What do software engineering students need from student support?

student supportsoftware engineering

Most software engineering students need support that is responsive to assessment pressure, accessible to disabled students, and reliable in delivery and communications. Across National Student Survey (NSS) open-text for student support there are 23,254 comments, with 68.6% Positive, 29.7% Negative and 1.6% Neutral (index 32.9), but software engineering feedback is more finely balanced at 49.1% Positive, 47.5% Negative and 3.4% Neutral. The student support category aggregates UK-wide comments about academic and personal support, while the software engineering grouping maps CAH11-01-04 programmes within computing. These benchmarks signpost priorities: tighten assessment clarity—feedback alone accounts for 8.0% of remarks and trends negative (−22.3)—and close the disability gap (index 28.0 versus 35.1 for non-disabled) through accessible, joined-up services.

Understanding the unique challenges and needs of software engineering students in UK higher education plays a substantive role in shaping effective student support. Software engineering courses demand technical skill, innovative problem-solving and sustained commitment, which places pressure on students. Engaging with student voice helps tailor support: surveys and text analysis illuminate where support can improve and where it already works well. Institutions that analyse these patterns design frameworks that respond to the needs students express, aligning academic, wellbeing and operational supports with real use.

How should academic support address software engineering’s specific demands?

Academic support must reflect the subject’s intensity. Students grapple with advanced programming and substantial project work, so targeted tutoring in languages and domains such as Java, Python and machine learning, plus office hours that align with assessment timelines, make a noticeable difference. Access to well-equipped labs provides hands-on experience that underpins learning. Given assessment clarity drives sentiment in software engineering, programmes that publish exemplars, use interpretable marking criteria and provide actionable feedforward see better engagement with support. Alongside enhancement, providers should improve access and awareness by packaging signposting into a single front door with clear next steps and timeframes.

What mental health and wellbeing support works for this cohort?

Sustained coding, live project deadlines and tight sprints can elevate stress and undermine wellbeing. Universities should provide counselling, workshops on stress management and quiet spaces, but also ensure rapid triage, named case ownership and proactive follow-up so students do not have to repeat their story. The NSS pattern shows disabled students report lower sentiment than their peers, so standardising accessible communications, consistent adjustments and timely check-ins is essential. Regular evaluation of take-up and outcomes ensures provision adapts to need.

Which career services best bridge university and the tech workplace?

Effective career support integrates with the curriculum. Job search advice, skills workshops and alumni mentoring help students connect academic work to industry expectations. Internships and live briefs bridge theory and practice, but workload balance requires careful planning. Career counselling that aligns goals, timing and role expectations reduces conflict with assessment peaks. Providers can strengthen outcomes by coordinating signposting, preparing students for technical interviews and closing the loop on employer feedback to keep activities current.

Do technical resources match learning and industry needs?

High-performance computing, contemporary IDEs and version control, and ready access to cloud and testing platforms form the core technical infrastructure. Licences must be current and easy to obtain, with platforms aligned so students do not waste time navigating multiple systems. Hardware alone is insufficient; curricula should embed these tools in modules so students apply them under assessment conditions. Regular reviews keep resources aligned to evolving industry practice and minimise friction in hybrid or remote elements.

How does community and peer support improve outcomes?

Peer mentoring, coding clubs and hackathons promote belonging and knowledge exchange, mirroring the collaborative nature of software engineering. For newer coders, supportive facilitation matters so competitive environments remain inclusive. Peer mentoring helps students navigate modules and assessment expectations while building mentors’ leadership skills. A multifaceted culture of support, spanning academic help and social connection, strengthens resilience and persistence.

How should providers use student voice to improve support?

NSS open-text and ongoing dialogue channels provide granular evidence on how services land with students. Programme teams should synthesise survey insights with live feedback from representative fora, then act visibly and quickly. Establish a single source of truth for communications, publish reasons for changes to timetabling or assessment arrangements, and evidence “you said, we did”. Tracking time to resolution and reasons for delay, and sharing a short monthly summary with students and staff, builds trust.

What should providers prioritise next?

• Make assessment clarity non-negotiable: publish annotated exemplars, checklist-style rubrics and grade descriptors; calibrate marking across modules; commit to feedback that includes next steps.
• Reduce operational friction: coordinate communications in one place, name owners for timetabling and organisation, and provide timely rationales for changes.
• Lift the learning experience in mixed modes: align platforms, materials and timelines; make interactions easy to find and revisit.
• Close gaps in access: guarantee quick triage, accessible communications and proactive follow-up, with targeted outreach to disabled students and those less likely to seek help.
• Protect people-centred strengths: maintain visible, supportive staff and effective signposting so students know where to go and what will happen next.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

Student Voice Analytics turns thousands of open-text comments into concise, prioritised actions. It tracks topic volume and sentiment over time, from provider to school and programme, with like-for-like comparisons across subject areas and student demographics. You can segment by cohort or site, export anonymised summaries for programme and professional services teams, and benchmark software engineering against the wider student support picture to focus on assessment clarity, delivery and communications, and equitable access.

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.

Book a demo Prefer email? [email protected]

More posts on student support:

• What kind of support helps medical technology students succeed?
• What support works for students in combined, general or negotiated studies?
• What support do computer science students say works best?
• Does targeted support improve success for dentistry students?

More posts on software engineering student views:

• What holds back delivery of software engineering education?