Skip to content
All work

Case study 04Consulting · Education · Process Improvement

SCOT Student Consultant

Role
Student Consultant, Feedback Analysis & Strategy
Organization
SCOT (Student Consulting on Teaching), Syracuse University
Timeline
Spring 2026 — Present
Focus
Consulting · Education · Process Improvement

Impact at a glance

  • 2

    faculty-led courses

  • 10–20

    students per feedback session

01

Project overview

SCOT (Student Consulting on Teaching) gives faculty an outside read on how their course is landing with students. As a student consultant, I gather that feedback, find the patterns in it, and help instructors decide what to change.

So far I’ve worked across two faculty-led courses, with 10–20 students in each feedback session.

02

The challenge

Faculty need clear, usable student insight while a course is still running, not only at the end of the semester when it’s too late to change anything.

03

Goals and objectives

  1. Objective 01

    Collect honest, structured feedback from students.

  2. Objective 02

    Identify where instruction could improve.

  3. Objective 03

    Present findings in a way that helps faculty make decisions.

04

My role and responsibilities

As a student consultant, I work directly with faculty in two courses.

  • Facilitate structured discussions and classroom observations.
  • Synthesize qualitative feedback into evidence-based findings.
  • Write faculty reports and present prioritized recommendations directly to faculty.

05

Strategy and approach

  1. Step 01

    Collect

    Structured discussions and classroom observations, with feedback from 10–20 students per session.

  2. Step 02

    Diagnose

    Synthesize the feedback to find recurring engagement and teaching themes.

  3. Step 03

    Recommend

    Present prioritized recommendations directly to faculty.

06

Execution and deliverables

  • Feedback sessions

    Structured discussions and classroom observations across 2 faculty-led courses.

  • Faculty reports

    Detailed reports identifying recurring engagement and teaching themes.

  • Recommendations

    Prioritized recommendations presented to faculty in person, in time to act on during the semester.

07

Results and impact

Organization

Outcomes for the courses

  • Revised teaching strategies implemented for the rest of both courses

Individual

What I personally did

  • Facilitated feedback sessions and observations
  • Synthesized findings into faculty reports
  • Presented prioritized recommendations

08

Lessons learned

  • 1.Timing matters as much as the insight. Because the feedback came mid-semester, both courses could change while students were still in them, which an end-of-term evaluation can’t do. Feedback is most useful when it reaches people while they can still act on it.
  • 2.The way you ask shapes what you hear. A structured discussion with 10–20 students surfaces patterns a single comment never would. A lot of the job is separating what one person said from what the room kept coming back to.
  • 3.Recommendations have to be prioritized to get used. No instructor can change everything at once, so I lead with the few changes that would matter most and show the evidence behind each one.
  • 4.Honest feedback has to be delivered with respect. Faculty are opening up their teaching to student criticism. Framing findings as evidence and options, rather than a verdict, keeps the conversation constructive and makes it more likely the changes actually happen.