Are aeronautical and aerospace engineering students getting feedback they can use?
Mostly, not consistently. Across the National Student Survey (NSS), the feedback category trends negative, with 57.3% of 27,344 comments coded as negative, and aeronautical and aerospace engineering within aeronautical and aerospace engineering shows a similar pattern: feedback occupies 7.6% of topic share and skews negative (−20.4). As an NSS category used to benchmark providers and a CAH subject classification used across the sector to compare disciplines, these signals point to issues of timeliness, usefulness and transparency that programmes can address through calibrated marking, structured feed‑forward, and visible turnaround standards.
Why does feedback matter in this discipline?
Students in aeronautical and aerospace engineering rely on specific, criteria‑aligned feedback to iterate designs, evidence calculations and refine professional judgement. Poorly targeted or delayed comments slow progression through demanding modules and undermine confidence in assessment briefs and marking criteria. Staff can prioritise concise rubrics, annotated exemplars and short marking rationales to reduce ambiguity and support learning.
What do students say about feedback quality and quantity?
Students describe limited, vague comments and inconsistent tone across tutors. They want actionable guidance that maps to criteria and shows what to improve next, not just a summary of errors. Programme teams can require structured feed‑forward within each assessment, run spot checks on specificity and alignment, and calibrate feedback language through brief shared‑marking sprints.
How does online learning change the feedback dynamic?
Shifts to online delivery reduce opportunities for immediate clarification after labs, presentations and group design reviews. Turnaround stretches, and dialogue drops. Teams that schedule short, dialogic feedback sessions on Teams or in labs, and provide annotated exemplars in the VLE, restore interaction and help students apply feedback promptly.
Why does timeliness of feedback matter most?
Students need feedback while the task is still live in memory and before the next assessment builds on it. Publish a feedback service‑level by assessment type, track on‑time rates, and share brief you said → we did updates so cohorts see turnaround improving. Clear expectations reduce anxiety and increase uptake of feed‑forward actions.
What does the wider university experience reveal?
Organisation, timetabling and staff responsiveness shape how feedback lands. Disorganised modules and late changes amplify frustration with any delay or ambiguity. Where staff respond quickly and assessments are well‑sequenced, students describe a more coherent learning experience. Facilities and peer collaboration often offset pressures when access and scheduling are reliable.
How does feedback shape assessments and group work?
Assessment design magnifies the effect of feedback quality. In aeronautical and aerospace engineering, students’ comments on marking criteria are especially negative (−51.6), signalling a need to make standards transparent. Publish annotated exemplars across grade bands, show how methods align to outcomes, and calibrate markers at the start of each cycle. For group projects, provide stage gates with brief, targeted comments on technical accuracy, teamwork and project management to support fair contributions and steady progress.
Which support systems need strengthening?
Students value a clear route to the right person when feedback is missing or unclear. Programme pages should signpost escalation points, and staff should close the loop when issues are raised. Short guidance on how to use your feedback within each module helps students translate comments into action and supports wellbeing.
How should institutions implement student feedback?
Act on what cohorts tell you and make changes visible. Young and full‑time cohorts tend to report the least favourable feedback experience, so replicate practices that work well in mature and part‑time provision, such as staged feedback, checklists and quick dialogic sessions. Calibrate in disciplines where tone is weakest and run spot checks on actionability and alignment.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
- Translates NSS open‑text into trackable metrics for feedback, with drill‑downs from provider to programme and by cohort characteristics.
- Benchmarks across CAH subject areas and segments, so you can prioritise where tone is weakest and evidence improvement.
- Surfaces assessment pain points (e.g. criteria alignment, timeliness) and highlights practices from stronger‑performing cohorts you can replicate.
- Produces concise, anonymised summaries for module teams and boards, with export‑ready outputs for rapid action planning.
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 feedback:
- What do nursing students need from feedback?
- What do mental health nursing students need from feedback?
- Is feedback in biomedical sciences helping students learn?
- Are politics students getting the feedback they need?
More posts on aeronautical and aerospace engineering student views:
- How does course communication affect aerospace engineering students?
- Are current aeronautical and aerospace engineering assessments working for students?
- What do aeronautical engineering students say about teaching staff?
- What do students say about teaching delivery in aeronautical and aerospace engineering?