Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33306720›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Online biology degree program broadens access for women, first-generation to college, and low-income students, but grade disparities remain.

Chris Mead, K Supriya, Yi Zheng, Ariel D Anbar, James P Collins, Paul LePore, Sara E Brownell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Chris MeadCenter for Education Through Exploration, School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4547-6830
K SupriyaBiology Education Research Lab, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.
Yi ZhengSchool of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.
Ariel D AnbarCenter for Education Through Exploration, School of Earth and Space Exploration, School of Molecular Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.
James P CollinsSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.
Paul LePoreCollege of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.
Sara E BrownellBiology Education Research Lab, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States of America.

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute GT11046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Online education has grown rapidly in recent years with many universities now offering fully online degree programs even in STEM disciplines. These programs have the potential to broaden access to STEM degrees for people with social identities currently underrepresented in STEM. Here, we ask to what extent is that potential realized in terms of student enrollment and grades for a fully online degree program. Our analysis of data from more than 10,000 course-enrollments compares student demographics and course grades in a fully online biology degree program to demographics and grades in an equivalent in-person biology degree program at the same university. We find that women, first-generation to college students and students eligible for federal Pell grants constitute a larger proportion of students in the online program compared to the in-person mode. However, the online mode of instruction is associated with lower course grades relative to the in-person mode. Moreover, African American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, Native American, and Pacific Islander students as well as federal Pell grant eligible students earned lower grades than white students and non-Pell grant eligible students, respectively, but the grade disparities were similar among both in-person and online student groups. Finally, we find that grade disparities between men and women are larger online compared to in-person, but that for first-generation to college women, the online mode of instruction is associated with little to no grade gap compared to continuing generation women. Our findings indicate that although this online degree program broadens access for some student populations, inequities in the experience remain and need to be addressed in order for online education to achieve its inclusive mission.

Indexed as

AchievementAdultBiologyCurriculumEducational StatusEducation, DistanceFamily CharacteristicsFemaleHumansIncomeMalePovertyStudentsUniversitiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33306720
PMCPMC7732118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.