Student perspectives on university wellbeing: Reflections on emerging interventions

Welcome to our reflection on evaluations of mental health support in higher education. As members of the Student Advisory Team, we had the privilege of supporting a comprehensive wellbeing evaluation funded by TASO and conducted by Ipsos.

University life represents a transformative period of growth, but it can also present significant challenges. Consequently, effective wellbeing support is far more than an optional amenity – it is an essential foundation for student success. 

In this article, we outline the preliminary findings of this evaluation, share our reflections, and consider how these approaches might shape future institutional strategies.

Why evaluate preventative wellbeing initiatives?

While mental health services have been in focus for a while, there has been much less research into preventative wellbeing interventions. TASO recognised this evidence gap and set out to contribute by funding a robust evaluation of three new approaches being piloted at UK universities. 

A defining feature of this project was its methodology. Ipsos evaluated the interventions using a quasi-experimental design, comparing outcome metrics between participating and non-participating student groups to assess true impact. This quantitative approach was combined with qualitative data from interviews and focus groups with students and staff to get a rich, personal insight into their experiences. For further background on the project’s origins, see Ruichen’s interview with Tatjana Damjanovic.

Evaluation findings and student advisory reflections

1. University of Exeter: The pastoral mentor

This intervention provides a dedicated, department-based staff member who proactively contacts students identified as ‘potentially disengaged’. Preliminary findings suggest that the model reached approximately 3,660 students in the 2024/25 academic year alone. The initial plan for proactive outreach based on student data shifted to become more reactive to referrals from staff or students themselves, partly due to challenges in getting consistent data. The support was highly valued, with students praising the quick response times, something that ‘set them apart from other wellbeing services’.

In our early reflections and discussions, our group thought this model had the most potential. We really liked its proactive nature, as it ‘fills a gap’ by providing active outreach instead of relying on students to ask for help which we know can be a key barrier. The impact on students appear to be strong, albeit preliminary. For us, the testimony of one particular student was particularly powerful: “It probably stopped me from dropping out because in that first term I felt so alone and felt so worried”. 

So are there any concerns about this type of proactive intervention? Well, while we really like the proactive outreach of this approach, tracking engagement data risks making students feel monitored or penalised. For this reason, we thought it’s important to think about compassionate, carefully worded communication that focuses on support rather than compliance.

2. Canterbury Christ Church University: The Wellbeing Toolkit

The Wellbeing Toolkit is a digital platform and email system designed to help students create their own personalised wellbeing action plans through self-reflection. .

The toolkit faced operational challenges during rollout, making it difficult to integrate directly into academic curricula as planned. An email campaign was used to promote the toolkit, but unfortunately this strategy also struggled to gain traction in the early stages with approximately only 1–1.5% of students opening the emails. We noted the limitations of relying solely on email for critical student communications, and that perhaps using social media or another outlet would have helped reach students. 

However, for the students who did engage, the feedback was positive. They appreciated the self-reflection prompts and personalised recommendations. One student said: “It’s more like a personal therapy session for me. That’s how I feel.”

The great strength here is empowerment. We felt the toolkit’s flexibility empowers students and allows them to select and decide on their needs. We also like the platform’s self-paced nature – rather than expecting students needing to attend a specific workshop. We’re excited to see how the intervention progresses and how they overcame some of these early challenges.  

3. University of East Anglia: Embedded wellbeing workshops

This initiative delivers focused workshops on specific wellbeing topics, facilitated by specialist teams and integrated directly into academic timetables to reach broad student cohorts.

Where workshops were timetabled into courses, they achieved a high 82% attendance rate, with 1,401 students attending in 2024/25. Preliminary student feedback suggests the content was relevant and the facilitators were warm and approachable. They particularly valued the interactive elements as well as learning from peers. One student noted: “You’re not only just learning from the content they’ve got, but you can also see what people that are in the same position as you do”.

Our team was initially sceptical about this initiative, as we thought the content may be too general, and attendance would be low as it’s difficult to make time for wellbeing when things are stressful and busy. However, the preliminary evaluation data really challenged our assumptions. It showed that if you embed workshops into the curriculum and make them relevant, students can get real value from them. We also thought that this intervention showed the most potential for providing a space for students to build a community and that this sense of community is really important. 

Alignment with the University Mental Health Charter

To contextualise the wellbeing interventions, we discussed how they map onto the University Mental Health Charter. Developed by Student Minds, the charter provides an evidence-based framework for universities to adopt a ‘whole-university approach’ to mental health and wellbeing. The charter is organised into four key domains: Learn, Support, Live, and Work 

• The ‘Learn’ Domain (Academic Life): The preliminary evaluation of all three interventions provide encouraging insights into how support can be integrated into learning and into academic departments.
• The ‘Support’ Domain (Services): We think the workshops were viewed as a gateway to other wellbeing services for students, and that the non-clinical framing of the pastoral mentor could particularly appeal to international students who may face cultural barriers to accessing formal mental health services. Likewise the toolkit could help to build capacity in support services by offering more immediate preventive self-help support to students before their difficulties emerge. 
• The ‘Work’ Domain (Staff): The pastoral mentor model was also praised for reducing the pastoral burden on academic tutors. However, preliminary observations from the evaluation raise a risk of ‘mission creep’, if mentors are asked to take on too many responsibilities and it’s important to protect them from burnout.
• The ‘Live’ Domain (Holistic Life): Preliminary findings show promise for all three interventions fostering community. For example, the Toolkit was tentatively shown to increase students’ sense of belonging, with another student crediting it for encouraging them to join clubs and societies which they found to be beneficial.

A multi-tiered approach to mental health support

Our discussions indicate that there is no single solution for student wellbeing. Rather, an effective framework requires a multi-tiered approach where complementary strategies address different needs.

The pastoral mentor model was praised for its proactive, personalised support that makes students feel ‘heard and validated’. Whereas the Wellbeing Toolkit stands out for its ability to empower students with flexible, autonomous tools they can use anytime, anywhere. And finally, the wellbeing workshops showed potential for building community and facilitating vital peer support.

However, our talks and preliminary evaluation findings also highlighted several outstanding gaps that require further work. 

The fundamental tension between academic priorities and wellbeing remains a systemic challenge for students. The ongoing issue of ensuring genuine student engagement is also a critical hurdle. For interventions like the pastoral mentor, establishing clear, transparent protocols around data usage is essential to build student trust, and the risk of ‘mission creep’ must be managed to protect the core role. It also will not fully remove the pastoral responsibilities of academic staff. Some students will feel more comfortable talking to their lecturers or they may feel more connected to them as a familiar face. 

Finally, universities must address resource constraints to ensure sustainability. As one staff member noted, the workshop team is a team of three across a university of over 17,000 students. Addressing these gaps is the next crucial step in creating robust, whole-university support systems.

Meet the student advisory team

Our advisory group comprises six students representing diverse academic backgrounds and universities across the UK:

•  University of Exeter
  • Ruichen: Studying for an MSc in Clinical Mental Health Sciences
  • Audrey: A recent graduate from the University of Exeter, serving as the Sustainable Education Intern and Student Advisor on the Nurture-U project.
• Canterbury Christ Church University 
  • Clem: An MA student studying Film Theory 
  • Felicity: A final-year Law with International Relations undergraduate
• University of Sheffield
  • Kristenn-Lenaig: A second-year Psychology PhD student, investigating longitudinal student mental health trends.
  • Jodie: A recent Master’s graduate in Psychological Research Methods

The team behind the evaluation

This initiative represents a significant cross-sector collaboration:

• Funder: TASO is an independent charity dedicated to eliminating equality gaps in higher education. TASO funded this project to expand the evidence base on student wellbeing strategies.
• Evaluator: Ipsos, a leading market and social research company, designed and conducted the evaluations across three university interventions.
• Student voice lead: Dr Emma Broglia at the University of Sheffield facilitated the Student Advisory Group’s activities and directed their contributions to the Ipsos evaluation.

Additional resources

To learn more about this project and access related content, explore the resources below.

Podcast Series

Listen to our two-part discussion on the evaluation findings and their alignment with the Mental Health Charter:

Expert Interview

Read Ruichen’s and Audrey’s full interview with Tatjana Damjanovic on how evidence is reshaping institutional support.