Concordance (or Discordance) Between Students and Staff/Faculty Perceptions of Student Stress in Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the experience and management of stress in science students and to evaluate concordance with faculty/staff members’ appraisal of student stress. A survey was completed by 308 students and by 40 staff and faculty members. Students’ stress levels were high but there were no differences based on demographic groups. Students’ top stressors included workload, grades, career, time management, and anxiety. Faculty and staff members accurately estimated the level of undergraduate student stress but underestimated graduate student stress. They also demonstrated a good understanding of the role of specific academic stressors, but consistently overestimated the contribution of stress from other sources. Students described using a variety of different coping strategies, including social support, self-care, hobbies, and problem-solving. L’objectif de cette étude était d’explorer l’expérience et la gestion du stress parmi les étudiants et les étudiantes en sciences et d’évaluer leur concordance avec l’évaluation du stress des étudiants et des étudiantes par les professeurs, les professeures et les membres du personnel. Un sondage a été mené auprès de 308 étudiants et étudiantes ainsi que 40 professeurs, professeures et membres du personnel. Les niveaux de stress ressenti par les étudiants et les étudiantes étaient élevés mais il n’y avait aucune différence basée sur les groupes démographiques. Les principaux facteurs de stress ressenti par les étudiants et les étudiantes étaient la charge de travail, les notes, les carrières, la gestion du temps et l’anxiété. Les professeurs, les professeures et les membres du personnel avaient estimé avec exactitude le niveau de stress ressenti par les étudiants et les étudiantes de premier cycle mais avaient sous-estimé le niveau de stress ressenti par les étudiants et les étudiantes des cycles supérieurs. Ils avaient également montré une bonne compréhension du rôle des divers facteurs de stress spécifiques à l’université, mais avaient systématiquement surestimé la contribution du stress causé par d’autres sources. Les étudiants et les étudiantes ont expliqué qu’ils faisaient appel à toute une variété de stratégies différentes pour gérer le stress, y compris le soutien social, les soins personnels, les passe-temps et la résolution de problèmes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".