Scholars examine how faculty define rigor in online college courses

X

LinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

University of Phoenix College of Doctoral Studies announces the publication of a new article by scholars Jennifer L. James, Ph.D., Karen Myers, DNP, and Olivia Miller, M.A., in the Journal of Educators Online. The article, “Studying Faculty Perceptions of Rigor in Online College Courses: Compromising or Accommodating? A Literature Review,” examines how faculty perceive academic rigor when teaching, grading and managing online courses for nontraditional students.

The systematic literature review used the PRISMA 2020 method to organize peer-reviewed literature published from 2018 to 2023. The authors examined faculty perceptions of online teaching rigor before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, including perceptions related to course management, academic integrity, student engagement, assessment practices, technology and institutional support.

“Rigor in online education should not be reduced to whether a course is hard or whether faculty make accommodations,” said James, lead author and research fellow in the University of Phoenix College of Doctoral Studies. “Our review suggests that rigor is shaped by course design, assessment practices, faculty preparation, student engagement and the realities of teaching nontraditional students online. When institutions support faculty with clear expectations, training and resources, rigor and responsiveness can work together rather than compete.”

Key findings based on five main themes in the literature reviewed

The literature review found that faculty perceptions of rigor in online courses are shaped by multiple factors, including course design, student engagement, academic integrity concerns, technology access, workload and professional development. The article identifies five main themes in the literature reviewed:

• Experience with online teaching: Faculty varied in their comfort with online teaching and technology, with some reporting opportunities to learn new tools and others noting technical challenges and increased workload.
• Perceived effectiveness of online learning: Faculty perceptions were mixed, with some studies indicating online learning outcomes could equal or surpass face-to-face courses, while others reflected concern that online learning may be less effective in some contexts.
• Challenges and support needed: Faculty reported challenges related to technology, broadband access, workload and the need for professional development and institutional support.
• Benefits of online teaching: Faculty recognized benefits including flexibility, accessibility, opportunities to share materials and new ways to engage students.
• Future of online education: Many faculty indicated online and blended learning would continue to grow after the pandemic, while also noting the need for clearer expectations and sustained support.

The authors note that despite extensive research on academic rigor for students, there is less common ground on how faculty perceive the challenges of facilitating online courses for nontraditional students.

The study also points to areas for future research, including how deadline extensions affect faculty workload and perceptions of rigor, how faculty approach student requests to resubmit assignments, and how faculty manage emotionally challenging online course facilitation. The authors recommend further examination of student perceptions of rigor in online classes and the instructor’s role in shaping student expectations.

The publication contributes to broader research on online higher education at a time when institutions continue to evaluate how course quality, academic integrity, flexibility and student support intersect in digital learning environments.

The full article, “Studying Faculty Perceptions of Rigor in Online College Courses: Compromising or Accommodating? A Literature Review,” is available in the Journal of Educators Online, 23(1), at https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2026.23.1.22.

Article in The Geography Teacher: Awe-Inspired Learning and Connection Through Geography

The article, titled “The Overview Effect and Sense of Place: Awe-Inspired Learning and Connection Through Geography,” examines how awe and sense of place may influence how learners engage with and interpret geographic concepts, with implications for instructional design in online and classroom environments.

What is the overview effect and why does it matter for learning?

The article explores the “overview effect,” a cognitive shift described by astronauts viewing Earth from space, characterized by a heightened sense of interconnectedness, perspective and reflection. Building on this concept, the authors examine how experiences of awe, often prompted by scale, landscape and environment, may open attention, expand thinking, and support how learners process new information.

The paper situates these ideas within geography education, suggesting that place-based and visually grounded learning experiences may help students connect abstract concepts to real-world environments while strengthening their sense of place.

Our research highlights the power of a simple show-and-share discussion activity,” said Kelly. “Students explored awe-inspiring landscapes and then shared places that were meaningful to them. Those personal stories and images created opportunities for reflection, strengthened students’ connections to environmental topics, and helped bring a sense of place into the online classroom. We hope this provides a model that other educators can use to foster engagement and connection in online learning environments.”

The authors also discuss how awe-informed approaches may support curiosity and reflection, helping learners recognize gaps in understanding and integrate new knowledge with existing perspectives.

Key themes of the article include:

• Examination of the overview effect as a framework for understanding perspective shift and learning
• Exploration of awe as a factor that may influence attention, curiosity and conceptual understanding
• Consideration of sense of place as a meaningful element in student connection to course content
• Insights into how intentional instructional design may incorporate these concepts in educational settings

Kelly is a published researcher with more than 20 years of experience in science and mathematics education. Her work focuses on translating STEM education research into practice in higher education settings. She has dedicated her work to scaling and sustaining research-based practices in science and mathematics education. Kelly earned a doctorate in curriculum and instruction with a specialization in science education and a Master of Science in materials science and engineering from Arizona State University. She holds a bachelor’s degree in physics and chemistry from California State University, San Marcos.

Gielstra is a biogeographer, course designer and faculty member in the College of General Studies Environmental Science program, with research interests in human and environmental connections, geography, and polar, mountain and riparian environments. Gielstra earned a doctorate in geography from Texas A&M University and holds a Master of Science in Environmental Studies from the Medical University of South Carolina and a Bachelor of Science in biology from Coastal Carolina University.

Oberding is a coastal ecologist, course designer and faculty member in the College of General Studies Environmental Science program. His research interests include hydrology, mariculture, coral, ecology and environmental remediation. He earned a doctorate in natural resource and environmental management from the University of Hawaii at Manoa and holds a Master of Science in mariculture from Texas A&M University Corpus Christi and a Bachelor of Science in biology from the University of New Mexico.

Cerveny is a Professor of Geography in the Department of Cultural Science, Philosophy, and Religious Studies at Mesa Community College in Arizona. Her research interests are in geomorphology, landscape evolution, Native American rock art conservation, and sustainable heritage management.

The full article is available here: https://doi.org/10.1080/19338341.2025.2592717

Reassessing the Role of Standardized Tests in University Admissions

 There is a long-running debate over using standardized test scores to inform college and graduate admissions decisions, with some arguing that test scores are an important signal of academic strength and others arguing that they are biased and exclusionary. 

This study revisits this issue by analyzing a novel dataset of more than 13,000 applications over roughly a decade to a large public policy master’s program in the United States. 

Consistent with past work, the authors find that GRE scores substantially improve predictions of first-year grades relative to predictions based on GPA alone. However, when these predictions are used to inform admissions decisions, they find that test scores only modestly improve the expected academic quality of admitted students. 

The gap shrinks further when they augment the test-aware and test-blind predictive models with more fine-grained information available in student transcripts and other application materials. Specifically, they estimate that incorporating standardized test scores in our setting would result in admitting students who perform, on average, only 0.03 grade points better. 

They show—both empirically and theoretically—that this pattern stems from a subtle distinction between predictions and decisions. Even with improved predictions, the downstream admissions decisions are often the same; and where there are differences, they often involve selecting between similarly qualified applicants. 

The results indicate that standardized test scores may be less important for university admissions than previously suggested.

The Labor Market Value of Community College Bachelor’s Degrees

 Community colleges are more financially, academically, and geographically accessible than four-year institutions. Yet despite most community college students intending to earn a bachelor’s degree, few successfully transfer and complete one. Community College Baccalaureate (CCB) programs have emerged as an alternative pathway, allowing community colleges to confer bachelor’s degrees directly. However, little is known about how employers value these credentials in the labor market. 

To address this question, the authors of this study conducted the first resume audit study of CCB degrees, submitting fictitious applications to real job vacancies while experimentally varying applicants’ educational credentials, degree-granting institutions, and demographic signals. 

In this pilot study, they focused on the early childhood education (ECE) labor market, a rapidly growing CCB field characterized by labor shortages and increasing educational requirements. They find that employers view CCB degrees similarly to both traditional bachelor’s and associate degrees, with statistically indistinguishable interview-request rates across degree types. 

A text analysis of employer callback messages reveals little evidence that employers communicate differently with CCB applicants, while a net-price simulation suggests that sticker-price comparisons substantially overstate the affordability advantage of CCB programs. 

Together, these findings provide new evidence on the labor market value and affordability of CCB degrees and inform an ongoing large-scale audit study across additional fields and labor markets.

Racial Disparities in Education During and Following the Pandemic

 This study examines pandemic related racial and ethnic disparities in test scores, absenteeism, and disciplinary incidents for K-12 students in the State of Connecticut through the 2024-25 school year.

Consistent with prior studies, the authors find persistent negative effects of the pandemic on test scores, as well as substantial disparities in test scores along racial and ethnic lines.

For middle school, they also find persistent post-pandemic increases in both severe disciplinary incidents overall and racial and ethnic disparities in severe discipline incidents. However, they document substantial recovery in racial and ethnic disparities in attendance rates and chronic absenteeism by 2024-25.

For all outcomes, most of the increases in disparities are associated with Black and Latinx students attending schools that had worse pre-pandemic outcomes and higher pre-pandemic shares of students who are either economically disadvantaged or face learning barriers.

Federal Support to Help Neighborhoods Thrive: Promise Neighborhoods Grantees

 

Today, the Institute of Education Sciences released Federal Support to Help Neighborhoods Thrive: Services, Challenges, and Outcomes of Promise Neighborhoods Grantees (NCEE 2026-006).   Children in the nation’s most distressed neighborhoods often face complex, interconnected challenges stemming from persistent poverty and a lack of coordinated supports and services to help them achieve. The Promise Neighborhoods program aims to improve the academic and developmental outcomes of these children by enabling a grantee organization and its partners to identify priority needs and deliver associated services. Representing the U.S. Department of Education’s largest commitment to “place-based” funding, the program invests substantial resources in struggling communities to address their potentially wide-ranging but specific difficulties. This report assesses the first 25 Promise Neighborhood grantees, covering awards between 2011 and 2018. The report describes these grantees and their neighborhoods and assesses how grantees sought to address neighborhood needs and navigate potential implementation challenges. For grantees that received awards in 2011 and 2012, the report also examines whether children living in Promise Neighborhoods experienced changes in educational outcomes.  Findings include:  The first decade of grantees and their neighborhoods varied in resources and scale; despite these differences, neighborhoods often had high rates of poverty and high-priority needs related to improving children’s academic skills and kindergarten readiness.   Most grantees allocated a majority of their funds to adding and expanding service offerings in their Promise Neighborhoods. Services were intended to address a broad set of needs as required by the program, not just the highest priority needs of their neighborhoods.  Most grantees reported that it was difficult to implement and monitor Promise Neighborhoods services due to a lack of school and district involvement, and many grantees faced broader grant management challenges as well.  Even though educational outcomes are central to the program, changes in math and English language arts achievement, attendance, and high school graduation during the grant years were similar for schools in early Promise Neighborhoods and other comparable schools.  To access the report, please visit: https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/resource-library/report/evaluation-report/federal-support-help-neighborhoods-thrive-services-challenges-and-outcomes-promise-neighborhoods.

Avoid intentional screen time for under-twos

Using screens during the first 1001 days of life can lead to developmental concerns for the next generation, researchers warn.

Digital screen time for under-twos is associated with long-term impacts on health and quality of life, and limited benefits, according to the most comprehensive systematic review yet of global peer-reviewed research into babies’ screen time, published today (Saturday 27 June).  

This has implications for a whole generation and their future quality of life.

Rafe Clayton, School of Media and Communication

Based on the findings, the iADDICT group of researchers from four UK universities recommends that under-twos should not receive any intentional, regular screen time. The academics are calling for any guidance that points under-twos to shared screen time, or suggests that screen technology is suitable for “all ages”, to be reconsidered.   

Researchers stress the findings reflect the pressures of modern digital environments rather than individual parenting choices. They hope the review will provide caregivers with the most up-to-date evidence so they can understand risks and seek support sooner. 

Commissioned by the 1001 Critical Days Foundation, the research was conducted by academics across disciplines of mental health, physical health and social science from the University of Leeds, Leeds Trinity University, Aston University and Loughborough University. The study also invited 174 parents across the UK to share their views on young children’s screen use and their concerns around it through an online survey and focus group interviews. 

Report co-lead Rafe Clayton, Senior Lecturer in Media and Communication at the University of Leeds, said: “We have learned that screen use among the under-twos is a global concern that in 2026 is not being adequately addressed. This has implications for a whole generation and their future quality of life. 

“Screen time guidelines exist for children but are not being followed, in part because the adults who are setting the precedents for societal use are themselves without guidance. As we experience the digital revolution, problematic screen use among adults is common, yet the Government is not currently providing screen time guidelines for adults in the UK, despite the British people wanting them and expecting them. As role models, unguided adults are inadvertently teaching children and babies to develop unhealthy habits and relationships with screen devices and this has to change.” 

The research found a lack of guidance from health professionals for parents about screen use. The researchers believe this is a reminder of the discrepancies between government and healthcare guidance and the real challenges parents face on a daily basis, and call for more targeted support.  

Assessing risk for babies  

Existing guidance from the World Health Organization (2019) and the American Academy of Paediatrics (2024), which recommends that under-twos avoid screen time, is already being exceeded globally during the critical first 1001 days of life, from pregnancy to age two, according to the report.  

The harms of this include reduced opportunities to bond with caregivers, reduced play with peers, limited language development, increased risk of overstimulation, difficulty sleeping, eye health implications, increased risk of childhood obesity and reliance on devices for emotional regulation. However, the review does not establish causal links between screen use and specific developmental conditions. 

The researchers are calling for the creation of a baby screen time risk assessment in collaboration with policymakers, healthcare workers and early years practitioners. This could help services to provide targeted support, guide families toward interactive alternatives, and intervene where developmental vulnerabilities may be emerging. 

Report co-lead Carmen Clayton, Professor of Family and Cultural Dynamics at Leeds Trinity University, said: “Screen time is heavily interwoven into the lives of many families throughout the day. Caregivers are calling for more guidance, but professional support is limited. The Government must consider how to engage with families better about problematic screen use, whilst being sensitive to the fear of judgement that many parents face when opening up about such issues.” 

Tips for parents 

More research is needed into which strategies are most effective for parents and caregivers wanting to reduce and cut out babies’ screen time. But the following strategies from the review have evidenced benefits:  

• Taking children outdoors to spend time in nature prevents screen time and can benefit physical development and eye health. 
• Avoiding using screens at mealtimes could correlate with healthier eating habits. 
• Access to non-digital toys is beneficial for reducing screen time and improving development. 
• Spending time in the physical presence of others – meeting, interacting and playing with other people – supports social development. 

A wake-up call for society 

The review also found that parent and caregiver screen time correlates with babies’ screen time, but the researchers emphasise that parents should not be the focus of blame or criticism here. Digital screens are embedded in our lives – from working, to buying groceries, accessing healthcare and communicating with friends and family – so passive screen exposure is inevitable. 

Families are navigating this challenge without the information and support they need. The responsibility cannot rest solely on their shoulders.  

Dame Andrea Leadsom, Founder of 1001 Critical Days Foundation

To have healthy human futures, the researchers say we need to sustainably change our relationships with digital screens – including smartphones, tablets, TVs and games consoles – as a society. The first steps to societal change are focusing on understanding adult screen time thresholds, and reconsidering any guidance on screen time for children. 

Dame Andrea Leadsom, Founder of 1001 Critical Days Foundation, said: "This landmark review is a wake-up call. The evidence increasingly suggests that screens offer limited benefits for babies and may carry significant risks during the first 1001 days, the most important period of human development. Parents must not be blamed for a problem they did not create. 

"Screens are now part of everyday life and many families are navigating this challenge without the information and support they need. The responsibility cannot rest solely on their shoulders.  

"That is why every family should have access to a Best Start Family Hub, where they could access trusted advice and practical help during their baby's earliest years. 

"Technology companies must play their part too. Parents should not be presented with content that is labelled or promoted as suitable for babies when the evidence points to the contrary. It is time for a more honest approach to how content is promoted. 

“Every baby should experience the best start in life. Helping parents navigate the digital world is an essential part of making that ambition a reality.” 

The report itself is not peer-reviewed but the full list of peer-reviewed studies referenced is available in the report.