Digital inequality, faculty communication, and remote learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of U.S. undergraduates.

AimsThe COVID-19 pandemic forced closure of most U.S. university campuses in March 2020, obliging millions of students to finish their semesters via remote learning. This study examines whether and how students' prior and current experiences of digital inequality-defined as constrained access to the internet and internet-connecting devices-were associated with their remote learning experiences.MethodAn anonymous, online survey of 2,913 undergraduate college students from 30 U.S. universities completing their spring term remotely was conducted between April and May 2020. Hypothesis testing utilized a structural equation model with cluster-bootstrapped standard errors and p-values, to account for students being clustered by university.ResultsFindings revealed that students' challenges with internet connectivity and digital devices during remote learning were associated with lower remote learning proficiency (RLP). Difficulty communicating with professors and teaching assistants was also associated with lower RLP. Prior experience with online coursework was associated with higher RLP, and digital inequality challenges during the year prior to the pandemic with lower RLP. Moreover, students who reported greater financial hardship since the start of the pandemic experienced significantly more connectivity, device, and faculty communication challenges during remote learning, and had significantly lower RLP.ConclusionsMany students will continue to learn remotely in some form until the pandemic recedes. We identify key factors associated with students' remote learning proficiency: (1) consistent, high-speed internet connectivity and functioning devices to connect to it, and (2) the ability to relate to and communicate easily with professors and teaching assistants. This study identifies potential barriers to effective remote learning, as well as possible opportunities to improve students' experiences

Heterogeneity assumptions in the specification of bargaining models: a study of household level trade-offs between commuting time and salary

With many real world decisions being made in conjunction with other decision makers, or single agent decisions having an influence on other members of the decision maker's immediate entourage, there is strong interest in studying the relative weight assigned to different agents in such contexts. In the present paper, we focus on the case of one member of a two person household being asked to make choices affecting the travel time and salary of both members. We highlight the presence of significant heterogeneity across individuals not just in their underlying sensitivities, but also in the relative weight they assign to their partner, and show how this weight varies across attributes. This is in contrast to existing work which uses weights assigned to individual agents at the level of the overall utility rather than for individual attributes. We also show clear evidence of a risk of confounding between heterogeneity in marginal sensitivities and heterogeneity in the weights assigned to each member. We show how this can lead to misleading model results, and argue that this may also explain past results showing bargaining or weight parameters outside the usual [0,1] range in more traditional joint decision making contexts. In terms of substantive results, we find that male respondents place more weight on their partner's travel time, while female respondents place more weight on their partner's salary