CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 182Education during COVID-19 pandemicOnline and Blended LearningHigher Education Research Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Student engagement declines in stem undergraduates during COVID-19-driven remote learning

Open access
Wester, Emma R., Walsh, Lisa L., Arango-Caro, Sandra, Callis-Duehl, Kristine L.·2021·Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
DOI 10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2385PMC PMC8046661
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We examined how the shift in learning environment from in-person to online classes, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, impacted three constructs of student engagement: behavioral engagement, including students' frequency of participating in class discussions, meeting with instructors, and studying with peers outside of class; cognitive engagement, including students' sense of belonging and self-efficacy; and emotional engagement, including students' attitudes toward science, their perceived value of the course, and their stress. Seventy-three undergraduate STEM students from across the country completed five-point Likert-style surveys in these areas of student engagement, both prior to their science course transitioning online and at the end of the spring 2020 semester. We found that while overall behavioral engagement did not change, students participated less frequently in class discussions but met with professors more often outside of class. We saw no significant change in cognitive engagement, indicating that while students' sense of belonging and self-efficacy ideally increases over the course of the semester, in this case, it did not. Most alarmingly, we found a significant decrease in emotional engagement, with students reporting a drastic decline in positive attitudes toward science. Students' reported stress levels remained unchanged, and students reported a slight increase in their perceived value of the science course they were taking. These data shed light on how the transition to online learning had an overall negative impact on undergraduate student engagement in science courses.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2385

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

FIGURE 1 Percentage of student behavioral engagement before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 emergency transition to online learning. Students self-reported the frequency of their behavior on a five-point Likert scale for class participation, meeting with the professor outside of class, and using a study group.
FIGURE 1 Percentage of student behavioral engagement before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 emergency transition to online learning. Students self-reported the frequency of their behavior on a five-point Likert scale for class participation, meeting with the professor outside of class, and using a study group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
FIGURE 4 Emotional engagement of students before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 transition to online learning. Calculated perceived value of the course and stress were standardized to a value out of 5 for this graph. Error bars are ± 1 standard error. ***, p < 0.001.
FIGURE 4 Emotional engagement of students before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 transition to online learning. Calculated perceived value of the course and stress were standardized to a value out of 5 for this graph. Error bars are ± 1 standard error. ***, p < 0.001.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
FIGURE 2 Students’ overall behavior, cognitive, emotional, and engagement scores before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 transition to online learning. Each score was linearly scaled to a range of 0 to 1 for graphing. Error bars are ± 1 standard error. **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.
FIGURE 2 Students’ overall behavior, cognitive, emotional, and engagement scores before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 transition to online learning. Each score was linearly scaled to a range of 0 to 1 for graphing. Error bars are ± 1 standard error. **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
FIGURE 3 Cognitive engagement of students before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 transition to online learning. Calculated self-efficacy and sense of belonging measurements were standardized to a value out of 5 for this graph. Error bars are ± 1 standard error.
FIGURE 3 Cognitive engagement of students before (Pre) and after (Post) the COVID-19 transition to online learning. Calculated self-efficacy and sense of belonging measurements were standardized to a value out of 5 for this graph. Error bars are ± 1 standard error.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 57 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Fox K Bryant G Lin N Srinivasan N. 2020. Time for Class – COVID-19 edition part 1: a national survey of faculty during COVID-19. https://www.everylearnereverywhere.org/wp-content/uploads/TimeforClass-COVID19-Part-1-NationalFacultySurvey-Final.pdf.
  2. Casey N. 4 April 2020. College made them feel equal. The virus exposed how unequal their lives are. The New York Times.
  3. Levin D. 8 April 2020. “I’m in high school again”: virus sends college students home to parents, and their rules. The New York Times.
  4. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. 2012. Engage to excel: producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC.
  5. 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Thomas L. 2012. Building student engagement and belonging at a time of change in higher education. Paul Hamlyn Foundation, London, UK.
  7. Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. 1995. Generalized self-efficacy scale, p 35–37. In Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M, Measures in health psychology: a user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. NFER-NELSON, Windsor, UK.
  8. Olave BJ. 2019. Self-efficacy and academic performance among college students: analyzing the effects of team-based learning. Master’s thesis California State University Long Beach CA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Wester, E. R., Walsh, L. L., Arango-Caro, S., & Callis-Duehl, K. L.
Affiliations
  • Donald Danforth Plant Science Center (US)
  • Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, St. Louis, Missouri, USA 63132
Corresponding author
Callis-Duehl, Kristine L.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Published
2021-04-30
Volume
22
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1935-7877 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-7885
DOI
10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2385
PMC
PMC8046661
OpenAlex
W3154814883
Cited by
182
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 12
FWCI
60.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
Keywords
student engagement, STEM undergraduates, COVID-19 pandemic, distance education, online learning, behavioral engagement, cognitive engagement, emotional engagement, sense of belonging, self-efficacy, attitudes toward science, student stress, instructor-student interaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review