Abstract

Background

     The outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in 2019 and the resulting quarantine may have increased the prevalence of mental health problems in adolescents. The aim of this study was to explore the association between the effects of home-based learning during the pandemic and the risks of depression, anxiety, and suicidality among junior and senior high school students.

Methods

     An online survey using Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) was conducted between 12 to 30 April 2020, on a total of 39,751 students. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the risk factors of associated depression, anxiety and suicidality during the pandemic.

Results

     Prevalence of depression, anxiety symptoms and suicidality found was 16.3% (95% CI: 16.0, 16.7), 10.3% (95% CI: 10.0, 10.6) and 20.3% (95% CI: 19.9, 20.7), respectively. Participants with female gender and in junior high school, with poor overall sleep quality and poor academic performance and very worried about being infected during COVID-19 were highly associated with the risk of depression, anxiety symptoms and suicidal ideation (all P<0.001).

Conclusions

     Prevalence of self-reported mental health problems for adolescents using home-based distance learning was high. Implementing measures (e.g., wearing face masks) and spending only moderate time focusing on COVID-19-related information could be protective factors for mental health. These results provide suggestions for teachers and policy makers regarding adolescent improving sleep quality (sufficient sleep) and academic performance and reducing worry about pandemic during quarantine to prevent mental health problems.

Introduction

     Since the first outbreak of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) at the end of 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic was listed as a global public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2020). In order to contain the spread of COVID-19, most recently, the Chinese Government issued a stay-at-home order, which meant that mass quarantine was mandatory during the initial outbreak of COVID-19 (Brooks et al., 2020). For example, only residents were allowed to enter residential communities, the wearing of face masks was made compulsorily, and non-essential community services were shut down (Leung et al., 2020). Meanwhile, 107 countries as estimated by the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on 18 March 2020, had implemented national school closures related to COVID-19, affecting 862 million children and adolescents (UNESCO, 2020). In particular, there were more than 220 million children and young people confined to their homes in China, according to the Ministry of Education of China (Ministry of Education of China, 2020). Normal daily life shifted for adolescents to home-based distance learning models, which has resulted in substantial disruption to the lives of students and their families and which may have longer-term consequences for adolescent health (Golberstein et al., 2020). There are obvious advantages to remote learning, e.g., accessibility and comfort during online learning, however, the limitations of inefficient learning, lack of eye contact and feedback from teachers, inattention and the difficulty in maintaining academic integrity are also of concern (Mukhtar et al., 2020). Although adolescence is a transitional and critical developmental period with brain and body maturation, students still faced further challenges in terms of losing structure and support, routine social connections, social distancing and loneliness, less physical activity, spending more time on screens, increased irregular sleep patterns, and less favorable diets, resulting collectively in weight gain and a loss of cardiorespiratory fitness (Brazendale et al., 2017; Loades et al., 2020). These challenges have been associated with increased mental health problems in adolescents, including an increase in anxiety, depression, loneliness and a loss of motivation and purpose (Caspi et al., 2006). Therefore, adolescent mental health needs to be prioritized during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusions

     The current findings indicate that the prevalence of depression, anxiety symptoms and suicidal ideation is relatively high, particularly for respondents who are female and in junior high school, with poor academic performance and negative health status, spending more than three hours focusing on COVID-19 information, very worried about being infected and those who did not implement preventive measures. Additionally, high risk of mental health problems is indicated in students who had poor overall sleep quality, little or no physical activity and who were spending more than five hours on the internet. These study findings contribute to a greater understanding of mental health problems during pandemics in both junior and high school students, especially in terms of suicidal ideation. The research will help to identify risk factors in the mental health of adolescents and provides some suggestions to prevent and manage according to the above factors, such as spending less time online, taking enough physical exercise (30–60 minutes per day), and improving sleep quality (for example, taking sufficient sleep, keeping exercise). Further longitudinal studies of the long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and quarantine on adolescents are needed to expand on this research.

Abstract

     The existing evidence shows that parental engagement is one of the most effective educational interventions. Most parents, carers, and teachers are aware of that and wish to engage with their children’s education. However, most parents are still only peripherally involved through parent–teacher evenings, school activities, or by helping their children keep up with their homework. In this review paper, we summarize the evidence about the impact of parental engagement, as opposed to involvement, on the learning of children. Via that, we critically look at the design choice of most western mainstream public education systems to distance parents from their children’s education, which, as the review results indicate, can be detrimental to children’s learning. Based on these results, we reframe parental engagement in the light of two global shifts: (1) the implications of the school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic for the role of parents in their children’s learning; and (2) the increased use of educational technologies for learning, and specifically, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. We conclude by calling for a renewed conversation about parents’ and families’ roles in their children’s learning and their interface with schools and teachers.

Introduction

     The idea of a mandatory-attendance public education system based on out-of-home institutions called schools has its roots from at least the 16th century [1]. This initiated the daily routine of school-aged children exiting their homes every morning, leaving their parents, cultures, and familial beliefs behind to go into schools. Once there, they adhere to the schools’ standards of curriculum and conform to their behavioural schemas, rewards, and implications. This journey was, and still is, designed and realised by various stakeholders: such as governments, employers, religious institutions, industry leaders, and education policymakers [1], each with their own agenda, led by their own political, economic, or pedagogical interests, not all of which have to do with children’s wellbeing and learning.

     The original aims of national educational systems from around the world differed in time and location. These ranged from producing obedient soldiers in Prussia to efficient assembly line workers in the US during the 19th century, to eradicating the original culture of “first nation” children in Australia in the 20th century, and onto today’s national education systems in western countries such as the US and the UK, who strive to prepare young people as future members of a workforce, whose needs are hard to predict (see, for example [2,3]).

Concluding Remarks

     This review paper’s aim is to bring a non-systematic critical overview of the current state of research and practice around parents’ and carers’ roles in their children’s education. We do that by synthesizing the existing evidence in light of recent global shifts that are challenging the current design principles and opening new opportunities for radical changes in schooling–parents relationships. In this concluding section, we summarize our findings and provide recommendations.

     Most western governments and schools today would state that supporting their students’ wellbeing and effective learning are their first priority. Whether or not schools are best designed to support either is debatable, but what is evidentially clear is that actively engaged parents and pulling the learning experience away from being regulated solely within schools into a home–school–community continuum are what would most benefit children. School is just one element in every child’s ZPD, just one form of education out of many, and just one milestone in a life-long journey. Supportive parents, carers, families, and the community surrounding children shape and hold their ZPD way before school starts and are likely to play a significant role long after school ends. If we accept that at least some of our educational system’s aims are to support learners in developing self-regulated skills for learning, we should bring their ZPD “closer to home”. In normative and supportive homes reside those people who understand where the children are coming from, what they have gone through, whether they slept tight at night, and whether they had a nutritious breakfast in the morning. Moreover, the students themselves, with the support of their parents are eventually those who will be making decisions regarding their potential future. Therefore, if schools’ priority is children’s learning, it is essential that children’s ZPD space is integratively built on top of a partnership, and, in that, it would be influenced by those factors that are most personal and relevant to each child.

Abstract

Open Access and Permissions

Share and Cite

Article Metrics

Order Article Reprints

Abstract

(1) Background: A variety of social and economic changes are happening worldwide due to the pandemic caused by COVID-19, which has produced new problems and challenges for the population as a whole. These events demand new investigations and key studies for their management. This review addresses the repercussions of COVID-19 at the educational level in the primary education stage, delving into the effects produced in teaching and different aspects related to it, such as the situation and challenges of teachers, family involvement, and the perceptions and repercussions of the learning and socio-educational development of students (especially in the case of students with Autism Spectrum Disorder). (2) Methods: The methodological design is a systematic review study, following the PRISMA guidelines, from a search carried out during the month of July 2021 in the Scopus, Dialnet, and WoS databases on the object of study. (3) Results: The selected studies were analyzed through a qualitative content analysis based on a population of 103 articles, with a final sample of 13, using the inclusion criteria: empirical studies or research in English or Spanish; free access through the Internet; categories restricted to “education/educational research” related to the proposed objectives; specific documents of the primary education stage and/or students with Autism Spectrum Disorder. (4) Conclusions: The research reveals the presence of an existing digital gap in certain sectors of the student population aggravated by the pandemic, as well as the scarcity of general teacher training in this type of situation, leading to different personal and professional problems that hinder teaching and emphasize the vulnerability of the right to education, which leads to further promoting the already existing social inequalities.

1. Introduction

According to UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) [1], the starting point of the new pandemic was Wuhan, the capital of Hubei, which belongs to central China. The date of its origin is estimated to be December 2019. The name established for this disease is COVID-19, known as a coronavirus type characterized by symptomatologies associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-COV-2). The transmission of this virus is associated with the social relationship between people, placing its highest rate of contagion in direct person-to-person transmission. In order to prevent the spread of COVID-19, all the governments of the affected countries have decided to carry out different measures to control it.

1- Introduction

2- Social networks, social capital, social support and higher education outcomes

3- Method

4- Description of the studies included in the review and major themes

5- Relationship between social networks, social capital, social support and academic achievement in higher education

6- Conclusion and discussion

References

Abstract

Widening higher education participation has resulted in efforts directed towards increasing higher education access. However, inequality in higher education completion continues to exist. Social factors have been found to play an important role in academic achievement. Given the role of social factors, this article examines the academic outcomes of students from a social network, social capital, and social support perspective with a special focus on underrepresented groups in higher education. The article is based on a systematic review of literature where evidence shows that the networks of students including their family, ethnic and religious affiliations, friends, and faculty play a role in academic success. The article details a framework describing how network members of underrepresented groups complement each other with regard to resources offered and contribute to academic success.

Introduction

Widening higher education participation has gained increased political focus globally in recent years, resulting in efforts directed towards expanding higher education access (Marginson, 2016; Osborne, 2003). Indeed, these political reforms have resulted in an increase in the number and diversity of students entering higher education. For instance, in the last ten years, the enrolment of students aged 25–34 years in tertiary education has increased in all OECD countries, with some countries e.g., Australia, Czech Republic, Greece, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland even reporting an increase of over 10% (OECD, 2018). Furthermore, previously underrepresented groups such as students from low social background are now increasingly becoming a part of the higher education system. Nonetheless, disparities in education achievement continue to exist as increased participation within these groups alone cannot guarantee academic success (Crozier, Reay, Clayton, Collinader, & Grinstead, 2008; Marginson, 2016). It is observed that first-generation learners (Müller & Schneider, 2013; OECD, 2018), those with migration background (Ebert & Heublein, 2017) are still at-risk of dropping out of university without obtaining a degree. The achievement gap between students from high and low socio-economic backgrounds can be attributed partly to the differences in family’s resources vis-à-vis finances, academic guidance or information, parental involvement or language skills (Willingham, 2012). Alongside family members, the role of peers and support groups at university also influence academic outcomes. Hossler, Schmidt, and Vesper (1999) highlight the importance of peer support in improving understanding of course materials and clarifying difficult concepts (Gallop & Bastien, 2016). Peer support and networks also determine student’s integration and acceptance in higher education institutions which subsequently affects retention and success (Gallop & Bastien, 2016; Nagasawa & Wong, 1999).

Background: High-quality and relevant nursing education is needed to ensure graduates meet entry to practice competencies. Despite the important role of curricula in the development of nurses and the nursing profession, there does not appear to be a consistent or widely accepted approach to nursing curriculum renewal. Objective: To identify and synthesize existing curriculum renewal/redesign practices, create an aggregated logic model depicting an evidence-informed process for nursing curriculum renewal, and stimulate dialogue about how to keep nursing curricula relevant in an ever-changing healthcare context. Design: An integrative review, modeled on the Joanna Briggs Methodology of Systematic Reviews, of the available published articles, including empirical research and discussion articles. Data sources: We searched for quantitative, qualitative, and non-research literature (English and French) on full nursing programs or curriculum revisions for pre-licensure nursing students enrolled in an undergraduate or associate degree program. Databases included CINAHL, Nursing and Allied Health, and Medline from January 2010 to January 2017. We then did a hand search for articles from January 2017 to April 2019. Synthesis: Extracted data were synthesized into an aggregated logic model based on Yin’s method of cross-case analysis. Data included information about the internal context, the external context, drivers, the preparatory phase, the active phase, outcomes, and evaluation methods of the described curriculum renewal process. Results: Twenty articles were included, which were published between 2010 and 2018. The resulting logic model, The Ottawa Model for Nursing Curriculum Renewal, includes information on the context, process and outcomes of the renewal process, and how and when to evaluate curricula. Conclusion: This synthesis aids in defining the process of curriculum renewal for undergraduate nursing education. It stimulates systems level thinking and reveals gaps, such as the need for further research into curriculum evaluation. The Ottawa Model for Nursing Curriculum Renewal is a usable template to aid educators undertaking their own process of curriculum renewal.

Background

High-quality and relevant nursing education is needed to ensure graduates meet entry to practice competencies. Nurses are expected to maintain quality and ethical standards in busy, high-pressured, and sometimes under-staffed clinical environments (de Vries and Timmins, 2016; Peternelj-Taylor, 2013). Nurses support and advocate for individual and collective wellbeing, understand population health needs within fluctuating global landscapes, and provide skillful care for persons with acute and chronic conditions (D’Antonio et al., 2013; Faison and Montague, 2013). Given the complexity of nursing practice, undergraduate nursing curricula must constantly adapt and evolve to adhere to professional standards, meet academic accreditation requirements, integrate new evidence, respond to social and demographic changes, and accommodate technological advances (Hickey et al., 2010; Mailloux, 2011; van de Mortel and Bird, 2010). Contemporary nursing education includes greater pedagogical diversity, integration of new technologies, increased use of simulations, distance learning, and a shift away from strictly didactic teaching approaches (Hsu, 2012; Lira and Lopes, 2011). Research also supports the need to incorporate experiential and work-integrated learning opportunities to ensure that students gain exposure to clinical settings and are safe to enter nursing practice upon program completion (Didion et al., 2013; Noland, 2014; Wright, 2015). Despite the important role of curricula in the development of nurses and the nursing profession, there does not appear to be a consistent or widely accepted approach to nursing curriculum renewal.

1- Introduction

2- Methodological Procedures

3- Presentation and Discussion of Results

4- Conclusions

References

Introduction

In an attempt to respond to the demands of today’s world, teachers have been abandoning the traditional model of content memorization and verification, seeking to train critical and reflexive professionals, capable of solving problems. On the educator’s side, we expect competency-oriented skills and the ability of enabling the students to participate actively in the learning process (Hoffmann & Koifman, 2013). Prosser, Trigwell and Taylor (1994) defined two major types of approaches to teaching: Conceptual Change/Student-Focused” (CCSF) and “Information Transmission/Teacher-Focused” (ITTF). The approaches to teaching are constituted by an intention (conception) and a strategy (Prosser & Trigwell, 2000). In a perspective of knowledge transmission, teaching is typically associated with a content approach, in which students are regarded as passive receivers of knowledge. In that context, learning consists of remembering and reproducing the right answers or solutions, and/or memorizing facts. In contrast, teaching viewed as knowledge facilitation is typically linked to a learning approach to teaching (Kember & Kwan, 2000). In this kind of approach, the aim is to change and challenge the students’ concepts with respect to learning, and the latter is seen as a process in which students construct their own understanding. The focus is on insight, critical thinking and knowledge application. It was based on this complex relationship between teaching approaches focused on the students and deep learning that we elaborated the following research question: “Which are the strategic teaching orientations that promote conceptual change in the higher education student?”

1- Background

2- Method

3- Results

4- Discussion

5- Limitations

6- Conclusion

7- Recommendations

References

Abstract

Attrition rates among nursing students are a global issue, and a possible factor in current nursing shortages. Numerous studies have been conducted to determine why students drop out of nursing programmes. The limitations of previous studies have included overly small sample sizes, being largely descriptive, and not focusing on attrition as an outcome. The aim of this study is to review the issue of attrition among undergraduate nursing students in relation to curriculum design. Five electronic databases, namely CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane Library, British Nursing Index, and PsycINFO, were adopted. Using the Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome model, search terms were identified, such as ‘student nurse’, ‘undergraduate programme’, ‘curriculum design’, and ‘attrition’. Mixed Method Appraisal Tools were used to evaluate the methodological quality of the identified research papers. A total of 16 publications were reviewed and four themes were identified: pre-enrolment criteria for recruiting nursing students; curriculum content; clinical placement-related policies; and student support services. Institutional-level risk factors that could be reduced were identified, including academic failure, poor clinical performance, stress, and unrealistic expectations of nursing. This review gives insights into how a curriculum for undergraduate nursing programmes can be designed that will engage students and increase the nursing workforce.

Background

Nurses play a significant role in healthcare systems. According to the World Health Organization (2018), nurses and midwives comprise nearly 50% of the global health workforce. They provide primary care and treatment to patients, educate the public about the importance of health in the community, and participate in controlling diseases and infections (World Health Organization, 2018). Therefore, the importance of nursing education and training cannot be overemphasized. Today, most registered nurses are trained in universities, where the emphasis is on critical thinking, leadership, systems analysis, and teamwork (American Association of Colleges of Nursing, 2016; The Nursing Council of Hong Kong, 2016). Students need to complete a bachelor’s degree to become registered nurses. However, a significant number of students worldwide drop out from undergraduate nursing programmes (ten Hoeve et al., 2017). Hence, the complex reasons behind such attrition need to be investigated, such as personal, institutional, course-related, and financial factors (Urwin et al., 2010). Of these, it is practical to explore the design of the undergraduate nursing curriculum, because it can potentially be modified and improved so that students can better enjoy and appreciate their learning experience (Taylor, 2005). This will encourage more students to complete their nursing programme and increase the supply of nurses, easing the burden on public healthcare systems.

Introduction

Analysing the critical

Reviewing the literature: principles, priorities and practices

Shades of the critical

Provisional conclusions

Coda—in medias res | adrift on Neurath’s boat?

References

Abstract

Perspectives and approaches to health and wellbeing education vary considerably over time and space even as certain contextual and critical features may be maintained. Through an analysis of a range of studies published in the Journal of Curriculum Studies, we illustrate what unites as much as divides various positions taken by their authors through a focus on which assumptions they proceed from, those they may seek to problematise, and which they try to rework through their scholarship. Our analysis centres on two key questions: (a) the critical question of health education, and (b) the question of critical health education. To advance our analysis, we draw on insights from critical literature review techniques and the need to problematise research topics and assumptions that frame and guide their selection and investigation. Key outcomes include six thematic categories and the key parameters for identifying various degrees of light and shade to the criticality within these studies, including their thresholds. We conclude with a reflection on the significance of determining the object of critique during curriculum studies, and the continuing need to inquire into, rather than bypass, what counts as critical in health and wellbeing education.

Introduction

The health and wellbeing of populations and their particular subgroups are both recurring and highly contentious themes in debates about public policy (De Leeuw, Clavier, & Benton, 2014; Thorburn, 2018). For the Journal of Curriculum Studies, it includes discussing general and specific priorities and policies regarding whether educational institutions should promote particular agenda and practices related to health and wellbeing, or not (e.g. Thorburn, 2017). At the heart of such debates are familiar and core questions for curriculum inquiry (Reid, 2018), such as examining: ● which educative experiences a curriculum should foster and why? ● what should be the scope of a worthwhile curriculum and how should it be decided, organised and reworked? ● why is distinctive curricula provided to different groups of students? and ● how should curriculum be best enacted and evaluated? The scholarly literature illustrating the ‘tinder’ that fuels debates on these matters in relation to health and wellbeing education is wide-ranging. It may be how those in education engage with relatively perennial to ephemeral topics related to healthy eating, physical activity, chronic diseases, sexual behaviours, and substance use (Marmot & Allen, 2014). Equally, ‘kindling’ may arrive by asking whether it is a core duty of schools to promote particular forms of mental health, mindfulness, happiness, and alternative forms of wellbeing (Leahy & Simovska, 2017). While stretching the analogy further to consider the ‘firewood’, debate and developments on these matters may flare up with some heat—and light, it is hoped—at various levels. Transnationally, a blaze of concerns may arise from how education, educators and educationalists are expected to respond to a wide range of health-related developments and ‘epidemics’ across populations in Western countries and beyond, e.g. related to obesity and other forms of malnutrition, beginningof-life to end-of-life policy and care, the relative benefits and burdens individually and collectively of health care provision and costs, and so forth. Equally, debates at national, regional and local levels might be fuelled by asking what is (deemed) necessary, appropriate and acceptable as health and wellbeing promotion initiatives in schools (Simovska, Nordin, & Dahl, 2016). And it is here, we note, that sometimes debate rages in relation to traditions and contestations of sociocultural conditions and priorities that are expressed in education (Green & Tones, 2010), while at others, it may well be to question the experiences students might expect to bring, have or discuss in a school setting on these matters—if not what others expect those to be—including their boundaries, participatory modes or challenges to such student experience (Grieber et al., 2017).

INTRODUCTION

Adaptable and flexible nurses are needed to meet the fluctuating demands of healthcare systems. The Canadian Nurses’ Association (CNA) states that the knowledge, skills, and personal attributes required by today’s health system can only be gained through baccalaureate nursing programs (2016). However, despite the changes to nursing education, there has been no change to the persistent culture of bullying within nursing. Bullying of nursing students is not a recent phenomenon. An article published in the New York Times in 1909 documented an example of the bullying experienced by nursing students from a physician’s perspective. The physician witnessed “head nurse despotism” directed towards student nurses and recounted stories of bullying (New York Times, 1909). Biographers have documented Florence Nightingale, the symbolic 19th century nursing icon, as being intimidating and domineering with her peers, behaviors often considered as bullying (Lim & Bernstein, 2014). Today, there is a prevalence of literature documenting bullying of nursing students in the clinical setting. Clarke et al. (2012) found that 88.7% of undergraduate Canadian nursing students from various years (n=674) experienced at least one act of bullying with the main sources of bullying being clinical instructors and staff nurses. Nursing students experience bullying from the 1st year of their nursing education programs (Clarke et al., 2012). It therefore follows that there is an opportunity within nursing education programs to change this experience and break the cycle of bullying. Doing so will lead to a workforce where bullying is not a part of the culture (Pope, 2008; Smith et al., 2016).

BACKGROUND

Bullying among nurses is a persistent, international problem. In Australia, the incidence of nurseto-nurse bullying ranges between 14.7% and 21.7% (Hegney et al., 2010; Roche et al., 2010), while in the USA, rates of 23% were reported (Vessey et al., 2009). A national study in the UK found that 20% of healthcare staff, of which the majority were nurses, experienced bullying (Carter et al., 2013). The evidence is clear, bullying in nursing is prevalent internationally. This prevalence of bullying has several implications for the profession. Much of the concern in the literature is focused on staff retention and burn out (Chachula et al., 2015; Yildrim, 2009). New Canadian graduates who were planning to leave the profession reported horizontal hostility as a factor influencing their decision to leave nursing (Chachula et al., 2015). Impaired wellbeing is another unfortunate consequence of bullying in nursing. Yildirim (2009) found a positive association between workplace bullying and depression (r=0.51, p <0.00). Nurses have reported experiencing stress, anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms after bullying experiences (Berry et al., 2016; Rodwell & Demir, 2012; Yildirim, 2009). The negative effects of bullying on nurses’ physical and mental health can also compromise patient safety. An Australian study (Roche et al., 2010) found delayed delivery of nursing tasks to be a consequence of workplace bullying, Nurses have also reported being unable to concentrate on patient tasks and procedures because of bullying (Carter et al., 2013, Rosenstein & Naylor, 2012). A delay in intervention delivery and an inability to think clearly is concerning in the fast-paced healthcare systems of the 21st Century, where patients have higher acuity, requiring time sensitive interventions.