From a crisis to an opportunity: Eight insights for doing science in the COVID-19 era and beyond

Coping with COVID-19. Work life experiences of nursing, midwifery and paramedic academics: An international interview study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 global pandemic was declared in March 2020. By June 2022, the total deaths worldwide attributed to COVID-19 numbered over 6.3 million. Health professionals have been significantly impacted worldwide primarily those working on the frontline but also those working in other areas including nursing, midwifery, and paramedic higher education. Studies of occupational stress have focused on the clinical health professional roles but scant attention has been drawn to the pressures on university-based academic staff supporting and preparing professionals for frontline health work.

DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES

This qualitative study sought to explore the challenges experienced by health academics (nurses, midwives and paramedics), during COVID-19 and identify strategies enlisted.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Six Australian and two United Kingdom universities collaborated, from which 34 health academics were individually interviewed via video or teleconference, using six broad questions. Ethical approval was obtained from the lead site and each participating University.

DATA ANALYSIS

Thematic analysis of the data was employed collaboratively across institutions, using Braun and Clarke's method.

RESULTS

Data analysis generated four major themes describing academics': Experiences of change; perceptions of organisational responses; professional and personal impacts; and strategies to support wellbeing. Stress, anxiety and uncertainty of working from home and teaching in a different way were reported. Strategies included setting workday routine, establishing physical boundaries for home-working and regular online contact with colleagues.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of nursing, midwifery and, paramedic academic staff to adapt to a sudden increase in workload, change in teaching practices and technology, while being removed from their work environment, and collegial, academic and technological supports is highlighted. It was recognised that these changes will continue post-COVID and that the way academics deliver education is forever altered.

Promoting lab culture to enhance academic resilience during crises

The COVID‐19 pandemic has heavily impacted academics’ professional and personal lives, forcing many research groups (labs) to shift from an academic system primarily based on in‐person work to an almost full‐time remote workforce during lockdowns. Labs are generally characterized by a strong lab culture that underpins all research and social activities of its members. Lab culture traditionally builds on the pillars of in‐person communication, knowledge sharing, and all social and professional activities that promote collaboration, team building, scientific productivity, and well‐being. Here, we use the experience of our research group facing the COVID‐19 pandemic to illustrate how proactively reinforcing lab culture and its positive outcomes have been essential to our lab when transitioning from an in‐person to a remote lab environment, and through its ongoing evolution toward a hybrid remote/in‐person model. We argue that the proactive promotion of lab culture in research groups can foster academic resilience during crises, helping research groups to maintain their capacity to conduct scientific activities while preserving a sustainable life/work balance and a healthy mental condition.

Undergraduates' Experiences with Online and in-Person Courses Provide Opportunities for Improving Student-Centered Biology Laboratory Instruction

Biology laboratory courses with hands-on activities faced many challenges when switched to online instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. The transition back to in-person instruction presents an opportunity to redesign courses with greater student input. Undergraduates in an ∼350-student laboratory course were surveyed about their preferences for online or in-person instruction of specific laboratory course components. We predicted that students who have taken a virtual laboratory course prefer keeping some of the components online. We also hypothesized that their preferences are affected by their experience with online-only or with both online and in-person instruction. The results showed that students would like to move the laboratory component and group meetings back to in-person instruction, even if they never experienced college-level in-person courses. Also, many components, including the lectures, exams, assignment submission, and office hours are preferred to be held online. Surprisingly, students who have only taken online courses would rather give group presentations in person, while those who experienced both online and in-person instruction were undecided. Group presentations were the only component where the preference of the two groups significantly differed. Self-assessed learning gains showed that students performed very well in both the online semesters and the in-person semesters. Therefore, the preferences measured in this study were likely developed based on students' future expectations and personal gains, and not only on their metacognitive decisions and academic performances. This study provides considerations for redesigning components of laboratory courses to be more student-centered after the pandemic.