Are computer science students right to say workload is disproportionate?
Yes. Across the National Student Survey (NSS) open-text dataset, the workload theme is predominantly negative: 81.5% Negative with a sentiment index of −33.6 from 6,847 comments. In computer science, defined using the Common Aggregation Hierarchy applied across the sector for subject benchmarking, workload comments trend even more negative at −43.3, albeit a modest share at 2.4%. These patterns frame the credit-load tensions discussed here and explain why students perceive imbalance between modules nominally set at different credit weights.
How does coursework structure in computer science map to hours and expectations?
Students starting a degree in computer science often find the credit system opaque. In most UK universities, computer science courses typically operate on a credit model where each course unit is assigned a certain number of credits, usually ranging between 10 to 20 credits per course. These credits directly correlate to the number of contact hours a student is expected to engage with, including lectures, practical labs, and private study. The standard rule of thumb suggests that one credit equates to approximately 10 hours of student effort. Hence, a 10-credit course should theoretically encompass about 100 hours of work, and a 20-credit course roughly 200 hours. However, looking into the workload, students frequently report that 10-credit courses might require as much, if not more, labour than 20-credit ones. This discrepancy can significantly skew a student's ability to manage time and stress effectively. In computer science, where experiential learning and practical applications are central, such inconsistencies can hinder students from engaging deeply with the content or investing time in crucial personal projects or further learning.
Why do 10-credit modules sometimes feel as heavy as 20-credit ones?
A core concern among computer science students centres on the demanding nature of 10-credit courses that often require as much effort as 20-credit options. This strains time management and academic balance. Analysing feedback from student surveys, this issue emerges as central to maintaining a sustainable study-life balance. Academic staff need to evaluate how coursework is structured and consider the implications of workload on student outcomes. Not all students experience the disparity in the same way, so a nuanced approach is essential. Facilitating dialogue between students and staff helps capture actionable feedback that can inform module design, sequencing of assessments and expectations in assessment briefs and marking criteria.
How does heavy coursework crowd out personal projects and independent learning?
Heavy coursework can severely limit students' capacity to engage in personal projects and independent study, both essential for skill development and innovation. Computer science thrives on experimentation and practical application, often pursued through self-initiated projects and exploration of new technologies. When coursework consumes most available time, students lose opportunities to apply theory, build portfolios and test ideas that drive employability. Staff recognise the need for structured learning, yet they also value space for independent work; prioritising both requires thoughtful timetabling, coherent assessment design and clarity about expected weekly effort.
What are the wellbeing implications of uneven workload?
Sustained overload increases stress, anxiety and sleep disruption, which depresses learning and progression. Staff benefit from recognising early indicators and providing timely support. Institutions should maintain a supportive framework that includes counselling, workshops focused on stress management and a reviewed approach to deadline clustering. Integrating mental health support into the academic framework fosters an environment that promotes wellbeing and academic attainment.
How should programmes respond to workload feedback?
Treat feedback as an operational signal, not only a pastoral one. Programme teams can:
- Map summative deadlines across modules, avoid bunching and set escalation rules before adding or altering deadlines.
- Publish a single assessment calendar and lock a short change window ahead of peak periods.
- Provide explicit weekly time budgets for tasks and check them with high-volume cohorts, especially full-time and younger students, through short workload check-ins mid-term.
- Communicate any changes via a single source of truth so students can plan.
These steps align with sector evidence that workload concerns are a persistent pain point and that visible responsiveness improves student voice outcomes.
What practices help programmes balance workload?
- Sequence assessments at programme level, with caps on simultaneous heavy tasks.
- Align assessment briefs, marking criteria and feedback turnaround with realistic student effort, and pilot adjustments with representative cohorts.
- Blend synchronous and asynchronous components to widen participation while protecting core contact.
- Offer practical planning support and targeted study skills for cohorts who report more negative workload experiences, monitoring whether actions lift sentiment over subsequent cycles.
Where does this leave computer science programmes?
The signal from student comments is consistent: workload needs active programme-level design, not tacit accumulation. Programmes that publish coherent assessment calendars, budget student effort transparently and maintain predictable communications create the headroom for independent learning and reduce stress. Doing this well complements wider improvements students ask for in assessment clarity and the delivery of teaching.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics surfaces workload sentiment alongside assessment, delivery and support themes for computer science, enabling you to:
- Track workload trends from provider to programme, with demographic cuts and subject groupings for precise targeting.
- Produce concise, anonymised summaries and export-ready tables for rapid briefing and like-for-like benchmarking by subject and cohort.
- Identify deadline-bunching weeks, high-friction modules and the impact of changes across cycles, so programme teams can prioritise the adjustments that move the dial.
Book a Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and standards and NSS requirements.
More posts on workload:
- Do law students find their workload manageable?
- Do psychology students face distinctive workload pressures in UK higher education?
- Are adult nursing students’ workloads manageable?
- What drives workload pressures for teacher training students?