How did mechanical engineering students experience COVID-19?
They faced a largely negative shift in delivery and access to practical learning but kept confidence in staff and peer collaboration. Across the COVID-19 topic that groups National Student Survey (NSS) open‑text comments sector‑wide, students contribute 12,355 remarks with 68.6% negative sentiment, setting the context for disrupted study and uneven communications. Within mechanical engineering as defined by the Common Aggregation Hierarchy used for subject‑level comparison across UK HE, the balance is more upbeat at 49.8% positive overall, yet remote learning trends negative (−23.0) and marking criteria attract the sharpest criticism (−46.1). These results steer the analysis below: stabilise delivery mechanics, protect practical learning, and make assessment transparency a design principle.
How did the shift to online learning change mechanical engineering delivery?
The transition to online learning moved a hands‑on discipline into virtual spaces at pace. Students adapted to conducting complex simulations and design tasks remotely, while staff introduced tools that simulate authentic problems. Flexibility and replayable lectures helped some cohorts, yet others reported reduced immediacy of support and less structured interaction. Given remote learning’s negative sentiment in mechanical engineering, programmes now set expectations for format and interaction, align online activities to module learning outcomes, and provide predictable rhythms for synchronous engagement.
What happened to practical learning and lab work?
Restricted access to workshops and labs disrupted the development of tactile skills. Virtual labs sustained continuity, but students questioned whether simulated environments can substitute for equipment handling and materials experience. Departments responded by sequencing on‑campus practicals for priority cohorts, recording demonstrations, and using simulation to prepare students for shorter, intensive lab blocks. This pattern retains educational quality while managing health and safety constraints.
How did students access specialist resources from home?
Access to CAD and simulation software from home exposed inequalities in hardware and connectivity. Many universities provided remote licences, cloud access and loan devices, and introduced short online tutorials to reduce friction. A single source of truth for software access, updates and troubleshooting improves predictability, and staff now publish short “what changed and why” notes when licensing or platform arrangements shift. These practices reduce uncertainty and support timely project work.
How did the changes affect mental health and wellbeing?
Isolation, interrupted groupwork and uncertainty increased stress. Although online counselling and peer forums helped to maintain community, students who rely on collaborative studio and lab environments still reported reduced motivation. Younger and full‑time cohorts reported more negative experiences across COVID‑19 comments, so teams prioritise proactive check‑ins, consistent timetabling information, and structured group tasks to rebuild a sense of cohort.
How did industry engagement and placements adapt?
Paused placements limited workplace immersion. Virtual internships and remote projects preserved exposure to real tasks and employer contact but reduced hands‑on learning. Staff worked with companies to define outcomes, cadence, and feedback processes so students could demonstrate competence. Programmes increasingly scaffold placement‑adjacent activity within modules: live briefs, code reviews, design critiques and reflective logs that map explicitly to learning outcomes.
How did assessment and exams change?
Online assessment protected continuity but raised concerns about fairness, criteria and reliability. Mechanical engineering feedback patterns emphasise assessment design and transparency: students ask for criteria that map to outcomes, consistent marking, and feedback they can act on. In response, departments publish annotated exemplars, checklist‑style rubrics and sample marked scripts; they set realistic feedback service levels with progress tracking; and they stabilise assessment windows with a “no surprises” approach to timetabling. These steps address persistent pain points around marking criteria and feedback while maintaining academic integrity.
What should mechanical engineering keep after the pandemic?
Hybrid delivery now focuses on purpose: use online modes where they add value, protect time‑intensive labs on campus, and keep teamwork structures that strengthen learning communities. Programme teams capture and re‑use the most effective practices, maintain a concise playbook for rapid shifts, and draw on areas that sustained more neutral tone during disruption (e.g. clear assessment briefs, continuity of learning). Students expect accessible resources and transparent communications; programmes that meet these expectations lift confidence and reduce avoidable friction.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
- Track COVID‑19 topic volume and sentiment over time, then drill from institution to school/department, cohort and site.
- Compare like‑for‑like across mechanical engineering and other CAH groups, and by demographics, mode and campus.
- Generate concise, anonymised summaries with representative comments for programme and quality teams, and export tables and figures for rapid briefing.
- Evidence progress with year‑on‑year trends in delivery, assessment clarity and operations, targeting where sentiment is lowest and publishing visible fixes.
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 COVID-19:
- How did COVID-19 reshape social work students’ learning?
- How did COVID-19 change English literature students’ experience?
- What did mathematics students say about COVID-19?
- How did COVID-19 affect cinematics and photography students?