How did COVID-19 change sport and exercise sciences learning and research?
Updated Apr 06, 2026
COVID-19sport and exercise sciencesWhen practical teaching is disrupted, sport and exercise sciences students feel it immediately. NSS open-text shows the trade-off clearly: the sector-wide COVID-19 topic remains negative overall (index −24.0 from 12,355 comments, with younger cohorts generating 69.4% of the volume), while sport and exercise sciences stays broadly positive overall (57.2% Positive) but still exposes a persistent assessment clarity gap, especially around marking criteria (−38.4). Read together, these lenses show where provision held up, and where institutions still need to rebuild confidence in practical learning, communication, and assessment.
What does the evidence show and why does it matter?
COVID-19 acted as a stress test across UK higher education. In sport and exercise sciences, where labs, fieldwork, and coached practice are central, the disruption was sharper than in more classroom-based subjects. Student feedback and NSS open-text analysis show where programmes adapted well, where the pivot left lasting gaps, and which changes are still worth keeping. The practical takeaway is straightforward: protect hands-on learning, communicate changes early, and make assessment expectations unmistakably clear.
How did COVID-19 affect practical learning?
Practical activities such as laboratory work and on-field training are essential for mastering technique and applying theory, so their disruption hit this subject hard. Staff reworked hands-on sessions for online or distanced delivery, which helped continuity but made tacit, visually mediated skill development harder to sustain. Virtual simulations, video demonstrations, and interactive digital content kept students engaged, yet they could not fully replace supervised in-person practice. The benefit of reviewing this feedback is clear: teams can see where digital support is enough, where catch-up labs are needed, and how guaranteed access windows can protect core skill development for younger, full-time cohorts who report more negative COVID-19 sentiment.
How did teaching adapt online?
Programmes moved theoretical content online at pace, which preserved continuity and widened flexible access, even though practical skill development remained harder to replicate. Staff piloted tools that mimicked physical interaction and curated asynchronous materials so students could rehearse and reflect in their own time. Many students value that flexibility, but they still miss direct participation and immediate feedback, a pattern echoed in remote learning in sport and exercise sciences. The lasting lesson is to keep disruption-ready playbooks, one clear source of truth for changes, and concise module updates that protect trust when delivery shifts.
What happened to mental health and wellbeing?
Remote study and reduced peer interaction increased stress, anxiety, and isolation. For many students in this subject, the loss of structured physical activity also weakened a routine that underpins wellbeing. Institutions introduced online wellbeing programmes and virtual sport; some students found them helpful, while others still needed in-person community and activity to feel connected. The operational takeaway is practical: pair digital support with timely check-ins, clear disability-related adjustments when arrangements change, and visible personal tutoring that students can actually access.
How did access to facilities and equipment change?
Campus closures restricted access to specialist facilities and equipment that sit at the centre of learning and research. Virtual tours, equipment tutorials, and remote data resources offered some continuity, but they lacked the depth and confidence-building that come from direct use, a gap also visible in learning resources in sport and exercise sciences. Final-year students and those on research-intensive modules felt this most sharply. That makes the institutional priority clear: schedule intensive on-campus blocks when possible, define viable alternatives in advance, and communicate predictable access arrangements so standards stay high and friction stays low.
How were research and projects affected?
Fieldwork and lab-based studies were paused or redesigned around simulations, online data collection, and secondary datasets. In some cases, this widened participation and accelerated digital research skills, but it also limited direct measurement of human kinetics and performance. Staff adapted supervision, marking criteria, and ethical approvals to reflect feasible methods while protecting academic rigour. The long-term gain is a more resilient research model, provided programmes state acceptable substitutions clearly and keep standards transparent from project brief to final marking.
What are the implications for future careers?
Students understandably worry about disrupted sports sectors and fewer traditional roles, yet the period also opened up opportunities in digital fitness, sports technology, and health promotion. Programmes can turn that disruption into career value by integrating digital skills, data literacy, entrepreneurship, and community health into the curriculum. Strong student sentiment about career support and staff availability in this subject suggests the foundations are already there. The next step is earlier, more targeted guidance and employer-linked projects that help students translate a disrupted period into credible experience.
What did adaptation and resilience involve?
Staff and students iterated quickly, using live online sessions, interactive webinars, and simulations to keep learning moving. These adaptations show that digital tools can complement in-person practice, but not replace it in a subject built around embodied performance and observation. The lasting opportunity is not generic digitalisation; it is a more resilient delivery model with consistent assessment briefs, protected practical hours, stable timetables, published exemplars, and the kind of clear assessment methods in sport and exercise sciences that students can interpret with confidence. That combination reduces ambiguity, supports fair marking, and helps students trust the standards they are being held to.
How Student Voice Analytics helps you
Student Voice Analytics shows where COVID-19 disruption is still shaping sport and exercise sciences feedback. It tracks topic volume and tone over time, compares cohorts and providers, and highlights where timetabling, remote delivery, assessment clarity, and access to facilities most affect NSS outcomes. Programme teams use concise, anonymised summaries and like-for-like CAH comparisons to prioritise clearer rubrics, more stable schedules, better access planning, and stronger wellbeing support, then monitor whether those changes improve sentiment where it matters most.
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
More posts on COVID-19:
- How did COVID-19 affect cinematics and photography students?
- Did COVID-19 undermine UK biology students’ learning and wellbeing?
- What did mathematics students say about COVID-19?
- How did COVID-19 affect CS students' learning?