What did sociology students say about COVID-19?
Students describe a predominantly negative experience during COVID-19, centred on disrupted interaction, assessment clarity and uneven support. In the National Student Survey (NSS), the COVID-19 topic aggregates sector-wide open-text comments and shows 12,355 remarks with a sentiment index of −24.0; younger students drive much of the negativity (−27.3 vs −16.8 for mature students). Within sociology, the CAH discipline grouping for UK providers, this overlays longer-standing concerns about how marking criteria are communicated and used, even where staff-student relationships remain a strength.
The COVID-19 pandemic has had an important impact on higher education, particularly shaping the experiences and perspectives of sociology students. As we look into the ongoing implications, sociology, with its focus on social structures and interactions, faces unique challenges in a largely virtual learning environment. An analysis of student voices, gathered through surveys and text analysis, reveals a nuanced view of needs and concerns. Students emphasised the disruption of not only their studies but also the social interactions that form the core of sociological education. These interactions are formative to their understanding and critical analysis of societal structures. The shift prompts staff and institutions to re‑evaluate and adapt approaches, so educational quality and student engagement remain high. While some argue that online platforms expand access, others highlight reduced personal interaction and support. Balancing these perspectives matters as we address both the potential and limits of digital education in sociology.
How did the rapid move online reshape sociology teaching?
With the onset of COVID-19, staff and institutions moved teaching online at pace, especially challenging in sociology where face‑to‑face debate and group work underpin learning. Students reported lower engagement and difficulty replicating practical and discursive activities. Online technologies sustained delivery and widened access, but content and interaction design often struggled to recreate seminar spontaneity. Teams introduced virtual formats for group analysis and community-based tasks, yet many students perceived a loss of dynamism. These experiences underline the need to prioritise disruption-ready delivery: tested templates for online seminars, consistent VLE signposting, and a single source of truth for changes to teaching, assessment and access to resources.
Why did many sociology students feel ignored by their university?
Students frequently reported weak communication, patchy access to libraries and databases, and uncertainty about what was changing and why. Many felt that adaptations focused on technology rather than the human and relational aspects vital in sociology. Interactive debates and collaborative projects often became impersonal forums and email exchanges, leaving some feeling disconnected from their learning community. Institutions respond over time, but students still call for timely micro‑briefings, Q&A sessions, and visible ownership of decisions so that academic and socio‑emotional needs are addressed.
Why does social interaction matter so much in sociology?
Sociology relies on interaction to test ideas, practise argumentation and connect theory to lived experience. Restrictions curtailed the informal exchanges and layered discussions that stimulate critical thinking. While digital tools add structure, online formats constrain pace, turn‑taking and nuance. Staff experiment with breakout rooms, peer facilitation and asynchronous debate to restore interactional depth, but the challenge persists: design modules so that dialogue, community and collaborative inquiry remain central, whatever the mode.
How did disrupted learning affect academic performance?
Disrupted fieldwork and altered seminar dynamics limited opportunities to apply theory in real settings. Students also struggled with variable digital access and competing demands at home, which compounded learning disadvantages. In sociology feedback, sentiment around marking criteria is strongly negative (−47.3), so opaque expectations and inconsistent application during rapid change amplified perceptions of unfairness. The most effective mitigations make assessment clarity the first lever: publish annotated exemplars, checklist‑style rubrics and explicit weighting/thresholds; set realistic turnaround standards; and explain any temporary adjustments to briefs or marking in one place.
What happened to students’ mental health and wellbeing?
Stress, isolation and anxiety rose as social learning spaces and routine support routes contracted. Students facing financial or housing precarity found engagement harder still. Effective responses prioritise accessible wellbeing services, structured peer support within modules, and flexible assessment pathways (extensions, alternative formats) to support fair outcomes without reducing academic standards.
Why did students seek refunds or compensation?
Perceived declines in educational value—reduced contact, fewer peer interactions, constrained access to facilities—prompted demands for fee refunds or compensation. Universities balanced financial sustainability with fairness. Transparency helps most: explain what changed, what was preserved, and how learning outcomes are safeguarded, alongside routes for redress where commitment cannot be met.
What lessons should universities carry forward?
- Keep a disruption playbook that sets out rapid switches in teaching, assessment and resource access, and maintain a single, up‑to‑date source of truth.
- Target support at cohorts most likely to be negative—typically younger and full‑time—through short, timely briefings, flexible access routes and explicit disability-related adjustments when arrangements change.
- Lift practice from subjects that maintained continuity and assessment clarity, adapting rhythms that worked (e.g., predictable clinical-style scheduling) to sociological contexts.
- Make subject-level pain points visible with short reviews of assessment clarity, workload pacing and access to specialist activities, then publish specific fixes that students can track.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics turns open‑text survey comments into prioritised actions for both the COVID‑19 topic and sociology. It lets you track topic volume and sentiment over time, drill from institution to programme and cohort, and compare like‑for‑like across disciplines and demographics. You can surface sociology’s high‑impact themes (e.g., assessment clarity, communication, timetabling), evidence improvements year‑on‑year, and export concise, anonymised summaries for programme and quality teams.
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 COVID-19:
- How did COVID-19 reshape midwifery students’ education?
- What did COVID-19 change in UK law education?
- What did COVID-19 mean for business and management students?
- How did COVID-19 change English literature students’ experience?