Student engagement has become increasingly important in higher education in recent years. Influenced internationally by government drivers to improve student outcomes, many countries and institutions have participated in surveys such as the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and its progeny, the Australasian Survey of Student Engagement (AUSSE). Findings from these surveys are used to make comparisons, for example, between disciplines within an institution, and between different institutions. The intention is positive--to generate institutional improvement. However, some researchers are raising issues with the design and use of instruments like the NSSE, particularly as it becomes dominant in countries such as the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, China and Ireland. Questions have also been raised about discipline differences in student engagement. This article reports on a study conducted in New Zealand. It draws on data from an AUSSE to answer the question: what can we learn about discipline differences in student engagement from AUSSE data in one institution? It uses analysis of variance and post hoc procedures to identify significant differences between disciplines. Findings show that: there were significant differences between disciplines on all six engagement scales; some discipline differences are influenced by assumptions in the AUSSE; findings on differences between hard and soft disciplines are both similar to and different from previous studies; AUSSE data not be compared across disciplines within an institution; and the AUSSE scales need to go beyond the current focus on measuring students' behaviours.