The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Undergraduate Students’ Interest in the STEM Field

The deadly consequences of COVID-19 have been well documented, as have the social, emotional, and cognitive effects. These sequelae extend to the educational system. Much less investigated have been the potential positive outcomes of the pandemic. Given that STEM education relies heavily on hands-on laboratory experiences, STEM students may have been especially impacted by pandemic-imposed remote instruction. We surveyed 392 students at one liberal arts college querying why they continue studying in STEM or leave the STEM disciplines. Because the literature indicates that people of color and those from lower socioeconomic groups were more negatively affected by COVID-19, we hypothesized that students from traditionally marginalized groups in STEM would report greater adverse educational consequences of the pandemic as well; however, this was not borne out by the findings. Across demographic groups, students reported negative impacts of COVID-19, although in a few areas we found that more traditionally “privileged” groups complained of more negative outcomes than traditionally marginalized students did. What was most novel and dramatic in our results were the positive outcomes of the “lockdown” reported by students. These beneficial results were in the areas of enhanced resilience, improved social relationships, greater opportunities, academic improvement, and better mental health. Our paper concludes with recommendations for addressing the negative outcomes of COVID-19 and remote instruction, and for taking advantage of the unexpected positive effects

Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS) indicates limited scientific thinking gains as a result of science and mathematics general education

A number of instruments designed to measure scientific literacy exist, but none has been used to assess improvements in undergraduates’ scientific thinking over their college career. This study utilized the Test of Scientific Literacy Skills (TOSLS) in a longitudinal fashion to measure scientific thinking gains of over 800 students from matriculation to graduation at a small liberal arts college. We found the TOSLS to be a useful assessment instrument. Our results indicated rather small benefits of science general education overall, though there were larger improvements for some demographic groups (i.e., women, first-generation college students). STEM majors showed much greater development in their scientific thinking skills than non-STEM majors, although they started at a more advanced level. Suggestions are made to rethink STEM general education, either in terms of content or with regard to pedagogy, in order to improve future citizens’ ability to deal with the scientific challenges society faces

COVID-19 is Not All Bad News: Negative and Surprisingly Positive Reports from College STEM Students and Implications for STEM Instruction

The negative educational consequences of COVID-19 are well documented. Much less investigated have been any potential positive outcomes of the pandemic. We surveyed 392 students at one college querying why they continue studying STEM or leave the STEM disciplines and about the effects of COVID-19 on their education. STEM students may have been especially impacted by pandemic-imposed remote instruction given STEM’s reliance on hands-on laboratory experiences. Because the literature indicates that people of color and those from lower socioeconomic groups were more negatively affected by COVID-19, we hypothesized that students from these groups would report greater adverse educational consequences of the pandemic; however, this was not borne out by our findings. Across demographic groups, students reported negative impacts of COVID-19, although in a few areas we found that more traditionally “privileged” groups complained of more negative outcomes than traditionally “marginalized” students did. Most novel and dramatic in our results were the positive outcomes of the “lockdown” reported by students in the areas of enhanced resilience, improved social relationships, greater opportunities, academic improvement, and better mental health. We conclude with recommendations for addressing the negative outcomes of COVID-19 and remote instruction, and for taking advantage of the unexpected positive effects

A randomized clinical trial of high-dosage coenzyme Q10 in early Parkinson disease: no evidence of benefit

Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), an antioxidant that supports mitochondrial function, has been shown in preclinical Parkinson disease (PD) models to reduce the loss of dopamine neurons, and was safe and well tolerated in early-phase human studies. A previous phase II study suggested possible clinical benefit. To examine whether CoQ10 could slow disease progression in early PD. A phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial at 67 North American sites consisting of participants 30 years of age or older who received a diagnosis of PD within 5 years and who had the following inclusion criteria: the presence of a rest tremor, bradykinesia, and rigidity; a modified Hoehn and Yahr stage of 2.5 or less; and no anticipated need for dopaminergic therapy within 3 months. Exclusion criteria included the use of any PD medication within 60 days, the use of any symptomatic PD medication for more than 90 days, atypical or drug-induced parkinsonism, a Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) rest tremor score of 3 or greater for any limb, a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 25 or less, a history of stroke, the use of certain supplements, and substantial recent exposure to CoQ10. Of 696 participants screened, 78 were found to be ineligible, and 18 declined participation. The remaining 600 participants were randomly assigned to receive placebo, 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, or 2400 mg/d of CoQ10; all participants received 1200 IU/d of vitamin E. Participants were observed for 16 months or until a disability requiring dopaminergic treatment. The prospectively defined primary outcome measure was the change in total UPDRS score (Parts I-III) from baseline to final visit. The study was powered to detect a 3-point difference between an active treatment and placebo. The baseline characteristics of the participants were well balanced, the mean age was 62.5 years, 66% of participants were male, and the mean baseline total UPDRS score was 22.7. A total of 267 participants required treatment (94 received placebo, 87 received 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, and 86 received 2400 mg/d of CoQ10), and 65 participants (29 who received placebo, 19 who received 1200 mg/d of CoQ10, and 17 who received 2400 mg/d of CoQ10) withdrew prematurely. Treatments were well tolerated with no safety concerns. The study was terminated after a prespecified futility criterion was reached. At study termination, both active treatment groups showed slight adverse trends relative to placebo. Adjusted mean changes (worsening) in total UPDRS scores from baseline to final visit were 6.9 points (placebo), 7.5 points (1200 mg/d of CoQ10; P = .49 relative to placebo), and 8.0 points (2400 mg/d of CoQ10; P = .21 relative to placebo). Coenzyme Q10 was safe and well tolerated in this population, but showed no evidence of clinical benefit. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00740714