Did remote learning work for law students?

By Student Voice Analytics
remote learninglaw

Mostly mixed, with stronger dissatisfaction on digital delivery overall but a relatively more positive response in law. Across the UK’s National Student Survey (NSS, the annual survey of final‑year undergraduates) open‑text comments tagged to remote learning from 2018–2025, tone skews slightly net‑negative at 42.0% positive and 53.8% negative across 12,933 comments. Within the sector’s law subject grouping used for comparisons across providers, overall feedback reads more positive, with 51.1% positive and 44.9% negative. These benchmarks frame what follows: law cohorts tend to value teaching expertise and structure, but report friction when online modes constrain discussion, assessment clarity and access.

Law students’ experiences of remote learning during the COVID‑19 pandemic span achievement and struggle around flexibility, engagement and quality. Rapid shifts in delivery asked staff to adjust methods at pace. Text analysis of student surveys highlights a spectrum of experiences and the factors that influence engagement and satisfaction in online legal education.

How varied were remote learning experiences for law students?

Student engagement and instructional quality vary. Some staff adapt quickly, using digital tools to sustain debate and case analysis; others lean on one‑way delivery that limits advocacy practice. Mode and life stage shape tone across the sector: full‑time and younger cohorts often read more negatively than part‑time and mature learners, so programme teams should set a consistent weekly rhythm, use shorter blocks, and signpost tasks in one place. Standardising remote teaching practices and creating an accessible, stable link hub per module improves parity and reduces the gap in experience. Support and training for staff sustain rigour in online seminars and moots.

What specific challenges do law students face online?

Replicating interactive, practice‑based elements is difficult. Moots, negotiations and discursive seminars lose spontaneity when poorly scaffolded online. Law students also prioritise assessment clarity: comments often ask for clearer marking criteria, exemplars and predictable turnaround. Programmes can respond by publishing annotated exemplars that map criteria to learning outcomes, using rubric‑based guidance within assessment briefs, and calibrating markers for consistency. Stronger focus here reduces anxiety and improves attainment.

Which technology barriers constrain online legal study?

Variable internet access and study space limit participation in complex legal discussions. Without reliable technology, students struggle to practise core skills such as negotiations and client interviewing. Make remote‑first materials standard: captioned recordings, transcripts, alt‑text, low‑bandwidth versions, and a single, stable link per session. Pair live activity with timely, searchable recordings and concise summaries so asynchronous students have parity. Invest in infrastructure and device‑loan schemes to prevent digital disadvantage from widening attainment gaps.

How did lecturer support and student-staff engagement change?

Students describe a spectrum. Many praise staff who create collaborative online environments, structuring seminars and offering responsive office hours. Others report over‑reliance on pre‑recorded content without interaction or timely feedback. In law, teaching staff are a recurring strength, but visibility and timing of support can slip when communications fragment. Institutions should provide ongoing training, clarify routes for help and response expectations, and build proactive check‑ins through personal tutoring.

How did remote learning affect mental health and work-life balance?

Flexibility helps some students manage competing responsibilities, but blurred boundaries raise stress and burnout. Studying in the same space as rest erodes downtime, especially when deadlines cluster and communication is inconsistent. Programmes should pace workload with predictable timetabling, summarise weekly priorities, and maintain clear contact points. Providers should extend access to wellbeing services and normalise use, with prompt signposting in modules and assessments.

What financial concerns did remote learning raise?

Students query value for money when fees mirror on‑campus study but interaction and tailored support feel reduced. Transparent communication about what is provided online, how contact time works, and what changes improve learning helps address perceptions. Regularly gathering and acting on student feedback, then closing the loop with “what we changed” updates, demonstrates value and responsiveness.

What does this mean for the future of legal education?

A hybrid model that combines in‑person advocacy training with well‑designed online components best fits law’s pedagogy. Use digital for flexibility and reach, and reserve campus time for high‑challenge simulations. Avoid digital fatigue by structuring weeks and aligning assessment windows across modules. Ongoing staff development and consistent course communications keep cohorts engaged while protecting standards.

How Student Voice Analytics helps you

  • Track topic volume and sentiment over time for remote learning in law, from provider to school and cohort level.
  • Slice results by mode, age, domicile and disability to target support where tone is most negative.
  • Provide concise, anonymised summaries for programme teams and governance, with like‑for‑like comparisons.
  • Export tables and charts for rapid briefing and continuous improvement, and evidence change to NSS and internal boards.

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.

More posts on remote learning:

More posts on law student views: