What are computer science students saying about their teaching staff?

By Student Voice AI

Published May 10, 2024 · Updated Oct 12, 2025

teaching staffcomputer science

Students are positive about their lecturers overall, but Computer Science shows a more mixed profile and sharper priorities. In the National Student Survey (NSS), the UK‑wide survey of final‑year undergraduates, comments about Teaching Staff are predominantly favourable (78.3% Positive), yet sentiment within Computing sits lower by index at +44.6. Across Computer Science, the balance is more even with 50.1% Positive, and students focus on assessment clarity and delivery reliability: feedback is rated poorly (−27.8) while predictable access to staff remains a strength (+30.1). These sector patterns frame the analysis below of how students experience expertise, communication, availability, pedagogy, enthusiasm and feedback in computer science programmes.

Why does technical expertise matter in computer science teaching?

Students value lecturers who combine robust theoretical grounding with recent, applied experience. They respond when staff connect algorithms, architectures and tooling to authentic workflows and contemporary practice. In technical subjects where sentiment trends lower than the category baseline, lecturers lift understanding by demonstrating worked exemplars, narrating trade‑offs, and aligning assessment briefs with the skills industry expects. Providers should prioritise continuous professional development that keeps curricula and lab practice current, and enable staff to iterate modules in response to cohort feedback.

How should lecturers communicate complex concepts?

Students engage when lecturers scaffold explanations and signpost what good work looks like. They report stronger learning when staff break down problems, use multiple representations, and check understanding at natural pause points. In Computing, a sharper focus on explicit assessment criteria, exemplars, and consistent session structure improves perceptions of delivery and reduces avoidable confusion. Institutions can provide practical training on explanation strategies and encourage teaching teams to converge on shared marking criteria and language across modules.

How available and supportive are lecturers?

Predictable access to people is consistently valued by computer science students. They want timely responses, known office hours, and drop‑ins that line up with deadlines. Programmes should set simple, visible service standards, mirror support for part‑time and commuter cohorts through flexible contact options and asynchronous Q&A, and ensure personal tutor systems are easy to navigate. Brief pulse surveys after major teaching moments help teams close the loop and keep support consistent across a large teaching workforce.

Which teaching methods work best in computer science?

Students favour interactive labs, project‑based tasks and code‑along demonstrations that let them apply concepts immediately. Structured session signposting, short problem‑solving sprints, and peer review help students translate theory into practice. Where lecture‑only delivery feels abstract, blending it with hands‑on activities and regular formative checkpoints improves momentum and confidence.

Does staff enthusiasm improve learning?

Enthusiasm from lecturers lifts participation and helps students see the relevance of their studies. When staff share current projects and explain why a method or pattern matters, it accelerates understanding and raises ambition. Teams sustain this energy by coordinating guest inputs, showcasing student work, and making links to personal development and career pathways visible within modules.

How should coursework and feedback be handled?

Assessment and feedback represent the most actionable improvement area for Computer Science. Students ask for transparent marking criteria, annotated exemplars, and feed‑forward that shows exactly how to progress next time. Consistent turnaround times, structured feedback aligned to published criteria, and a single source of truth for any changes to assessment briefs reduce noise and help students use feedback effectively.

What do students want improved, and what already works?

Students praise approachable staff and appreciate when teaching connects to real‑world practice. They ask for more interactive sessions, consistent communications about changes, and assessment expectations that are unambiguous across modules. Programmes that stabilise delivery rhythms, maintain predictable access to teaching teams, and make marking criteria explicit see satisfaction rise without compromising academic standards.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

  • Continuous visibility of Teaching Staff comments and sentiment over time, with drill‑downs from provider to subject family and cohort in Computer Science.
  • Like‑for‑like comparisons by subject group and student demographics, plus segmentation by mode, site and year of study to find pockets where change matters most.
  • Concise, anonymised summaries for programme and departmental briefings, with export‑ready tables for quality boards.
  • Proof of progress through comparable benchmarks, so teams can show how assessment clarity, delivery rhythm and access standards improve student experience over time.

Request a walkthrough

Book a Student Voice Analytics demo

See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and governance packs designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.

  • All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
  • Versioned outputs with TEF-ready governance packs.
  • Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.
Prefer email? [email protected]

More posts on teaching staff:

More posts on computer science student views:

© Student Voice Systems Limited, All rights reserved.