How did COVID-19 change English literature students’ experience?
Published Jun 21, 2024 · Updated Feb 23, 2026
COVID-19English LiteratureEnglish literature students were markedly negative about COVID-19 disruption in NSS open‑text feedback (see our NSS open-text analysis methodology). In the COVID-19 topic, 68.6% of 12,355 comments are Negative (sentiment index −24.0), with younger cohorts more critical than mature students (−27.3 vs −16.8).
Literature in English sits within the Literature in English classification used for discipline benchmarking. This extract lacks discipline‑specific metrics, but the sector signal points to recurring pressure points for this cohort: online seminars, assessment clarity and access to support.
How did online platforms shape literary learning?
The shift to online platforms for literature classes changed how students and staff interact, creating both opportunities and obstacles (see our analysis of remote learning for English literature students). Platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams enabled teaching to continue despite restrictions, and offered features like breakout rooms for smaller group discussions that support close reading and analysis. The sudden shift also exposed platform usability issues, especially for those less familiar with digital tools, and sometimes reduced the depth of literary discourse. Uneven access to stable internet connections or quiet environments further complicated engagement with complex texts.
Staff rethought and sometimes simplified teaching approaches, occasionally at the cost of detailed literary exploration. While some students adapted quickly, others struggled to stay connected to their studies. Given stronger negativity among younger cohorts in NSS feedback, departments can stabilise the online experience with short micro‑briefings, Q&A sessions, and a single, up‑to‑date source of truth for timetabling, module formats and assessment briefs, so students spend less time chasing updates and more time engaging with the texts.
What changed when campus life and study spaces disappeared?
The transition from physical to virtual classrooms changed study for literature in English. Traditional courses depend on libraries and quiet study areas. With these largely inaccessible, students and staff had to adapt quickly to expanded digital resources. The lack of campus presence reduced spontaneous discussions and peer interactions central to interpretative work. The challenge became replicating literature‑rich environments digitally without losing the serendipity of browsing and debate. Staff worked to enhance the digital experience and protect academic discourse and deep engagement with texts. Predictable change windows, plus a concise playbook for access to e‑resources, study spaces and programme delivery, reduce uncertainty and preserve 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 also had to support participation from those managing symptoms or recovery, balancing expectations with wellbeing. Recorded mini‑lectures, annotated slides, flexible seminar attendance and alternative activities help students keep pace without compromising marking criteria. When arrangements change, explicit disability‑related adjustments and clear signposting help students understand what support is available and how to access it.
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 in online assessments. More flexible deadline policies reduced anxiety but also raised questions about long‑term expectations. Transparent, criteria‑based extension decisions, consistent feedback turnaround, and checklists for assessment briefs provide fairness and make expectations clearer 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. Staff 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 build student confidence and make marking feel more consistent 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, a common pattern in value for money in English studies. 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 lets you track topic volume and sentiment over time within COVID-19 feedback, then benchmark by discipline, including Literature in English. Drill down from institution to faculty, school and programme, segment by cohort and mode, and pinpoint where tone is lowest. Generate concise, anonymised summaries and export figures for rapid briefing to programme and quality teams, with evidence that is straightforward to share with academic leaders and external stakeholders. If you want to see where students are struggling most, explore Student Voice Analytics.
Request a walkthrough
Book a free Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and reporting designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.
- All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
- Versioned outputs with TEF-ready reporting.
- Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.
UK-hosted · No public LLM APIs · Same-day turnaround
Related Entries
- Are assessment methods holding back literature in English students?
- Does remote learning work for English literature students?
- Is English studies good value for money?
- What support do universities provide for literature students?
- Do strikes disrupt learning and creativity on English Literature courses?
- NSS open-text analysis methodology for UK HE