How should electrical and electronic engineering students choose modules?
Choose modules that align with your target roles and are feasible within timetabling and allocation constraints, prioritising applied content, assessment clarity and viable fallbacks. Across Module choice variety in the UK National Student Survey (NSS), students are broadly positive about choice (~15,673 comments; 64.6% Positive; sentiment index +27.8), but engineering cohorts are less enthusiastic where prerequisites and compulsory components limit options. Within electrical and electronic engineering as defined by the Common Aggregation Hierarchy used to group UK HE subjects, open‑text feedback (2018–2025) is modest in volume (~1,935 comments) and discussion of module choice/variety is infrequent (3.7%) and near neutral, so planning early against published module diets, known clashes and high‑demand options matters.
This post analyses the perspectives of electrical and electronic engineering students regarding the variety and relevance of module choices available within their programmes. It addresses the balance between theoretical knowledge and practical application, exploring how students navigate their curriculum to align with personal career goals and industry trends. Engaging with student voice, through methods such as text analysis and student surveys, provides insights into their needs and preferences. Institutions and staff teaching electrical and electronic engineering students should offer a broad module diet that is both relevant and engaging. The ability to tailor one’s education with relevant modules prepares students for the dynamic engineering environment by combining personal interests with industry‑relevant skillsets.
Why does module relevance matter for engineering careers? When selecting modules, relevance to current industry demands underpins student outcomes and employability. Modules in project management, nanotechnology, power engineering and electronics design map directly onto live engineering problems. Multidisciplinary projects and software‑focused modules build breadth, which employers value. Computing and engineering cohorts are among the least positive about module choice when capacity and compulsory components restrict options, so programmes should audit prerequisites and required modules to preserve meaningful optionality without diluting standards. A varied module diet enables students to match study choices to career aspirations and supports progression into a rapidly changing sector.
Where does variety and flexibility add value in module choice? Choice increases engagement when students can select options in areas such as renewable energy, robotics or communication systems. Institutions should publish the full module diet early with prerequisites, caps and known clashes, label high‑demand options and provide viable alternatives. Flexibility in timetable scheduling—especially avoiding single‑slot bottlenecks—helps students balance study and other commitments. Mature and part‑time learners often face more constraints; evening or online variants and a short, low‑friction switching window after teaching starts make optionality more accessible and equitable.
How do quality and organisation affect module choices? Students reward modules with coherent outcomes, current content and enjoyable learning. Outdated or poorly organised modules erode confidence, especially in fast‑moving fields. Staff should revise content regularly, monitor industry trends and integrate student feedback into module development. Transparent and fair allocation, visible waiting lists, time‑stamped queues and rules for priority (e.g., finalists, prerequisites) reduce frustration and help students commit early to a coherent pathway.
What does course and curriculum structure enable or constrain? Students often critique limited advanced options and the weight of foundational requirements that delay specialisation. A tightly packed trimester structure can amplify these concerns. Programme teams should run capacity and clash checks before enrolment windows open and aim for “no‑clash” timetables for common option pairs. Publishing “what changed and why” after allocation cycles demonstrates responsiveness and helps students plan with confidence.
What role do online learning and support systems play? Online delivery expands access to niche options and can improve advice via virtual office hours, forums and real‑time feedback. To maintain quality, providers should set expectations for format, interaction and materials so the experience is predictable. Well‑designed recordings, simulations and digital resources widen access without compromising pedagogical intent. Embedding student voice mechanisms within platforms makes it easier to iterate modules at pace.
How do assignments and workload shape module selection? Assessment design drives student choice and satisfaction. In electrical and electronic engineering, students talk most about assessment, with a particular focus on the clarity and consistency of feedback, marking criteria and methods. Providers should publish annotated exemplars, checklist‑style rubrics and indicative grade profiles, and run light‑touch marker calibration to reduce variance between modules. Workload feels more manageable when students can select engaging modules; conversely, narrow submission windows and intensive groupwork without scaffolding can deter otherwise attractive options. Aligning deadlines and providing transparent expectations reduces unnecessary stress.
What changed about module choice during COVID‑19 and what remains? The rapid pivot online expanded module availability but also exposed gaps in information and reduced face‑to‑face advice at critical decision points. Practical modules reliant on labs needed re‑design through virtual labs and simulation software to protect learning outcomes. Those adaptations continue to add value when used to increase flexibility and resilience, not as a lower‑quality substitute.
Why prioritise certifications and practical skills when choosing modules? Industry‑recognised certifications and structured practical experiences demonstrate proficiency and readiness. Simulations and laboratories that connect theory to authentic tasks build confidence for complex engineering challenges. Programmes that incorporate certification opportunities and prioritise practical application equip graduates to adapt and thrive in professional roles.
What should providers do next? Use published data and student voice to prioritise module relevance, protect real optionality and stabilise delivery operations. For module choice, this means transparent information before enrolment, clash‑aware timetabling, fair allocation with visible queues, flexible variants for mature and part‑time students, and a time‑bound switching window. Focus on assessment clarity and consistent marking to sustain engagement with chosen modules, and keep renewing content to track the discipline.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you Student Voice Analytics surfaces topic and sentiment over time for module choice and for electrical and electronic engineering. It enables like‑for‑like comparisons across subject areas and demographics, flags cohorts at risk where optionality is constrained, and provides export‑ready summaries for programme boards and timetabling meetings. Teams use it to evidence change, track fill rates and sentiment by cohort, and close the loop with concise “what changed and why” updates.
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 :
More posts on electrical and electronic engineering student views:
- What are electrical and electronic engineering students saying about course organisation and management?
- What do electrical and electronic engineering students say about their teaching staff?
- Are assessment methods working for electrical and electronic engineering students?
- Do electrical and electronic engineering students prioritise hands-on learning over theory?