BackCSS 2025 Results

English Literature

0.00%Written pass rate
68Candidates appeared
0%Written → allocated

English Literature produced no allocations in CSS 2025, with its pipeline failing at the written stage. Of the 68 candidates who appeared, none cleared the written paper, so none advanced toward a seat. Set against a small field, that clean sweep of failure makes the subject one of the riskier optional choices on offer.

High Competition

Subject vs CSS Average

English Literature's mean of 32% trails the CSS optional-subject average of 43.5% by around 11 points, placing it among the weaker-scoring papers in the examination. The gap below average is real, but it is overshadowed by the harder fact that the subject produced no written passes and no allocations among its 68 candidates. For anyone weighing it up, the 32% mean is best read not as 'almost passable' but as confirmation that this is a difficult paper that, in 2025, rewarded no one.

Candidate Pipeline

100% failed written0% not allocated
Overall conversion: 0.0% of appeared candidates allocated

All 68 candidates who appeared failed the written stage, leaving zero passers and zero allocations. Because the collapse occurred within the paper rather than at the later merit cut, the subject stopped its entire field before aggregate scorecards were ever considered, which is the most severe form the funnel can take.

Score Distribution

32.0%Mean score32 / 100 marks
30.0%Median score30 / 100 marks
±20.0%Std deviation±20 marks
MeanMedian±1 std dev33% pass threshold
High scoring risk — mean below 33%; most candidates fail this paper outright

The mean of 32% lands just a point below the 33% passing threshold, and with the median slightly lower at 30% the distribution carries a thin upper tail doing most of the work of holding the average up. A standard deviation of 20 points is wide for a mean this modest, so the scores ran from very low to comfortably above the line rather than clustering, which marks this as an unpredictable paper to score in. That high-risk profile fits the outcome, since the typical candidate fell short and even the stronger ones could not convert their marks into a pass. A strong script was possible here, but it was clearly the exception rather than anything a candidate could count on.

Provincial Breakdown

No provincial allocation data recorded

No province secured an allocation, because the subject allocated no one. With all 68 candidates stopped at the written stage, geography had no bearing on a result that was nil everywhere.

Gender Distribution

No gender breakdown available — no candidates were allocated in this subject.

No gender breakdown exists, since not a single candidate was allocated. English Literature offered no path to a seat in CSS 2025 for any candidate, whatever their gender or preparation.

English Literature is a sensible choice only for candidates with a genuine command of the literary canon and the analytical writing it demands, and even they should note the 2025 outcome. Sixty-eight candidates attempted it and not one was allocated. A small candidate pool can look like an opportunity, but here it is closer to a warning that the subject seldom produces a successful result.

Share this analysis:

Ready to Make Your CSS Choice?

Get your personalised subject selection recommendation backed by the data above.