The impact of virtual or blended learning on sense of belonging in first-year undergraduate health sciences students enrolled in an inquiry-based course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature suggests post-secondary students felt disengaged and socially isolated while learning virtually, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we explored whether a sense of belonging is differentially achieved in an inquiry-based course between two different delivery formats: virtual and blended (combination of virtual and in-person). Our primary measurement instrument was a modified version of the 26-item Sense of Belonging-Revised Scale, which we distributed to all first-year health sciences students enrolled in an Inquiry course at [institution name removed for blinding purposes] University during the 2021-2022 school year. Data analyses revealed no statistically significant difference between the two groups across the four subscales of the Sense of Belonging-Revised Scale: perceived peer support, perceived classroom comfort, perceived isolation, and perceived faculty support. As promoting community is a core skill in our Inquiry course, this may have reduced the perceived difference between the two groups. Future directions include exploring facilitators’ perceptions and experiences across course delivery formats.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".