Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36276715›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2022

Academic discourse on education during the early part of the pandemic.

Ralph Meulenbroeks, Martijn Reijerkerk, Elisabeth Angerer, Toine Pieters, Arthur Bakker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Ralph MeulenbroeksFreudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Martijn ReijerkerkFreudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Elisabeth AngererFreudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Toine PietersFreudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Arthur BakkerFreudenthal Institute, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the global COVID-19 pandemic forced a sudden transition to emergency online education in early 2020, academic discourse quickly shifted to focus on the new situation and what could be learned from it. The present study gives an overview of the discourse on education during the pandemic in publications that appeared in the top-50 journals on the Clarivate Education list in the period April 2020-May 2021. Based on a final selection of 63 articles and 12 editorials, mostly on higher education, five main themes were identified: affect, teaching practice, teaching context, achievement and assessment, and equity. The academic discourse in these publications indicates that the emergency situation exacerbated previously existing issues: mental distress was observed to rise sharply for all stakeholders and gaps in access to education between different social groups widened. In response, teachers revisited the core values of education to guide them in approaching online teaching. Management focused less on procedures and communicated in a more human and empathic way. We argue that the acute interconnectedness experienced during the pandemic can be used to develop a pedagogy of care in which support is explicitly organized on both socio-emotional and academic levels.

Indexed as

Blended learningCOVID-19Higher educationOnline educationPandemicPedagogy of care

Identifiers

PMID36276715
PMCPMC9578970

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.