well as the Sabbatical Officer lead for each Priority, and progress updates on the SU page soon! We'll be workshopping the priorities over term three and early summer.  

International Student Survey

We have been conducting an insight report into the international student experience. The project is still ongoing with a focus group taking place next week, but here are some of our initial takeaways from the survey:

• 177 students completed the survey (22% International EU, 70% International outside EU).
• Housing: Top 5 issues looking for private housing: poor housing conditions, no guarantor, limited availability, need for advanced rent of more than 1 month, lack of information about the housing market
• Arrivals: 60% felt the University had prepared them for what to expect before starting their course. 22% experienced issues or delays with applying for a visa and 58% of those students said RHUL helped them resolve the issue. 19% used the free airport pickup service and 24% didn't know about it. 55% arrived before Welcome Week, 27% during and 12% after (67% of these students said it was because of a visa delay). 53% stated they experienced culture shock when arriving, top five experiences were: homesickness, loneliness, feeling isolated, sadness, and trouble sleeping. 
• Academic Experience: 87% said they feel supported in their learning by staff on their course. 67% said staff and students in their department are welcoming and inclusive. 30% said this is only sometimes the case. Students listed the following as the top academic barriers they experienced: different assessment methods, different marking criteria, different teaching styles, lack of confidence to ask questions, name mispronunciation, A-level assumptions and struggled with academic independence.
• Belonging: 65% agree to an extent that they feel like they are part of an academic community. 55% agree they had opportunities to form new friendships. 48% said they sometimes feel lonely. On their course and in halls are the top two places students reported as how they formed close friendships. 52% are members of a society and 17% a sports club. 
• Discrimination & Prejudice: 16% have personally experienced discrimination or prejudice at RHUL, 14% have witnessed discrimination or prejudice happen to others. 
• Final Notes: 23% have considered leaving or suspending their course. 18% have experienced a severe impact because of the cost-of-living crisis and 31% had a major impact. 64% agreed their experience as an international student at RHUL has met their expectations. 78% are satisfied to an extent with their overall experience of their course so far. 92% would recommend Royal Holloway to another international student. 

For the next bulletin, we'll be able to share a full report of the results! 

Advice Centre- AI and Academic Misconduct

The Regulations on Academic Misconduct 2024/25 introduce two AI-related offences: Commissioning AI, which accounted for over 40% of academic misconduct cases we supported with last year, and Unauthorised Use of AI, a new offence introduced this academic year to reflect the university’s updated guidance, which now permits ethical AI use in certain assessments.

While the updated policy is a positive step, it also brings new challenges due to varying AI guidelines between departments and assessments. This makes it even more important for students to read their assessment briefs carefully, while also requiring us, the advice team, to navigate case-by-case complexities without always knowing what guidance the student has received from their department.

This trend suggests that students are still adjusting to the evolving role of AI in academia and may need more support in understanding what constitutes ethical use. Many have expressed difficulties in distinguishing between Google searching and generative AI, interpreting assessment guidelines, and knowing where to access clear guidance. This highlights the importance of ongoing communication and support to help students to navigate these challenges.

A further challenge is the lack of definitive methods for identifying AI use, meaning that academic misconduct cases can sometimes rely on subjective interpretation. Markers may have varying levels of experience in recognising AI-generated content, leading to inconsistencies in how cases are identified and handled. This creates difficulties for both staff and students, with instances where students who have produced exemplary work face scrutiny simply because the standard raises suspicions.

To address these issues, the Advice team, in collaboration with the CeDAS team, is providing guidance by encouraging them to maintain a log of their process, including plans, drafts, and records of any AI usage. We also aim to provide clarification on proper citation, referencing, and declaration of AI tools, as well as to raise awareness of the ethical use of AI and its limitations. Raising awareness through departmental efforts and encouraging students to seek support from module leaders and CeDAS will help create a more informed and supportive environment as students navigate these challenges.