Analysis of student grades and demographic data to understand the effects of modality and Covid-19 on academic performance is important for universities to understand the impact these factors may have on course grades. This study analyzes all the 615,964 complete undergraduate student-course records from Kennesaw State University (KSU) spanning from 2015 to 2024 to examine the impact of course modality and the Covid-19 pandemic on academic performance. The population dataset includes student demographics (e.g., sex, age, ethnicity), prior GPA, and course characteristics (e.g., department, modality). Descriptive statistics and trend analyses were employed to evaluate grade outcomes across in-person, online, and hybrid modalities over the 9-year period. Results indicate a temporary increase in mean course grades during the Covid-19 period, followed by a return to the pre-pandemic upward trend. Hybrid courses consistently exhibited the highest mean grades throughout the study period. However, consistent patterns across modalities, demographics, and academic units suggest that these factors have limited influence on grade outcomes. These findings raise questions about the reliability of GPA and course grades as indicators of learning success across different instructional contexts and student populations.

Despite progress made in recent years, women continue to be underrepresented in academic publishing. We aim to share insights from academic women researchers who participated in the Training Needs Assessment for developing their writing for publication skills in an Open Distance Learning institution in South Africa. The research questions that guided the study were: a) What specific challenges do academic women researchers face in developing research and publishing skills? b) What motivated academic women researchers to participate in a writing project? c) What type of support do academic women researchers identify as essential for advancing their research and publishing skills? The data were collected through an initial face-to-face meeting, followed by a Training Needs Assessment from eight purposively chosen participants in a case study design. The findings indicate participants’ challenges of time constraints, lack of confidence, and knowledge as obstacles that hindered their publishing. Despite their challenges, women researchers reported their motivation to participate in the writing project for career advancement, personal development, academic recognition, and their inspiration to publish their research work. The study found that women researchers required writing support, peer collaboration, mentorship, and institutional support to improve their writing for publishing skills. Supporting academic women researchers with focused training, engaging them in collaborative networks, and developing gender-sensitive policies is crucial for promoting equity, breaking down barriers, and ensuring their academic and professional success.

Within the context of investigating belief systems, this work exemplifies a mixed-method approach. Two approaches are utilized to explore the philosophical, ontological, and epistemological assumptions that university students foster regarding the relationships between knowledge and reality. In the first step, written materials that elaborated on the matter at hand were subjected to content analysis with the assistance of Leximancer, a software that recognizes themes and concepts and turns textual data into concept maps that express networks of meaning. The second step involved conducting a cluster analysis on the data obtained from the questionnaire to identify distinct groups of participants who shared consistent epistemological viewpoints. The results obtained from the two approaches are in agreement and shed light on the prevalent epistemic inclination that favors a constructivist viewpoint. Discussion on the ramifications of the findings, as well as the methodological issues that are pertinent to the present illustration, is provided.

These days, many schools are reviewing their curricula, and Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM) education is one area where these changes are being applied. Because STEAM education integrates five subjects, it requires an approach in which teachers from these subjects work collaboratively. However, applying traditional assessment methods in STEAM education is challenging, as it requires teachers to jointly decide on appropriate assessment strategies. At present, no clear framework exists to support this process. This study examined the potential of the ordinal priority approach (OPA), a recently introduced method for multi-criteria decision-making, to facilitate teachers’ collaborative selection of assessment methods for STEAM education. It further explored the extent to which subject differences affect collaboration by comparing the decision-making of two groups: a homogeneous group (teachers of the same subject) and a heterogeneous group (teachers of different subjects). Pre- and post-questionnaires were administered to both groups to determine how the OPA can assist teachers in jointly developing a STEAM assessment method. Analyses of the responses identified differences in each group’s consensus-building process. The study revealed three key contributions of OPA to teacher collaboration in STEAM education: 1) it ensures that teachers from diverse subjects have their opinions considered; 2) its transparent decision-making process helps mitigate distrust during discussions; and 3) it promotes fair decision-making, unaffected by social power differences within the group. Based on these findings, OPA appears effective in converging diverse expert opinions through a clear decision-making process.