Super-Curriculars for Engineering: Build Something, Then Explain Why It Failed

Engineering admissions want two things that pull in different directions: mathematical capability, and evidence you actually make things. Most applicants are strong on one and thin on the other, and the statement usually reveals which.

Maths first, and it is not close

Engineering degrees are mathematically heavy from week one, and admissions know that applicants consistently underestimate this. Every selective engineering course is filtering on mathematical ability, whether through Further Maths requirements, the TMUA, or the ESAT.

So the first honest answer to "what super-curricular should I do for Engineering" is: get better at maths. Isaac Science, NRICH, UKMT challenges and admissions-test preparation are all engineering super-curriculars, even though none of them look like engineering.

An applicant who writes beautifully about a robotics project but cannot demonstrate mathematical depth is a recognisable and unsuccessful type.

Then build something, with a constraint

The second half is what distinguishes engineering from physics. Engineering is design under constraint: cost, weight, material, time, safety, someone else's requirements.

A project only counts as engineering evidence if there was a constraint and you hit it. "I built a robot" is a hobby. "I built a robot and the servo torque was the binding limit, so I redesigned the arm geometry to reduce the moment" is engineering.

Routes with real constraints built in:

• Arkwright Engineering Scholarships — aptitude exam plus interview, and a genuine mark of engineering promise.
• Engineering Education Scheme and Headstart courses (EDT) — work on a real industry problem with a company mentor.
• Smallpeice Trust residentials — subject-specific, hands-on, and mostly free or low cost.
• STEM Racing (formerly F1 in Schools) and the UK Space Design Competition — team design under specification and deadline.
• CREST Gold — run and document your own investigation.
• Your own project. A repaired engine, a 3D-printed mechanism, a PCB that did not work first time. Self-directed work with an honest failure in it is often the best material in the statement.

Follow one real UK project properly

The move almost nobody makes: pick a live piece of UK engineering and follow it for a few months.

The grid transition, offshore wind, HS2, battery manufacturing, water infrastructure, semiconductor fabrication. These are all publicly documented, contested, and full of the trade-offs engineering is made of. The Institution of Mechanical Engineers publishes accessible material, as do the other professional bodies.

The reason this works: it gives you scale. School projects are small, and an applicant who has only ever built small things talks about engineering in small terms. Following a real project gives you something to say about cost, regulation, and why the technically optimal answer is often not the one that gets built.

Which discipline? Say something, but not everything

Mechanical, civil, chemical, electrical, aerospace and general engineering are different degrees, and many universities admit to a common first year before you specialise.

If you know, say so and say why, with reference to something specific you have done. If you do not, do not fake it — but do not write a statement so general it could be for any of them. The middle path is to write about a problem you find interesting and let the discipline be implied.

Across the Engineering courses we hold official outcome data for, 48% of graduates are working as engineering professionals fifteen months out, with 16% in software and IT. That second figure is worth knowing: engineering degrees lead into software in significant numbers, and computational work is a real part of modern engineering practice rather than a defection from it.

The failure is the interesting part

The strongest engineering paragraphs are almost always about something that did not work.

"The frame failed at the joint, not the member, which is where I had put all the analysis. I had modelled the parts and not the connections between them."

That sentence shows a real engineering lesson, honestly reported. It generates an obvious interview question and you would have an answer.

Compare with the version most applicants write: the project is described, it succeeded, everyone learned teamwork. There is nothing in it to ask about.

Engineering is a discipline where things fail and you find out why. Writing as though yours did not is the least convincing thing you can do.

What goes wrong

Enthusiasm without numbers. "I have always been fascinated by how things work" is the opening line of a large fraction of engineering statements and carries no information.

Lego and Meccano. Childhood construction toys appear constantly. They say nothing about your capability now.

No maths. A statement that never demonstrates mathematical thinking is a problem for a mathematically demanding degree.

Describing the team. For a group project, write about your technical decision, not about how the team communicated.

Naming a company as an ambition. Wanting to work for a specific manufacturer is not evidence of engineering interest.

Common questions

Do I need Physics A-level? For most engineering courses yes, and Maths certainly. Check each course; chemical engineering often wants Chemistry.

TMUA or ESAT? Depends on the university. ESAT is used at Cambridge and Oxford for the relevant courses; TMUA at a defined set including Imperial, UCL, LSE, Warwick and Durham. Check every course before planning.

Is an EPQ useful? Yes, particularly if it is a design or investigation rather than an essay about engineering.

What if I have no access to competitions or kit? Following a live project properly and doing serious maths preparation covers most of the ground. Admissions tutors know what facilities differ between schools.

Should I learn CAD or programming? Both are genuinely useful and both give you something concrete to write about. Neither is required.

---

Writ coaches the new three-question UCAS statement with a rubric written for Engineering. It never writes a word for you — it pushes on the technical claims you make until they are specific enough to defend. Try it free.