Abstract:

Student participation in curriculum evaluation is increasingly recognized as a key component of quality enhancement in higher education. While traditional approaches relied primarily on institutional and faculty-driven evaluation, recent perspectives emphasize the integration of student voice as a means of improving teaching and learning practices. This paper examines how student voice is operationalized within curriculum evaluation processes and proposes a structured participatory model that extends beyond feedback collection toward dialogic and collaborative engagement, representing the main contribution of the study.

The research was conducted during the 2024–2025 academic year within a Romanian public university and involved 62 students (undergraduate and postgraduate) and 12 academic staff members from three faculties (Social Sciences, Education, and Economics). Student voice is defined as meaningful involvement in curriculum-related decision-making, including design, implementation, and evaluation processes.

A qualitative research design was employed, supported by basic quantitative indicators to strengthen transparency. Data collection included 6 focus groups with students (6–10 participants each), 12 semi-structured interviews with academic staff, and the analysis of institutional documents related to curriculum review procedures. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, following a coding framework developed iteratively to capture patterns related to participation, perceived impact, and institutional practices.

The study introduces a structured model of student participation consisting of three interconnected components:
(1) facilitated dialogue spaces (e.g., moderated feedback forums),
(2) formal student representation in curriculum committees, and
(3) collaborative review sessions where students and staff jointly interpret feedback and propose changes. This model provides a more systematic approach compared to ad hoc or purely consultative practices.

Findings indicate that when student voice is embedded within transparent and structured processes, it contributes to more targeted curriculum improvements and increased student engagement. Participants reported that dialogue-based mechanisms enabled deeper understanding of learning experiences and more actionable feedback. In courses where follow-up actions were explicitly communicated, student participation rates in evaluation activities increased by approximately 25%. Conversely, tokenistic practices, such as collecting feedback without visible outcomes, were associated with reduced trust and lower engagement.

The paper argues that the novelty of this study lies in articulating and empirically grounding a structured, multi-level model of student participation that connects feedback, dialogue, and co-construction. Embedding such approaches within institutional quality cultures can support more responsive curricula, strengthen student–staff partnerships, and enhance the sustainability of teaching and learning improvement processes in higher education.

Keywords:

Student voice, curriculum evaluation, quality enhancement, student partnership, higher education quality.