Back

COVID-19 and the abrupt shift to remote learning: Impact on grades and perceived learning for undergraduate biology students

Supriya, K.; Mead, C.; Anbar, A. D.; Caulkins, J. L.; Collins, J. P.; Cooper, K. M.; LePore, P. C.; Lewis, T.; Pate, A.; Scott, R. A.; Brownell, S. E.

2021-03-29 scientific communication and education
10.1101/2021.03.29.437480 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Institutions across the world transitioned abruptly to remote learning in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This rapid transition to remote learning has generally been predicted to negatively affect students, particularly those marginalized due to their race, socioeconomic class, or gender identity. In this study, we examined the impact of this transition in the Spring 2020 semester on the grades of students enrolled in the in-person biology program at a large university in Southwestern United States as compared to the grades earned by students in the fully online biology program at the same institution. We also surveyed in-person instructors to understand changes in assessment practices as a result of the transition to remote learning during the pandemic. Finally, we surveyed students in the in-person program to learn about their perceptions of the impacts of this transition. We found that both online and in-person students received a similar small increase in grades in Spring 2020 compared to Spring 2018 and 2019. We also found no evidence of disproportionately negative impacts on grades received by students marginalized due to their race, socioeconomic class, or gender in either modality. Focusing on in-person courses, we documented that instructors made changes to their courses when they transitioned to remote learning, which may have offset some of the potential negative impacts on course grades. However, despite receiving higher grades, in-person students reported negative impacts on their learning, interactions with peers and instructors, feeling part of the campus community, and career preparation. Women reported a more negative impact on their learning and career preparation compared to men. This work provides insights into students perceptions of how they were disadvantaged as a result of the transition to remote instruction and illuminates potential actions that instructors can take to create more inclusive education moving forward.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
41.9%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 7%
20.7%
50% of probability mass above
3
BMC Medical Education
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.9%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.9%
5
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.9%
6
FEBS Open Bio
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 44%
1.6%
8
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
9
FASEB BioAdvances
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
10
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
11
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
12
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
13
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
14
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
15
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
16
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
17
Frontiers in Psychology
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
18
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
19
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
20
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
46 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
21
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
22
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%