MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308802272 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi.15828

Student Experience of Emergency Remote Teaching During COVID-19 Early in the 2020/21 Academic Year

2022· article· en· W4308802272 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEngineering Education and Technology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingMedical educationClosure (psychology)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Academic yearEmergency departmentPsychologyStudent engagementMedicineMathematics educationDiseaseNursingPolitical scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to the contagious disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a number of health and safety measures were enacted across Canada in March 2020. These measures included the physical closure of postsecondary institutions, including the authors’ institution Carleton University. The physical closure resulted in an abrupt transition from normal in-person teaching to emergency remote teaching (the term emergency remote teaching is used to distinguish it from online teaching, which is not subject to the challenges and constraints associated with an emergency situation). Emergency remote teaching continued at Carleton University for the entire 2020/21 academic year. There were increased resources, training opportunities, supports, and time to prepare for teaching, as compared to the sudden change in the Winter 2020 term. Simultaneously, there were still many ongoing challenges and constraints in the pursuit of optimal remote teaching and learning. Midway through the Fall 2020 term, a questionnaire on the student experience with emergency remote teaching was developed and delivered to undergraduate students in the Department of Systems and Computer Engineering at Carleton University. This paper presents the findings of this questionnaire from the 159 respondents. Results suggest that, on average, academic and intellectual student engagement was slightly worse for emergency remote teaching versus normal in-person teaching. Emergency remote teaching posed some difficulties and challenges, but also provided some advantages that were preferred (e.g., less travel time, ability to rewatch asynchronous lectures). There was a notable worsening of social student engagement, which was associated with increased feelings of isolation and decreased mental health and well-being. There was also a number of students who faced technical barriers with respect to remote teaching, with only 22% indicating that they experienced few or inconsequential technical barriers. This research adds to the discourse on emergency remote teaching, including the lens of engineering education. The paper can help inform future transitions to emergency remote teaching, with some insights potentially useful for online teaching, which is anticipated to continue to increase in its prevalence.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it