articles about educational experiences

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

In this EdWeek blog, an experiment in knowledge-gathering, Ferlazzo will address readers’ questions on classroom management, ELL instruction, lesson planning, and other issues facing teachers. Send your questions to [email protected]. Read more from this blog.

Students Share Their Best School Experiences and What We Can Learn From Them

• Share article

Today, five students from my classes contribute short pieces about their favorite moments, and what others might be able to learn from them.

You might also be interested in these two other posts:

• Students Describe Their Favorite Teachers
• ‘He Was a Very Good Listener’ - Students Write About Their Most Memorable Teachers

Response From Leslie Servin

During my time in high school I had it really good moments, but my best moments that I’ve experienced are in a particular class during my senior year, in Sacramento, Calif. So I was basically a new student in these kind of classes and also I’m English learner. I remember my first presentation in this class. I didn’t want to do it, but finally I did it and that one was my best moment. When I went to present I felt afraid, and then when I presented I felt so good for the effort I applied on. Now I feel so much better than my first day of presentations because I now know that I can do whatever I want to do. The learnings that I acquire made it so good this moment because I know that I have to trust on me. Something teachers or students can learn from my experience is that we have to overcome our fears and not let them control ourselves because we can’t know our capabilities if we are afraid.

Response From Jesneel Singh

The best moment in class was when I was in 9th grade in sixth period. That was when I got into poetry and spoken word. Having that “character and scene” class made my life even greater. Not knowing anything about poetry, hating on poems about reading and writing it in the past. That class was fun in many ways. For example; there was this one time where we had to write our own plays and poems and perform them in front of the class. I felt alive, and the creative side of me came out. When I wrote my first poem in freshman year. I realized that it was fun and unique. I felt like I wanted to write more and more. When I performed my first poem to that class I found my passion. Since that day and today I have written over 400 poems and made two books. I have performed on many stages in small audience and in school. That was a good day for me because I can write my thoughts down and write the truth about the world. Teachers and students can learn from this experience that, you can find what best fits you.

Response From Nancy Ramirez

I would say my best class moment would be from my sophomore year in high school. For my Spanish class, our teacher decided we would do a class circle (Editor’s note: see “How To Practice Restorative Justice in Schools” for more information on class circles) for the day. She asked us a sequence of questions which required us to give a more in depth and heartfelt answer each time, starting with something along the lines of “How are you feeling?” and ending with “Why do you think that is?” A class circle which only should have lasted one day extended to three, with each and every single one of us having to share our deepest and darkest fears and insecurities. By then it felt more than just a class and opened my eyes to very different ways of teaching styles. I believe there is much to learn from this experience, both then and now. I have come to deeply appreciate not only the class but the teacher as well. This experience showed me the extent a relationship with your classmates and your teacher can go....

Response From Oscar Salazar

The best moment I’ve ever experienced in school was last year when I was a sophomore. I took biology last year and towards the end of the year we got to dissect a fetal pig. I know that it sounds gross but it’s really not. That’s what I thought at first too. I did lots of fun experiments in that class that were new to me, such as making a small ecosystem in a bottle and dissecting owl pellets to find mouse skeletons. I think that these experiences were really fun and interesting. I’ve never done anything like that in a class before.

I think that when teachers introduce students to hands-on activities and projects the students enjoy it more. Since we have more energy it’s a good use of it. We learn better when we’re allowed to move around and be creative. Our lives aren’t going to be pen on paper or books forever. It’s best to get us students to explore the world using our skills that we learn and strengthen our understanding of daily life that is sometimes hidden from us and exposed to us abruptly once we turn into adults.

Response From Kayla Guzman

What has been my best moment in a class? I’ve had many great moments but perhaps the most best moment took place in my English class about a month ago. I had a 10-15 minute presentation and I felt pretty confident. 30 minutes before my presentation I decided to incorporate an actor for visual appeal, to correspond with my presentation. I felt even more confident, assure that I would captivate the audience’s attention and keep them engaged. When my presentation started, I gave a signal to my actor which led me to drop my 8 notecards all over the floor. I was aware that the time was ticking, so I quickly grabbed all the notecards off the floor. I became overwhelmed with embarrassment, listening to the echoing laughter of the audience as I tried to rearrange the cards. The cards in my hand then became extremely restraining. My anxiety levels rose, and the disorganized cards just added stress to my emotions. I placed the cards down, and felt a great sense of relieve. My words, my explanations, my connections all flowed out my mouth with harmony, and I felt more natural and free as I presented my topic.

My presentation was a diagnosis of a character with schizophrenia, explaining the symptoms and the reasoning behind my diagnosis. The movement of my hands and my exaggeration presented by a drive of passion, along with my visual representative, kept the audience captive. I felt like a completely different person. By the end of the presentation I was sweaty, not by nervousness but because I left it all on the floor. I realized that the key to presenting with people is not getting their attention just by visual appeal. You need to let your heart pour out so that you can captivate their hearts, reach their souls. You can’t just be the center of attention, you need to give the audience attention, you need to talk to them. First and foremost, you can’t present without emotions. Anything you present should be built off of passion. As long as you can find a connection between yourself and the topic and exude your passion, you will keep the audience engaged.

Thanks to Nancy, Jesneel, Kayla, Leslie, and Oscar for their contributions!

(This is the last post in a three-part series. You can see Part One here and Part Two here .)

The new “question-of-the-week” is:

What was the best moment you ever had in the classroom?

In Part One , Jen Schwanke, Amy Sandvold, Anne Jenks, and Sarah Thomas shared their top moments. You can listen to a 10-minute conversation I had with them on my BAM! Radio Show . You can also find a list of, and links to, previous shows here. In Part Two , Meghan Everette, Jeryl-Ann Asaro, Jeffery Galle, and Kara Vandas shared their memories. I also included comments from readers.

Please feel free to leave a comment with your reactions to the topic or directly to anything that has been said in this post.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at [email protected] . When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

Anyone whose question is selected for this weekly column can choose one free book from a number of education publishers.

Education Week has published a collection of posts from this blog, along with new material, in an e-book form. It’s titled Classroom Management Q&As: Expert Strategies for Teaching .

If you missed any of the highlights from the first six years of this blog, you can see a categorized list below. They don’t include ones from this current year, but you can find those by clicking on the “answers” category found in the sidebar.

This Year’s Most Popular Q&A Posts

Classroom Management Advice

Race & Gender Challenges

Implementing The Common Core

Best Ways To Begin The School Year

Best Ways To End The School Year

Student Motivation & Social Emotional Learning

Teaching Social Studies

Project-Based Learning

Using Tech In The Classroom

Parent Engagement In Schools

Teaching English Language Learners

Student Assessment

Brain-Based Learning

Reading Instruction

Writing Instruction

Education Policy Issues

Differentiating Instruction

Math Instruction

Science Instruction

Advice For New Teachers

Author Interviews

Entering The Teaching Profession

Administrator Leadership

Teacher Leadership

Relationships In Schools

Professional Development

Instructional Strategies

I am also creating a Twitter list including all contributors to this column .

Look for the next “question-of-the-week” in a few days.

The opinions expressed in Classroom Q&A With Larry Ferlazzo are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Educational Experiences Become Experiential When the Learner is Fully Present There is more to experiential learning than just "having" the experience.

Article sidebar.

Main Article Content

The 21st century has seen a dramatic rise in experiential learning research and practice. After the previous century, where research on subjective experience was for the most part excluded from academic journals, there is today a resurgence of scholarly research on experience and experiential learning. Yet, how do we know when a given educational experience is experiential? We argue that there is something more to experiential learning than just having an experience.  That “something more” is a process of experiencing, a process whereby the learner deeply engages with an experience and is fully present. Through research conducted from an international sample of learners who based response to their lived experience outside of the classroom, we extend findings from Stock & Kolb (2021) and introduce a revised version of the Experiencing Scale based on the discovery of the overarching importance of the role of presence and its ramifications for the experiencing process.  Our analysis here suggests that when learning is experiential, it is characterized by active participation, sensory engagement, deep involvement, alert/ aware attention and being fully present in the here-and-now.  

Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

How technology is reinventing education

Stanford Graduate School of Education Dean Dan Schwartz and other education scholars weigh in on what's next for some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom.

Image credit: Claire Scully

New advances in technology are upending education, from the recent debut of new artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots like ChatGPT to the growing accessibility of virtual-reality tools that expand the boundaries of the classroom. For educators, at the heart of it all is the hope that every learner gets an equal chance to develop the skills they need to succeed. But that promise is not without its pitfalls.

“Technology is a game-changer for education – it offers the prospect of universal access to high-quality learning experiences, and it creates fundamentally new ways of teaching,” said Dan Schwartz, dean of Stanford Graduate School of Education (GSE), who is also a professor of educational technology at the GSE and faculty director of the Stanford Accelerator for Learning . “But there are a lot of ways we teach that aren’t great, and a big fear with AI in particular is that we just get more efficient at teaching badly. This is a moment to pay attention, to do things differently.”

For K-12 schools, this year also marks the end of the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funding program, which has provided pandemic recovery funds that many districts used to invest in educational software and systems. With these funds running out in September 2024, schools are trying to determine their best use of technology as they face the prospect of diminishing resources.

Here, Schwartz and other Stanford education scholars weigh in on some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom this year.

AI in the classroom

In 2023, the big story in technology and education was generative AI, following the introduction of ChatGPT and other chatbots that produce text seemingly written by a human in response to a question or prompt. Educators immediately worried that students would use the chatbot to cheat by trying to pass its writing off as their own. As schools move to adopt policies around students’ use of the tool, many are also beginning to explore potential opportunities – for example, to generate reading assignments or coach students during the writing process.

AI can also help automate tasks like grading and lesson planning, freeing teachers to do the human work that drew them into the profession in the first place, said Victor Lee, an associate professor at the GSE and faculty lead for the AI + Education initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning. “I’m heartened to see some movement toward creating AI tools that make teachers’ lives better – not to replace them, but to give them the time to do the work that only teachers are able to do,” he said. “I hope to see more on that front.”

He also emphasized the need to teach students now to begin questioning and critiquing the development and use of AI. “AI is not going away,” said Lee, who is also director of CRAFT (Classroom-Ready Resources about AI for Teaching), which provides free resources to help teach AI literacy to high school students across subject areas. “We need to teach students how to understand and think critically about this technology.”

Immersive environments

The use of immersive technologies like augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality is also expected to surge in the classroom, especially as new high-profile devices integrating these realities hit the marketplace in 2024.

The educational possibilities now go beyond putting on a headset and experiencing life in a distant location. With new technologies, students can create their own local interactive 360-degree scenarios, using just a cell phone or inexpensive camera and simple online tools.

“This is an area that’s really going to explode over the next couple of years,” said Kristen Pilner Blair, director of research for the Digital Learning initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning, which runs a program exploring the use of virtual field trips to promote learning. “Students can learn about the effects of climate change, say, by virtually experiencing the impact on a particular environment. But they can also become creators, documenting and sharing immersive media that shows the effects where they live.”

Integrating AI into virtual simulations could also soon take the experience to another level, Schwartz said. “If your VR experience brings me to a redwood tree, you could have a window pop up that allows me to ask questions about the tree, and AI can deliver the answers.”

Gamification

Another trend expected to intensify this year is the gamification of learning activities, often featuring dynamic videos with interactive elements to engage and hold students’ attention.

“Gamification is a good motivator, because one key aspect is reward, which is very powerful,” said Schwartz. The downside? Rewards are specific to the activity at hand, which may not extend to learning more generally. “If I get rewarded for doing math in a space-age video game, it doesn’t mean I’m going to be motivated to do math anywhere else.”

Gamification sometimes tries to make “chocolate-covered broccoli,” Schwartz said, by adding art and rewards to make speeded response tasks involving single-answer, factual questions more fun. He hopes to see more creative play patterns that give students points for rethinking an approach or adapting their strategy, rather than only rewarding them for quickly producing a correct response.

Data-gathering and analysis

The growing use of technology in schools is producing massive amounts of data on students’ activities in the classroom and online. “We’re now able to capture moment-to-moment data, every keystroke a kid makes,” said Schwartz – data that can reveal areas of struggle and different learning opportunities, from solving a math problem to approaching a writing assignment.

But outside of research settings, he said, that type of granular data – now owned by tech companies – is more likely used to refine the design of the software than to provide teachers with actionable information.

The promise of personalized learning is being able to generate content aligned with students’ interests and skill levels, and making lessons more accessible for multilingual learners and students with disabilities. Realizing that promise requires that educators can make sense of the data that’s being collected, said Schwartz – and while advances in AI are making it easier to identify patterns and findings, the data also needs to be in a system and form educators can access and analyze for decision-making. Developing a usable infrastructure for that data, Schwartz said, is an important next step.

With the accumulation of student data comes privacy concerns: How is the data being collected? Are there regulations or guidelines around its use in decision-making? What steps are being taken to prevent unauthorized access? In 2023 K-12 schools experienced a rise in cyberattacks, underscoring the need to implement strong systems to safeguard student data.

Technology is “requiring people to check their assumptions about education,” said Schwartz, noting that AI in particular is very efficient at replicating biases and automating the way things have been done in the past, including poor models of instruction. “But it’s also opening up new possibilities for students producing material, and for being able to identify children who are not average so we can customize toward them. It’s an opportunity to think of entirely new ways of teaching – this is the path I hope to see.”

Why learning from experience is the educational wave of the future

Dean of Engineering and Professor, McMaster University

Disclosure statement

Ishwar K. Puri receives funding from National Science and Engineering Research Council. He is chair of the National Council of Deans of Engineering and Applied Science and Fellow of the Canadian Academy of Engineering.

McMaster University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation CA.

McMaster University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA-FR.

View all partners

The university experience has changed .

It used to be enough for students to spend four years working hard on assignments, labs and exams to earn a useful undergraduate degree that signalled competence and was redeemable for a good job.

Employers would spend weeks or months training their newly hired graduates , sometimes in cohorts, shaping their broad knowledge so it could be applied to the specific needs of the company or government agency.

Today, in contrast, employers want fresh graduates who they don’t have to train .

That means students must learn and apply their knowledge at the same time, inside and outside the classroom, all without adding extra months or years to their studies . After completing their degrees, they are expected to be ready to compete for jobs and jump into working life immediately, without further training.

In the ongoing global drive for efficiency and competitiveness, education and training are now seen as the responsibility of the post-secondary sector, where students face a wider set of expectations not only to learn and synthesize subject matter, but to adapt it and put it to use almost immediately.

Learning by doing

This idea of learning by doing is what is now called “experiential learning,” and though it’s demanding, it is also very effective. It is vital to the mission of all advanced institutions of higher learning, including the one where I am dean of engineering, McMaster University in Hamilton.

In class, this method of learning means replacing chalk-and-talk pedagogy of the past with inquiry, problem-based and project-based learning, sometimes using the tools of what we call a maker space — an open, studio-like creative workshop.

These methods recognize that lectures on complex, abstract subjects are difficult to comprehend, and that hands-on, minds-on learning by experience not only makes it easier to absorb complex material, it also makes it easier to remember .

Outside class, experiential learning takes the form of clubs, activities and competitions for fun, such as the international EcoCAR competition, converting muscle cars from gas to electric power , or hackathons that see students compete to solve complex technical and social problems .

This year at McMaster, experiential learning has been both the competition and the prize as six winners of an extracurricular Big Ideas competition flew off to tour Silicon Valley facilities where they hope one day to work or learn how to start up their own ventures.

Experiential learning also means engaging undergraduates directly in high-level research that was once the exclusive domain of graduate students and professors, exposing them to scholarship at the highest level from early in their academic careers.

In the community, experiential learning is learning through service , both within and beyond one’s area of study — rebuilding hurricane-damaged communities, for example, or helping at local soup kitchens. We are teaching students not only to be workers who drive the modern economy, but also to be engaged citizens .

Work-integrated learning sees students stepping into the actual workplace to get a flavour of what working life is like in their fields , including managing time, working independently, multi-tasking, and adapting to the particular culture and expectations of a specific workplace, all as part of their formal education.

We want students to understand and approach the grand challenges and wicked problems facing our world, such as climate change and opioid addiction, which are not solely issues of science or technology, sociology or economics, but complex, layered issues that demand broad thinking and collaboration.

Canada needs innovators

We want our students to be innovators. If life in Canada is to improve, especially in the context of challenging trade relationships such as NAFTA, we need a workforce that can address global problems with innovation that is relevant —technologically, socially, economically, with respect for all cultures and genders.

All of this learning drives students to begin thinking and acting with their careers in mind from their very first year of study.

Is that fair?

It is important to remember that high school has changed too. Students are better prepared than they were a generation ago. By the time they enter university, they are more aware of the new demands on their time and achievements.

Much more information is also available about employment and specific employers from portals like Glassdoor , allowing students to make more informed choices about their co-op placements or the permanent employers they will target or reject, based on reputation and organizational climate.

We cannot change the fact that the world is more competitive, nor that it takes more to succeed than it used to.

What we can do is make sure that the extra work that goes into creating and completing a fully realized university experience is as valuable as it can possibly be.

• Universities
• Engineering
• Competitiveness
• Post-secondary education
• Experiential learning

Program Manager, Teaching & Learning Initiatives

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

Sydney Horizon Educators (Identified)

Deputy Social Media Producer

Associate Professor, Occupational Therapy

• Open supplemental data
• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, insights into students’ experiences and perceptions of remote learning methods: from the covid-19 pandemic to best practice for the future.

• 1 Minerva Schools at Keck Graduate Institute, San Francisco, CA, United States
• 2 Ronin Institute for Independent Scholarship, Montclair, NJ, United States
• 3 Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

This spring, students across the globe transitioned from in-person classes to remote learning as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This unprecedented change to undergraduate education saw institutions adopting multiple online teaching modalities and instructional platforms. We sought to understand students’ experiences with and perspectives on those methods of remote instruction in order to inform pedagogical decisions during the current pandemic and in future development of online courses and virtual learning experiences. Our survey gathered quantitative and qualitative data regarding students’ experiences with synchronous and asynchronous methods of remote learning and specific pedagogical techniques associated with each. A total of 4,789 undergraduate participants representing institutions across 95 countries were recruited via Instagram. We find that most students prefer synchronous online classes, and students whose primary mode of remote instruction has been synchronous report being more engaged and motivated. Our qualitative data show that students miss the social aspects of learning on campus, and it is possible that synchronous learning helps to mitigate some feelings of isolation. Students whose synchronous classes include active-learning techniques (which are inherently more social) report significantly higher levels of engagement, motivation, enjoyment, and satisfaction with instruction. Respondents’ recommendations for changes emphasize increased engagement, interaction, and student participation. We conclude that active-learning methods, which are known to increase motivation, engagement, and learning in traditional classrooms, also have a positive impact in the remote-learning environment. Integrating these elements into online courses will improve the student experience.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed the demographics of online students. Previously, almost all students engaged in online learning elected the online format, starting with individual online courses in the mid-1990s through today’s robust online degree and certificate programs. These students prioritize convenience, flexibility and ability to work while studying and are older than traditional college age students ( Harris and Martin, 2012 ; Levitz, 2016 ). These students also find asynchronous elements of a course are more useful than synchronous elements ( Gillingham and Molinari, 2012 ). In contrast, students who chose to take courses in-person prioritize face-to-face instruction and connection with others and skew considerably younger ( Harris and Martin, 2012 ). This leaves open the question of whether students who prefer to learn in-person but are forced to learn remotely will prefer synchronous or asynchronous methods. One study of student preferences following a switch to remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic indicates that students enjoy synchronous over asynchronous course elements and find them more effective ( Gillis and Krull, 2020 ). Now that millions of traditional in-person courses have transitioned online, our survey expands the data on student preferences and explores if those preferences align with pedagogical best practices.

An extensive body of research has explored what instructional methods improve student learning outcomes (Fink. 2013). Considerable evidence indicates that active-learning or student-centered approaches result in better learning outcomes than passive-learning or instructor-centered approaches, both in-person and online ( Freeman et al., 2014 ; Chen et al., 2018 ; Davis et al., 2018 ). Active-learning approaches include student activities or discussion in class, whereas passive-learning approaches emphasize extensive exposition by the instructor ( Freeman et al., 2014 ). Constructivist learning theories argue that students must be active participants in creating their own learning, and that listening to expert explanations is seldom sufficient to trigger the neurological changes necessary for learning ( Bostock, 1998 ; Zull, 2002 ). Some studies conclude that, while students learn more via active learning, they may report greater perceptions of their learning and greater enjoyment when passive approaches are used ( Deslauriers et al., 2019 ). We examine student perceptions of remote learning experiences in light of these previous findings.

In this study, we administered a survey focused on student perceptions of remote learning in late May 2020 through the social media account of @unjadedjade to a global population of English speaking undergraduate students representing institutions across 95 countries. We aim to explore how students were being taught, the relationship between pedagogical methods and student perceptions of their experience, and the reasons behind those perceptions. Here we present an initial analysis of the results and share our data set for further inquiry. We find that positive student perceptions correlate with synchronous courses that employ a variety of interactive pedagogical techniques, and that students overwhelmingly suggest behavioral and pedagogical changes that increase social engagement and interaction. We argue that these results support the importance of active learning in an online environment.

Materials and Methods

Participant pool.

Students were recruited through the Instagram account @unjadedjade. This social media platform, run by influencer Jade Bowler, focuses on education, effective study tips, ethical lifestyle, and promotes a positive mindset. For this reason, the audience is presumably academically inclined, and interested in self-improvement. The survey was posted to her account and received 10,563 responses within the first 36 h. Here we analyze the 4,789 of those responses that came from undergraduates. While we did not collect demographic or identifying information, we suspect that women are overrepresented in these data as followers of @unjadedjade are 80% women. A large minority of respondents were from the United Kingdom as Jade Bowler is a British influencer. Specifically, 43.3% of participants attend United Kingdom institutions, followed by 6.7% attending university in the Netherlands, 6.1% in Germany, 5.8% in the United States and 4.2% in Australia. Ninety additional countries are represented in these data (see Supplementary Figure 1 ).

Survey Design

The purpose of this survey is to learn about students’ instructional experiences following the transition to remote learning in the spring of 2020.

This survey was initially created for a student assignment for the undergraduate course Empirical Analysis at Minerva Schools at KGI. That version served as a robust pre-test and allowed for identification of the primary online platforms used, and the four primary modes of learning: synchronous (live) classes, recorded lectures and videos, uploaded or emailed materials, and chat-based communication. We did not adapt any open-ended questions based on the pre-test survey to avoid biasing the results and only corrected language in questions for clarity. We used these data along with an analysis of common practices in online learning to revise the survey. Our revised survey asked students to identify the synchronous and asynchronous pedagogical methods and platforms that they were using for remote learning. Pedagogical methods were drawn from literature assessing active and passive teaching strategies in North American institutions ( Fink, 2013 ; Chen et al., 2018 ; Davis et al., 2018 ). Open-ended questions asked students to describe why they preferred certain modes of learning and how they could improve their learning experience. Students also reported on their affective response to learning and participation using a Likert scale.

The revised survey also asked whether students had responded to the earlier survey. No significant differences were found between responses of those answering for the first and second times (data not shown). See Supplementary Appendix 1 for survey questions. Survey data was collected from 5/21/20 to 5/23/20.

Qualitative Coding

We applied a qualitative coding framework adapted from Gale et al. (2013) to analyze student responses to open-ended questions. Four researchers read several hundred responses and noted themes that surfaced. We then developed a list of themes inductively from the survey data and deductively from the literature on pedagogical practice ( Garrison et al., 1999 ; Zull, 2002 ; Fink, 2013 ; Freeman et al., 2014 ). The initial codebook was revised collaboratively based on feedback from researchers after coding 20–80 qualitative comments each. Before coding their assigned questions, alignment was examined through coding of 20 additional responses. Researchers aligned in identifying the same major themes. Discrepancies in terms identified were resolved through discussion. Researchers continued to meet weekly to discuss progress and alignment. The majority of responses were coded by a single researcher using the final codebook ( Supplementary Table 1 ). All responses to questions 3 (4,318 responses) and 8 (4,704 responses), and 2,512 of 4,776 responses to question 12 were analyzed. Valence was also indicated where necessary (i.e., positive or negative discussion of terms). This paper focuses on the most prevalent themes from our initial analysis of the qualitative responses. The corresponding author reviewed codes to ensure consistency and accuracy of reported data.

Statistical Analysis

The survey included two sets of Likert-scale questions, one consisting of a set of six statements about students’ perceptions of their experiences following the transition to remote learning ( Table 1 ). For each statement, students indicated their level of agreement with the statement on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (“Strongly Disagree”) to 5 (“Strongly Agree”). The second set asked the students to respond to the same set of statements, but about their retroactive perceptions of their experiences with in-person instruction before the transition to remote learning. This set was not the subject of our analysis but is present in the published survey results. To explore correlations among student responses, we used CrossCat analysis to calculate the probability of dependence between Likert-scale responses ( Mansinghka et al., 2016 ).

Table 1. Likert-scale questions.

Mean values are calculated based on the numerical scores associated with each response. Measures of statistical significance for comparisons between different subgroups of respondents were calculated using a two-sided Mann-Whitney U -test, and p -values reported here are based on this test statistic. We report effect sizes in pairwise comparisons using the common-language effect size, f , which is the probability that the response from a random sample from subgroup 1 is greater than the response from a random sample from subgroup 2. We also examined the effects of different modes of remote learning and technological platforms using ordinal logistic regression. With the exception of the mean values, all of these analyses treat Likert-scale responses as ordinal-scale, rather than interval-scale data.

Students Prefer Synchronous Class Sessions

Students were asked to identify their primary mode of learning given four categories of remote course design that emerged from the pilot survey and across literature on online teaching: live (synchronous) classes, recorded lectures and videos, emailed or uploaded materials, and chats and discussion forums. While 42.7% ( n = 2,045) students identified live classes as their primary mode of learning, 54.6% ( n = 2613) students preferred this mode ( Figure 1 ). Both recorded lectures and live classes were preferred over uploaded materials (6.22%, n = 298) and chat (3.36%, n = 161).

Figure 1. Actual (A) and preferred (B) primary modes of learning.

In addition to a preference for live classes, students whose primary mode was synchronous were more likely to enjoy the class, feel motivated and engaged, be satisfied with instruction and report higher levels of participation ( Table 2 and Supplementary Figure 2 ). Regardless of primary mode, over two-thirds of students reported they are often distracted during remote courses.

Table 2. The effect of synchronous vs. asynchronous primary modes of learning on student perceptions.

Variation in Pedagogical Techniques for Synchronous Classes Results in More Positive Perceptions of the Student Learning Experience

To survey the use of passive vs. active instructional methods, students reported the pedagogical techniques used in their live classes. Among the synchronous methods, we identify three different categories ( National Research Council, 2000 ; Freeman et al., 2014 ). Passive methods (P) include lectures, presentations, and explanation using diagrams, white boards and/or other media. These methods all rely on instructor delivery rather than student participation. Our next category represents active learning through primarily one-on-one interactions (A). The methods in this group are in-class assessment, question-and-answer (Q&A), and classroom chat. Group interactions (F) included classroom discussions and small-group activities. Given these categories, Mann-Whitney U pairwise comparisons between the 7 possible combinations and Likert scale responses about student experience showed that the use of a variety of methods resulted in higher ratings of experience vs. the use of a single method whether or not that single method was active or passive ( Table 3 ). Indeed, students whose classes used methods from each category (PAF) had higher ratings of enjoyment, motivation, and satisfaction with instruction than those who only chose any single method ( p < 0.0001) and also rated higher rates of participation and engagement compared to students whose only method was passive (P) or active through one-on-one interactions (A) ( p < 0.00001). Student ratings of distraction were not significantly different for any comparison. Given that sets of Likert responses often appeared significant together in these comparisons, we ran a CrossCat analysis to look at the probability of dependence across Likert responses. Responses have a high probability of dependence on each other, limiting what we can claim about any discrete response ( Supplementary Figure 3 ).

Table 3. Comparison of combinations of synchronous methods on student perceptions. Effect size (f).

Mann-Whitney U pairwise comparisons were also used to check if improvement in student experience was associated with the number of methods used vs. the variety of types of methods. For every comparison, we found that more methods resulted in higher scores on all Likert measures except distraction ( Table 4 ). Even comparison between four or fewer methods and greater than four methods resulted in a 59% chance that the latter enjoyed the courses more ( p < 0.00001) and 60% chance that they felt more motivated to learn ( p < 0.00001). Students who selected more than four methods ( n = 417) were also 65.1% ( p < 0.00001), 62.9% ( p < 0.00001) and 64.3% ( p < 0.00001) more satisfied with instruction, engaged, and actively participating, respectfully. Therefore, there was an overlap between how the number and variety of methods influenced students’ experiences. Since the number of techniques per category is 2–3, we cannot fully disentangle the effect of number vs. variety. Pairwise comparisons to look at subsets of data with 2–3 methods from a single group vs. 2–3 methods across groups controlled for this but had low sample numbers in most groups and resulted in no significant findings (data not shown). Therefore, from the data we have in our survey, there seems to be an interdependence between number and variety of methods on students’ learning experiences.

Table 4. Comparison of the number of synchronous methods on student perceptions. Effect size (f).

Variation in Asynchronous Pedagogical Techniques Results in More Positive Perceptions of the Student Learning Experience

Along with synchronous pedagogical methods, students reported the asynchronous methods that were used for their classes. We divided these methods into three main categories and conducted pairwise comparisons. Learning methods include video lectures, video content, and posted study materials. Interacting methods include discussion/chat forums, live office hours, and email Q&A with professors. Testing methods include assignments and exams. Our results again show the importance of variety in students’ perceptions ( Table 5 ). For example, compared to providing learning materials only, providing learning materials, interaction, and testing improved enjoyment ( f = 0.546, p < 0.001), motivation ( f = 0.553, p < 0.0001), satisfaction with instruction ( f = 0.596, p < 0.00001), engagement ( f = 0.572, p < 0.00001) and active participation ( f = 0.563, p < 0.00001) (row 6). Similarly, compared to just being interactive with conversations, the combination of all three methods improved five out of six indicators, except for distraction in class (row 11).

Table 5. Comparison of combinations of asynchronous methods on student perceptions. Effect size (f).

Ordinal logistic regression was used to assess the likelihood that the platforms students used predicted student perceptions ( Supplementary Table 2 ). Platform choices were based on the answers to open-ended questions in the pre-test survey. The synchronous and asynchronous methods used were consistently more predictive of Likert responses than the specific platforms. Likewise, distraction continued to be our outlier with no differences across methods or platforms.

Students Prefer In-Person and Synchronous Online Learning Largely Due to Social-Emotional Reasoning

As expected, 86.1% (4,123) of survey participants report a preference for in-person courses, while 13.9% (666) prefer online courses. When asked to explain the reasons for their preference, students who prefer in-person courses most often mention the importance of social interaction (693 mentions), engagement (639 mentions), and motivation (440 mentions). These students are also more likely to mention a preference for a fixed schedule (185 mentions) vs. a flexible schedule (2 mentions).

In addition to identifying social reasons for their preference for in-person learning, students’ suggestions for improvements in online learning focus primarily on increasing interaction and engagement, with 845 mentions of live classes, 685 mentions of interaction, 126 calls for increased participation and calls for changes related to these topics such as, “Smaller teaching groups for live sessions so that everyone is encouraged to talk as some people don’t say anything and don’t participate in group work,” and “Make it less of the professor reading the pdf that was given to us and more interaction.”

Students who prefer online learning primarily identify independence and flexibility (214 mentions) and reasons related to anxiety and discomfort in in-person settings (41 mentions). Anxiety was only mentioned 12 times in the much larger group that prefers in-person learning.

The preference for synchronous vs. asynchronous modes of learning follows similar trends ( Table 6 ). Students who prefer live classes mention engagement and interaction most often while those who prefer recorded lectures mention flexibility.

Table 6. Most prevalent themes for students based on their preferred mode of remote learning.

Student Perceptions Align With Research on Active Learning

The first, and most robust, conclusion is that incorporation of active-learning methods correlates with more positive student perceptions of affect and engagement. We can see this clearly in the substantial differences on a number of measures, where students whose classes used only passive-learning techniques reported lower levels of engagement, satisfaction, participation, and motivation when compared with students whose classes incorporated at least some active-learning elements. This result is consistent with prior research on the value of active learning ( Freeman et al., 2014 ).

Though research shows that student learning improves in active learning classes, on campus, student perceptions of their learning, enjoyment, and satisfaction with instruction are often lower in active-learning courses ( Deslauriers et al., 2019 ). Our finding that students rate enjoyment and satisfaction with instruction higher for active learning online suggests that the preference for passive lectures on campus relies on elements outside of the lecture itself. That might include the lecture hall environment, the social physical presence of peers, or normalization of passive lectures as the expected mode for on-campus classes. This implies that there may be more buy-in for active learning online vs. in-person.

A second result from our survey is that student perceptions of affect and engagement are associated with students experiencing a greater diversity of learning modalities. We see this in two different results. First, in addition to the fact that classes that include active learning outperform classes that rely solely on passive methods, we find that on all measures besides distraction, the highest student ratings are associated with a combination of active and passive methods. Second, we find that these higher scores are associated with classes that make use of a larger number of different methods.

This second result suggests that students benefit from classes that make use of multiple different techniques, possibly invoking a combination of passive and active methods. However, it is unclear from our data whether this effect is associated specifically with combining active and passive methods, or if it is associated simply with the use of multiple different methods, irrespective of whether those methods are active, passive, or some combination. The problem is that the number of methods used is confounded with the diversity of methods (e.g., it is impossible for a classroom using only one method to use both active and passive methods). In an attempt to address this question, we looked separately at the effect of number and diversity of methods while holding the other constant. Across a large number of such comparisons, we found few statistically significant differences, which may be a consequence of the fact that each comparison focused on a small subset of the data.

Thus, our data suggests that using a greater diversity of learning methods in the classroom may lead to better student outcomes. This is supported by research on student attention span which suggests varying delivery after 10–15 min to retain student’s attention ( Bradbury, 2016 ). It is likely that this is more relevant for online learning where students report high levels of distraction across methods, modalities, and platforms. Given that number and variety are key, and there are few passive learning methods, we can assume that some combination of methods that includes active learning improves student experience. However, it is not clear whether we should predict that this benefit would come simply from increasing the number of different methods used, or if there are benefits specific to combining particular methods. Disentangling these effects would be an interesting avenue for future research.

Students Value Social Presence in Remote Learning

Student responses across our open-ended survey questions show a striking difference in reasons for their preferences compared with traditional online learners who prefer flexibility ( Harris and Martin, 2012 ; Levitz, 2016 ). Students reasons for preferring in-person classes and synchronous remote classes emphasize the desire for social interaction and echo the research on the importance of social presence for learning in online courses.

Short et al. (1976) outlined Social Presence Theory in depicting students’ perceptions of each other as real in different means of telecommunications. These ideas translate directly to questions surrounding online education and pedagogy in regards to educational design in networked learning where connection across learners and instructors improves learning outcomes especially with “Human-Human interaction” ( Goodyear, 2002 , 2005 ; Tu, 2002 ). These ideas play heavily into asynchronous vs. synchronous learning, where Tu reports students having positive responses to both synchronous “real-time discussion in pleasantness, responsiveness and comfort with familiar topics” and real-time discussions edging out asynchronous computer-mediated communications in immediate replies and responsiveness. Tu’s research indicates that students perceive more interaction with synchronous mediums such as discussions because of immediacy which enhances social presence and support the use of active learning techniques ( Gunawardena, 1995 ; Tu, 2002 ). Thus, verbal immediacy and communities with face-to-face interactions, such as those in synchronous learning classrooms, lessen the psychological distance of communicators online and can simultaneously improve instructional satisfaction and reported learning ( Gunawardena and Zittle, 1997 ; Richardson and Swan, 2019 ; Shea et al., 2019 ). While synchronous learning may not be ideal for traditional online students and a subset of our participants, this research suggests that non-traditional online learners are more likely to appreciate the value of social presence.

Social presence also connects to the importance of social connections in learning. Too often, current systems of education emphasize course content in narrow ways that fail to embrace the full humanity of students and instructors ( Gay, 2000 ). With the COVID-19 pandemic leading to further social isolation for many students, the importance of social presence in courses, including live interactions that build social connections with classmates and with instructors, may be increased.

Limitations of These Data

Our undergraduate data consisted of 4,789 responses from 95 different countries, an unprecedented global scale for research on online learning. However, since respondents were followers of @unjadedjade who focuses on learning and wellness, these respondents may not represent the average student. Biases in survey responses are often limited by their recruitment techniques and our bias likely resulted in more robust and thoughtful responses to free-response questions and may have influenced the preference for synchronous classes. It is unlikely that it changed students reporting on remote learning pedagogical methods since those are out of student control.

Though we surveyed a global population, our design was rooted in literature assessing pedagogy in North American institutions. Therefore, our survey may not represent a global array of teaching practices.

This survey was sent out during the initial phase of emergency remote learning for most countries. This has two important implications. First, perceptions of remote learning may be clouded by complications of the pandemic which has increased social, mental, and financial stresses globally. Future research could disaggregate the impact of the pandemic from students’ learning experiences with a more detailed and holistic analysis of the impact of the pandemic on students.

Second, instructors, students and institutions were not able to fully prepare for effective remote education in terms of infrastructure, mentality, curriculum building, and pedagogy. Therefore, student experiences reflect this emergency transition. Single-modality courses may correlate with instructors who lacked the resources or time to learn or integrate more than one modality. Regardless, the main insights of this research align well with the science of teaching and learning and can be used to inform both education during future emergencies and course development for online programs that wish to attract traditional college students.

Global Student Voices Improve Our Understanding of the Experience of Emergency Remote Learning

Our survey shows that global student perspectives on remote learning agree with pedagogical best practices, breaking with the often-found negative reactions of students to these practices in traditional classrooms ( Shekhar et al., 2020 ). Our analysis of open-ended questions and preferences show that a majority of students prefer pedagogical approaches that promote both active learning and social interaction. These results can serve as a guide to instructors as they design online classes, especially for students whose first choice may be in-person learning. Indeed, with the near ubiquitous adoption of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, remote learning may be the default for colleges during temporary emergencies. This has already been used at the K-12 level as snow days become virtual learning days ( Aspergren, 2020 ).

In addition to informing pedagogical decisions, the results of this survey can be used to inform future research. Although we survey a global population, our recruitment method selected for students who are English speakers, likely majority female, and have an interest in self-improvement. Repeating this study with a more diverse and representative sample of university students could improve the generalizability of our findings. While the use of a variety of pedagogical methods is better than a single method, more research is needed to determine what the optimal combinations and implementations are for courses in different disciplines. Though we identified social presence as the major trend in student responses, the over 12,000 open-ended responses from students could be analyzed in greater detail to gain a more nuanced understanding of student preferences and suggestions for improvement. Likewise, outliers could shed light on the diversity of student perspectives that we may encounter in our own classrooms. Beyond this, our findings can inform research that collects demographic data and/or measures learning outcomes to understand the impact of remote learning on different populations.

Importantly, this paper focuses on a subset of responses from the full data set which includes 10,563 students from secondary school, undergraduate, graduate, or professional school and additional questions about in-person learning. Our full data set is available here for anyone to download for continued exploration: https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId= doi: 10.7910/DVN/2TGOPH .

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics Statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

GS: project lead, survey design, qualitative coding, writing, review, and editing. TN: data analysis, writing, review, and editing. CN and PB: qualitative coding. JW: data analysis, writing, and editing. CS: writing, review, and editing. EV and KL: original survey design and qualitative coding. PP: data analysis. JB: original survey design and survey distribution. HH: data analysis. MP: writing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We want to thank Minerva Schools at KGI for providing funding for summer undergraduate research internships. We also want to thank Josh Fost and Christopher V. H.-H. Chen for discussion that helped shape this project.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.647986/full#supplementary-material

Aspergren, E. (2020). Snow Days Canceled Because of COVID-19 Online School? Not in These School Districts.sec. Education. USA Today. Available online at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/12/15/covid-school-canceled-snow-day-online-learning/3905780001/ (accessed December 15, 2020).

Google Scholar

Bostock, S. J. (1998). Constructivism in mass higher education: a case study. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 29, 225–240. doi: 10.1111/1467-8535.00066

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bradbury, N. A. (2016). Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or more? Adv. Physiol. Educ. 40, 509–513. doi: 10.1152/advan.00109.2016

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chen, B., Bastedo, K., and Howard, W. (2018). Exploring best practices for online STEM courses: active learning, interaction & assessment design. Online Learn. 22, 59–75. doi: 10.24059/olj.v22i2.1369

Davis, D., Chen, G., Hauff, C., and Houben, G.-J. (2018). Activating learning at scale: a review of innovations in online learning strategies. Comput. Educ. 125, 327–344. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.019

Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., and Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 116, 19251–19257. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1821936116

Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. Somerset, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., et al. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, 8410–8415. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111

Gale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., and Redwood, S. (2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 13:117. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-117

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. Internet High. Educ. 2, 87–105. doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. Multicultural Education Series. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Gillingham, and Molinari, C. (2012). Online courses: student preferences survey. Internet Learn. 1, 36–45. doi: 10.18278/il.1.1.4

Gillis, A., and Krull, L. M. (2020). COVID-19 remote learning transition in spring 2020: class structures, student perceptions, and inequality in college courses. Teach. Sociol. 48, 283–299. doi: 10.1177/0092055X20954263

Goodyear, P. (2002). “Psychological foundations for networked learning,” in Networked Learning: Perspectives and Issues. Computer Supported Cooperative Work , eds C. Steeples and C. Jones (London: Springer), 49–75. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4471-0181-9_4

Goodyear, P. (2005). Educational design and networked learning: patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 21, 82–101. doi: 10.14742/ajet.1344

Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. Int. J. Educ. Telecommun. 1, 147–166.

Gunawardena, C. N., and Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment. Am. J. Distance Educ. 11, 8–26. doi: 10.1080/08923649709526970

Harris, H. S., and Martin, E. (2012). Student motivations for choosing online classes. Int. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn. 6, 1–8. doi: 10.20429/ijsotl.2012.060211

Levitz, R. N. (2016). 2015-16 National Online Learners Satisfaction and Priorities Report. Cedar Rapids: Ruffalo Noel Levitz, 12.

Mansinghka, V., Shafto, P., Jonas, E., Petschulat, C., Gasner, M., and Tenenbaum, J. B. (2016). CrossCat: a fully Bayesian nonparametric method for analyzing heterogeneous, high dimensional data. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 17, 1–49. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-69765-9_7

National Research Council (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, doi: 10.17226/9853

Richardson, J. C., and Swan, K. (2019). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Online Learn. 7, 68–88. doi: 10.24059/olj.v7i1.1864

Shea, P., Pickett, A. M., and Pelz, W. E. (2019). A Follow-up investigation of ‘teaching presence’ in the suny learning network. Online Learn. 7, 73–75. doi: 10.24059/olj.v7i2.1856

Shekhar, P., Borrego, M., DeMonbrun, M., Finelli, C., Crockett, C., and Nguyen, K. (2020). Negative student response to active learning in STEM classrooms: a systematic review of underlying reasons. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 49, 45–54.

Short, J., Williams, E., and Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Tu, C.-H. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment. Int. J. E Learn. 1, 34–45. doi: 10.17471/2499-4324/421

Zull, J. E. (2002). The Art of Changing the Brain: Enriching Teaching by Exploring the Biology of Learning , 1st Edn. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Keywords : online learning, COVID-19, active learning, higher education, pedagogy, survey, international

Citation: Nguyen T, Netto CLM, Wilkins JF, Bröker P, Vargas EE, Sealfon CD, Puthipiroj P, Li KS, Bowler JE, Hinson HR, Pujar M and Stein GM (2021) Insights Into Students’ Experiences and Perceptions of Remote Learning Methods: From the COVID-19 Pandemic to Best Practice for the Future. Front. Educ. 6:647986. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.647986

Received: 30 December 2020; Accepted: 09 March 2021; Published: 09 April 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Nguyen, Netto, Wilkins, Bröker, Vargas, Sealfon, Puthipiroj, Li, Bowler, Hinson, Pujar and Stein. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Geneva M. Stein, [email protected]

This article is part of the Research Topic

Covid-19 and Beyond: From (Forced) Remote Teaching and Learning to ‘The New Normal’ in Higher Education

Advertisement

The Value of School: Educational Experiences and Maturational Growth Among Delinquent Youth

• Original Article
• Published: 16 July 2021
• Volume 7 , pages 385–419, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• David Abeling-Judge   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9812-5199 1  

438 Accesses

2 Citations

Explore all metrics

Maturational growth through psychosocial, adult role, identity, civic, and cognitive change has proven an insightful explanation of behavioral change among offender populations. It has evolved to address both endogenous growth, such as advancing age, and exogenous influences, such as family. The relevance of family bonding processes to maturation is well documented, in both psychological and criminological work, but an unexplored social process of relevance may be education. The current study uses the longitudinal Pathways to Desistance Study to explore the influence of school orientation variables and teacher bonding connections on specific domains of maturational growth as articulated by the integrated maturation theory. Analyses address the distinct influences of schools attended in the general community and schools attended while under placement in a secure juvenile detention facility. The current study identifies significant within-individual variation in various domains of maturity influenced by community school bonds, with corresponding patterns emerging for institutional school bonding experiences. Relationships with teachers produce some positive change, but the results are not consistent. Educational processes play a significant role in facilitating maturational growth, independent of family influences. This pattern emerges across different contexts, expands theoretical insight, and suggests focused policy interventions to promote desistance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Facilitating Maturation Through Social Bonds Among Delinquent Youth in the Transition to Adulthood

Can universal sel programs benefit universally effects of the positive action program on multiple trajectories of social-emotional and misconduct behaviors.

Routing back: social, psychological, and criminological influences on educational reengagement among youth offenders who drop out

Abeling-Judge, D. (2019). Stopping out and going back: The impact of educational attainment on criminal desistance among stopped-out offenders. Crime & Delinquency, 65 , 527–554.

Article   Google Scholar  

Abeling-Judge, D. (2020). Facilitating maturation through social bonds among delinquent youth in the transition to adulthood. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 6 , 448–476.

Abeling-Judge, D. (2021). Social bonding experiences facilitating desistance in adolescence. Crime & Delinquency, 67 , 287–315.

Abrams, D. E. (2005). Reforming juvenile delinquency treatment to enhance rehabilitation, personal accountability, and public safety. Oregon Law Review, 84 , 1001–1094.

Google Scholar  

Ahmed, W., Minnaert, A., van der Werf, G., & Kuyper, H. (2010). Perceived social support and early adolescents’ achievement: The mediational roles of motivational beliefs and emotions. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39 , 36–46.

Bandura, A., Barbarnelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7 , 364–374.

Baumrind, D., & Moselle, K. A. (1985). A developmental perspective on adolescent drug abuse. Advances in Alcohol & Substance Abuse, 4 , 41–67.

Benson, J. E., & Elder, G. H. (2011). Young adult identities and their pathways: A developmental and life course model. Developmental Psychology, 47 , 1646–1657.

Benson, J. E., Johnson, M. K., & Elder, G. H. (2012). The implications of adult identity for educational and work attainment in young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 48 , 1752–1758.

Bersani, B., & Doherty, E. E. (2018). Desistance from offending in the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Criminology, 1 , 311–334.

Bryan, J., Moore-Thomas, C., Gaenzle, S., Kim, J., Lin, C., & Na, G. (2012). The effects of school bonding on high school seniors’ academic achievement. Journal of Counseling and Development, 90 , 467–480.

Cate, H. M. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, motivation goals, and burnout in juvenile corrections and residential educational settings doctoral dissertation . Capella University.

Cauffman, E., & Steinberg, L. (2000). (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 18 , 741–760.

Cavanagh, C., & Cauffman, E. (2015). Viewing law and order: Mothers’ and sons’ justice system legitimacy attitudes and juvenile recidivism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 21 , 432–441.

Cernkovich, S., & Giordano, P. (1992). School bonding, race and delinquency. Criminology, 30 , 261–291.

Chassin, L., Dmitrieva, J., Modecki, K., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R., Knight, G. P., & Losoya, S. H. (2010). Does adolescent alcohol and marijuana use predict suppressed growth in psychosocial maturity among male juvenile offenders? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24 , 48–60.

Chung, H., Little, M., & Steinberg, L. (2005). The transition to adulthood for adolescents in the juvenile justice system: A developmental perspective. In W. Osgood, M. Foster, C. Flanagan, & G. Ruth (Eds.), On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations (pp. 68–91). University of Chicago Press.

Cohen, P., Cohen, J., Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1999). The problem of units and the circumstance for POMP. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34 , 315–346.

Coker, D. C. (2020). Multiple regression analysis of noncognitive factors affecting academic achievement of juvenile delinquents Doctoral dissertation . American College of Education.

Conger, R., Ge, X., Elder, G., Jr., Lorenz, F., & Simons, R. (1994). Economic stress, coercive family process, and developmental problems of adolescents. Child Development, 65 , 541–561.

Copen, C. E., Daniels, K., Vespa, J., & Mosher, W. D. (2012). First marriages in the United States: Data from the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth . National Center for Health Statistics.

Cox, C., Visker, J., & Hartman, A. (2011). Educational faculty perceptions of the learning climate in a juvenile justice residential facility. Current Issues in Education, 14 , 1–16.

Crosnoe, R., Johnson, M. K., & Elder, G., Jr. (2004). Intergenerational bonding in school: The behavioral and contextual correlates of student-teacher relationships. Sociology of Education, 77 , 60–81.

Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. (1994). Marital conflict and child adjustment: An emotional security hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 116 , 387–411.

Davis, J., & Sorensen, J. R. (2010). Disproportionate minority confinement of juveniles: A national examination of Black-White disparity in placements, 1997–2006. Crime & Delinquency, 59 , 115–139.

Day J.,C., Newburger E.,C. (2002). The big payoff: Educational attainment and synthetic estimates of work-life earnings. Congress. Current Population Reports

Dmitrieva, J., Monahan, K. C., Cauffman, E., & Steinberg, L. (2012). Arrested development: The effects of incarceration on the development of psychosocial maturity. Development and Psychopathology, 24 , 1073–1090.

Dumais, S. A. (2009). Cohort and gender differences in extracurricular participation: The relationship between activities, math achievement, and college expectations. Sociological Spectrum, 29 , 72–100.

Ellison, J. M., Owings, W., & Kaplan, L. S. (2017). State fiscal effort and juvenile incarceration rates: Are we misdirecting our investment in human capital? Journal of Education Finance, 43 , 45–64.

Enders, C. K., Du, H., & Keller, B. T. (2019). A model-based imputation procedure for multilevel regression models with random coefficients, interaction effects, and nonlinear terms. Psychological Methods, 25 , 88–112.

Enders, C. K., Keller, B. T., & Levy, R. (2018). A fully conditional specification approach to multilevel imputation of categorical and continuous variables. Psychological Methods, 23 , 298–317.

Engstrom, R. S., & Scott, D. (2020). Juvenile institutional misconduct: Examining the role of educational attainment and academic achievement. Crime & Delinquency, 66 , 663–686.

Feldman, S. S., & Weinberger, D. A. (1994). Self-restraint as a mediator of family influences on boys’ delinquent behavior: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 65 , 195–211.

Fine, A., Wolff, K. T., Baglivio, M. T., Piquero, A. R., Frick, P. J., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2018). Does the effect of justice system attitudes on adolescent crime vary based on psychosocial maturity? Child Development, 89 , 468–479.

Ford, J., Kerig, P., Desai, N., & Feierman, J. (2016). Psychosocial interventions for traumatized youth in the juvenile justice system: Research, evidence base, and clinical/legal challenges. OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice, 5 , 31–49.

Giordano, P. C., Cernkovich, S. A., & Rudolph, J. L. (2002). Gender, crime, and desistance: Toward a theory of cognitive transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 107 , 990–1064.

Gorman-Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to community violence and developmental problems among inner city youth. Development and Psychopathology, 10 , 101–116.

Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime . Stanford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Greenberger, E., Bond, L. (1976). Technical manual for the psychosocial maturity inventory. Unpublished manuscript, Program in Social Ecology, University of California

Greenberger, E., Josselson, R., Knerr, C., & Knerr, B. (1974). The measurement and structure of psychosocial maturity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 4 , 127–143.

Groot, W., & van den Brink, H. M. (2010). The effects of education on crime. Applied Economics, 42 , 279–289.

Hansen, K. (2003). Education and the crime-age profile. British Journal of Criminology, 43 , 141–168.

Hawkins, J. D., Guo, J., Hill, K. G., Battin-Pearson, S., & Abbott, R. (2001). Long-term effects of the Seattle social development intervention on school bonding trajectories. Applied Developmental Science, 5 , 225–236.

Helsen, M., Vollebergh, W., & Meeus, W. (2000). Social support from parents and friends and emotional problems in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29 , 319–335.

Hipwell, A. E., Beeney, J., Ye, F., Gebreselassie, S. H., Stalter, M. R., Ganesh, D., Keenan, K., & Stepp, S. D. (2018). Police contacts, arrests and decreasing self-control and personal responsibility among female adolescents. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 59 , 1252–1260.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency . University of California Press.

Hockenberry, S., sSladky, A. (2020). Juvenile residential facility census 2018: Selected findings. Juvenile Justice Statistics – National Report Series Bulletin. U.S. Department of Justice: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Houchins, D. E., Puckett-Patterson, D., Crosby, S., Shippen, M. E., & Jolivette, K. (2009). Barriers and facilitators to providing incarcerated youth with a quality education. Preventing School Failure, 53 , 159–166.

Hyde, L. W., Shaw, D. S., & Moilanen, K. L. (2010). Developmental precursors of moral disengagement and the role of moral disengagement in the development of antisocial behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38 , 197–209.

Jaggi, L., & Kliewer, W. (2020). Reentry of incarcerated juveniles: Correctional education as a turning point across juvenile and adult facilities. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47 , 1348–1370.

Kelly, J. B. (2000). Children’s adjustment in conflicted marriage and divorce: A decade of review of research. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39 , 963–973.

Kim-Spoon, J., Maciejewski, D., Lee, J., Deater-Deckard, K., & King-Cases, B. (2017). Longitudinal associations among family environment, neural cognitive control, and social competence among adolescents. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 26 , 69–76.

Kiriakidis, S. P. (2008). Moral disengagement: Relation to delinquency and independence from indices of social dysfunction. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52 , 571–583.

Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (1993). Turning points in the life course: Why change matters to the study of crime. Criminology, 31 , 301–325.

Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70 . Harvard University Press.

Libbey, H. P. (2004). Measuring student relationships to school: Attachment, bonding, connectedness, and engagement. The Journal of School Health, 74 , 274–283.

Lochner, L. (2004). Education, work, and crime: A human capital approach. International Economic Review, 45 , 811–843.

Luna, B., & Sweeney, J. A. (2001). Studies of brain and cognitive maturation through childhood and adolescence: A strategy for testing neurodevelopmental hypotheses. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 27 , 443–455.

Machin, S., Marie, O., & Vujic, S. (2011). The crime reducing effect of education. The Economic Journal, 121 , 463–484.

Macoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1980). Sex differences in aggression: A rejoinder and reprise. Child Development, 51 , 964–980.

Mallett, C. A. (2014). Youthful offending and delinquency: The comorbid impact of maltreatment, mental health problems, and learning disabilities. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 31 , 369–392.

Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family and community violence on children. Annual Review of Psychology, 51 , 445–479.

McCord, E., Widom, C. S., & Crowell, N. A. (2001). Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice . The National Academies Press.

McCuish, E., Lussier, P., & Rocque, M. (2020). Maturation beyond age: Interrelationships among psychosocial, adult role, and identity maturation and their implications for desistance from crime. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49 , 479–493.

McKelvey, L. M., Whiteside-Mansell, L., Bradley, R. H., Casey, P. H., Conners-Burrow, N. A., & Barrett, K. W. (2011). Growing up in violent communities: Do family conflict and gender moderate impacts on adolescents’ psychosocial development? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 39 , 95–107.

Moeller, J. (2015). A word on standardization in longitudinal studies: Don’t. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , 1–4.

Moffitt, T. E., Poulton, R., & Caspi, A. (2013). Lifelong impact of early self-control. American Scientist, 101 , 352–359.

Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Mulvey, E. P. (2009). Trajectories of antisocial behavior and psychosocial maturity from adolescence to young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 45 , 1654–1668.

Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Mulvey, E. P. (2013). Psychosocial (im)maturity from adolescence to early adulthood: Distinguishing between adolescence limited and persisting antisocial behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 25 , 1093–1105.

Mulvey, E. P. (2000–2010). Research on pathways to desistance [Maricopa County, AZ and Philadelphia County, PA]: Subject measures.

Mulvey, E. P., Schubert, C. A., & Chung, H. L. (2007). Service use after court involvement in a sample of serious adolescent offenders. Child and Youth Services Review, 29 , 518–544.

Musick, K., Brand, J. E., & Davis, D. (2012). Variation in the relationship between education and marriage: Marriage market mismatch? Journal of Marriage & Family, 74 , 53–69.

Newton, D., Day, A., Giles, M., Wodak, J., Graffam, J., & Baldry, E. (2018). The impact of vocational education and training programs on recidivism: A systematic review of current experimental evidence. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62 , 187–207.

Paternoster, R., & Bushway, S. (2009). Desistance and the “feared self”: Toward an identity theory of criminal desistance. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 99 , 1103–1156.

Patterson, J. M., & McCubbin, H. I. (1987). Adolescent coping style and behaviors— Conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Adolescence, 10 , 163–186.

Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed). Sage Publications

Rocque, M. (2015). The lost concept: The (re)emerging link between maturation and desistance from crime. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 15 , 340–360.

Rocque, M., Beckley, A. L., & Piquero, A. R. (2019). Psychosocial maturation, race, and desistance from crime. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48 , 1403–1417.

Rocque, M., Posick, C., & White, H. R. (2015). Growing up is hard to do: An empirical evaluation of maturation and desistance. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 1 , 350–384.

Rutherford, R., Nelson, C., & Wolford, B. (1985). Special education in the most restrictive environment: Correctional/special education. Journal of Special Education, 19 , 59–71.

Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectations. Health Psychology, 4 , 219–247.

Schwab-Stone, M., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Silver, D., Lichtman, J., & Voyce, C. (1999). No safe haven II: The effects of violence exposure on urban youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38 , 359–367.

Selner-Ohagan, M., Kindlon, D., Buka, S., Raudenbush, S., & Earls, F. (1998). Assessing exposure to violence in urban youth. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 39 , 215–224.

Spear, L. P. (2000). Neurobehavioral changes in adolescence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9 (4), 111–114.

Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (1996). Maturity of judgment in adolescence: Psychosocial factors in adolescent decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 20 , 249–272.

Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Monahan, K. C. (2015). Psychosocial maturity and desistance from crime in a sample of serious juvenile offenders . OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin.

Steinberg, L., Chung, H. L., & Little, M. (2004). Reentry of young offenders from the justice system: A developmental perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2 , 21–38.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Darling, N., Mounts, N., & Dornbusch, S. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 65 , 754–770.

Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 , 742–752.

Sullivan, K. (2018). Educational systems in juvenile detention centers. Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, 2 , 71–100.

Torr, B. M. (2011). The changing relationship between education and marriage in the United States, 1940–2000. Journal of Family History, 36 , 483–503.

Twomey, K. (2008). The right to education in juvenile detention under state constitutions. Virginia Law Review, 94 , 765–811.

Vilorio, D. (2016). Education Matters . U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Walker, S. C., & Herting, J. R. (2020). The impact of pretrial juvenile detention on 12-month recidivism: A matched comparison study. Crime & Delinquency, 66 , 1865–1887.

Walters, G. D. (2018). Callous-unemotional traits and moral disengagement as antecedents to the peer influence effect: Moderation or mediation? Journal of Crime and Justice, 41 , 259–275.

Weaver, R. M. (2017). Factors influencing teacher efficacy in a Pennsylvania juvenile detention center education program Doctoral Dissertation . Concordia University.

Weinberger, D. A., Feldman, S. S., Ford, M. E., & Chastain, R. L. (1987). Construct validity of the Weinberger Adjustment Inventory

Weinberger, D. A., & Schwartz, G. E. (1990). Distress and restraint as superordinate dimensions of self-reported adjustment: A typological perspective. Journal of Personality, 58 , 381–417.

Williams, L. R., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Reciprocal relations between parenting and adjustment in a sample of juvenile offenders. Child Development, 82 , 633–645.

Zaff, J. F., Moore, K. A., Papillo, A. R., & Williams, S. (2003). Implications of extracurricular activity participation during adolescence on positive outcomes. Journal of Adolescent Research, 18 , 599–630.

Zimbardo, P. G. (1990). The Stratford time perspective inventory . Stratford, CA: Stratford University

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Barton College, Wilson, NC, USA

David Abeling-Judge

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Abeling-Judge .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Abeling-Judge, D. The Value of School: Educational Experiences and Maturational Growth Among Delinquent Youth. J Dev Life Course Criminology 7 , 385–419 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-021-00171-x

Download citation

Received : 10 December 2020

Revised : 25 May 2021

Accepted : 14 June 2021

Published : 16 July 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-021-00171-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Delinquency
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Student nurses' educational experiences during COVID-19: A qualitative study

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many unexpected changes occurred in healthcare. With the abrupt change to online education in 2020, nursing students experienced challenges with virtual learning which impacted their perception of preparedness to practice. There were few qualitative studies completed in the U.S. that investigated the nursing students' experiences. The aim of this study was to explore pre-licensure nursing students' experiences with the transition to virtual learning and their perception of nursing amidst a pandemic.

This study investigated nursing students' experiences and perceptions of the nursing profession amidst a pandemic and explored whether students would continue pursuing a career in nursing.

A descriptive exploratory qualitative study utilizing focus group interviews and questions using the Theory of Planned Behavior as a framework.

A university in Northern Illinois educating baccalaureate degree pre-licensure nursing students.

Participants

Twenty-four pre-licensure nursing students first through fifth semesters. Ten focus groups were established and consisted of two to three students.

A descriptive qualitative study design using the Theory of Planned Behavior to construct 9 semi-structured questions. These questions were utilized in the focus groups ( n  = 24) and Framework Analysis was utilized to analyze data.

Five themes and three sub-themes emerged from the study. Themes included: inspiration to become nurses with sub-themes-students' own inspiration and inspired by family; relationship strain with friend/family due to poor adherence to isolation guidelines; transition to online learning with sub-theme mental health strain; unprepared to begin nursing practice; and ambiguity regarding how to impact government health policy.

Conclusions

This study found that the students' perceptions of the nursing profession did not waiver, and their desire to pursue a nursing career was resolute. This study demonstrated the challenges students experienced with a transition to virtual learning. Students expressed having insufficient in-person experiences and felt unprepared to begin practice.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has elicited many unexpected changes in healthcare worldwide and continues to strain the nursing workforce. According to Alexander and Johnson (2021) , the demand for nurses by 2026 is predicted to exceed the projected increase in the nursing workforce. Zhang et al. (2018) further surmised that by 2030, there would be a deficit of >500,000 nurses in the U.S. Hence, the nursing profession's focus begins to shift toward the future nurses and how they perceive nursing amidst the current climate.

In 2020, in-person nursing education abruptly halted due to the pandemic, and schools needed to implement strategies to convert to a virtual learning environment ( Michel et al., 2021 ). The sudden change significantly impacted students' ability to cope and learn effectively, and there was a concern this would affect their pursuit of a nursing career ( Diaz et al., 2021 ; Michel et al., 2021 ). Consequently, the effects of the pandemic on nursing students' perception of the profession and desire to continue a nursing career have become an area of focus for educators. This qualitative research study aimed to explore pre-licensure nursing students' experiences and perceptions of nursing amidst a pandemic, how it impacted their desire to practice, their educational experience, and how these experiences affected their readiness for practice.

2. Background

Numerous international quantitative studies have evaluated pre-licensure nursing students' perceptions during the pandemic. For example, studies evaluated students' anxiety levels ( Cici and Yilmazel, 2021 ; Savitsky et al., 2020 ; Yilmaz and Yilmaz, 2021 ), psychological stress ( Aslan and Pekince, 2021 ; Brouwer et al., 2021 ; Ersin and Kartal, 2021 ), quality of life/resilience ( Drach-Zahavy et al., 2022 ; Keener et al., 2021 ), and satisfaction with the transition to online learning ( Natarajan and Joseph, 2022 ; Penrod et al., 2022 ; Yavaş Çelik, 2021 ).

Similarly, international qualitative studies have explored the transition to virtual learning ( Bdair, 2021 ; Jiménez-Rodríguez et al., 2020 ; Kim et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ) and stress and anxiety related to the transition to virtual learning ( Cengiz et al., 2022 ; Türkleş et al., 2021 ). However, few qualitative studies completed explicitly in the U.S. have explored these same themes, and even fewer have explored nursing students' perceptions of the profession.

Two U.S. qualitative studies explored students' perceptions and experiences transitioning to virtual learning during the pandemic ( Smith et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ). Each concluded that technical difficulties with virtual learning caused students stress and anxiety ( Smith et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ). Additionally, students lacked face-to-face interaction, which reduced their attention and motivation during online sessions ( Smith et al., 2021 ). Students also experienced relationship changes and found it challenging to communicate with faculty and classmates while participating in online classes ( Smith et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ).

Two other U.S. studies focused on nursing students' perceptions of the nursing field and psychosocial struggles during the pandemic. Diaz et al. (2021) utilized a survey to determine pre-licensure nursing students' experiences, stress levels and coping mechanisms, and views of the nursing profession. They found that the transition to online learning negatively affected students' lives. The study also found that nursing students experienced isolation, breakdown in normalcy, role identity issues, and ways to cope with these changes ( Diaz et al., 2021 ). Similarly, Michel et al. (2021) investigated pre-licensure nursing students' perceptions of the nursing profession, psychosocial experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, and challenges with online learning. They concluded that the pandemic strengthened students' desire to continue in the nursing profession; however, students had difficulty adjusting to online learning and experienced challenges refining the necessary skills to begin practice ( Michel et al., 2021 ). This national study implemented a survey using one open-ended question to explore students' experiences. The authors suggested utilizing focus groups in future studies to explore nursing students' experiences further ( Michel et al., 2021 ). Our study's design answered this recommendation. The aim was to explore the student's experiences with the transition to online learning, investigate their perceptions of the nursing profession amidst a global pandemic, and examine how their experiences impacted their desire and preparedness to practice.

This study used a descriptive exploratory design to examine the pre-licensure nursing students' experience during a pandemic. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is the conceptual model used to construct the semi-structured questions posed to the pre-licensure students in the focus group interviews ( Ajzen, 1991 ). The TPB consists of three different domains: attitude toward the behavior (a person's experiences or beliefs), subjective norms (society's expectations regarding a specific behavior), and perceived behavioral control (resources that will facilitate performing the intended behavior). Nine semi-structured questions ( Table 1 ) were composed using these three factors as a template. Two external expert qualitative researchers were consulted in the development of the questions. The experts concurred that the questions reflected the TBP.

Focus group questions.

3.1. Setting and sample

The study took place at a public university in Northern Illinois. Approximately 150 students graduate from the university's pre-licensure nursing program annually. Prior to March 2020, the pre-licensure program's didactic courses and clinical rotations were exclusively in-person. After March 2020, due to the pandemic, all classes were transitioned to a virtual platform, and virtual clinical simulations labs were substituted for in-person clinical rotations. The sample of participants was a purposive sample until saturation. All who volunteered participated. The student participants ( n  = 24) included first semester (track 1) through final semester (track 5). The focus group interviews were conducted from February 2021 through March 2021.

3.2. Data collection

The university Institutional Review Board approved the research study protocol (HS21-0193). All nursing students enrolled in the pre-licensure program during the spring of 2021 received a recruitment email. Interested students received information regarding the study's intention and the protocol, and all students consented to participate and were assigned study numbers to preserve anonymity. Ten focus groups, each with two to three students, were arranged based on student availability. Focus groups were intentionally small to allow for individualized responses to questions. The focus group interviews were executed virtually via Microsoft TEAMS, recorded, and transcribed. Once the students completed the focus group session and answered a demographic questionnaire, they received $20.00 for their participation. The monetary compensation was disclosed prior to study participation.

Each interview consisted of nine semi-structured questions ( Table 1 ). One investigator acted as the moderator and conducted all interviews to provide consistent delivery of the questions. Probes helped cultivate conversations within each group to explore all questions comprehensively. The moderator summarized the students' responses to each question verbally to ascertain clarity and act as a method of member checking to promote reliability of the response. The second investigator recorded responses and observed verbal and non-verbal cues. A debrief session was conducted after each focus group to discuss group dynamics and to summarize emerging themes. Both investigators taught exclusively at the graduate level, to encourage unbiased responses. Focus group interviews lasted approximately 60 min. During the interviews, the investigators found that focus group 8 elicited different themes. The investigators proceed with the two additional focus group interviews to assure content saturation. After the interview, each student completed an online Qualtrics demographic survey ( Table 2 ).

Student participant demographic characteristics.

Note: N  = 24.

3.3. Data analysis

Data were analyzed using Framework Analysis, a three-stage process that promotes rigorous data evaluation through a smooth transition from original data to identified themes ( Smith and Firth, 2011 ). During the first stage, data management, the investigators reviewed the data as the information was transcribed into an organized table format to identify themes ( Smith and Firth, 2011 ). The second step entailed reviewing the initial themes and emerging global concepts ( Smith and Firth, 2011 ). Lastly, the investigators reviewed the original data to validate the identified themes, promoting the data's trustworthiness ( Gale et al., 2013 ; Smith and Firth, 2011 ; Ward et al., 2013 ). The data collected reflects the TPB as this was the conceptual framework used in the study design.

Using Framework Analysis, the primary investigators demonstrated investigator and data triangulation by independently evaluating, summarizing, and extracting initial themes from the 10 focus groups, reflecting the first two steps of data management and descriptive organization. The third author was not involved in the study investigation and acted as a peer reviewer. Finally, all authors collectively collaborated and compared the responses to determine the prominent themes and sub-themes. The ability to transition from the original data to the identified themes in Framework Analysis creates an audit trail to promote accuracy of data evaluation.

All students ( n  = 24) in the study were enrolled in the pre-licensure nursing program. 87 % were female, 68 % were ages 18–22, 79 % were Caucasian, and there was a relatively equal distribution of students among the 5 nursing semesters ( Table 2 ).

Five themes and three sub-themes emerged from the data analysis:

4.1. Inspired to become nurses

The first of the five themes, and one of the most conclusive, is that students were deeply inspired to become nurses and to continue their education despite working and learning during a pandemic. One student described it this way:

My mindset transitioned to what are my grandkids going to ask me. Where was I at this time and what happened? I want to say that I was on the front line and took care of COVID patients. I have an S on my chest, and I feel like a superhero. (Focus group 8, student 2 [8–2])

Another student commented:

It [the pandemic] made me feel I was right where I wanted to be. Being on the front line is a scary concept, but I joined this field to be there for people in need. I knew that wanted to be in health care field, and I don't think that changes depending on the illness. The pandemic increased my drive to want to be a nurse. (7–1)

A third student stated:

We [nurses] are front line workers and help the community stay healthy. I feel more responsibility to be a nurse due to the pandemic. (9–3)

The students concluded that nursing continued to be their chosen career, and all were proud to become nurses. Being a nursing student during the pandemic did not change the students' perspectives of the nursing profession.

A sub-theme that emerged from this central theme was the students' own inspiration to become nurses. One student noted:

I lost my father when I was a senior in high school and was inspired by the nurses that provided his care. I wanted to help people through difficult times. Getting into nursing school was the greatest achievement in my life, and I strive hard to become a great nurse. (3–2)

A second sub-theme was inspiration from family. One student stated:

My family is amazed by me. They want me to be a nurse, and I am getting to experience the pandemic and all the changes occurring in facilities. They really support me, and my friends just say, “I don't know how you do it!” (10−2)

While the students' families were concerned about their students contracting COVID-19, all of them supported the students' career choices.

4.2. Relationship strain

A second theme that emerged from the study was the relationship strain students experienced within their friends and family groups. Many students witnessed a lack of compliance with isolation guidelines from their friends and family members, which elicited frustration. As one student commented:

Emotionally the pandemic has strained some of my relationships. They know that I'm a nurse, yet I see my friends going out to bars on social media. I have done my best to be responsible. To see them not care makes me very upset with people I consider close to me. It is hard to maintain these relationships because it feels like a middle finger right back at you. (2–2)

4.3. Transition to online learning experiences

The third theme was an aversion to online learning in the pre-licensure program. Frequently, technology related to the virtual environment was confusing, and some students were less engaged and felt uncomfortable asking questions during synchronous online classes. One student noted:

I feel one of the main cons is our age. A lot of professors think we know a lot about technology when we don't. It is awkward to ask a question in the middle of class when all the attention is turned on you in Zoom meetings. I'm bad at paying attention online. Right now, I'm twirling around in my chair and can't stay focused on my computer. (6–1)

An additional sub-theme was the mental health strain the students experienced with the transition to online learning. The abrupt change in the learning method experienced by the pre-licensure students created a feeling of isolation. They had minimal interaction with professors or other students and missed classmates' educational and emotional support. One student concluded:

We have these asynchronous classes, and we have extra lectures on top of our normal scheduled lectures. I feel we are getting more assignments in addition to our lectures. Also being isolated from my family is really hard, and it has taken a toll because basically my whole life is school and clinicals, and there isn't much beyond that. (5–1)

The lack of social interaction created additional strain on students enrolled in an already demanding nursing program. Many of the students expressed having bouts of depression and anxiety during this change. One student said:

My mental health is terrible. My depression has gotten a lot worse, and I can't even read the news anymore. I'm just sad, and I just sit there and don't want to do anything. (4–2)

4.4. Unprepared to begin nursing practice due to virtual clinical learning

The fourth theme was feeling unprepared to begin nursing practice. The students expressed apprehension about exclusively using a virtual simulated clinical environment. Some felt the virtual simulation environment was not an effective tool to provide them with the experience required to take care of patients. A student commented:

I just don't want us to be missing out on stuff. It's one thing to be in the lab and do procedures, but to actually be out in the world and practice different skills is essential. (2–3)

Most of the students felt unprepared to provide patient care in a clinical setting. Those in their final clinical rotation felt unqualified to start their nursing practice. A final semester student stated:

Because we have missed out on that clinical time, we are now looking at nurse residencies programs because we don't necessarily feel prepared to go straight into working as nurses. (5–1)

4.5. Uncertain how to impact governmental health policy

The fifth and final theme was students' views on how to influence government health policy during the pandemic and their opinions on how the government responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. All the students believed nurses should be more visible in the media and should provide education to the public. One student concluded:

I think it is important to educate the public, but unfortunately, I think our ability as nurses to do so is limited. There are nurses in some positions that can be influential, but I think much of it will come from the government. I think unless things get bad again, there isn't too much that we [nurses] can do or say that can make a big change. (7–1)

Although all the students felt nurses should have a role in health care policy and be politically engaged, none understood how nurses could influence policy on a national, state, or even local level. Additional quotes supporting these themes are noted on Table 3 .

Additional quotes for themes and subthemes.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to explore pre-licensure students' experiences with the transition to online learning, their perceptions of the nursing profession amidst a pandemic, and how these experiences impacted their desire and preparedness to practice. As a framework, the TPB provided insight into students' personal experiences, their desire to continue in the nursing profession, and their lack of control when faced with the transition to virtual learning. This merges the TPB with the study results. This resulted in five themes and three sub-themes.

Continuing to pursue a career in nursing was the first theme identified in this study. As supported in previous studies ( Diaz et al., 2021 ; Goni-Fuste et al., 2021 ; Türkleş et al., 2021 ; Yilmaz and Yilmaz, 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ), students continued their education despite the pandemic, and they were inspired to be part of a profession that would make a difference in the lives of others. Family and friends provided emotional support and reinforced their student's career choices, and this was supported by Michel et al. (2021) and Yilmaz and Yilmaz (2021) . During this global crisis, the pandemic highlighted the essential role of the nursing profession. In the future, emphasizing the nursing profession may encourage nursing student enrollment and have a positive impact on the nursing shortage.

The second theme that emerged was relationship conflicts between friends and family, specifically related to inconsistencies with adherence to isolation guidelines. Students in the study were diligent with following mandatory isolation guidelines because they feared missing clinical learning experiences if they contracted COVID. Rarely did they express concerns for their wellbeing but were much more concerned about transmitting the virus to others. However, some students found friends and family members had limited knowledge of the virus and its effects, or they held no regard for governmental social distancing and mask guidelines. The students expressed frustration with the laissez-faire attitude exhibited by friends and family who failed to follow guidelines. This experience of conflicting opinions created tensions between the students and their friends and family ( Prosser et al., 2020 ). As the pandemic continues, inconsistencies with guideline practices will continue to create discord among those with opposing views.

The third theme that developed was the students' adverse responses to the transition to online learning. The rapid transition to online learning in March of 2020 left both educators and students unprepared. Keener et al. (2021) found that approximately 56 % of students were not ready or did not have the ability to navigate this new learning format, and many expressed dissatisfaction. In this study, students expressed concerns regarding the curricula changes because of the transition. Often, these changes focused on alternative assignments like increased discussion board posts and supplementary assignments to engage students in the virtual environment. Students felt these activities did not promote effective learning and provided little opportunity to interact with professors and other students to cultivate their critical thinking. Additionally, they felt less motivated and uncomfortable communicating or asking questions. Numerous studies reported similar findings ( Diaz et al., 2021 ; Michel et al., 2021 ; Smith et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ), including a breakdown in the student/educator relationship, discomfort asking questions in a virtual environment, and an increased workload.

However, students were able to identify some positive benefits of the online learning environment, such as the flexibility of asynchronous lectures, which allowed students to review the content at their convenience. Students no longer commuted to school, which gave them additional free time to spend with family and friends and allowed for a better school-life balance and this was supported by Diaz et al. (2021) . Despite their struggles many students showed resilience and adaptability in adjusting to online learning. Nurse educators may use the insight gained to implement teaching pedagogy strategies to enhance online course content development by identifying the negative and positive student responses to online learning.

Despite the students' ability to adapt to the online environment, mental health strain still emerged as a sub-theme of the study. Before the pandemic, students could interact with professors and classmates as well as support each other by engaging in study groups and communicating in the classroom environment, which facilitates more accessible communication. The abrupt transition to online learning created a lack of personal contact, which further caused a sense of loneliness and isolation that resulted in mental strain. Students confirmed experiencing heightened symptoms of depression and anxiety. As in other studies ( Diaz et al., 2021 ; Michel et al., 2021 ; Türkleş et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ), students missed pre-pandemic in-person activities and lacked socialization with classmates, family, and friends, which negatively impacted their mental health. Students may need additional individualized attention to mitigate the feelings of isolation that may lead to mental health issues. Going forward, educators need to have an increased awareness and recognize the mental health strain caused by online learning.

The fourth theme was the students' perception of being unprepared to begin practice due to virtual clinical learning. Due to the reduction of in-person clinicals, students expressed apprehension about graduating and starting their first position as a nurse. As a result, some students considered exploring post-graduation nursing residency programs to enhance their clinical preparedness. Various studies similarly found students were concerned about their lack of hands-on experience and how it would impact their ability to be prepared for their first nursing position ( Diaz et al., 2021 ; Michel et al., 2021 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ). Nursing programs have historically required patient contact experiences as an essential component of pre-licensure nursing training. In the future, if virtual learning continues, finding creative ways to provide patient contact, such as working with community public health centers, may be used in place of other traditional clinical settings.

The last theme identified was that students expressed having limited knowledge of how to influence health policy related to pandemic protocols. COVID-19 revealed the intersection of a global health crisis and the government's role in health policy. In this study, while the students appreciated the nurse's role in health care, their knowledge regarding the nurses' ability to impact health care policy was limited. In addition, students felt they had a limited voice in policy change. Jaurigue and Schmidt (2020) discussed innovative ways to introduce nursing students to their local and state representatives and stressed the importance of being politically active to promote change. As educators in pre-licensure programs, it is essential to emphasize ways to promote the nursing voice and communicate the necessity of having a role in health policy as this directly impacts the ability of these future practitioners to provide nursing care.

6. Limitations

This study was isolated to one Midwest university and may reflect the experiences within this geographic area. A sample consisting of a more diverse demographic background ( Table 2 ) could have expanded upon the views revealed in this study. Most students were not in a high-risk group for adverse COVID-19 events, which may have influenced their attitude toward caring for infectious patients. Additionally, vaccines became available in 2021 and may have also influenced the views of the student participants.

7. Conclusion

There was concern that the pandemic climate may discourage students from continuing to pursue a nursing career. This study found that the students' desire to continue nursing was steadfast. However, the students felt they did not have sufficient in-person experiences and felt unprepared to begin clinical practice. Additionally, this study demonstrated the significant challenges nursing students experienced with a rapid transition to online learning and the isolation that ensued.

Nursing education in the U.S. faces a paradigm shift in learning environments, and as educators, we must explore ways to optimize the student learning experience. By identifying the barriers that students experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study provides insight for educators to understand the current challenges that have ensued from the abrupt shift to online learning. In the future, additional studies exploring innovative teaching techniques to promote critical thinking and creative ways to provide student experiences are essential.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Linda Rood DNP, APRN, FNP-BC, BS

Contribution to the manuscript includes but is not limited to:

• • Writing the manuscript
• • Data collection
• • Data analysis and interpretation of manuscript
• • Critical revision of manuscript
• • Supervision

Tanya Tanzillo DNP, APRN, FNP-BC, MS

• • Supervision & statistical expertise

Nancy Madsen PhD, RN

• • Conception of the study
• • Peer Reviewer
• • Administrative and materials support

Declaration of competing interest

We confirm that this manuscript has not been published or submitted elsewhere for consideration. We confirm that this manuscript has been read and approved for submission by all named authors.

• Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991; 50 (2):179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alexander G.R., Johnson J.H., Jr. Disruptive demographics: their effects on nursing demand, supply and academic preparation. Nurs. Adm. Q. 2021; 45 (1):58–64. doi: 10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000449. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aslan H., Pekince H. Nursing students’ views on the COVID-19 pandemic and their perceived stress levels. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care. 2021; 57 (2):695–701. doi: 10.1111/ppc.12597. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bdair I.A. Nursing students’ and faculty members’ perspectives about online learning during COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study. Teach. Learn. Nurs. 2021; 16 (3):220–226. doi: 10.1016/j.teln.2021.02.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brouwer K.R., Walmsley L.A., Parrish E.M., McCubbin A.K., Welsh J.D., Braido C.E.C., Okoli C.T.C. Examining the associations between self-care practices and psychological distress among nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurse Educ. Today. 2021; 100 :1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.104864. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cengiz Z., Gurdap Z., Işik K. Challenges experienced by nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care. 2022; 58 (1):47–53. doi: 10.1111/ppc.12923. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cici R., Yilmazel G. Determination of anxiety levels and perspectives on the nursing profession among candidate nurses with relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care. 2021; 57 (1):358–362. doi: 10.1111/ppc.12601. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diaz K., Staffileno B.A., Hamilton R. Nursing student experiences in turmoil: a year of the pandemic and social strife during final clinical rotations. J. Prof. Nurs. 2021; 37 (5):978–984. doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.07.019. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drach-Zahavy A., Goldblatt H., Admi H., Blau A., Ohana I., Itzhaki M. A multi-level examination of nursing students’ resilience in the face of the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-sectional design. J. Adv. Nurs. 2022; 78 (1):109–120. doi: 10.1111/jan.14951. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ersin F., Kartal M. The determination of the perceived stress levels and health protective behaviors of nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care. 2021; 57 (2):929–935. doi: 10.1111/ppc.12636. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gale N., Heath G., Cameron E., Rashid S., Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2013; 13 (117):1–8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-117. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goni-Fuste B., Wennberg L., Martin-Delgado L., Alfonso-Arias C., Martin-Ferreres M.L., Monforte-Royo C. Experiences and needs of nursing students during pandemic outbreaks: a systematic overview of the literature. J. Prof. Nurs. 2021; 37 (1):53–64. doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2020.12.004. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jaurigue L., Schmidt C. Political activism: preparing future nurses to impact healthcare policy. Ariz. Nurse. 2020; 73 (1):10–11. https://assets.nursingald.com/uploads/publication/pdf/2006/Arizona_Nurse_1_20.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiménez-Rodríguez D., Torres Navarro M., Plaza Del Pino F.J., Arrogante O. Simulated nursing video consultations: an innovative proposal during COVID-19 confinement. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2020; 48 :29–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2020.08.004. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keener T.A., Hall K., Wang K., Hulsey T., Piamjariyakul U. Quality of life, resilience, and related factors of nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurse Educ. 2021; 46 (3):143–148. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000969. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim M.J., Kang H.S., De Gagne J.C. Nursing students’ perceptions and experiences of using virtual simulation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2021; 60 :11–17. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2021.06.010. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Michel A., Ryan N., Mattheus D., Knopf A., Abuelezam N.N., Stamp K., Branson S., Hekel B., Fontenot H.B. Undergraduate nursing students’ perceptions on nursing education during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic: a national sample. Nurs. Outlook. 2021; 69 (5):903–912. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2021.05.004. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Natarajan J., Joseph M.A. Impact of emergency remote teaching on nursing students’ engagement, social presence, and satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurs. Forum. 2022; 57 (1):42–48. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12649. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Penrod D., Shaw T., Nash J., Dierkes M., Collins S. Community college students’ perspectives on online learning during COVID-19 and factors related to success. Teach. Learn. Nurs. 2022 doi: 10.1016/j.teln.2022.01.012. Advance online publication. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Prosser A.M.B., Judge M., Bolderdijk J.W., Blackwood L., Kurz T. ‘Distancers’ and ‘non-distancers’? The potential social psychological impact of moralizing COVID-19 mitigating practices on sustained behaviour change. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2020; 59 (3):653–662. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12399. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Savitsky B., Findling Y., Ereli A., Hendel T. Anxiety and coping strategies among nursing students during the Covid-19 pandemic. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2020; 46 :1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102809. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith J., Firth J. Qualitative data analysis: the framework approach. Nurse Res. 2011; 18 (2):52–62. doi: 10.7748/nr2011.01.18.2.52.c8284. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith Y., Chen Y.J., Warner-Stidham A. Understanding online teaching effectiveness: nursing student and faculty perspectives. J. Prof. Nurs. 2021; 37 (5):785–794. doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.05.009. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Türkleş S., Boğahan M., Altundal H., Yaman Z., Yılmaz M. Diaries of nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative descriptive study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021; 18 (16):1–12. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18168556. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wallace S., Schuler M.S., Kaulback M., Hunt K., Baker M. Nursing student experiences of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurs. Forum. 2021; 56 (3):612–618. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12568. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ward D., Furber C., Tierney S., Swallow V. Using framework analysis in nursing research: a worked example. J. Adv. Nurs. 2013; 69 (11):2423–2431. doi: 10.1111/jan.12127. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yavaş Çelik M. The effect of staying at home due to COVID-19 outbreak on nursing students’ life satisfaction and social competencies. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care. 2021; 57 (2):655–659. doi: 10.1111/ppc.12590. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yilmaz D., Yilmaz D.U. An examination of the relationship between fear of Coronavirus (COVID-19) in first year nursing students and their attitudes to the profession. Curr. Health Sci. J. 2021; 47 (3):331–337. doi: 10.12865/CHSJ.47.03.01. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang X., Tai D., Pforsich H., Lin V.W. United States registered nurse workforce report card and shortage forecast: a revisit. Am. J. Med. Qual. 2018; 33 (3):229–236. doi: 10.1177/1062860617738328. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

New evidence of the benefits of arts education

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, brian kisida and bk brian kisida assistant professor, truman school of public affairs - university of missouri @briankisida daniel h. bowen dhb daniel h. bowen assistant professor, college of education and human development - texas a&m university @_dhbowen.

February 12, 2019

Engaging with art is essential to the human experience. Almost as soon as motor skills are developed, children communicate through artistic expression. The arts challenge us with different points of view, compel us to empathize with “others,” and give us the opportunity to reflect on the human condition. Empirical evidence supports these claims: Among adults, arts participation is related to behaviors that contribute to the health of civil society , such as increased civic engagement, greater social tolerance, and reductions in other-regarding behavior. Yet, while we recognize art’s transformative impacts, its place in K-12 education has become increasingly tenuous.

A critical challenge for arts education has been a lack of empirical evidence that demonstrates its educational value. Though few would deny that the arts confer intrinsic benefits, advocating “art for art’s sake” has been insufficient for preserving the arts in schools—despite national surveys showing an overwhelming majority of the public agrees that the arts are a necessary part of a well-rounded education.

Over the last few decades, the proportion of students receiving arts education has shrunk drastically . This trend is primarily attributable to the expansion of standardized-test-based accountability, which has pressured schools to focus resources on tested subjects. As the saying goes, what gets measured gets done. These pressures have disproportionately affected access to the arts in a negative way for students from historically underserved communities. For example, a federal government report found that schools designated under No Child Left Behind as needing improvement and schools with higher percentages of minority students were more likely to experience decreases in time spent on arts education.

We recently conducted the first ever large-scale, randomized controlled trial study of a city’s collective efforts to restore arts education through community partnerships and investments. Building on our previous investigations of the impacts of enriching arts field trip experiences, this study examines the effects of a sustained reinvigoration of schoolwide arts education. Specifically, our study focuses on the initial two years of Houston’s Arts Access Initiative and includes 42 elementary and middle schools with over 10,000 third- through eighth-grade students. Our study was made possible by generous support of the Houston Endowment , the National Endowment for the Arts , and the Spencer Foundation .

Due to the program’s gradual rollout and oversubscription, we implemented a lottery to randomly assign which schools initially participated. Half of these schools received substantial influxes of funding earmarked to provide students with a vast array of arts educational experiences throughout the school year. Participating schools were required to commit a monetary match to provide arts experiences. Including matched funds from the Houston Endowment, schools in the treatment group had an average of $14.67 annually per student to facilitate and enhance partnerships with arts organizations and institutions. In addition to arts education professional development for school leaders and teachers, students at the 21 treatment schools received, on average, 10 enriching arts educational experiences across dance, music, theater, and visual arts disciplines. Schools partnered with cultural organizations and institutions that provided these arts learning opportunities through before- and after-school programs, field trips, in-school performances from professional artists, and teaching-artist residencies. Principals worked with the Arts Access Initiative director and staff to help guide arts program selections that aligned with their schools’ goals.

Our research efforts were part of a multisector collaboration that united district administrators, cultural organizations and institutions, philanthropists, government officials, and researchers. Collective efforts similar to Houston’s Arts Access Initiative have become increasingly common means for supplementing arts education opportunities through school-community partnerships. Other examples include Boston’s Arts Expansion Initiative , Chicago’s Creative Schools Initiative , and Seattle’s Creative Advantage .

Through our partnership with the Houston Education Research Consortium, we obtained access to student-level demographics, attendance and disciplinary records, and test score achievement, as well as the ability to collect original survey data from all 42 schools on students’ school engagement and social and emotional-related outcomes.

We find that a substantial increase in arts educational experiences has remarkable impacts on students’ academic, social, and emotional outcomes. Relative to students assigned to the control group, treatment school students experienced a 3.6 percentage point reduction in disciplinary infractions, an improvement of 13 percent of a standard deviation in standardized writing scores, and an increase of 8 percent of a standard deviation in their compassion for others. In terms of our measure of compassion for others, students who received more arts education experiences are more interested in how other people feel and more likely to want to help people who are treated badly.

When we restrict our analysis to elementary schools, which comprised 86 percent of the sample and were the primary target of the program, we also find that increases in arts learning positively and significantly affect students’ school engagement, college aspirations, and their inclinations to draw upon works of art as a means for empathizing with others. In terms of school engagement, students in the treatment group were more likely to agree that school work is enjoyable, makes them think about things in new ways, and that their school offers programs, classes, and activities that keep them interested in school. We generally did not find evidence to suggest significant impacts on students’ math, reading, or science achievement, attendance, or our other survey outcomes, which we discuss in our full report .

As education policymakers increasingly rely on empirical evidence to guide and justify decisions, advocates struggle to make the case for the preservation and restoration of K-12 arts education. To date, there is a remarkable lack of large-scale experimental studies that investigate the educational impacts of the arts. One problem is that U.S. school systems rarely collect and report basic data that researchers could use to assess students’ access and participation in arts educational programs. Moreover, the most promising outcomes associated with arts education learning objectives extend beyond commonly reported outcomes such as math and reading test scores. There are strong reasons to suspect that engagement in arts education can improve school climate, empower students with a sense of purpose and ownership, and enhance mutual respect for their teachers and peers. Yet, as educators and policymakers have come to recognize the importance of expanding the measures we use to assess educational effectiveness, data measuring social and emotional benefits are not widely collected. Future efforts should continue to expand on the types of measures used to assess educational program and policy effectiveness.

These findings provide strong evidence that arts educational experiences can produce significant positive impacts on academic and social development. Because schools play a pivotal role in cultivating the next generation of citizens and leaders, it is imperative that we reflect on the fundamental purpose of a well-rounded education. This mission is critical in a time of heightened intolerance and pressing threats to our core democratic values. As policymakers begin to collect and value outcome measures beyond test scores, we are likely to further recognize the value of the arts in the fundamental mission of education.

Related Content

Seth Gershenson

January 13, 2016

Brian Kisida, Bob Morrison, Lynn Tuttle

May 19, 2017

Joan Wasser Gish, Mary Walsh

December 12, 2016

Education Policy K-12 Education

Governance Studies

Brown Center on Education Policy

Sopiko Beriashvili, Michael Trucano

April 26, 2024

Richard V. Reeves, Ember Smith

Michael Trucano, Sopiko Beriashvili

April 25, 2024

An IERI – International Educational Research Institute Journal

• Open access
• Published: 19 September 2023

Investigating the educational experiences of students with disabilities during the COVID-19 school disruption: an international perspective

• Alexandra Shelton   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3659-347X 1 &
• Tuba Gezer 2  

Large-scale Assessments in Education volume  11 , Article number:  34 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

1655 Accesses

1 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

Students with disabilities generally experience educational inequities around the world. The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic likely exacerbated these inequities in access, resources, and support as schools shut down to mitigate the spread of the disease. Although some research has explored disparities between students with and without disabilities during the pandemic, limited research has explored this issue from the perspective of students across multiple countries. Therefore, we conducted a secondary analysis of the UNESCO Responses to Educational Disruption Survey student questionnaire administered to eighth graders in five countries to investigate changes in the educational experiences of students with disabilities during COVID-19 school disruptions and differences between these experiences and the experiences of students without disabilities during these disruptions. Specifically, we aimed to understand how students with disabilities’ perceptions of their educational experiences changed during disruptions and varied from those of students without disabilities. Contrary to previous research, our findings revealed that students with disabilities generally reported positive experiences to a greater extent than students without disabilities. We discuss the implications of these findings and areas for future research beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

15% of people in the world (i.e., 1 billion people) experience disability (World Health Organization, 2021 ), and approximately 240 million children with disabilities live in the world (UNICEF, 2021 ). Historically, children with disabilities have been denied an education due to having a disability. Today, access to education for children with disabilities is still limited (e.g., United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2018 ; UNICEF, 2021 ). In fact, children with disabilities are 49% more likely than children without disabilities to have never attended school (UNICEF, 2021 ). Additionally, children with disabilities in developing countries are likely to face greater barriers to education. Census data from 19 developing countries have revealed that the number of 11-year-olds with disabilities who have ever enrolled in school is 13 percentage points lower than the number of their peers without disabilities who have ever enrolled (Male & Wodon, 2017 ). In these same countries, people with disabilities are less likely than people without disabilities to complete both primary schooling (15.4-point gap among women and 17.6-point gap among men) and secondary schooling (10.4-point gap among women and 14.5-point gap among men; Male & Wodon, 2017 ). Thus, there is a clear need to improve educational opportunities for children with disabilities around the world.

Based on the premise that education is a right to all, efforts have been made to ensure that children with disabilities have access to education. For example, in 2006, the United Nations (UN) adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to “promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities” (UN General Assembly, 2006 , p. 4). The treaty recognizes that countries should ensure that “persons with disabilities are not excluded from the general education system on the basis of disability, and that children with disabilities are not excluded from free and compulsory primary education, or from secondary education, on the basis of disability” (UN General Assembly, 2006 , p. 17). As of June 2022, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has 164 signatories, including the five countries represented in the current article. Although there seems to be a global commitment to making education more accessible for children with disabilities, even among those who are enrolled in school, students with disabilities (SWDs) typically experience poorer educational outcomes than students without disabilities around the world (e.g., Gilmour et al., 2019 ).

Education of students with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) has had a major impact on education today. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic (World Health Organization, 2020 ). Therefore, most countries closed their school buildings for at least some period to mitigate the spread of the disease (UNESCO, 2020 ), and many replaced in-person learning with remote learning. Several studies have suggested that these school closures—despite emergency remote learning—negatively affected the education of children worldwide. For example, Di Pietro et al. ( 2020 ) predicted that students in select countries in the European Union would experience learning loss. Further, researchers have reported that school closures and social lockdowns in response to COVID-19 were associated with negative mental health outcomes, such as anxiety and depression (Viner et al., 2022 ).

The pandemic has also exacerbated educational inequalities that existed before the pandemic (Human Rights Watch, 2021 ). In fact, SWDs have had worse educational experiences since the pandemic, due to COVID-19 school disruptions (Human Rights Watch, 2021 ). For example, 61% of parents of SWDs in Germany rated their children’s learning during COVID-19 disruptions as significantly less than what it had been during regular schooling (Nusser, 2021 ). Parents of SWDs selected this rating more than parents of students without disabilities but with low achievement (44%) and parents of students without disabilities and without low achievement (28%).

Jesus et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a scoping review investigating the health and social impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns on individuals with disabilities. The authors reported that school disruptions caused disruptions to the professional support, educational equipment, and therapy SWDs received because access to these supports and services had been primarily provided in school settings until then. Many SWDs also lacked necessary social participation as well as structure and daily routines due to school disruptions. Additionally, although virtual options were available for SWDs in some countries, Jesus et al. reported that these solutions were not necessarily available to SWDs experiencing poverty and, even when available, did not consistently meet the needs of SWDs and their families. Therefore, many SWDs experienced more stress, greater challenging behaviors, and a regression of skills previously gained in school. These findings align with those of Shi et al. ( 2022 ), whose systematic review related to the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that students with learning difficulties or disabilities often had inadequate resources to support their learning, required more support from their parents to access learning, and experienced emotional difficulties as well.

Further, Rohwerder et al. ( 2022 ) conducted a scoping review exploring the experiences of adolescents with disabilities during COVID-19 and other large-scale humanitarian emergencies in low- and middle-income countries and concluded that SWDs experienced greater difficulties than students without disabilities during COVID-19 remote learning. For instance, Rohwerder et al. reported that adolescents’ motivation for remote learning waned, and students engaged in little studying. Additionally, parents felt unable to support their SWDs’ education during remote learning, were dissatisfied with teachers’ engagement during remote learning, and worried about the negative effects of remote learning on their adolescents’ future. Rohwerder et al. also reported that remote learning in response to COVID-19 school closures disrupted non-educational school benefits, such as therapies and rehabilitation, which is consistent with Jesus et al. ( 2021 ), and even school feeding programs that served SWDs.

Conceptual framework: potential factors influencing COVID-19 remote learning

Multiple factors may have influenced the experiences of SWDs engaging in emergency remote learning during COVID-19 school disruptions. Based on a review of 619 articles published between 2009 and 2018, Martin et al. ( 2020 ) identified several themes, organized by domain, related to research on the delivery of online learning, which presents a framework that delivers insight into factors that potentially contributed to the outcomes of SWDs participating in emergency remote learning during COVID-19 school disruptions.

Organization domain

The organization domain includes contextual factors that may influence remote learning experiences and outcomes (Martin et al., 2020 ). Within this domain is institutional support, which includes social, academic, and cognitive support for students. For example, well-resourced schools can support the experiences and outcomes of SWDs participating in remote learning. However, other schools, particularly those in high-poverty areas, may face greater challenges that hinder remote learning. Therefore, school socioeconomic and demographic factors can influence the academic outcomes of students participating in virtual instruction.

Course and instructor domain

The course and instructor domain refers to the design of a course and the role of the instructor (Martin et al., 2020 ). This domain also influences SWDs’ outcomes during remote learning. For example, during spring 2020 virtual instruction, synchronous virtual instruction was positively associated with time spent on schoolwork among students with neurodevelopmental disorders (McFayden et al., 2021). As such, Martin et al. ( 2020 ) explained that program design and development engage and assist students to achieve desired learning outcomes.

Learner domain

Finally, the learner domain relates to a learner’s characteristics and outcomes and how the learner interacts with a course (Martin et al., 2020 ). This domain consists of themes such as engagement (e.g., interaction, participation, and collaboration), self-regulation (e.g., executive function), and readiness for online learning, which are all relevant to remote learning. For instance, emotional intelligence is positively associated with readiness for online learning (Buzdar et al., 2016), executive function and computational skill use (Robertson et al., 2020), and emotion regulation and engagement during virtual instruction among students with neurodevelopmental disorders (McFayden et al., 2021). Thus, learner factors may influence, or moderate, the relationships among organizational and course and instructor factors and the outcomes of SWDs participating in virtual instruction.

Research purpose

Because SWDs in different countries may have had varying experiences during COVID-19 school disruptions, a multinational analysis of these experiences is warranted. Additionally, it is important to explore these experiences from the perspectives of SWDs themselves. In fact, Rohwerder et al. ( 2022 ) argued that engaging adolescents as participants enables inclusive research focused on issues that are relevant to SWDs. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which SWDs’ perceptions of their educational experiences in five countries changed and varied from those of students without disabilities during school disruptions. Specifically, we aimed to answer the following research questions:

How did SWDs within each country perceive the amount of support they received specifically for a disability during the COVID-19 school disruption?

How did SWDs’ perceptions of teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and learning progress as well as their feelings during the COVID-19 school disruption vary from those of students without disabilities in each country?

To what extent is learning progress during the COVID-19 school disruption influenced by teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and feelings, while controlling for gender, parental education, and disability status in each country?

This article presents results from a secondary data analysis of the Responses to Educational Disruption Survey (REDS; Meinck et al., 2022 ) student questionnaire. The REDS survey examined the effect of COVID-19 school disruptions on teaching and learning from an international perspective. REDS was a joint effort by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) and UNESCO as an initiative of the Global Education Coalition, which was founded in March 2020 by UNESCO. The study focuses on lower-secondary (or middle-level) education as eighth graders were administered the REDS student questionnaire. Data collection took place between December 2020 and July 2021.

Participating countries

Eight countries administered the REDS student questionnaire: Burkina Faso, Denmark, Ethiopia, Kenya, Russia, Slovenia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Uzbekistan. However, three countries—Russia, Slovenia, and Uzbekistan—did not include any SWDs in their samples. Thus, for the purpose of our study, we analyzed student questionnaire data from the five countries with SWDs in their samples: Burkina Faso, Denmark, Ethiopia, Kenya, and the UAE—each of which has been a signatory of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities for at least a decade.

Burkina Faso

According to UNESCO, the Constitution of Burkina Faso recognizes that SWDs have the right to education. As such, special education in Burkina Faso is dedicated to students with physical, sensory, and learning disabilities as well as students who have difficulties with “personal adaptation and social integration.” SWDs can attend specialized centers, specialized schools, integrative schools, and inclusive schools.

According to the REDS International Report (Meinck et al., 2022 ), schools in Burkina Faso were physically closed in mid-March 2020 and reopened in October 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Students who responded to the REDS student questionnaire were asked to consider this 7.5-month closure (excluding the break between the 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 school years) as their reference period when completing the survey.

According to the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (n.d.), the Folkeskole (i.e., public school) Act in Denmark requires schools to differentiate education or, if needed, provide supplementary education, to ensure that all students receive a “relevant and efficient education” that is appropriate for their development and needs. If supplementary education is insufficient and inefficient for SWDs or if students need more than nine hours of support each week, the Folkeskole Act stipulates students can receive special needs education in mainstream schools, schools with special classes, or special schools.

The REDS International Report states that Danish schools shut down in mid-March 2020 and reopened in mid-May 2020. As COVID-19 rates increased, schools closed again in mid-December 2020 and reopened in mid-March 2021. REDS student respondents only considered the first school closure in Denmark as their reference period.

According to UNESCO, special education in Ethiopia is designed for students who experience difficulties or barriers with learning and development and, thus, need additional support. While these difficulties can be attributed to disability, they can also be attributed to other factors, such as low socioeconomic status or isolation in rural communities. For SWDs, specifically, the Ethiopian Constitution recognizes that education is a human right and assures that all citizens, including individuals with disabilities, have access to education. However, UNESCO acknowledges that regulations enforcing education for all are absent in Ethiopia. Nonetheless, SWDs in Ethiopia can attend special day schools, special boarding schools, special classrooms in general education schools, as well as inclusive classrooms in general education schools.

According to the REDS International Report, Ethiopian schools shut down between mid-March 2020 and late November 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Students who completed the REDS student questionnaire considered these 7.5 months of school disruption (excluding the break between school years) as their reference period.

According to UNESCO, Kenya’s 2012 Basic Education Act acknowledges education for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (including specific learning disabilities), hearing and visual impairments, deaf-blindness, and physical impairments. Additionally, the Constitution recognizes SWDs’ right to access educational institutions integrated into society, as appropriate for each student. As such, SWDs can attend special schools, integrated schools, and special classes within general education schools.

The REDS International Report (Meinck et al., 2022 ) indicates that schools in Kenya closed in mid-March 2020. However, the point at which schools reopened was not reported on Kenya’s REDS survey. Therefore, the length of the reference period in Kenya is unknown.

United Arab Emirates

UNESCO indicates that a person with “special needs” in the UAE is considered to be someone whose abilities (e.g., physical, communication, psychological) limit their ability to perform what are considered “ordinary” requirements. As such, special education is reserved for students with a disability, difficulty, or other factor that impacts student learning or educational performance. Additionally, SWDs are guaranteed equal opportunities and reasonable accommodations to study in general education or special classes.

According to the REDS International Report, schools in the UAE closed in late March 2020. The school closure continued at least through July 2021. However, the reference period for student respondents to consider ended in December 2020.

Student respondents

To identify students to complete the REDS questionnaire, the REDS team used a two-stage stratified random sample design where schools were the first sampling stage and students were the second stage. Urbanization, type of funding, and region were used as stratification variables to facilitate both sampling and data analysis. The total sample size for the five countries in our sample was 12,229 students.

We used students’ responses to Q26A (IS1G26AA) to distinguish SWDs (i.e., students who reported receiving support from their school and teachers for a disability) from students without disabilities (i.e., students who did not report receiving support from their school and teachers for a disability). Of the total sample, 26.1% ( n =  3,195) reported receiving support from their school and teachers for a disability and were thus identified as SWDs. Meanwhile, 54.1% ( n  = 6,622) reported not receiving support for a disability and were thus identified as students without disabilities. Finally, some of the participants (19.7%, n  = 2,412) did not respond to the survey question regarding receiving disability support and were not included in our analysis. Thus, the final sample was 9,817 (32.5% SWDs; 67.5% students without disabilities).

Table  1 provides demographic characteristics of the students included in our final sample categorized by disability status. Nearly half of the sample was female among both students with and without disabilities. The average ages were 14 and 14.2 for SWDs and students without disabilities, respectively. Both SWDs (42.3%) and students without disabilities (46.8%) were most likely to indicate that they did not come to school and instead attended lessons from a place away from their school during the COVID-19 disruption. Meanwhile, 21.7% of SWDs and 13.9% of students without disabilities reported attending school for at least some lessons during the disruption. Finally, 18.5% of SWDs and 33.4% of students without disabilities stated that they did not do any schoolwork during the COVID-19 disruption. Please see Appendix A for demographic information for each country.

In this section, we describe the REDS student questionnaire measures we used to answer our research questions. Please see Appendix B for a full list of each measure used and the accompanying items.

School support before and during the COVID-19 disruption

School support for SWDs both before and during the COVID-19 school disruption was assessed in six areas. These areas were how students: (a) move around (lifting and carrying things, holding things, moving from place to place, getting around your community), (b) learn (seeing, hearing, learning to read, learning to write, learning math), (c) communicate (understanding what people say, communicating needs, speaking clearly, having conversations), (d) take care of themselves (personal grooming, using the bathroom, eating and drinking, and keeping safe), (e) relate to others (making friends, keeping friends, managing disagreements, understanding other points of view), and (f) solve problems (solving problems, persisting, staying on task, completing tasks independently, coping with setbacks).

SWDs were asked how much their school gave them support before the COVID-19 disruption in each of the aforementioned areas (IS1G26BA-IS1G26BF). These questions had three response categories: (a) I do not need support in this area , (b) my school provided a little support in this area , and (c) my school provided a lot of support in this area .

SWDs were also asked how the support from their school changed during the COVID-19 disruption in the same areas (IS1G26CA-IS1G26CF). These questions had four response categories: (a) I do not need support in this area , (b) [support] increased during the COVID-19 disruption , (c) [support] stayed the same during the COVID-19 disruption , and (d) [support] decreased during the COVID-19 disruption.

Confirmatory factor analysis

Using Mplus, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for each of the following variables: teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, learning progress, and feelings. We conducted a Chi-square test and the following goodness-of-fit indices (Kline, 2016 ): root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA); standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR); and comparative fit index (CFI). For RMSEA, values greater than 0.10 may indicate a lack of fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1992 ). For SRMR, perfect model fit is indicated by SRMR = 0, while values greater than 0.10 may indicate poor fit (Kline, 2016 ). Finally, CFI values greater than 0.90 indicate that the proposed model fit is 90% greater than the baseline model fit, thus serving as an indicator of adequate fit (Kline, 2016 ).

Teacher support

Eight items required all students (i.e., students with and without disabilities) to rate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with several statements about the support they received from their teachers during the COVID-19 disruption (IS1G21A-IS1G21H). For example, one item stated, “ My teachers adapted my schoolwork to meet my individual needs .” Each item used the following four-point Likert scale: (1) strongly agree , (2) agree , (3) disagree , and (4) strongly disagree and was recoded so that higher values (i.e., ratings) indicated greater agreement. The CFA provides evidence that the data reasonably fit the teacher support construct. Although the Chi-square goodness-of-fit statistics are statistically significant, which suggests that the model fit is not perfect, the other goodness-of-fit statistics suggest a reasonable fit for the model (Chi-square = 791.45 (df = 20), p  < .001; RMSEA = 0.07 [90% CI: 0.065 to 0.074]; SRMR = 0.033; CFI = 0.958). The standardized factor loadings were between 0.69 and 0.8.

Students with and without disabilities were asked if various aspects of their schoolwork changed during the COVID-19 disruption (IS1G18A- IS1G18J). Each of 10 aspects (e.g., quality of schoolwork) was rated on the following three-point scale: (1) increased during the COVID-19 disruption , (2) did not change during the COVID-19 disruption , and (3) decreased during the COVID-19 disruption . The responses were recoded as (1) decreased , (2) did not change , and (3) increased , so that higher values indicate positive schoolwork outcomes (IS1G18 A, B, C, D, E, G, H, I, J). Based on CFA results with eight items (IS1G18 A-D, G-J), the data reasonably fit the schoolwork construct. The Chi-square goodness-of-fit statistics are statistically significant, which suggests that the model fit is not perfect, but the other goodness-of-fit statistics suggest a reasonable fit for the model (Chi-square = 291.4 (df = 20), p  < .001; RMSEA = 0.041 [90% CI: 0.037 to 0.045]; SRMR = 0.02; CFI = 0.983). The standardized factor loadings were between 0.54 and 0.76.

Learning experiences

Nine statements assessed all students’ perceptions of their learning experiences during the COVID-19 disruption (IS1G14A-IS1G14I). For instance, one statement read: “ I was unable to get help for my schoolwork from a teacher or school support staff. ” Students responded to each statement on the following four-point Likert scale: (1) strongly agree , (2) agree , (3) disagree , and (4) strongly disagree . We conducted a CFA with the items related to challenging learning experiences (IS1G14A, D-G), and the results presented a reasonable model fit for the learning experiences construct. The chi-square goodness-of-fit statistics are statistically significant, which suggests that the model fit is not perfect, but the other goodness-of-fit statistics suggest a reasonable fit for the model (Chi-square = 253.8 (df = 5), p  < .001; RMSEA = 0.078 [90% CI: 0.07 to 0.087]; SRMR = 0.034; CFI = 0.928). The standardized factor loadings were between 0.45 and 0.63. Considering the Likert scale used for this variable, the higher values indicated positive learning experiences.

Learning progress

The REDS student questionnaire included two statements about students’ perceptions of their learning progress during the COVID-19 disruption (IS1G22A-B). These questions were “ I learned about as much as before the COVID-19 disruption ” and “ I made more progress in some subjects than before the COVID-19 disruption.” Students rated each item on the same four-point scale: (1) strongly agree , (2) agree , (3) disagree , and (4) strongly disagree . These items were recoded so that higher values indicated learning progress. Since there were only two indicators for learning progress, both factor loadings and error terms were set to be equal to create an overidentified model. The CFA results provide evidence that the data reasonably fit learning progress. The Chi-square goodness-of-fit statistics are statistically significant, which suggests that the model fit is not perfect. However, the other goodness-of-fit statistics suggest a reasonable fit for the model (Chi-square = 10.53 (df = 1), p  < .001; RMSEA = 0.035 [90% CI: 0.018 to 0.055]; SRMR = 0.033; CFI = 0.996). The standardized factor loading was 0.71 for both items.

Thirteen items evaluated how students felt during the COVID-19 school disruption (IS1G24A- IS1G24M). An example item is “ I felt overwhelmed by what was happening in the world due to [the COVID-19 pandemic] .” Students responded to each item on a four-point scale: (1) strongly agree , (2) agree , (3) disagree , and (4) strongly disagree . Reflecting the Likert scale used for this variable, the higher values represented positive feelings. We conducted a CFA with the items related to worrying (IS1G24 A-F, K), and the results presented a reasonable model fit for the feelings construct. The Chi-square goodness-of-fit statistics are statistically significant, which suggests that the model fit is not perfect, while the other goodness-of-fit statistics suggest a reasonable fit for the model (Chi-square = 380.1 (df = 13), p  < .001; RMSEA = 0.049 [90% CI: 0.045 to 0.053]; SRMR = 0.025; CFI = 0.978). The standardized factor loadings were between 0.5 and 0.79.

Measurement invariance

Putnick and Bornstein ( 2016 ) emphasized that measurement invariance has a critical value and is a requirement when comparing group means. Thus, we tested measurement invariance between countries to maintain accurate comparisons among the countries in Mplus. There are four levels of measurement invariance: configural, metric (weak), scalar (strong) and strict models. In particular, scalar invariance is generally regarded as sufficient evidence for measurement invariance and requires both factor loadings and intercepts to be invariant across groups (Lubke & Muthén, 2005 ; Meredith, 1993 ). Thus, we tested configural, metric, and scalar measurement invariance. However, our results indicated that scalar measurement invariance was not attained among the teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, learning progress, and feelings variables among the five countries ( Appendix C ). Therefore, instead of comparing countries’ learning progress (RQ3), we conducted separate multiple regression analyses to identify which variables significantly predicted learning progress in each country.

Reliability

We used the mean of the items within each category to create teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, learning progress, and feelings variables. We conducted a reliability analysis for each variable based on CFA results. Table  2 provides reliability (i.e., Cronbach’s Alpha) and other information regarding these variables. A Cronbach’s Alpha value above the 0.7 threshold indicates appropriate reliability (Nunnally, 1978 ). While Alpha values for teacher support, schoolwork, and feelings were above the cut score, the values for learning experience and learning progress were just below the cut score.

Data Analysis

The following data analysis procedures were conducted on SPSS 28 (IBM Corp., 2021 ) and IEA IDB Analyzer 5.0.11 (IEA, 2022 ) to answer our research questions. Additionally, we used sampling weight during data analysis when it was appropriate. In particular, we used the final student weight included in the REDS international database, which adjusted for varying selection probabilities for sampled schools and students and the varying patterns of non-participation among students in participating schools (UNESCO, 2022 ).

We conducted a separate analysis for each country for all three research questions. To answer our first research question, we used frequency counts to determine the amount of support SWDs reported receiving from their schools before the COVID-19 school disruption as well as SWDs’ perceived change in the amount of school support during the COVID-19 disruption. For the second research question, we used descriptive statistics to determine students with and without disabilities’ perceptions of teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and learning progress as well as their feelings during the COVID-19 school disruption. We also conducted t-tests to examine if there was a statistically significant difference between students with disabilities and students without disabilities in each area. Since there were five t-tests for each country, we used Bonferroni correction and set the significance level to 0.01, which was determined by dividing 0.05 by 5 (i.e., the number of t-tests for each country).

To answer the third research question, we conducted a hierarchical (sequential) multiple regression to understand how learning progress during the COVID-19 school disruption was influenced by teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and feelings, while controlling for gender and parental education, and disability status. We performed a hierarchical multiple regression for each country separately because measurement invariance was not achieved. Gender was coded as 1 (female) and 0 (male), and the male students were the reference group. Parental education was coded as 1 (parent has at least some postsecondary education) or 0 (parent has high school education or less), which was the reference group in the regression analysis. Disability status was coded as 1 (student with a disability) or 0 (student without a disability), which was the reference group.

The predictor variables were added in the regression model in the following order: (1) gender, parental education, and disability status; and (2) teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and feelings. Additionally, sampling weights were not used in the regression analysis because sampling weights were not available for the REDS student questionnaires administered in Burkina Faso, Denmark, Ethiopia, and Kenya due to low student participation or missing sampling documentation.

Research question #1: the amount of support SWDs received specifically for a disability by country

Our first research question investigated the amount of support SWDs received before the COVID-19 school disruption and the change in school support during the disruption within each country. Table  3 presents the weighted percentages of school support before and during the disruption in six areas (i.e., moving around, learning, communicating, taking care of myself, relating to others, and solving problems) for each county and the total sample. In general, the percentage of SWDs who reported not needing support in each area decreased during the COVID-19 disruption, indicating that more SWDs needed support during this time. For example, in Burkina Faso, while 65% of SWDs indicated that they did not need support in learning before the COVID-19 school disruption, only 40% claimed not needing support during the disruption. Additionally, 45% of SWDs among the total sample reported not needing support in how they take care of themselves before COVID-19, compared to only 35% who reported not needing it during the COVID-19 school disruption.

The proportion of students to report receiving decreased school support during the disruption (14–21%) was generally smaller than the proportion who reported having increased support (17–30%) in the total sample. Additionally, while about 14% of SWDs in the total sample indicated that school support for moving around stayed the same during the disruption, approximately 20% of SWDs stated that school support stayed the same in the other five areas. Additionally, nearly 30% of SWDs in the total sample reported that school support increased in both learning and taking care of themselves, while 21% and 15% of SWDs claimed that school support decreased during the disruption in these two areas, respectively. Similar results related to SWDs’ taking care of themselves were observed in Ethiopia, Kenya, and the UAE as approximately 30% of SWDs in these countries indicated that school support for taking care of themselves increased.

Research question #2: comparing students with and without disabilities during the COVID-19 school disruption by country

We conducted t-tests to examine the differences between students with and without disabilities in each country. Table  4 presents country-level and total sample descriptive statistics and t-test results for students’ perceptions of teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and learning progress, as well as their feelings. The overall trend is that SWDs had significantly higher ratings than students without disabilities. In Denmark, Ethiopia, Kenya, and the UAE, SWDs reported statistically significantly higher ratings of teacher support and learning progress than students without disabilities, indicating generally better perceptions among SWDs. SWDs in Burkina Faso, Denmark, Kenya, and the UAE also had higher ratings for schoolwork. Finally, it should be noted that, although the total sample descriptive statistics show that SWDs had higher ratings of their feelings than students without disabilities (indicating that SWDs worried less than students without disabilities during the COVID-19 school disruption), Kenya was the only country in which SWDs rated their feelings higher than students without disabilities ( d  = 0.35).

Our t-test analyses revealed statistically significantly higher ratings of teacher support, learning progress, and feelings among SWDs in the total sample, indicating that they were more likely to have positive perceptions of teacher support and learning progress and less likely to experience feelings of worry during the COVID-19 school disruption. Additionally, SWDs reported statistically significantly lower ratings of learning experiences than students without disabilities in the total sample, indicating negative perceptions of SWDs’ learning experiences. It is necessary to highlight these significant differences (in teacher support, learning experiences, learning progress, and feelings) between SWDs and students without disabilities had small effect sizes ranging between 0.09 and 0.26.

Research question #3: analyzing the influence of disability status, teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, feelings, on learning progress during the COVID-19 school disruption for each country

A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to determine significant predictors of learning progress during COVID-19 for each country (due to lack of measurement invariance). Table  5 presents the hierarchical regression analysis results. In step 1, gender, parental education, and disability status explained between 1% and 4% of the variance in learning progress. In step 2, teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and feelings explained between 12% and 44% of the variance in learning progress, after controlling for gender, parental education, and disability status. In particular, teacher support and schoolwork (i.e., an indication of students’ perceptions of the schoolwork they completed) were the most influential variables on learning progress in all five countries. There were mixed results of disability status when controlling for all other variables. In Burkina Faso, SWDs reported slightly higher learning progress than students without disabilities, while SWDs in Ethiopia, Kenya, and the UAE reported slightly lower learning progress. Denmark was the only country in which disability status was not a significant predictor of learning progress.

The regression model for Burkina Faso explained 44% of the variance in learning progress. In this model, parental education, disability status, teacher support, and schoolwork were significant predictors of learning progress. In particular, learning progress increased 0.35 and 0.43 standard deviation units when teacher support and schoolwork, respectively, increased one standard deviation unit. Additionally, SWDs rated learning progress 0.11 standard deviation units higher than students without disabilities when all other variables are constant.

The regression model for Ethiopia explained 12% of the variance in learning progress. In this model, parental education, disability status, teacher support, and schoolwork were also significant predictors. However, learning progress increased 0.22 and 0.15 standard deviation units when teacher support and schoolwork, respectively, increased one standard deviation unit. Further, SWDs reported learning progress 0.17 standard deviation units lower than student without disabilities.

The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of secondary SWDs during the COVID-19 school disruption in several countries and to determine if their experiences varied from those of students without disabilities. This study is important because it directly explores SWDs’ perceptions, thus addressing Rohwerder et al.’s ( 2022 ) call for research that engages adolescents as participants. In order to answer our research questions, we conducted a secondary analysis of data from the REDS student questionnaire. Specifically, we examined SWDs’ perceptions of school support during the COVID-19 school disruption; the perceptions of students with and without disabilities regarding teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and learning progress, as well as their feelings during the disruption within each country; and the influence of disability status, teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, and feelings on learning progress, while controlling for gender and parental education, in each country.

Perceived school support for SWDs

Our findings revealed that SWDs reported needing more school support during the COVID-19 school disruption than before the disruption. Although it is unknown why more SWDs believed they needed school support, it is encouraging that many students believed that there was an increase in the school support they received. In fact, in all categories (e.g., how students communicate), students most frequently reported receiving increased school support during the COVID-19 school disruption. It is important to note, however, that this finding is inconsistent with previous findings indicating that SWDs do not receive sufficient support during distance learning (Shi et al., 2022 ).

Comparisons between students with and without disabilities

Students with and without disabilities had seemingly common ratings on items within the teacher support category (i.e., the average rating for each item was between 2.0 and 3.0—agree and disagree). However, our t-test analysis revealed significant differences in this category for each country. In particular, SWDs generally reported higher ratings than students without disabilities in the category of teacher support. For example, SWDs more frequently agreed that their teachers encouraged them to learn and adapted their schoolwork to meet their individual needs. The country-level analyses revealed these same patterns—SWDs reported better perceptions of teacher support than students without disabilities, indicating that SWDs perceived greater teacher support.

SWDs did not have significantly better perceptions of the schoolwork they completed than students without disabilities in total sample. However, the country-level analyses revealed SWDs had statistically significantly higher perceptions of schoolwork they completed than students without disabilities in four countries. In these countries, schoolwork differences favored SWDs, suggesting that SWDs had better perceptions of their completed schoolwork than students without disabilities. Further, the only country to have nonsignificant findings was Ethiopia. Ethiopia has the largest sample size, which might explain why the total sample had nonsignificant findings.

Students without disabilities had significantly higher ratings of learning experiences than SWDs. This difference means that students without disabilities rated their learning experiences more positively than SWDs. For example, students without disabilities were more likely than SWDs to disagree that they found it hard to understand the schoolwork their teachers gave them. Country-level statistics revealed statistically significant differences in Denmark only, again favoring students without disabilities.

Although students without disabilities reported better learning experiences, SWDs had better ratings of their learning progress. Specifically, SWDs had higher ratings related to learning as much as they did before the COVID-19 school disruption and making more progress than before the disruption. Additionally, this finding was replicated for each responding country. It is important to note, however, that when considering additional factors (Research Question #3), SWDs did not in fact have higher ratings of their learning progress.

SWDs had higher ratings on items pertaining to feelings than students without disabilities, indicating less worry among SWDs. For example, across the total sample, SWDs had higher ratings of feeling anxious about the changes in their schooling and worrying about catching COVID-19, again indicating less worry. However, this finding was not consistent across countries. In particular, our t-test analyses revealed only significant differences in feelings for Kenya, favoring SWDs.

Factors influencing learning progress

Our hierarchical regression revealed that several factors influenced students’ perceived learning progress during the COVID-19 school disruption. The general pattern of regression results indicates the following factors were influential: (a) parental education; (b) disability status; perceptions of (c) teacher support and (d) completed schoolwork; and (e) feelings. In particular, students of parents with any postsecondary education were more likely to report learning progress in all countries except Denmark. Students were also more likely to report learning progress with positive ratings of teacher support and completed schoolwork. Additionally, the feelings variable was a significant predictor in Denmark, Kenya, and the UAE. Further, when controlling for all other factors, SWDs were less likely to report positive learning progress than students without disabilities in Ethiopia, Kenya and the UAE. This finding is consistent with Nusser’s ( 2021 ) findings that parents of SWDs more frequently reported less learning during COVID-19 school disruptions than their typical (i.e., face-to-face) learning. Finally, Denmark was the only country in which disability status and parental education were not significant predictors of learning progress.

Practical and policy implications

The results of this study have important implications regarding the education of SWDs during the COVID-19 school disruption. For instance, our hierarchical regression revealed that parents’ postsecondary education was associated with higher ratings of learning progress, suggesting that differences in socioeconomic status (for which parental education is often used as a proxy) help explain differences in perceived learning progress during the COVID-19 school disruption. In particular, students of parents without any postsecondary education may be prone to poorer learning outcomes during remote learning. As such, school leaders and policymakers can consider providing students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds additional resources during remote learning.

Additionally, our finding that having a disability is associated with lower ratings of learning progress, when controlling for all other factors, suggests that SWDs experienced greater difficulty maintaining or increasing their learning progress during the COVID-19 school disruption. Therefore, practitioners and policymakers should consider putting policies and structures in place that provide SWDs with ongoing support during remote learning. For both students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and SWDs (and SWDs from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, in particular), these resources, policies, and structures should aim to (a) increase students’ teacher support, while promoting (b) positive perceptions of their schoolwork and (c) positive feelings, which were all associated with higher ratings of learning progress.

Further, our findings may have implications for remote learning beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. For instance, crises and disasters that force school buildings to close may necessitate emergency online learning (Rush et al., 2016 ). Given that natural disasters, in particular, may be increasingly common due to climate change (Van Aalst, 2006 ), the need for effective remote learning is critical. Fortunately, researchers posit that fully functioning emergency online learning is possible but requires “thoughtful planning and development” (Rush et al., 2016 , p. 188). Thus, we argue that the findings of our study can help ensure that the experiences and outcomes of SWDs during emergency online learning are considered during the planning and development of such learning.

Limitations

The current study has limitations that are important to consider when interpreting the results. As a secondary analysis, our study is limited by the same limitations of the original study. For instance, like with any survey, the data from the REDS student questionnaire is based on self-report, which is susceptible to bias. Additionally, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution as the results cannot be generalized to the population due to limited availability of sampling weights. The results for our first research question should also be interpreted with caution because a sensitivity analysis could not be conducted with the IEA IDB Analyzer. Further, meaningful differences regarding SWDs exist among the countries included in our analysis. For example, countries define student with a disability differently and had varying proportions of SWDs in their samples (range: 3.4–49.5%); therefore, we recommend making cross-country comparisons with caution and consideration of these differences. Finally, because the data collection period varied across countries (range: December 2020–July 2021), students could have been in different stages of the COVID-19 school disruption when they completed the survey. Nevertheless, our study provides an international snapshot of education during COVID-19 school disruptions.

Areas of future research

Future research should address the limitations of the current study. Additionally, it may be worth investigating the relationship between parents’ perspectives of student experiences during COVID-19 school disruptions and the perspectives of the students themselves (i.e., their children). Such a study would reveal whether students who report positive experiences have parents who also report positive experiences (and vice versa). If student and parent perspectives do not correlate, then it is possible that parents of SWDs have stricter criteria for what counts as learning than students do.

Because many students with and without disabilities have likely returned to in-person learning, future research could also compare students’ experiences (e.g., support, schoolwork, learning progress) during the COVID-19 school disruption to after the disruption. A follow-up study such as this could reveal if SWDs generally perceive that their school support for having a disability increased, stayed the same, or decreased upon returning to in-person schooling. This study could also reveal if patterns such as SWDs reporting better experiences than students without disabilities are sustained.

While we tested measurement invariance among the countries for teacher support, schoolwork, learning experiences, learning progress, and feelings, the partial measurement invariance was not included in our analysis. Partial measurement invariance may provide interesting insights into specific differences between countries. Thus, future research should examine the partial measurement invariance in the REDS dataset. Finally, it is important to acknowledge the nested structure of the data (e.g., students nested within schools). While beyond the scope of the present study, future research should analyze SWDs’ education during the COVID-19 school disruption while including school-level variables using hierarchical linear modeling.

Our study revealed the increased need for school support among SWDs during the COVID-19 school disruption. Additionally, our study revealed that SWDs generally had better perceptions of schooling than students without disabilities during the disruption. However, having a disability generally predicted lower ratings of learning progress. Given that SWDs reported needing more support during the disruption and may also experience less learning progress, education leaders and policymakers should explore how to provide SWDs the support they need to maximize their learning, as remote instruction remains an option for SWDs beyond the COVID-19 school disruption.

Data Availability

All data and materials are available via the UNESCO Responses to Educational Disruption Survey database at https://www.iea.nl/index.php/data-tools/repository .

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research , 21 , 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., Karpinski, Z., & Mazza, J. (2020). The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets

European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. (n.d.). Country information for Denmark - Legislation and policy https://www.european-agency.org/country-information/denmark/legislation-and-policy .

Gilmour, A. F., Fuchs, D., & Wehby, J. H. (2019). Are students with disabilities accessing the curriculum? A meta-analysis of the reading achievement gap between students with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children , 85 (3), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918795830 .

Human Rights Watch (2021). Years don’t wait for them: Increased inequality in children’s right to education due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Human Rights Watch . https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/media_2021/05/global_covideducation0521_web.pdf .

IBM Corp. (2021). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28.0 . IBM Corp.

IEA (2022). Help Manual for the IEA IDB Analyzer (Version 5.0). www.iea.nl .

Jesus, T. S., Bhattacharjya, S., Papadimitriou, C., Bogdanova, Y., Bentley, J., Arango-Lasprilla, J. C., Kamalakannan, S., & The Refugee Empowerment Task Force, International Networking Group of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. (2021). Lockdown-related disparities experienced by people with disabilities during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: Scoping review with thematic analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18 (12), https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18126178 .

Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.).). The Guilford Press.

Lubke, G. H., & Muthén, B. O. (2005). Investigating population heterogeneity with factor mixture models. Psychological Methods , 10 , 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.10.1.21 .

Male, C., & Wodon, Q. (2017). Disability gaps in educational attainment and literacy, the price of exclusion: Disability and education notes series . The World Bank.

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education , 159:104009 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009 .

Meinck, S., Fraillon, J., & Strietholt, R. (2022). The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on education . The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika , 58 , 525–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294825 .

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).). McGraw-Hill.

Nusser, L. (2021). Learning at home during COVID-19 school closures – how do german students with and without special educational needs manage? European Journal of Special Needs Education , 36 (1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2021.1872845 .

Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review , 41 , 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004 .

Rohwerder, B., Wong, S., Pokharel, S., Khadka, D., Poudyal, N., Prasai, S., Shrestha, N., Wickenden, M., & Morrison, J. (2022). Describing adolescents with disabilities’ experiences of COVID-19 and other humanitarian emergencies in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review. Global Health Action , 15 (1), https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2022.2107350 .

Rush, S. C., Partridge, A., & Wheeler, J. (2016). Implementing emergency online schools on the fly as a means of responding to school closures after disaster strikes. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 45 (2), 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516649740 .

Shi, Y., Pyne, K., Kulophas, D., & Bangpan, M. (2022). Exploring equity in educational policies and interventions in primary and secondary education in the context of public health emergencies: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Research , 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101911 .

UN General Assembly. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities . Author.

UNESCO (2018). Education and disability: Analysis of data from 49 countries Author. http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/ip49-education-disability-2018-en.pdf .

COVID-19 educational disruption and response . UNESCO, & Author (2020). https://en.unesco.org/news/covid-19-educational-disruption-and-response .

UNICEF (2021). Nearly 240 million children with disabilities around the world, UNICEF’s most comprehensive statistical analysis finds . Author . https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/nearly-240-million-children-disabilities-around-world-unicefs-most-comprehensive .

Van Aalst, M. K. (2006). The impacts of climate change on the risk of natural disasters. Disasters , 30 (1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00303.x .

Viner, R., Russell, S., & Saulle, R. (2022). School closures during social lockdown and mental health, health behaviors, and well-being among children and adolescents during the first COVID-19 wave: A systematic review. JAMA Pediatrics , 176 (4), 400–409. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.5840 .

World Health Organization (2020). WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19–11 March 2020 . Author. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 .

World Health Organization (2021). Disability and health . Author. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Author information, authors and affiliations.

Johns Hopkins University School of Education, 2800 N. Charles Street, Baltimore, MD, 21218, USA

Alexandra Shelton

The Ohio State University, College of Education and Human Ecology, 1945 North High Street, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The first author wrote the manuscript, while the second author conducted the statistical analyses for the study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandra Shelton .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests, additional information, publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Demographic description for students with and without disabilities by country

The measures and their items.

Measurement Invariance Results .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shelton, A., Gezer, T. Investigating the educational experiences of students with disabilities during the COVID-19 school disruption: an international perspective. Large-scale Assess Educ 11 , 34 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00183-7

Download citation

Received : 12 September 2022

Accepted : 11 September 2023

Published : 19 September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00183-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• School closure
• COVID-19 pandemic
• Special education

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 17 April 2024

Students with special educational needs in regular classrooms and their peer effects on learning achievement

• V. B. Salas García   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7568-3879 1 &
• José María Rentería   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6486-0032 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  521 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

753 Accesses

9 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Development studies

This study explores the impact of inclusive education on the educational outcomes of students without Special Educational Needs (non-SEN) in Peru, utilizing official Ministry of Education data and implementing cross-sectional regression analyses. Inclusive education is a complex issue that, without appropriate adaptations and comprehensive understanding, can present substantial challenges to the educational community. While prior research from developed nations offers diverse perspectives on the effects of inclusive education on non-SEN students, limited evidence exists regarding its impact in developing countries. Our study addresses this gap by examining inclusive education in Peru and its influence on non-SEN students, thereby contributing to the existing literature. Our findings reveal that, on average, the presence of SEN students in regular classrooms does not significantly affect their non-SEN counterparts. However, we uncover heterogeneous results contingent on the specific type of SEN and students’ academic placement. These results emphasize the importance of targeted resources and parental involvement in facilitating successful inclusive education, particularly for specific SEN types. In summary, this study underscores the need for tailored strategies and additional resources to foster the success of inclusive education and calls for further research in this field to expand our understanding and enhance educational policy.

Similar content being viewed by others

The concept of inclusive education from the point of view of academics specialising in special education at Saudi universities

Dreams and realities of school tracking and vocational education

Persistent association between family socioeconomic status and primary school performance in Britain over 95 years

Introduction.

Inclusive education has become a significant policy for improving access to and the quality of education for children with special educational needs (SEN), who often encounter physical and social barriers hindering their access to education and entry into the labor market, which in turn is detrimental to the economic and social progress of a country (Filmer, 2008 ; Mitra and Sambamoorthi, 2008 ). Thus, the United Nations has declared “inclusive and equitable quality education” as the fourth 2030 Sustainable Development Goal, which aims to reduce the disability gap in education. Likewise, there exist international declarations like the Salamanca Statement in 1994 (UNESCO, 1994 ) or the Declaration of the Decade of the Americas for the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities 2016–2026 (OAS, 2018 ) that incorporate the principle of inclusive education to guarantee education for all.

There are different education approaches Footnote 1 to ensure education for children with SEN, but the inclusive approach, unlike others, promotes equal participation of SEN students in regular schools by attending classes alongside same-aged non-SEN students (Dixon, 2005 ). Inclusive education goes beyond the placement of pupils; it refers to a unified system that receives all students regardless of their abilities or disabilities (Dixon, 2005 ). Under the inclusive approach, governments and schools should provide the means (i.e., physical and human resources) to reduce or eliminate physical, academic, and social hurdles faced by SEN students within regular schools (Dixon, 2005 ). Thus, inclusive education aims for social cohesion and a less discriminatory education approach that helps enhance the human capital acquisition of children with SEN (Kiuppis, 2014 ).

Despite the efforts for an inclusive education agenda worldwide, children with SEN remain behind in education indicators such as years of education, school attendance, or academic achievement (Filmer, 2008 ; Rangvid, 2022 ). This raises concerns about the impact that placement of children with SEN in regular schools may have on the educational achievement of children without SEN since these children are also involved in the inclusive education system (Rangvid, 2019 ; Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ). In Peru, for instance, some teachers in regular schools as well as some leaders of deaf organizations, do not support inclusive education as they think it is detrimental for both SEN and non-SEN students (Goico, 2019 ; Peruvian Ombudsman, 2019 ). Nevertheless, there is little empirical literature focused on the effects of inclusive education not only on SEN students but also on non-SEN students, especially in developing countries that shelter a high percentage of people with disabilities (Olusanya et al., 2022 ). This paper, therefore, aims to fill that gap by using information from a developing country, namely Peru. It investigates the impact of inclusive education, quantified through the presence of students with SEN in regular classrooms, on the academic performance of their non-SEN counterparts. Analyzing the peer effects of inclusive education is of utmost interest for policymakers aiming to increase the presence of SEN students in regular schools, as policy implications should consider the effects on all children.

The present work provides three main contributions to the existing literature regarding peer effects in the context of inclusive education. First, we provide new evidence using unusual and rich data from a middle-income country. To our knowledge, there is only one study focusing on a developing country. Indeed, Contreras et al. ( 2020 ) analyze the Chilean case and find that placement of children with SEN in regular classrooms negatively affects the standardized test scores in mathematics and reading of their non-SEN peers, but it is neutralized when schools receive additional resources and specialized professionals. Nevertheless, Contreras et al. ( 2020 ) use panel data for students attending primary schools in two periods, 2007 and 2011, without including types of SEN. In contrast, we study children attending primary and secondary schools using cross-section data between 2011 and 2019 and disaggregate our analysis by types of SEN Footnote 2 .

Our second contribution is to disaggregate our analysis by type of SEN. We are aware of two studies that use an overall indicator to reflect the presence of SEN students and disaggregate it by type of SEN. On one hand, Hanushek et al. ( 2002 ) examine two types of special educational needs: learning or emotional and speech; while, Ruijs ( 2017 ) examines four types: visual, hearing, physical or intellectual, and behavioral. In our case, besides evaluating the consequences of placing children with mobility, vision, hearing, and intellectual or learning disabilities in a regular classroom, we also evaluate the repercussions of placing children with autistic spectrum disorder in a regular classroom, which is a much less studied topic.

Finally, our third contribution is to explore the heterogeneous results of inclusive education on the non-SEN student population. Unlike previous studies, we explore the potential different impact of inclusive education between male and female non-SEN students. As most reproductive work has traditionally been done by women (cf. Razavi, 2012 ), it could be argued that female non-SEN students are more likely to take care of or help SEN students, which in turn may influence their educational achievement. Our heterogeneity analysis also takes into account school characteristics like classroom size as well as mother’s characteristics.

In our analysis, we take significant steps to mitigate potential biases stemming from endogenous classroom selection and the sorting of SEN students. We achieve this by focusing on schools with one class per grade level, which provides a more controlled setting for our study. Moreover, our dataset allows us to identify the class composition, which is vital for investigating educational peer effects. The classroom environment is particularly relevant, as classmates have a substantial impact on each other’s educational outcomes, given their shared classroom experience throughout the school day (Balestra et al., 2022 ; Burke and Sass, 2013 ; Lazear, 2001 ).

Our findings suggest that the inclusion of students with SEN in regular classrooms, on average, exerts a neutral influence on their non-SEN peers. A nuanced examination reveals varied results contingent upon the specific categories of SEN. This variability is consistent with the fact that SEN encompasses a broad spectrum of support requirements arising from diverse degrees and types of individual abilities, spanning physical, psychological, cognitive, and sensory domains. Hence, the influence of inclusive education would vary according to the distinct profile of the SEN student integrated into a conventional classroom setting. Furthermore, our results underscore the importance of accounting for temporal dynamics and the particular educational phase in gauging the impact of SEN students on their non-SEN counterparts. This observation aligns with the differential results discerned across academic grades.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The literature review and institutional setting are presented in the next section, followed by a description of the data and empirical strategy. After that, we discuss our results, and finally, we conclude.

This section starts with a brief literature review and then describes the main features of the Peruvian educational system as well as its public policy approach to inclusive education.

Literature review

The inclusion of students with SEN in regular schools remains a subject of debate due to the mixed findings within the empirical literature. Proponents of inclusive education argue that attending regular schools is not only a fundamental human right for children with SEN (Ainscow and César, 2006 ; Rangvid, 2022 ; Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ) but can also yield benefits for non-SEN students, particularly in terms of their learning development. This is attributed to the additional resources allocated to inclusive education (Keslair et al., 2012 ; Ruijs, 2017 ). Besides, inclusive education may help children without SEN to develop soft skills like kindness, tolerance, and patience, which are important to living in a diverse society (Contreras et al., 2020 ; Dixon, 2005 ). On the other hand, the main concerns regarding inclusive education are related to negative peer effects. The literature on class composition states that students’ performance is influenced by their peers’ characteristics (Ammermueller and Pischke, 2009 ; Burke and Sass, 2013 ; Lavy et al., 2012 ). Since children with SEN may require more teaching attention and show disruptive behaviors (Ahmed et al., 2021 ; Contreras et al., 2020 ; Rangvid, 2019 ; Ruijs, 2017 ), they could be considered “bad” students who could interfere with the educational development of their classmates without SEN (Lavy et al., 2012 ; Lazear, 2001 ), especially for those who are at the bottom of the ability distribution (Balestra et al., 2022 ; Lavy et al., 2012 ).

The quantitative studies that examine the peer effects of inclusive education mainly use data from developed countries. Most of them have found that inclusive education has a negative or null effect on non-SEN students’ outcomes. For instance, using data from Switzerland, Balestra et al. ( 2022 ) find that placing SEN students in regular classrooms harms not only educational outcomes but also labor market outcomes for non-SEN students. Similarly, studies from the United States (Fletcher, 2010 ) and Denmark (Kristoffersen et al., 2015 ; Rangvid, 2019 ) show that exposure to SEN students decreases reading test scores of non-SEN students. Also, for the United States, Gottfried ( 2014 ) and Gottfried et al. ( 2016 ) present evidence that inclusive education worsens the non-cognitive skills of non-SEN students. Fletcher ( 2010 ), however, points out that the negative effect of inclusive education in the United States disappears for reading when their lagged scores are considered in the analysis. Likewise, studies for Canada (Friesen et al., 2010 ), England (Keslair et al., 2012 ), and the Netherlands (Ruijs, 2017 ) also find that the presence of SEN students does not affect the academic performance of their non-SEN peers; but they point out that this result may be due to additional resources received by regular schools with SEN students. Conversely, other studies have found positive externalities of SEN students on the educational achievement of their non-SEN peers. For instance, Cole et al. ( 2004 ) point out that non-SEN students in the United States perform better at reading and mathematics tests since they may benefit from the additional resources allocated to inclusive education. Likewise, Hanushek et al. ( 2002 ) find that non-SEN students attending inclusive classrooms in the United States improve their mathematics test scores. Using data from the same country, Gottfried and McGene ( 2013 ) go beyond by showing that having a sibling with SEN helps to improve the schooling achievement of those siblings without SEN.

Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews have examined the effects of inclusive education on students with and without SEN. The coincidences lie in the varied impacts of inclusive education on non-SEN students, demonstrating a nuanced and context-dependent picture. While Dell’Anna et al. ( 2021 ) hint at positive peer attitudes in inclusive settings, the academic outcomes and the experience of non-SEN students diverge, with high achievers potentially benefiting more than low achievers (Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ). Kart and Kart ( 2021 ) and Szumski et al. ( 2017 ) contribute to the discussion, highlighting mixed academic effects across different grade levels. The meta-analyses by Oh-Young and Filler ( 2015 ) and Krämer et al. ( 2021 ) emphasize the overall positive impact of inclusive settings for students with SEN while still acknowledging variations in outcomes. Finally, Van Mieghem et al. ( 2020 ) emphasize the pivotal role of teacher professional development in the successful implementation of inclusive education.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that the conflicting results found in the literature may be explained by the differences in the criteria used to identify a SEN student. Most of the previous studies have used an aggregated measure to encompass all SEN students without considering the types of SEN (e.g., Contreras et al., 2020 ; Rangvid, 2019 ). On the other hand, some studies have focused on one or two types of special needs; such as emotional disturbances and mental disabilities (e.g., Cole et al., 2004 ; Fletcher, 2010 ; Hanushek et al., 2002 ; Kristoffersen et al., 2015 ), or learning and behavioral disabilities (e.g., Cole et al., 2004 ; Friesen et al., 2010 ; Hanushek et al., 2002 ). The present paper addresses these limitations found in the literature by taking into account different types of SEN and also by exploring the potential heterogeneous results of inclusive education for non-SEN students.

Institutional setting: The educational system in Peru

Primary and secondary education in Peru is compulsory and provided by the government at no cost and by the private sector with a wide tuition range. Peruvian children between 6- and 11- years old attend primary school and start secondary school by the age of 12 for a period of 5 years. The last National Population Census in 2017 reports that roughly 5.4% and 7.0% of Peruvians who are primary-school and secondary-school-aged, respectively, have at least one disability. However, according to the School Census of the same year, <1% of children attending regular schools are categorized as SEN students, which suggests that inclusive education in Peru is not well developed. Despite this low enrollment rate, the percentage of SEN students grew from 0.26% in 2007 to 0.96% in 2019.

Since primary and secondary schools in Peru must comply with a mandatory national curriculum, the same courses are taken by children who attend the same grade level across different schools. Schools may have more than one class per grade level, which are called sections , which students are assigned when they start primary school, which makes it less likely that students are sorted in a non-random fashion. Besides, every section has a specific classroom where students are instructed in most of their courses; thus, students do not need to move among different classrooms throughout the school day. At the primary school, the teacher assigned to a section is usually responsible for the majority of the courses; whereas, at the secondary school, it is often the case that there is a different teacher for each course. Another characteristic of the Peruvian education system is that it allows parents to send their children to any school, public or private, even if that school is outside their district of residence.

According to the last National Population Census in 2017, Peru has achieved almost universal coverage of education, 94.9% of the population aged 12 or over have primary education, and 74.5% aged 17 or over have secondary education. These numbers, however, mask a disability gap. Among adults aged 17 or over, 14.1% of people with at least one disability report having no education, whereas only 3.9% of people with no disabilities report the same. There is also an educational disability gap of 11.9 percentage points (p.p.) among the female population, but it decreases to 7.1 p.p. among the male population. These figures suggest that having a disability poses a larger burden for females than for males.

In this context, the Peruvian National Education Law recognized in 2003 inclusive education as the main approach to providing education to students with SEN, which should be accompanied by supplementary one-to-one attention by specialists (Congreso de la República, 2003 ). Thus, the Peruvian legal framework advocates an inclusive approach to integrating children and youth with disabilities into society. Aligned with the national inclusive policy, the state, as per the 2012 General Law of Persons with Disabilities (Law 29973), ensures access to quality inclusive education that accommodates individual needs. This entails adjustments in infrastructure, furniture, materials, curriculum, and teaching processes, all aimed at facilitating quality learning and fostering the comprehensive development of each student. It is worth noting, however, that empirical evidence indicates that many regular schools lack the necessary infrastructure, materials, and human resources to accommodate students with disabilities (Cueto et al., 2018 ; Peruvian Ombudsman, 2011 ).

The basic education system comprises three modalities: regular basic education (EBR), alternative basic education (EBA), and special basic education (EBE). EBR represents conventional formal education. EBA caters to students who lack access to EBR, emphasizing vocational and entrepreneurial skills. EBE is designated for students with SEN related to disability, talent, or giftedness. EBA and EBR schools, when admitting students with SEN, are termed inclusive schools . EBE operates in both inclusive schools and standalone EBE schools. In inclusive schools that accept students with mild disabilities and giftedness, EBE provides support and guidance through programs like Support and Advisory Services for Special Educational Needs (SAANEE). This includes personalized services and support to students, parents, teachers, and school principals through weekly visits of specialized professionals (Congreso de la República, 2006 ). Nevertheless, the evidence shows that inclusive education in Peru is far from successfully being implemented, and it is combined with an “integration approach” (Peruvian Ombudsman, 2011 ). On the other hand, dedicated EBE schools directly serve severe and multi-disabled students with needs beyond the scope of EBR or EBA schools. EBR and EBA schools are mandated to reserve at least two slots per classroom during the enrollment period for the inclusion of students with mild or moderate disabilities. However, in practice, this requirement is not systematically fulfilled (Cueto et al., 2018 ).

Data and methodology

In this study, we use three datasets that are collected by the Peruvian Ministry of Education (MINEDU). First, we utilized the Student Census Evaluation (ECE) as our primary data source, which encompasses the scores achieved by students in the national standardized tests of reading and mathematics Footnote 3 . To create our dependent variable, “learning achievement”, we transformed these scores into z -scores, standardizing them by grade level and by subject to have a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one for use in our econometric analysis. Furthermore, the ECE dataset includes additional demographic information such as gender and the primary language spoken by the students. The ECE started in 2007, with annual assessments of students in the 2nd grade of primary (2P). Subsequently, it was expanded in 2015 to encompass students in the 2nd grade of secondary (2S). In 2017, however, the ECE was not conducted. Our second dataset is the National School Census (CE) which contains information regarding school characteristics and grade composition. The CE has been yearly collected since 2004, and it covers public and private schools. We use it to measure inclusive education by identifying the presence of SEN students at the section level. These two datasets are merged at the school level through a school identifier; thus, each student is linked to section characteristics in the school he or she is attending. The last dataset is the Information System to Support the Management of the Education Institution (SG), which was implemented in 2003 but has been mandatory only since 2011. The SG contains information that is uploaded every year by teachers or school principals. This includes students’ age, mothers’ age and education, and number of siblings. The SG is merged with the other datasets by using a student identifier.

For our analysis, we focus on students attending 2P in the period dating from 2011 to 2016 (excluding 2014) Footnote 4 and students attending 2S from 2015 to 2019 (excluding 2017). Footnote 5 For both grades, 2P and 2S, we account for potential grade advancement and delay. Footnote 6 Therefore, in the case of 2P where students are usually 7 years old, we include children aged between 6 and 8 years, and for 2S where students are usually 13 years old, we include children aged between 12 and 14 years. The final number of observations for 2P comprises 55,637 students who took the reading test and 55,614 students who took the mathematics test. And, for 2S, we have 47,491 students who took the reading test and 47,484 students who took the mathematics test.

To evaluate the influence of inclusive education on non-SEN students’ learning achievement, we use the CE where the school principal reports the number of SEN students placed in each grade level every year and per type of SEN. Footnote 7 This report is based on medical certificates, psycho-pedagogical certificates, and parents’ affidavits. Thus, we can identify the presence of SEN students per section to measure inclusive education. Footnote 8 Besides, we disaggregate the presence of SEN students per type. Specifically, we distinguish, for each section, the presence of students with mobility, vision, hearing, and intellectual or learning disabilities, as well as those with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). In the case of intellectual or learning disabilities, the CE includes those students with Down syndrome, brain injury, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. The other SEN types considered in the CE include students with speech impairment, deaf-blindness, and hospitalized. Although gifted students are identified as SEN students in the CE, we exclude them in our measure of SEN.

There are three main challenges to estimating peer effects, as stated by Manski ( 1993 ), that could hinder proper identification of the influence of SEN students on the learning achievement of their non-SEN peers. First, students in the same cohort could face similar environmental factors or have similar unobserved characteristics that may influence their academic outcomes rather than having classmates with SEN. To disentangle the environment from peer effects, we follow the literature by using a large number of observations and fixed effects (Balestra et al., 2022 ; Burke and Sass, 2013 ).

Second, there is a potential reflection problem as classmates may influence each other and determine their outcomes simultaneously. Since we focus on SEN characteristics related to physical disabilities, health issues, and injuries determined by specialists, it is less likely that the SEN status of students was determined by the learning achievement of their non-SEN peers.

The third problem is related to self-selection. In the Peruvian school system, parents may choose to send their children to any school regardless of their district of residence; thus, specific school characteristics may attract certain types of students. To address this problem, we restrict the analysis to schools with similar characteristics. We select schools located in urban areas providing mixed-sex education that operate on the main school campus only during the morning shift and with 10–30 students per section. In the case of primary education, we select full-grade schools. Footnote 9 Besides, to address a potential sorting problem that could make it difficult to identify whether the learning outcome is due to the presence of SEN students or one’s ability, we select schools with one section per grade level. In this way, we avoid the possibility for school administrators to group students into sections based on their characteristics or for parents to choose a section without SEN students. Finally, more than 90% of non-SEN students take the standardized national tests, which suggests that school principals do not select high-performance students to take these tests.

To test the validity of our identification strategy, we perform two balancing checks for 2P and 2S, presented in Tables 1 and 2 , respectively. To perform these balancing checks, we use only students who took both reading and mathematics standardized tests, rather than separating them by subject as we do for the econometric analyses. Panels A, B, and C show that the presence of at least one SEN student does not determine the gender, language, or age of non-SEN students, respectively. We observe that coefficients are statistically not significant, and their size is smaller in comparison to those from the main analysis, except for reading test scores in 2S. In addition, panel D shows that individual characteristics do not determine the presence of at least one SEN student in the classroom. These results provide evidence against the likelihood of selection into classrooms.

To examine the impact of inclusive education on standardized test performance of non-SEN students, we estimate the following linear model:

Equation ( 1 ) is estimated separately for each grade level (2P or 2S) and subject (reading or mathematics) using a linear regression. \({{{\rm {EDC}}}}_{{i{\rm {s}}t}}\) is the learning achievement of student \(i\) in section \({s}\) at year \(t\) , measured by the z -score of the standardized test. \({{{\rm {SEN}}}}_{{{\rm {s}}}t}\) is a dichotomous variable capturing the presence of at least one SEN student in section \({s}\) at year \(t\) ; thus, \({\alpha }_{1}\) is our parameter of interest. In other specifications below, \({{{\rm {SEN}}}}_{{{s}t}}\) will be differentiated by type of SEN. \({{{\rm {STD}}}}_{{i{s}t}}\) is a vector of student-level control variables that include age in years and indicators for gender (1 = women) and spoken language (1 = indigenous). The vector \({{{\rm {SEC}}}}_{{st}}\) controls for section-level variables without student \(i\) . It includes mean age, proportion of male students, proportion of indigenous speakers, and number of students. The vector \({{{\rm {SCH}}}}_{t}\) includes number of students at the school level. \({{{\rm {HH}}}}_{{it}}\) includes the following household characteristics: mother’s age, mother’s education, and the number of siblings. We also include school-fixed effects \(\left({\gamma }_{{s}}\right)\) Footnote 10 and year-fixed effects \(\left({\gamma }_{t}\right)\) . Finally, \({\varepsilon }_{{i{s}t}}\) is an unobserved error term, and we cluster standard errors at the section level as this is the common environment shared by students (Balestra et al., 2022 ).

To assess potential heterogeneous influences, we follow recent literature Footnote 11 and estimate Eq. ( 1 ) using split samples by the characteristic of interest (Feigenberg et al., 2023 ). In particular, we evaluate the gender of the student \(i\) . For section characteristics, we evaluate the number of students. Finally, we assess the varying estimates based on the mother’s age and the mother’s education. In the case of characteristics that are represented by continuous or categorical variables, we convert them into dichotomous variables. For the number of students, we split the sample between sections that have 20 or fewer students and sections with 21 or more students. In the case of the mother’s age, we use the mean age to split the sample above and below the mean. The mean age is 41.5 for those mothers with children who attend 2P and 44.8 for those with children who attend 2S. Finally, for mothers’ education, we split the sample between those with and without tertiary education.

The descriptive statistics for our final cross-section subpopulations are presented in Table 3 . All descriptive and econometric analyses were conducted using Stata 18. In this case, we combine observations that include students who took both reading and mathematics standardized tests, as the characteristics of the separated subpopulations are similar to each other. According to Table 3 , students with SEN generally have lower reading and mathematics scores compared to their peers without SEN across both primary and secondary grades. This trend is more pronounced in 2S compared to 2P. We also observe in Table 3 that the proportions of women and indigenous language speakers are relatively consistent across SEN and non-SEN cohorts. Approximately 48% of the students are female, and the average age is 6.9 in 2P and 12.9 in 2S. However, it is interesting to note that the mean proportion of indigenous language speakers is higher in 2S (~22%) compared to 2P (~12%), indicating a potential demographic shift as students progress through the education system. A similar trend for indigenous language speakers is observed at the section level. Moreover, figures in Table 3 show that the mean age in a section is ~7.2 in 2P and 13.3 in 2S, the sample is balanced between male and female students at the section level, and there are around 20 students per section. Regarding household characteristics, the average age of mothers is 41.5 for those with children in 2P and 44.8 for those with children in 2S, around 6 out of 10 students have mothers with primary or secondary education, and the majority of students have more than two siblings. Finally, students enrolled in primary education typically attend larger schools, characterized by a pupil population exceeding 120, in contrast to those in secondary education, where schools typically accommodate fewer than 100 students.

Empirical results

Regression results from Eq. ( 1 ) are shown in Table 4 . Footnote 12 For column (1), we use ECE and CE datasets, which do not include students’ age or household characteristics. For columns (2) through (6), we add the SG dataset to incorporate students’ age and household characteristics. Columns (1) through (4) include the proportion of repeaters and the presence of at least one specialized teacher when students were 3 years old, and they were not attending school; thus, the presence of an SEN student should not influence the proportion of repeaters or presence of a specialized teacher. Columns (5) and (6) do not include those variables, and the results remain similar to those obtained in the previous columns. In addition, as a robustness check, we try different subpopulations based on students’ age (columns (2) through (4)) and schools with variation in SEN students (column (6)). For all the specifications, our results consistently show that the presence of at least one SEN student as a measure of inclusive education does not have a significant influence on the learning achievement of students who attend 2P or 2S. Our findings align with similar results from other countries such as Canada (Friesen et al., 2010 ), England (Keslair et al., 2012 ), and the Netherlands (Ruijs, 2017 ), indicating that inclusive education does not have a significant impact on the academic achievement of non-SEN students.

Nevertheless, we notice in Table 4 that, after including students’ age and household characteristics, the negative relationship between inclusive education and learning achievement (column 1) turned into a positive relationship (columns 2 through 6). Even in the case of students who attend 2S, the magnitude of the positive relationship between inclusive education and mathematics scores increased when student’s age and household characteristics were included in the regression. This suggests that the attributes of a student’s household, along with individual traits correlated with them, such as motivation, self-discipline, and parental support, may exert a positive influence on their learning environment. This influence could potentially counterbalance any adverse effects of inclusive education. An alternative explanation lies in the interaction effects between inclusive education and these supplementary factors. For instance, older students or those from more privileged households could potentially derive greater benefits from inclusive education due to their increased adaptability to the classroom environment. We further explore these issues in the Heterogeneity analysis section.

The main results, however, may mask different outcomes by type of SEN. Table 5 shows the results from Eq. ( 1 ) using the presence of at least one student with a certain type of SEN as a measure of inclusive education. Results Footnote 13 in Table 5 are estimated by gradually adding control variables in each column. Columns (1) and (6) do not include any control variable. Columns (2) and (7) add student controls. Cohort controls are added in columns (3) and (8), and school controls are added in columns (5) and (9). Finally, family controls are added in columns (5) and (10). As we can see in Table 5 , adding variables does not substantially change the estimates. We also notice that the sign of the relationship between inclusive education and learning achievement varies by type of SEN, and only vision disability (panel A) and mobility disability (panel B) have a significant positive relationship with the standardized test scores of students who attend 2P and 2S, respectively. As we can observe in Table 5 , even when we use the Romano-Wolf multiple hypothesis correction, the significance of our findings remains similar across different specifications (cf. Clarke, 2021 , Clarke et al., 2020 ). These findings confirm our main results that inclusive education would not harm the learning performance of non-SEN students, regardless of the type of SEN presented by their peers.

Results in Table 5 show that the impact of attending an inclusive classroom with at least one SEN student with a vision disability increases the reading and mathematics scores of students who attend 2P by 0.135 (adjusted p -value < 0.05) (column 5) and by 0.154 (adjusted p -value < 0.05) (column 10) of a standard deviation, respectively. In the case of students who attend 2S, the impact of the presence of at least one student with mobility disability increases the performance on reading and mathematics tests by 0.099 (adjusted p -value < 0.01) (column 5) and by 0.100 (adjusted p -value < 0.05) (column 10) of a standard deviation, respectively. Similar to our results, Ruijs ( 2017 ) found that the presence of students with vision disabilities as well as physical and intellectual disabilities in the third level of pre-vocational secondary education in the Netherlands increases standardized test scores of non-SEN students. Moreover, previous studies pointed out that non-SEN students show more positive attitudes toward their peers with physical disabilities (de Boer et al., 2012 ), which may explain the positive influence of SEN students with vision and mobility disabilities that we have found on the learning achievement on non-SEN students.

Heterogeneity analysis

We further undertake several analyses to understand the differences in the impact of inclusive education. Footnote 14 Clogg’s z -test is implemented for testing the statistical significance of the difference between the coefficients estimated separately by splitting Eq. ( 1 ) (Clogg et al., 1995 ).

Estimates of inclusive education by gender of non-SEN students are presented in Table 6 . The results show that the influence of inclusive education on learning achievement is not statistically significant for men or women, and there is no statistical difference between them.

To explore the influence of inclusive education by usage of adequate resources, we analyze the influence of the total number of students at the section level. We find that inclusive education is associated with higher scores in reading and mathematics for non-SEN students who attend classrooms with 10–20 students and with lower scores for those who attend classrooms with 21–30 students, regardless the student attends 2P or 2S. This result may reflect that small groups foster a closer interaction between students and teacher which in turn may allow the teacher to develop better teaching strategies since they know each student better. The result of inclusive education by section size, however, is statistically different only for the reading score obtained by non-SEN students who attend 2S. This result underscores the complexity of inclusive education’s effects and the importance of context-specific considerations. Authorities should pay special attention to the number of students assigned to an inclusive classroom.

To analyze the household’s characteristics, we use the mother’s age and education. In the case of reading and mathematics in 2P, it seems that older mothers help to improve the scores of non-SEN students who attend an inclusive classroom; but there is not a clear pattern in the case of 2S. The differences in the test scores by mother’s age, however, are not statistically significant in any case, 2P or 2S. We have to take this result with caution as it is possible that other family characteristics rather than the mother’s age act as a moderator that could influence the effect of inclusive education on children’s outcomes in school (Leigh and Gong, 2010 ; López Turley, 2003 ).

We also present in Table 6 the estimates of inclusive education on test scores of non-SEN students by mother’s education. We observe that the difference in inclusive education’s influence on test scores in reading and mathematics is not statistically different regardless mother’s education. Although the difference is small and not significant, we observe that among non-SEN students in 2P and 2S with well-educated mothers (i.e., tertiary education), inclusive education is associated with lower scores in reading and mathematics. This finding may suggest that well-educated mothers may dedicate fewer hours to helping their children as they are more likely to work outside the home in comparison to less-educated mothers.

The current study focused on the learning achievement of non-SEN students in Peru who attend an inclusive classroom. We use three rich administrative datasets that allow us to measure inclusive education by the presence of at least one SEN student in the classroom, which is the appropriate setting as students spend their school day mostly within the classroom. Thus, we are able to capture the influence of inclusive education on the test scores of non-SEN students on national standardized tests in reading and mathematics.

Inclusive strategies in regular classrooms are undeniably crucial, but without appropriate adaptations and a comprehensive understanding by all involved, inclusive education can pose considerable challenges for the entire educational community, including non-SEN students (Edwards et al., 2019 ; Nilsen, 2020 ). While some studies for developed countries show that the learning achievement of non-SEN students is improved by attending inclusive classrooms and others point to negative effects, there is limited evidence regarding the impact of inclusive education for developing countries. From this perspective, our study contributes to the literature by examining the case of inclusive education in Peru and its consequences on non-SEN students. To the best of our knowledge, this topic has not been previously analyzed in the Peruvian context. Further, we explore the influence of inclusive education by type of SEN and undertake a heterogeneity analysis.

Overall, this study has found that the inclusion of SEN students in regular classrooms, on average, yields no substantial implications for their non-SEN counterparts. Our results have shown consistency among the different model specifications estimated using several subpopulations with different age ranges as well as an additional sub-population restricted to schools with variation in the presence of SEN students. Nevertheless, it is worth noticing that there is a negative relationship between inclusive education and learning achievement of non-SEN students that turns into a positive relationship when the mother’s characteristics are included in the analysis. This may present an opportunity for school authorities to involve parents in the learning process of their kids to enhance inclusive education programs, as the literature suggests that the way inclusive education is implemented may lead to positive results on the academic performance of non-SEN students (Szumski et al., 2017 ).

We also found that the implications of inclusive education are contingent upon the specific type of SEN. In particular, non-SEN students benefit from attending classrooms with at least one student with a vision disability in 2P and a mobility disability in 2S. This finding underscores differential effects between lower and later grades, a phenomenon previously noted in the literature (Kart and Kart, 2021 ). Also, this result should draw attention from policymakers interested in inclusive education as schools may be more suitable to assist this type of SEN students, whereas the potential lack of resources to support other types of SEN might detrimentally affect SEN and non-SEN students (Edwards et al., 2019 ). In addition, we find that the influence of inclusive education is heterogeneous. We find that the small size of the classroom (20 or fewer students) helps to improve learning achievement in reading for non-SEN students who attend an inclusive classroom in 2S. Similar to previous literature (e.g., Szumski et al., 2017 ), this finding points to the need for educational policymakers to increase the budget for inclusive education, targeting to hire more and adequate resources. Finally, the mother’s characteristics are not relevant to explain differences in the estimates of inclusive education on academic achievement of non-SEN students.

Despite the contributions made by this study, some potential limitations could be addressed by future research. First, due to a lack of data, we are not able to incorporate a measure that reflects the diverse intensity of a disability (Oh-Young and Filler, 2015 ) that could be associated with different costs (Nicoriciu and Elliot, 2023 ). Second, the datasets employed in this analysis are unavailable for certain years, precluding our use of data from ECE before 2011. Additionally, the variable indicating the language spoken in 2S was not present in the same dataset (CE) for the years 2018 and 2019. Finally, despite our efforts to mitigate concerns related to omitted variable bias, we concede the possibility of residual biases. Specifically, we omitted socioeconomic status from our analysis due to substantial rates of missing data.

Data availability

The datasets used in this study are available from the Peruvian Ministry of Education repository upon request.

In the literature, there are three main approaches: (i) segregation, (ii) integration, and (iii) inclusive (see e.g., Dixon, 2005 ; Kiuppis, 2014 ; Madhesh, 2023 ).

It is worth noting that results from countries like Peru are not directly comparable to those previously presented by Contreras et al. ( 2020 ). Indeed, academic performance in Peru is poorer relative to Chile, as reported by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and it does not receive monetary incentives to enroll children with SEN. Furthermore, Chile displays a particular institutional framework worldwide since state-subsidized private schools (voucher schools) have around 50% of total enrollment (CEM, 2019 ). Thus, insights from the Peruvian case are valuable for other comparable countries.

Although the ECE evaluates other subjects, only mathematics and reading were evaluated in every ECE. Students attending 2nd grade of primary were evaluated from 2007 to 2016 on mathematics and reading. In the case of students attending 2nd grade of secondary, they were evaluated on mathematics and reading from 2015 to 2019 (except 2017), social sciences in 2016 and 2018, and science and technology in 2018 and 2019.

Unfortunately, information for SG was not available before 2011, and the MINEDU did not provide information for 2014.

The ECE was not conducted in 2017.

Advancement and delay in 2P (2S) are determined based on the chronological age of the students as of March 31. If a student is one year younger than the standard age of 7 (13), it would be considered advancement. Conversely, if a student is one year older than the standard age, that is, age of 8 (14), it would be considered within a delay.

Since we only include schools with one section per grade, the number of SEN students reported by grade is used to account for the presence of SEN students at the section level.

A cohort refers to the students within the same section for each grade level and year.

Full-grade refers to primary schools where teachers do not teach more than one grade in the same classroom.

Since we work with schools that have only one section, school-fixed effects can also be understood as section-fixed effects.

Feigenberg et al. ( 2023 ) state that using a split-sample approach is equivalent to a fully interacted model but avoids losing statistical power. Likewise, they state that, unlike a model with only one interaction, the split-sample approach reduces bias due to omitted variables.

Results, including all control variables, are presented in the Supplementary Information. Tables S1 and S2 for reading and mathematics in 2P, respectively. Tables S3 and S4 for reading and mathematics in 2S, respectively.

Results, including all control variables, are presented in Supplementary Information Table S5 .

Results, including all control variables, are presented in Supplementary Information from Table S6 to Table S10 .

Ahmed A, Hammarstedt M, Karlsson K (2021) Do schools discriminate against children with disabilities? A field experiment in Sweden. Educ Econ 29(1):3–16

Article   Google Scholar  

Ainscow M, César M (2006) Inclusive education ten years after Salamanca: setting the agenda. Eur J Psychol Educ 21(3):231–238

Ammermueller A, Pischke J (2009) Peer effects in European primary schools: evidence from the progress in international reading literacy study. J Labor Econ27(3):315–348

Balestra S, Eugster B, Liebert H (2022) Peers with special needs: effects and policies. Rev Econ Stat 104(3):602–618

Burke M, Sass T (2013) Classroom peer effects and student achievement. J Labor Econ 31(1):51–82

CEM (2019) Estadísticas de la educación 2018. Publicación 2019. Centro de Estudios MINEDUC

Clarke D (2021) rwolf2 implementation and flexible syntax https://www.damianclarke.net/computation/rwolf2.pdf

Clarke D, Romano J, Wolf M (2020) The Romano-Wolf multiple-hypothesis correction in Stata. Stata J 20(4):812–843

Clogg C, Petkova E, Haritou A (1995) Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. Am J Sociol 100(5):1261–1293

Cole C, Waldron N, Majd M (2004) Academic progress of students across inclusive and traditional settings. Mental Retard 42:136–144

Congreso de la República (2003) Ley General de Educación. Ley 28044. https://leyes.congreso.gob.pe/Documentos/Leyes/28044.pdf

Congreso de la República (2006) Directiva No. 076-2006-VMGP/DINEBE https://www.minedu.gob.pe/normatividad/resoluciones/rd_0354-2006-ed.pdf

Contreras D, Brante M, Espinoza S, Zuñiga I (2020) The effect of the integration of students with special educational needs: evidence from Chile. Int J Educ Dev 74:102163

Cueto S, Rojas V, Dammer M, Felipe C (2018) Cobertura, oportunidades y percepciones sobre la educación inclusiva en el Perú. GRADE

de Boer A, Pijl S, Minnaert A (2012) Students’ attitudes towards peers with disabilities: a review of the literature. Int J Disabil Dev Educ 59(4):379–392

Dell’Anna S, Pellegrini M, Ianes D (2021) Experiences and learning outcomes of students without special educational needs in inclusive settings: a systematic review. Int J Incl Educ 25(8):944–959. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1592248

Dixon S (2005) Inclusion—not segregation or integration is where a student with special needs belongs. J Educ Thought 39(1):33–53

Google Scholar  

Edwards B, Cameron D, King G, McPherson A (2019) How students without special needs perceive social inclusion of children with physical impairments in mainstream schools: a scoping review. Int J Disabil Dev Educ 66(3):298–324

Feigenberg B, Ost B, Qureshi J (2023) Omitted variable bias in interacted models: a cautionary tale. Rev Econ Stat https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01361

Filmer D (2008) Disability, poverty, and schooling in developing countries: results from 14 household surveys. World Bank Econ Rev 22(1):141–163

Fletcher J (2010) Spillover effects of inclusion of classmates with emotional problems on test scores in early elementary school. J Policy Anal Manag 29(1):69–83

Friesen J, Hickey R, Krauth B (2010) Disabled peers and academic achievement. Educ Financ Policy 5(3):317–348

Goico S (2019) The impact of “inclusive” education on the language of deaf youth in Iquitos, Peru. Sign Language Stud 19(3):348–374

Gottfried M (2014) Classmates with disabilities and students’ noncognitive outcomes. Educ Eval Policy Anal 36(1):20–43

Gottfried M, Egalite A, Kirksey J (2016) Does the presence of a classmate with emotional/behavioral disabilities link to other students’ absences in kindergarten? Early Child Res Q 36:506–520

Gottfried M, McGene J (2013) The spillover effects of having a sibling with special educational needs. J Educ Res 106(3):197–215

Hanushek J, Kain J, Rivkin S (2002) Inferring program effects for special populations: does special education raise achievement for students with disabilities? Rev Econ Stat 84(4):584–599

Kart A, Kart M (2021) Academic and social effects of inclusion on students without disabilities: a review of the literature. Educ Sci 11(1):1. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010016

Keslair F, Maurin E, McNally S (2012) Every child matters? An evaluation of “special educational needs” programmes in England. Econ Educ Rev 31(6):932–948

Kiuppis F (2014) Why (not) associate the principle of inclusion with disability? Tracing connections from the start of the ‘Salamanca process. Int J Incl Educ 18(7):746–761

Krämer S, Möller J, Zimmermann F (2021) Inclusive education of students with general learning difficulties: a meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 91(3):432–478. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321998072

Kristoffersen J, Krægpøth M, Nielsen H, Simonsen M (2015) Disruptive school peers and student outcomes. Econ Educ Rev 45:1–13

Lavy V, Silva O, Weinhardt F (2012) The good, the bad, and the average: evidence on ability peer effects in schools. J Labor Econ 30(2):367–414

Lazear E (2001) Educational production. Q J Econ 116(3):777–803

Leigh A, Gong X (2010) Does maternal age affect children’s test scores? Aust Econ Rev 43(1):12–27

López Turley R (2003) Are children of young mothers disadvantaged because of their mother’s age or family background? Child Dev 74(2):464–474

Madhesh A (2023) The concept of inclusive education from the point of view of academics specialising in special education at Saudi universities. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:278

Manski C (1993) Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Rev Econ Stud 60:531–542

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Mitra S, Sambamoorthi U (2008) Disability and the rural labor market in India: evidence for males in Tamil Nadu. World Dev 36(5):934–952

Nicoriciu A, Elliot M (2023) Families of children with disabilities: income poverty, material deprivation, and unpaid care in the UK. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:519

Nilsen S (2020) Inside but still on the outside? Teachers’ experiences with the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in general education. Int J Incl Educ 24(9):980–996

OAS (2018) Program of action for the decade of the Americas for the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities. OAS, Washington, DC

Olusanya B, Kancherla V, Shaheen A, Ogbo F, Davis A (2022) Global and regional prevalence of disabilities among children and adolescents: analysis of findings from global health databases. Front Public Health 10:977453

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ombudsman P (2011) Los niños y niñas con discapacidad: Alcances y limitaciones en la implementación de la política de educación inclusiva en instituciones educativas del nivel primaria. Serie Informes Defensoriales, Informe 155. Lima, Defensoría del Pueblo

Ombudsman P (2019) El derecho a la educación inclusiva. Barreras en la implementación de los servicios educativos públicos y privados para estudiantes con discapacidad y con otras necesidades educativas. Serie Informes Defensoriales, Informe 183. Lima, Defensoría del Pueblo

Rangvid B (2019) Returning special education students to regular classrooms: externalities on peers’ reading scores. Econ Educ Rev 68:13–22

Rangvid B (2022) Special educational needs placement in lower secondary education: the impact of segregated vs. mainstream placement on post-16 outcomes. Educ Econ 30(4):399–425

Razavi S (2012) World development report 2012: gender equality and development—a commentary. Dev Change 43(1):423–437

Ruijs N (2017) The impact of special needs students on classmate performance. Econ Educ Rev 58:15–31

Ruijs N, Peetsma T (2009) Effects of inclusion on students with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educ Res Rev 4:67–79

Szumski G, Smogorzewska J, Karwowski M (2017) Academic achievement of students without special educational needs in inclusive classrooms: a meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 21:33–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.02.004

Oh-Young C, Filler J (2015) A meta-analysis of the effects of placement on academic and social skill outcome measures of students with disabilities. Res Dev Disabil 47:80–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.014

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

UNESCO (1994) T he Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Adopted by the world conference on special needs education: access and quality. UNESCO

Van Mieghem A, Verschueren K, Petry K, Struyf E (2020) An analysis of research on inclusive education: a systematic search and meta review. Int J Incl Educ 24(6):675–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1482012

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was supported by the Peruvian Economic and Social Research Consortium (grant No. A1-PB03, CIES 2022). The authors express their gratitude to the participants of the XXXIV Annual Research Seminar 2023 hosted by the Economic and Social Research Consortium (CIES), as well as to two anonymous referees for their invaluable feedback, which contributed to the improvement of this manuscript. Special thanks to Juan Castañeda and Jonatan Amaya for their outstanding research assistance in earlier versions of this study. All remaining errors are our own.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Piura, Av. Ramón Mugica 131, Urb. San Eduardo, Piura, Perú

V. B. Salas García

Departamento de Economía, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Av. Universitaria 1801, Lima, 15088, Perú

José María Rentería

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All the authors contributed equally to this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. B. Salas García .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Salas García, V.B., Rentería, J.M. Students with special educational needs in regular classrooms and their peer effects on learning achievement. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 521 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03002-8

Download citation

Received : 09 November 2023

Accepted : 27 March 2024

Published : 17 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03002-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Our Mission

Question: What Early Advice Had a Lasting Impact on Your Teaching?

Share the pivotal advice that shaped your teaching and learn from others in our community.

Educators are inundated with advice. But some insights—often those you receive early in your career—can shape your practice for years. What's a piece of advice that stuck and made a lasting impact on you? Your contributions can help the new teachers in our community!

• Share full article

Advertisement

Subscriber-only Newsletter

Jessica Grose

Most teachers know they’re playing with fire when they use tech in the classroom.

By Jessica Grose

Opinion Writer

A few years ago, when researchers at Boston College and Harvard set out to review all of the existing research on educational apps for kids in preschool through third grade, they were surprised to find that even though there are hundreds of thousands of apps out there that are categorized as educational, there were only 36 studies of educational apps in the databases they searched. “That is not a strong evidence base on which to completely redesign an entire schooling system,” Josh Gilbert, one of the co-authors of the study, told me over the phone.

That said, their meta-analysis of the effects of educational app use on children’s literacy and math skills, published in 2021, found that well-designed apps can make a positive difference when it comes to “constrained skills” — things like number recognition or times tables in math, or letter sounds in literacy. Unconstrained skills are more complex ones that develop over a lifetime of learning and can deepen over the years. (It’s worth noting that many popular educational apps are not high-quality .)

Gilbert said that overall, “the range of effects was gigantic.” Because they were all over the place, “we have to go beyond the average effect and say, OK, for whom does the app work? Under what conditions? On what types of measures? And I think those are the questions that researchers, policymakers, school leaders, teachers and principals should be asking,” he said. “What are the best use cases for this digital technology in the classroom?”

In last week’s newsletter , I came in pretty hot about the pitfalls of educational technology in American classrooms. I’m convinced that since students returned to in-person school after the disruptions of 2020-21, there are too many schools that haven’t been taking a thoughtful or evidence-based approach to how they’re using screens and apps, and that it’s time for a pause and a rethink. But that doesn’t mean there are no benefits to any use of educational technology.

So for the second part of this series, I wanted to talk to people who’ve seen real upsides from using tech in their classrooms. Their experiences back up some of the available research , which shows that ed tech can help teachers differentiate their material to meet the needs of students with a wide range of proficiencies. Further, teachers report that students with disabilities can really benefit from the assistive technologies that screens and apps can provide.

Debbie Marks, who teaches third grade in Oklahoma, told me that her students’ school-issued laptops allow them “to participate in differentiated reading interventions designed specifically for them” during the school day. That differentiation allows her to better assess how each student has progressed and tailor her instruction to each student.

“So for example, we could be working on story elements and we’re working on characters,” she explained to me when we spoke. “One student might be at the point where they’re just trying to identify who the main character is. Another student might be trying to identify character traits while a higher-level student would be comparing characters or would be identifying how the character changes throughout the story based on the plot. So it really allows me to develop one-on-one lessons for every kid in my classroom.”

Marks works in a rural district, about 90 minutes away from Tulsa, and some of her students may be traveling 45 minutes to an hour just to get to class. She said that the use of devices allows her to better connect with her students’ parents and to get them more involved in what’s going on in a classroom that is physically far from them. Marks also said that screens enable her to do things like virtual author visits, which she says get the kids really excited and engaged in reading.

I also heard from several teachers who said that assistive technology has been a game changer for students with special needs. Duncan Law, who works as a special education support teacher in an elementary school in Oregon, put it this way: “Technology can be a necessity for students with special needs in accessing core curriculum/standards, as well as for fluency practice. In the best case scenario, learning via tech is guided and closely monitored by teachers, and students are actively engaged with feedback. For students with dysgraphia and dyslexia, word processing tools offer a meaningful way to demonstrate/assess their writing skills.”

Several middle school and high school teachers who said that tech was helpful in their classrooms seemed to be using it as an efficient way to teach students more rote tasks, allowing more class time to be spent helping build those “unconstrained” skills.

Doug Showley, a high school English teacher in Indiana who’s been teaching since 1996, gave me the example of how he has changed his quizzes over time by integrating technology. He used to just give straight-up vocabulary quizzes where students had to define words; now he and his colleagues have moved toward “diction quizzes,” requiring students to understand the nuances of using specific words in sentences.

Showley noted that it’s easier to quickly look up words than it was in the hard-copy dictionary days, and that his students “have access to online dictionaries” during these quizzes. They’re given four synonyms and are asked to figure out which synonym best fits into a sentence. “To determine that, they have to go beyond just that basic definition. They’ve got to get into the connotative meaning of the word and the common usage of the word,” he explained.

But Showley also said that he monitors the kids quite closely. When they’re doing a task that involves their laptops, he’ll have them set up so all of their screens are facing him. He estimates that usually only one or two kids out of a class of 25 really aren’t able to stay on task when they’re on the screens.

He also told me that his school has made the decision not to block A.I., including ChatGPT, though it is a hot topic of discussion. The challenge of dealing with A.I. is something that came up a lot among teachers in the upper grades, and the overall vibe I got was that no one quite knows what to do with it yet.

After we spoke, Showley emailed me to say that “we should carefully gauge to what degree and in what way tech is used at each level of education.” And he wrote something that I think really sums up both the promise and the peril of ed tech (and is also such a classic English teacher passage):

I couldn’t help but think of Prometheus defying the Olympic gods by sharing the first-ever technological advancement with humankind: fire. Fire, as with every other significant advancement since, both propelled society forward and burnt it to the ground. It enlightened our minds and souls, and it tormented them, just as Prometheus was perpetually tormented through his punishment for sharing too much of the gods’ power.

Perhaps deliberately, one of the popular digital whiteboards is the Promethean board.

The technology isn’t going away. We need to start creating better frameworks to think about how students and teachers are using technology in our schools, because the tech companies won’t stop pushing their products, whether or not there’s evidence that shows educational gains. CNN’s Clare Duffy reports that later this year, Meta “will launch new software for educators that aims to make it easier to use its V.R. headsets in the classroom,” though “it remains unclear just how useful virtual reality is in helping students learn better.”

In next week’s newsletter, I’ll write about solutions to some of the problems posed by ed tech, and how we might create a future where we can minimize some of the most egregious hazards of distraction and invasion of privacy, and realize some of the potential of technology’s most fantastic educational promises.

Jessica Grose is an Opinion writer for The Times, covering family, religion, education, culture and the way we live now.

The Campus-Left Occupation That Broke Higher Education

Elite colleges are now reaping the consequences of promoting a pedagogy that trashed the postwar ideal of the liberal university.

Listen to this article

Produced by ElevenLabs and News Over Audio (NOA) using AI narration.

This article was featured in the One Story to Read Today newsletter. Sign up for it here .

F ifty-six years ago this week, at the height of the Vietnam War, Columbia University students occupied half a dozen campus buildings and made two principal demands of the university: stop funding military research, and cancel plans to build a gym in a nearby Black neighborhood. After a week of futile negotiations, Columbia called in New York City police to clear the occupation.

The physical details of that crisis were much rougher than anything happening today. The students barricaded doors and ransacked President Grayson Kirk’s office. “Up against the wall, motherfucker, this is a stick-up,” Mark Rudd, the student leader and future member of the terrorist organization Weather Underground, wrote in an open letter to Kirk, who resigned a few months later. The cops arrested more than 700 students and injured at least 100, while one of their own was permanently disabled by a student.

In other ways, the current crisis brings a strong sense of déjà vu: the chants, the teach-ins, the nonnegotiable demands, the self-conscious building of separate communities, the revolutionary costumes, the embrace of oppressed identities by elite students, the tactic of escalating to incite a reaction that mobilizes a critical mass of students. It’s as if campus-protest politics has been stuck in an era of prolonged stagnation since the late 1960s. Why can’t students imagine doing it some other way?

Perhaps because the structure of protest reflects the nature of universities. They make good targets because of their abiding vulnerability: They can’t deal with coercion, including nonviolent disobedience. Either they overreact, giving the protesters a new cause and more allies (this happened in 1968, and again last week at Columbia), or they yield, giving the protesters a victory and inviting the next round of disruption. This is why Columbia’s president, Minouche Shafik, no matter what she does, finds herself hammered from the right by Republican politicians and from the left by her own faculty and students, unable to move without losing more ground. Her detractors know that they have her trapped by their willingness to make coercive demands: Do what we say or else we’ll destroy you and your university. They aren’t interested in a debate.

Michael Powell: The unreality of Columbia’s ‘liberated zone’

A university isn’t a state —it can’t simply impose its rules with force. It’s a special kind of community whose legitimacy depends on mutual recognition in a spirit of reason, openness, and tolerance. At the heart of this spirit is free speech, which means more than just chanting, but free speech can’t thrive in an atmosphere of constant harassment. When one faction or another violates this spirit, the whole university is weakened as if stricken with an illness. The sociologist Daniel Bell, who tried and failed to mediate a peaceful end to the Columbia occupation, wrote afterward:

In a community one cannot regain authority simply by asserting it, or by using force to suppress dissidents. Authority in this case is like respect. One can only earn the authority—the loyalty of one’s students—by going in and arguing with them, by engaging in full debate and, when the merits of proposed change are recognized, taking the necessary steps quickly enough to be convincing.

The crackdown at Columbia in 1968 was so harsh that a backlash on the part of faculty and the public obliged the university to accept the students’ demands: a loss, then a win. The war in Vietnam ground on for years before it ended and history vindicated the protesters: another loss, another win. But the really important consequence of the 1968 revolt took decades to emerge. We’re seeing it now on Columbia’s quad and the campuses of elite universities around the country. The most lasting victory of the ’68ers was an intellectual one. The idea underlying their protests wasn’t just to stop the war or end injustice in America. Its aim was the university itself—the liberal university of the postwar years, which no longer exists.

That university claimed a special role in democratic society. A few weeks after the 1968 takeover, the Columbia historian Richard Hofstadter gave the commencement address to a wounded institution. “A university is a community, but it is a community of a special kind,” Hofstadter said—“a community devoted to inquiry. It exists so that its members may inquire into truths of all sorts. Its presence marks our commitment to the idea that somewhere in society there must be an organization in which anything can be studied or questioned—not merely safe and established things but difficult and inflammatory things, the most troublesome questions of politics and war, of sex and morals, of property and national loyalty.” This mission rendered the community fragile, dependent on the self-restraint of its members.

The lofty claims of the liberal university exposed it to charges of all kinds of hypocrisy, not least its entanglement with the American war machine. The Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse, who became a guru to the New Left, coined the phrase repressive tolerance for the veil that hid liberal society’s mechanisms of violence and injustice. In this scheme, no institution, including the university, remained neutral, and radical students embraced their status as an oppressed group.

Charles Sykes: The new rules of political journalism

At Stanford (where my father was an administrator in the late ’60s, and where students took over a campus building the week after the Columbia revolt), white students compared themselves to Black American slaves. To them, the university was not a community dedicated to independent inquiry but a nexus of competing interest groups where power, not ideas, ruled. They rejected the very possibility of a disinterested pursuit of truth. In an imaginary dialogue between a student and a professor, a member of the Stanford chapter of Students for a Democratic Society wrote: “Rights and privacy and these kinds of freedom are irrelevant—you old guys got to get it through your heads that to fight the whole corrupt System POWER is the only answer.”

A long, intricate , but essentially unbroken line connects that rejection of the liberal university in 1968 to the orthodoxy on elite campuses today. The students of the ’68 revolt became professors—the German activist Rudi Dutschke called this strategy the “long march through the institutions”—bringing their revisionist thinking back to the universities they’d tried to upend. One leader of the Columbia takeover returned to chair the School of the Arts film program. “The ideas of one generation become the instincts of the next,” D. H. Lawrence wrote. Ideas born in the ’60s, subsequently refined and complicated by critical theory, postcolonial studies, and identity politics, are now so pervasive and unquestioned that they’ve become the instincts of students who are occupying their campuses today. Group identity assigns your place in a hierarchy of oppression. Between oppressor and oppressed, no room exists for complexity or ambiguity. Universal values such as free speech and individual equality only privilege the powerful. Words are violence. There’s nothing to debate.

The post-liberal university is defined by a combination of moneymaking and activism. Perhaps the biggest difference between 1968 and 2024 is that the ideas of a radical vanguard are now the instincts of entire universities—administrators, faculty, students. They’re enshrined in reading lists and codes of conduct and ubiquitous clichés. Last week an editorial in the Daily Spectator , the Columbia student newspaper, highlighted the irony of a university frantically trying to extricate itself from the implications of its own dogmas: “Why is the same university that capitalizes on the legacy of Edward Said and enshrines The Wretched of the Earth into its Core Curriculum so scared to speak about decolonization in practice?”

A Columbia student, writing to one of his professors in a letter that the student shared with me, explained the dynamic so sharply that it’s worth quoting him at length:

I think [the protests] do speak to a certain failing on Columbia’s part, but it’s a failing that’s much more widespread and further upstream. That is, I think universities have essentially stopped minding the store, stopped engaging in any kind of debate or even conversation with the ideologies which have slowly crept in to every bit of university life, without enough people of good conscience brave enough to question all the orthodoxies. So if you come to Columbia believing in “decolonization” or what have you, it’s genuinely not clear to me that you will ever have to reflect on this belief. And after all this, one day the university wakes up to these protests, panics under scrutiny, and calls the cops on students who are practicing exactly what they’ve been taught to do from the second they walked through those gates as freshmen.

The muscle of independent thinking and open debate, the ability to earn authority that Daniel Bell described as essential to a university’s survival, has long since atrophied. So when, after the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, Jewish students found themselves subjected to the kind of hostile atmosphere that, if directed at any other minority group, would have brought down high-level rebukes, online cancellations, and maybe administrative punishments, they fell back on the obvious defense available under the new orthodoxy. They said that they felt “unsafe.” They accused pro-Palestinian students of anti-Semitism—sometimes fairly, sometimes not. They asked for protections that other groups already enjoyed. Who could blame them? They were doing what their leaders and teachers had instructed them was the right, the only, way to respond to a hurt.

Adam Serwer: The Republicans who want American carnage

And when the shrewd and unscrupulous Representative Elise Stefanik demanded of the presidents of Harvard and Penn whether calls for genocide violated their universities’ code of conduct, they had no good way to answer. If they said yes, they would have faced the obvious comeback: “Why has no one been punished?” So they said that it depended on the “context,” which was technically correct but sounded so hopelessly legalistic that it led to the loss of their jobs. The response also made nonsense of their careers as censors of unpopular speech. Shafik, of Columbia, having watched her colleagues’ debacle, told the congresswoman what she wanted to hear, then backed it up by calling the cops onto campus—only to find herself denounced on all sides, including by Senator Tom Cotton, who demanded that President Joe Biden deploy the United States military to Columbia, and by her own faculty senate, which threatened a vote of censure.

T he right always knows how to exploit the excesses of the left. It happened in 1968, when the campus takeovers and the street battles between anti-war activists and cops at the Democratic convention in Chicago helped elect Richard Nixon. Republican politicians are already exploiting the chaos on campuses. This summer, the Democrats will gather again in Chicago, and the activists are promising a big show. Donald Trump will be watching.

Elite universities are caught in a trap of their own making, one that has been a long time coming. They’ve trained pro-Palestinian students to believe that, on the oppressor-oppressed axis, Jews are white and therefore dominant, not “marginalized,” while Israel is a settler-colonialist state and therefore illegitimate. They’ve trained pro-Israel students to believe that unwelcome and even offensive speech makes them so unsafe that they should stay away from campus. What the universities haven’t done is train their students to talk with one another.

Career Stepping Stones: Millikin’s Kailee Itzenhuiser Continues to Build Her Teaching Experiences

Also a standout on the volleyball court, the junior Elementary Education major has gained important teaching experience in schools in Argenta-Oreana, Decatur and Warrensburg-Latham.

**Kailee will be taking over Millikin's Instagram accoun t on Wednesday, April 24, so stop by to get a closer look at her day as a Big Blue student.**  

DECATUR, Ill. – Growing up, Millikin University Elementary Education major Kailee Itzenhuiser’s desire to be a teacher sometimes got her in a bit of trouble. When given an assignment in elementary school, the Big Blue junior would often not get started on her own work and instead turn her attention to her classmates. 

“I've just always had an intuition to go to the kids who are falling behind and need a little bit more help,” Kailee said. “All my teachers always commented that I was helping other students before I was doing my own work, so I was getting in trouble for that.”

Kailee has continued that passion for helping others by adding Special Education and English as a Second Language (ESL) endorsements to her curriculum. 

While she dreamed of becoming a teacher, it wasn’t until Kailee’s first year at Millikin that she got her first in-classroom teaching experience . It was also the first opportunity to see if her dream was truly going to become a career reality. 

“I have loved getting into the classroom. I'm very hands-on, and I learn well by experimenting and exploring. You can only learn so much through textbooks,” Kailee said. “When you start at Millikin, it's up to you if you want to jump in completely or just want observe. I was like, all right, push me in the deep end. Let me grade papers, let me work with students individually. Starting to do those individualized things with students helped me commit to that this is what I want to do. As a kid, you can talk all you want, but until you go and do it, you don’t really know if it is for you.”

While at Millikin, Kailee has spent time at Argenta-Oreana Elementary, Decatur’s Johns Hill Elementary and Hope Academy, and is currently interning in a second-grade classroom at Warrensburg-Latham Elementary School. 

“At Johns Hill, I was in ESL, and at Hope Academy, I got to go for Special Ed. In Argenta, I was in fourth grade, and now I’m in second grade. I’ve had a large variety of different grades, different environments,” Kailee said. “At Hope Academy, I was a part of a life skills class. They don't necessarily teach or focus on math and science and reading, but they're focusing on other life skills. Can I go brush my teeth alone? Can I walk around the halls and know my manners? Instead of it being a first-grade classroom, it is first grade through third.”

Millikin first came on Kailee’s radar during high school as she explored schools where she could continue her volleyball career. Three years later, she is a Big Blue team captain and led the team in kills (460) and serving aces (84) last season, while being named to the all-conference first team for the College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin (CCIW). The team also returned to the NCAA DIII Tournament for the second consecutive season. 

Kailee also has an extensive coaching career and is a coach for the Illini United Volleyball Club in Decatur. Being a leader allows her to bring the lessons from her School of Education curriculum to the team. 

“At first, my interest in Millikin was volleyball, but then I found out they had a great Education program, so I was even more interested,” Kailee said. “Being a coach is honestly putting my two favorite things together -- teaching and volleyball – and being able to coach young children to grow in the sport. They love that and I love to share my passion for the game, even with my teammates. I try to take the underclassmen under my wing. When I leave here next year, I want to make sure that my impact is made and that they continue growing the program because it is a great program.”

In January, Kailee was among a group of Big Blue Volleyball players who took part in a 12-day immersion trip to Italy. They toured Rome, Florence, Lucca, Venice and Padova and played several exhibitions against club and professional teams. 

“It was a great experience. They have a couple of different rules and play with a different ball than we do here,” she said. “It was interesting to see a different culture, not only in the traveling aspect, but also seeing the sport that you've played for so long and seeing that they do it differently over there. Talking to the players about it was really inspiring.”

Senior year for Elementary Education majors at Millikin is a big one, as the spring semester is devoted to student teaching, while in the fall, students get to introduce themselves to the classes they will lead in their final semester. 

“I think that here at Millikin, it's like stepping stones. You are slowly working your way up, and once you get to the top of the hill, you will feel completely confident,” Kailee said. “I am doing lessons right now, even if I'm in an internship and I'm not actually student teaching. I'm teaching lessons about math and science and a wide variety so that when I step into student teaching next year, I feel like I will be prepared, and I can manage different things that will come across me because of what Millikin has taught me.” 

Recent Articles

• Midwest Music Expo (MmX) Returns to Millikin University on May 4 April 27, 2024
• Students and faculty honored at the 2024 Millikin University Honors Convocation April 26, 2024
• John Albin, Class of 1950 April 25, 2024

Related news

Midwest Music Expo (MmX) Returns to Millikin University on May 4

Students and faculty honored at the 2024 Millikin University Honors Convocation

Millikin Community Arts Academy (MCAA) Opens 2024 Summer Events Enrollment