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.

No abstract

There have been multiple calls to incorporate the teaching of scientific practices within science laboratory courses over the past decade. To accomplish this goal, changes must be made to the curriculum standards, instructional programs, and assessment-evaluation systems used in laboratory courses. One instructional program that can used in a laboratory course to help students learn scientific practices such as investigation design, collecting and analyzing data, argument generation and critique, and science writing is the argument-driven inquiry (ADI) instructional model. This article describes the development of an end-of-course assessment, the Investigation Design, Explanation, and Argument Assessment for General Chemistry I Laboratory (IDEAA-GC1), that educators can use to measure students' ability to use scientific practices after incorporating the ADI instructional model into the General Chemistry I Laboratory. This new instrument has strong face and content validity as well as consistent instructor grading. The face validity of the instrument was established through iterative revisions of the IDEAA-GC1 based on faculty and student feedback. Content validity was established through the alignment of the IDEAA-GC1 with scientific practices and anchoring concepts as described by the Three-Dimensional Learning Assessment Protocol and the General Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map.

Academic integrity establishes a code of ethics that transfers over into the job force and is a critical characteristic in scientists in the twenty-first century. A student’s perception of cheating is influenced by both internal and external factors that develop and change through time. For students, the COVID-19 pandemic shrank their academic and social environments onto a computer screen. We surveyed science students in the United States at the end of their first COVID-interrupted semester to understand how and why they believed their peers were cheating more online during a pandemic. Almost 81% of students indicated that they believed cheating occurred more frequently online than in-person. When explaining why they believed this, students touched on proctoring, cheating influences, and extenuating circumstances due to COVID-19. When describing how they believed cheating occurred more frequently online, students touched on methods for cheating and surreptitious behavior. The student reasonings were associated with four theories (game theory, Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, neutralization theory, and planned behavior theory) that have been used to examine academic dishonesty. Our results can aid institutions in efforts to quell student concerns about their peers cheating during emergencies. Interestingly, most student beliefs were mapped to planned behavior theory while only a few students were mapped to neutralization theory, suggesting it was a novel modality of assessment rather than a pandemic that shaped student perceptions.