How did COVID-19 change English literature students’ experience?

COVID-19literature in English

Most literature students report a negative experience during COVID-19, with National Student Survey (NSS) open‑text comments in the COVID-19 topic showing 68.6% Negative from 12,355 comments (sentiment index −24.0). In a sector frame, younger cohorts express stronger criticism than mature students (−27.3 vs −16.8), which maps to the challenges we saw in seminars, assessment and access. Literature in English sits within the Literature in English classification used for discipline benchmarking; while the current extract lacks discipline‑specific metrics, the sector signal explains why online delivery, assessment clarity and support often felt fragile for this cohort.

How did online platforms shape literary learning?

The shift to online platforms for literature classes represented a substantive change in how students and staff interact, creating both opportunities and obstacles. Platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams enabled continuation of classes despite social restrictions and offer features like breakout rooms to facilitate smaller group discussions crucial for literary analysis. The sudden shift highlighted difficulties with platform usability, especially for those less familiar with digital tools, and affected the depth and quality of literary discourse. Uneven access to stable internet connections or quiet environments further complicated engagement with complex texts. Staff re‑thought and sometimes simplified teaching approaches, occasionally at the cost of detailed literary exploration. While some students adapted quickly, others struggled to maintain connection with their studies, indicating a divided experience. Given stronger negativity among younger cohorts in NSS feedback, departments that provide short micro‑briefings, Q&A sessions, and a single, up‑to‑date source of truth for changes to timetabling, module formats and assessment briefs help stabilise the online experience.

What changed when campus life and study spaces disappeared?

The transition from physical to virtual classrooms significantly changed study for literature in English. Traditional courses depend on libraries and quiet study areas; with these largely inaccessible, students and staff adapted quickly to expanded digital resources. The lack of campus presence reduced spontaneous discussions and peer interactions central to interpretative work. The challenge has been to replicate literature‑rich environments digitally without losing the serendipity of browsing and debate. Staff worked to enhance the digital experience and protect robust academic discourse and deep engagement with texts. Publishing predictable change windows and a concise playbook for access to e‑resources, study spaces and programme delivery reduces uncertainty and preserves academic rhythms.

How did integrated teaching continue when students or staff were ill?

Maintaining continuity when illness affected students or staff required swift adjustments. Virtual classes sustained delivery but reduced the richness of interpretative discussion that benefits from in‑person nuance. Staff sought to ensure participation from those managing symptoms or recovery, balancing expectations with wellbeing. Using recorded mini‑lectures, annotated slides, flexible seminar attendance and alternative activities helps students keep pace without compromising marking criteria. When arrangements change, explicit disability‑related adjustments and signposting are essential.

What was the combined impact of strikes and COVID-19 on continuity?

Strikes and pandemic regulations disrupted class schedules and support systems, complicating the consistent study rhythms literature courses rely on. Some institutions implemented strategies to minimise disruption, while others struggled, leaving students and staff stressed. Clear ownership for communications, a single information hub, and predictable change windows support continuity across modules. Short, time‑bound reviews of assessment clarity and workload pacing, followed by published fixes, help restore confidence in the learning environment.

How did extensions and deadlines evolve?

During the COVID-19 pandemic, UK universities saw more deadline extension requests from literature students, linked to online learning challenges, unsuitable study spaces and heightened stress. Staff handled increased volumes while considering fairness and academic integrity. More flexible deadline policies reduced anxiety but prompted debate about long‑term expectations. Transparent, criteria‑based extension decisions, consistent feedback turnaround, and checklists for assessment briefs provide fairness without diluting academic standards.

How did the pandemic affect assessment and grading?

The move online disrupted assessment methods that rely on essays and seminar participation. Professors introduced new approaches to facilitate discussion and maintain engagement, but digital settings sometimes made it harder to judge depth of understanding. Departments reworked assessment strategies, including formative tasks with timely feedback, to support adaptation. Transparent assessment briefs, annotated exemplars and reliable turnaround times improve student confidence and the consistency of marking in online and hybrid settings.

What did students think about value for money?

Financial concerns intensified as students paid full fees while courses ran primarily online. Many recognised the necessity of online delivery and staff effort, yet questioned whether the experience matched expectations for on‑campus study. Providers therefore need to demonstrate value through continuity of learning, access to resources, and transparent communication about what changed and why, aligning delivery and support to stated learning outcomes.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

Student Voice Analytics tracks topic volume and sentiment over time within COVID-19 feedback and benchmarks by discipline, including Literature in English. It enables drill‑down from institution to faculty, school and programme, and segmentation by cohort and mode so you can target support where tone is lowest. You can compare like‑for‑like across CAH groups and demographics, generate concise, anonymised summaries, and export figures for rapid briefing to programme and quality teams—providing evidence of change that is straightforward to share with academic leaders and external stakeholders.

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 COVID-19:

• What did sociology students say about COVID-19?
• How did COVID-19 affect cinematics and photography students?
• How did COVID-19 reshape social work students’ learning?
• How did COVID-19 change sport and exercise sciences learning and research?

More posts on literature in English student views:

• What support do UK universities provide for literature students, and where do gaps remain?
• Does remote learning work for English literature students?
• What helps English literature students succeed in the dissertation?
• What does effective feedback look like in English Literature programmes?