Experiences of post-secondary students during COVID-19 pandemic: A focus group study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite emerging knowledge on the pandemic’s impact, first-hand experiences of post-secondary students are not well understood. Focus groups were conducted with students to elicit their perspectives on the changes in their life routines, learning and coping. Methods: Five focus groups were conducted with 37 undergraduate students enrolled in a Canadian university. The transcribed discussions were thematically analyzed using the constant comparison technique. Results: While overall pandemic experience was mostly negative, five dominant themes emerged. Students experienced Disrupted Routines and discussed wellness and health changes (physical activity, sleep, diet) and its negative impact on their online learning due to lose of differentiation of time and space. They discussed Online Learning as having both pros (e.g., save commute time/cost, balance employment-study) and cons (e.g., technical issues, lack of interactive-learning, home distractions, screen-time increase, concentration/ motivation difficulties). Students used various strategies to overcome challenges (e.g., better technology, efficient schedules, Zoom libraries, WhatsApp groups). In terms of Mental Stress and Coping, they experienced emotional turmoil whereby feelings ranged from worries, uncertainties, fears, hopelessness, loss of motivation, anxiety, low mood, and helplessness along with caregiving-burden in some instances. The discussion on coping centred on positive (e.g., exercise, prayers, limiting social-media use, fun-activities) and some negative (e.g., more alcohol, smoking, online shopping) behaviors. The Social Connectedness theme revealed feelings of social isolation with a concurrent increase in use of social media and family-bonding opportunities. A few changes in everyday conversations were discussed: more empathy in small talks for some but lose-of-comfort in communicating with unfamiliar people for others. Student discussion on Institutional Response focused on financial supports, mental health resources, and online learning supports. Conclusion: Post-secondary students faced many stressors during the pandemic and used multiple ways to cope. The gained insights should inform development of programs at academic institutions and government support initiatives.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".