S. R. Cavanagh (
13) argued that engagement is the first step for learning, and this is particularly true in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). According to the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), engagement is a function of both a student’s personal desire to engage and institution-initiated opportunities to engage (
2–4). Engagement falls into three dimensions: (i) behavioral, (ii) affective, and (iii) cognitive. Behavioral engagement refers to the observable acts of students during learning (e.g., exhibiting effort and persistence, seeking help to solve a task, and in-class participation). Affective engagement is one’s emotional states linked to task investment. Cognitive engagement refers to the student’s efforts aimed at mastering the core concepts and competencies in a course, and it conveys deep processing of information, critical understanding, and the ability to apply new knowledge to solve challenging problems (
14).
In addition to understanding the impacts of engagement on learning, advances in neuroscience have allowed us to better understand the negative impacts stress and trauma have on learning (
6,
15,
16). Trauma connotes any experience in which a person’s internal resources are not adequate to cope with external stressors (
15) and is known to impact emotions, such that an individual’s executive functioning and self-regulation skills are compromised. That means faculty and students may have a harder time planning, remembering, and focusing on what they need to teach or learn (
16). Additionally, emotions, such as anger, fear, sadness, loneliness, and helplessness, can have a devastating effect on one’s levels of energy, interest, and engagement (
6). Coupled together, the pandemic and sociopolitical events over the past 18 months increased levels of stress and anxiety for many of our instructors and students. Effective teaching is challenging in the best of times, but in times of crisis and uncertainty we must be able to recognize and mitigate the effect of stress, anxiety, and trauma and apply best practices as we design resilient courses and caring communities (
17). As the pandemic continues to lead to change and uncertainty in higher education, we must reflect on the lessons learned during ERT and identify pedagogical approaches that keep trauma in mind, while increasing all dimensions of student engagement.
Lessons learned during ERT
As part of a research study, we conducted instructor and student surveys and interviews to identify supports and barriers during the transition to ERT (
18). We found that course attributes, community, and classroom technology were the most frequent support categories that emerged from the student data and that these ideas mentioned were related to reducing cognitive load and increasing student engagement. We defined course attributes as “instructional approaches used and specific components of the course, particularly in the LMS.” Community was defined as “a place or group of people that provides you with a sense of belonging, personal value, and support.” Classroom technology was defined as “having access to, and the effective use of, hardware, software, and instructional resources.” In the sections below, we review our own and previous research findings regarding lessons learned during ERT on course attributes, community, and classroom technology.
Course attributes
The organization and presentation of course material on the LMS can promote student engagement and reduce the cognitive load increased by pandemic-related trauma. According to D. Xu et al. (
19), well-organized online courses ensure that the content and materials are consistently broken into distinct learning units of manageable size and presented in a logical progression, such as weekly modules. B. Lake (
20) suggested that using a similar sequence and visual appearance in weekly modules on your LMS helps students develop expectations and a routine that will set them up for academic success. Additionally, providing students with an introductory module in the LMS helps students achieve a clear understanding of how to get started, when to find various course components, and how to access different resources online (
19), which will ultimately reduce their cognitive load (
21). Providing frequent opportunities for participation and interaction among students through online discussion boards allows students to respond to questions, participate equally, and potentially coconstruct knowledge through meaningful discourse (
22,
23). Z. Szabo (
24) found that the use of peer facilitation in online discussion boards positively impacts student participation and that instructor-facilitated discussions increase the depth and quality of reflections. Finally, assessment plays an important role in the learning process. Formative assessments, like homework or quizzes used during the learning process, help both the instructor and students facilitate and monitor students’ progress toward learning objectives or outcomes. Summative assessments, like projects or exams used at the end of a unit or semester, help evaluate individual mastery of course learning outcomes. The use of frequent low-stakes, formative assessments helps students effectively space their study and practice and more consistently engage with the course content and allows instructors and students to monitor progress and adjust their study strategies when needed (
25–27).
Community
V. Tinto (
28) theorized that students will increase their levels of satisfaction and the likelihood of persistence in a college program if they feel a sense of belonging and develop relationships with other members of the learning community. The sense of belonging in an academic context can influence individuals’ motivation, achievement, and well-being (
29). Traditionally, students assemble and interact before, during, and at the conclusion of a class session, leading to organic opportunities for social interactions. In the online classroom, students are represented as avatars, text on a screen, and sound bites, potentially leading to students becoming disembodied entities and a weakened sense of community (
30). One student wrote that she “felt cut off and sort of isolated from the class,” while another noted the “impersonalness of lectures” and the “difficulty of following lectures when the pace is not as connected with the students’ ability to keep up” (
18).
While several instructors we interviewed noted the importance of community during ERT, two challenges stand out. First, many noted how difficult communication was with their students. Instructors routinely described being uncertain as to whether students were receiving the information they were sending, and many expressed concerns that the students were being deluged with information, in part because the instructors and teaching assistants were often sending multiple announcements each week. Second, nearly all instructors interviewed noted that “students just become overwhelmed” and many instructors had “concerns for the mental health of [the] students” (
18).
Classroom technology
Long before the current pandemic, the growing field of academic technology enabled innovative pedagogy and information sharing using emerging technologies. However, when instructors and students were forced into ERT, it became critical to know about, and have access to, hardware, software, and instructional resources to enhance communication, engagement, and the overall student experience. Universities quickly addressed the most critical needs of instructors and students by providing laptops, tablets, hot spots, headsets with microphones, and access to software available in on-campus labs. Pedagogical coaches and instructional designers responded rapidly to provide instructors with a variety of workshops and consultations regarding the effective use of the classroom technologies. Supportive resources focused on course design, effective assessment practices, engagement strategies, classroom response systems (e.g., polling via Zoom), presentation software, capabilities of the LMS, and collaboration tools (
17).
During ERT, some instructors felt students were more productive and engaged when camera usage was required, while other instructors felt chat and breakout rooms facilitated group work and community (
25). A. Y. Wang and M. H. Newlin (
31) advocated the use of synchronous chat rooms as a means of fostering communication and instructor-student and student-student interactions in the online learning environment. Along with synchronous chat rooms, collaborative work in breakout rooms can help students develop a greater sense of community. However, given that many of our students’ out-of-class commitments increased during the pandemic (e.g., employment and care of siblings and/or family members), asynchronous communication via email and discussion boards was equally important.
Many instructors in our recent study (
18) mentioned how they appreciated the ease of organizing for group work, whereas others discussed the lack of student (behavioral) engagement once students entered the breakout rooms. We suspect that differences in implementation and group expectations may have contributed to the mixed feelings expressed by faculty. Also, students did not mention anything about breakout rooms specifically, but they did mention that they appreciated synchronous classes, indicating that they liked the personal and live interactions with their peers and the instructor(s). Students also mentioned they appreciated having introductory videos and recorded lectures in each module because these provided them with flexibility in their learning (i.e., cognitive engagement).