How do civil engineering students rate the delivery of teaching?

delivery of teachingcivil engineering

Students describe delivery as mixed. In National Student Survey (NSS) open‑text, the wider delivery of teaching theme trends positive (60.2% Positive), yet engineering and technology shows a more muted tone (+9.5). Within civil engineering, delivery sits near neutral (+3.4), with workload and timetabling dragging sentiment while access to staff and fieldwork lift it. In sector terms, the category captures how sessions are paced, structured and supported; the civil engineering subject grouping provides a common benchmark for discipline‑level analysis. These signals shape the student accounts below on staffing changes, drawing instruction, module structure, online learning, practical activity and lecture load.

How do faculty mergers affect specialist teaching in civil engineering?

Mergers change the teaching environment by redistributing specialist staff across larger units. Students report thinner access to niche expertise and fewer opportunities for detailed interaction with lecturers who hold domain‑specific knowledge. With delivery sentiment near neutral in civil engineering (+3.4), maintaining visibility and contact with specialists matters for depth and relevance. Larger departments can pool resources and equipment, but they also need to prioritise stable timetabling, predictable office hours and protected small‑group time so programmes preserve hands‑on learning that students value.

How should engineering drawings be taught for both manual and digital competence?

Students want a stronger blend of manual drafting for foundational understanding and software fluency (e.g., AutoCAD) for professional practice. Programmes that use step‑by‑step worked examples, short formative checks and standardised slide/terminology reduce cognitive load and help pace complex techniques. Interactive studios and application‑focused sessions encourage transfer to design tasks. Field‑based application reinforces classroom learning; placements, fieldwork and trips score very positively in civil engineering (+51.1), so using them to contextualise drawing decisions strengthens engagement and competence.

Why does module structure matter for comprehension and retention?

Students consistently describe densely packed modules as hard to track and retain. In civil engineering, workload sentiment is strongly negative (−44.1), signalling the need to segment content, stage assessments and provide concise session summaries with “what to do next” signposting. Splitting expansive topics (e.g., structural analysis, fluid mechanics) across smaller, better‑sequenced blocks supports mastery and gives room for practice. Programme teams benefit from a light‑touch delivery rubric (structure, clarity, pacing, interaction) and brief peer observations to spread effective habits.

What makes online learning hard to navigate for civil engineering students?

Synchronous sessions that clash with work or caring commitments, and inconsistent release of materials, undermine the promised flexibility of online learning. Language clarity and terminology consistency also matter more online. Students respond well when staff guarantee parity for those learning asynchronously: high‑quality recordings, timely slide decks, accessible assessment briefings and worked examples for catch‑up. Standardising session structures and providing micro‑exemplars (5–10 minutes) of problem‑solving supports comprehension across diverse cohorts.

How can programmes increase practical and engaging learning?

Students ask for greater use of real‑world briefs, site analysis, and collaborative projects aligned to current tools and methods. The discipline’s strengths lie in applied activity: placements and fieldwork perform strongly (+51.1), and opportunities to work with peers are described positively. Designing structured group tasks with clear roles and transparent assessment harnesses that energy while building professional skills. Balance practice with theoretical underpinnings to sustain progression across the programme.

How can we reduce lecture overload without losing depth?

Students report that single sessions often attempt too much content, reducing concentration and retention. Chunk longer lectures, alternate concept introduction with worked problems, and build in pacing breaks. Provide short, annotated exemplars that show what “good” looks like and use quick pulse checks to calibrate pace. Distribute supporting materials early and keep an accessible “source of truth” for changes so students can plan and revise efficiently.

What should institutions do next?

• Prioritise clarity at the point of delivery: step‑by‑step methods, pacing breaks, and consistent materials across modules.
• Stabilise the operational rhythm: clear timetabling ownership, prompt updates, and predictable staff contact.
• Use modular sequencing to manage workload (−44.1) and provide space for practice without losing rigour.
• Leverage what students value: applied tasks and field activity (+51.1), structured group work, and visible staff availability.
• Run brief pulse checks after teaching blocks and review results termly, targeting actions that lift delivery in an area with a near‑neutral tone (+3.4) and a lower baseline for engineering and technology (+9.5).

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

Student Voice Analytics turns open‑text feedback into focused action. It measures topics and sentiment over time for delivery of teaching from institution to programme level, with like‑for‑like benchmarks for civil engineering. You can segment by mode and age, surface hotspots in timetabling and workload, and evidence progress on clarity and pacing. Concise, anonymised summaries and export‑ready outputs help programme teams implement small, high‑leverage changes quickly and track their impact across cohorts.

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 delivery of teaching:

• What does student feedback tell us about delivering medical sciences teaching?
• How do teaching methods affect UK mathematics students?
• What do anatomy, physiology and pathology students need from the delivery of teaching?
• Student perspectives on teaching delivery in environmental and public health programmes

More posts on civil engineering student views:

• Should civil engineering departments change how teaching staff work with students?
• Are civil engineering assessment methods working for students?
• How available are teaching staff to civil engineering students?
• Where does student support for civil engineering students most need attention?