This research full paper presents screening rates for mental health issues and life-stress events in engineering-focused community college students during the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. Specifically, it attempts to answer the following research questions: 1) What is the overall rate of various mental health conditions among engineering-focused community college students, 2) What effects has the pandemic had on baseline stress levels engineering-focused community college, and 3) What effects has the pandemic had on quality of life, such as sleep habits and financial security of engineering- focused community college students? Data for this paper was collected via survey from May–July 2020 and includes responses from 84 students at 24 community colleges. The survey itself was a compilation of several widely- used instruments for measuring overall mental health and stress levels in a population. These instruments include the Kessler-6 for psychological distress, the PHQ for anxiety, depression, and eating disorders, the PC-PTSD for PTSD-like symptoms, and the SRRS for inventorying stressful life events. Among the major findings, 32% of respondents reported a major change in financial situation, 27% reported loss of employment, and 13% reported ceasing formal schooling because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, 32% of respondents reported that the COVID-19 pandemic worsened their housing security situation, 38% reported that COVID-19 has worsened their food security situation, and 36% report that COVID-19 has decreased their ability to access instruction, course materials, or course supplies. Finally, of respondents who completed at least one mental health screening instrument, 70% screened positive for at least one potentially diagnosable condition, while only 9% reported ever receiving a mental health diagnosis. Index Terms—Community College, Mental Health, Disability, Accessibility, Equity, Inclusion, Wellness
more »
« less
Using SenseMaker® to Understand the Prioritization of Self-Care and Mental Health of Minoritized Engineering Students during the 2020 Global Pandemic
The 2020 global pandemic caused by COVID-19 forced higher education institutions to immediately stop face-to-face teaching and transition to virtual instruction. This transition has been difficult for engineering education, which has strong hardware, software, and practical/laboratory components, and has further exacerbated the personal and professional experiences of minoritized students in engineering. This study sought to answer the following overarching research question: How has the abrupt transition to online instruction due to COVID-19 affected students traditionally underrepresented in engineering? The abrupt transition for minoritized students and their decision to prioritize their mental health was further explored to answer the following: (1) How many minoritized students chose to prioritize their mental health? (2) How do minoritized students describe their experiences and choices to prioritize (or not) their mental health? Using SenseMaker, participants shared stories using the following prompt: Imagine you are chatting with a friend or family member about the evolving COVID-19 crisis. Tell them about something you have experienced recently as an engineering student. After completing their narrative, a series of triadic, dyadic, and sentiment-based multiple-choice questions were presented. Student responses varied, including positive experiences, which resulted in a strong prioritization, while others had negative experiences resulting in varied prioritizations. Some students chose to prioritize their mental health to remain mentally and emotionally healthy; some with negative experiences abandoned self-care strategies in order to tend to the needs of academics and family. Participants’ decisions to prioritize their mental health were not monolithic.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2029564
- PAR ID:
- 10566270
- Publisher / Repository:
- MDPI
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Education Sciences
- Volume:
- 13
- Issue:
- 7
- ISSN:
- 2227-7102
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 643
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)In early 2020, colleges shifted abruptly from traditional in-person to remote distant instruction due to COVID-19 potentially exacerbating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students’ recruitment and retention. This preliminary study using survey methodology was conducted with STEM students at a small (700 students) private college to examine questions related to students’ perceptions of natural science careers, career decision-making factors, barriers influencing students’ career path, including effects of COVID-19 on career goals, mental health, and perceived quality of instruction. A Qualtrics® survey was sent to 180 STEM students, from which we received 53 responses (29.4% response rate). Consistent with other studies, family was one of the most important factors supporting their career path. Students had a relatively upbeat career outlook despite being in the middle of a global pandemic and were only moderately worried about the impact of COVID-19 on their future career. Despite these relatively positive outcomes, the abrupt switch to online instruction was viewed unfavorably by most respondents, who valued the hands-on learning experiences obtained with traditional in-person instruction. It is possible that respondents’ views of online instruction may improve over time as instructors become more adept at using new instructional tools. Future research should evaluate this aspect and whether students’ career goals change across time as the pandemic unfolds.more » « less
-
COVID-19 has been one of the most significant disruptors of higher education in modern history. Higher education institutions rapidly transitioned to Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) in mid-to-late March of 2020. The extent of COVID-19’s impact on teaching and learning, and the resulting challenges facilitating ERT during this time, likely varied by faculty, institutional, and geographical characteristics. In this study, we identified challenges in teaching and learning during the initial transition to ERT at Predominantly Undergraduate Institutions (PUIs) in the Midwest, United States. We conducted in-depth interviews with 14 faculty teaching at Midwestern PUIs to explore their lived experiences. We describe the most overarching challenges related to faculty teaching through four emergent themes: pedagogical changes, work-life balance, face-to-face interactions, and physical and mental health. Five themes emerged that we used to describe the most overarching challenges related to students and their learning: learning patterns, technology access, additional responsibilities, learning community, and mental health. Based upon the identified challenges, we provide broad recommendations that can be used to foster a more successful transition to ERT in unforeseen regional or global crises in the future.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)CONTEXT With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the resulting response from universities, engineering students find themselves in an unprecedented situation. In addition to stressors related to the curriculum, residential students across the United States are being asked to relocate away from campus and engage in distance learning. At the same time, social distancing requirements are limiting students’ ability to socialize, procure food and supplies, exercise, and remain employed and financially solvent. Some students will fall ill while others face the prospect of sick family members, and even deaths in the family. Prior research suggests that individuals living through this pandemic are likely to face stress, uncertainty, and fear that affects their mental health and academic performance for years to come. PURPOSE OR GOAL The purpose of this study was to understand the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting engineering students’ mental wellness, specifically stress, and how the effects differ for different groups of students. The research questions addressed are: 1) What effects has the pandemic had on baseline stress levels, and how do those vary by demographic group? 2) What effects has the pandemic had on quality of life, such as sleep habits and financial security, and how do those vary by demographic group? METHODS An online survey was conducted in the United States in May and June of 2020. More than 800 4-year engineering students who represented many engineering disciplines and universities responded. The survey used a modified version of the Holmes-Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Scale, which is a widely used and validated instrument to measure the effects of certain life events on stress. The data was analysed to determine the average increase in stress levels for students resulting from COVID-19, and which demographic groups have seen the most negative impact. We also report on which stress-inducing life-events were experienced most. OUTCOMES Latinx individuals and international students report statistically significantly higher levels of stress than the baseline population. Engineering students from other historically excluded identities, however,are not facing statistically significantly worse stress than their peers from historically over represented identities. Veterans fare better than the majority population on this metric.The data also indicates that different groups are more likely to experience different negative life-events because of COVID. CONCLUSIONS No previous research has examined the impacts of a global pandemic on engineering student stress and mental wellness. Our findings show that stress and mental wellness need to be understood intersectionally and that some underrepresented groups are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. Understanding the impacts on students can help universities strategize and allocate limited resources most effectively to support student success. KEYWORDS Mental wellness; COVID-19; stressmore » « less
-
Grundy, Quinn (Ed.)Early research on the impact of COVID-19 on academic scientists suggests that disruptions to research, teaching, and daily work life are not experienced equally. However, this work has overwhelmingly focused on experiences of women and parents, with limited attention to the disproportionate impact on academic work by race, disability status, sexual identity, first-generation status, and academic career stage. Using a stratified random survey sample of early-career academics in four science disciplines ( N = 3,277), we investigated socio-demographic and career stage differences in the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic along seven work outcomes: changes in four work areas (research progress, workload, concern about career advancement, support from mentors) and work disruptions due to three COVID-19 related life challenges (physical health, mental health, and caretaking). Our analyses examined patterns across career stages as well as separately for doctoral students and for postdocs/assistant professors. Overall, our results indicate that scientists from marginalized (i.e., devalued) and minoritized (i.e., underrepresented) groups across early career stages reported more negative work outcomes as a result of COVID-19. However, there were notable patterns of differences depending on the socio-demographic identities examined. Those with a physical or mental disability were negatively impacted on all seven work outcomes. Women, primary caregivers, underrepresented racial minorities, sexual minorities, and first-generation scholars reported more negative experiences across several outcomes such as increased disruptions due to physical health symptoms and additional caretaking compared to more privileged counterparts. Doctoral students reported more work disruptions from life challenges than other early-career scholars, especially those related to health problems, while assistant professors reported more negative changes in areas such as decreased research progress and increased workload. These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately harmed work outcomes for minoritized and marginalized early-career scholars. Institutional interventions are required to address these inequalities in an effort to retain diverse cohorts in academic science.more » « less
An official website of the United States government

