Self-efficacy
Did research programs protect science confidence in COVID?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
Biomedical students in a funded undergraduate research program gained science self-efficacy from 2019 to 2020, unlike matched peers outside the program.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Digital learning experiences and training contexts are studied as correlates of ICT or teaching-related self-efficacy and related engagement outcomes.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cohort — CSUN undergraduates surveyed Spring 2019 vs pandemic follow-up; propensity-matched BUILD vs non-BUILD
- N
- N=133 · 22 BUILD and 111 non-BUILD in the matched sample
- Population
- Undergraduates at a large public university in Southern California
- Outcome
- Sense of belonging (or related psychosocial outcome) before vs during COVID-19
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
Did research programs protect science confidence in COVID?
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
133 propensity-matched participants
Based on the PSM analysis, 133 participants produced similar propensity scores.
22 BUILD and 111 non-BUILD students
Of the 133 participants, 16% ( n = 22) were BUILD students, and 83% ( n = 111) were non-BUILD students.
Key findings
Overall science outcomes shifted across years, with significant gains in science self-efficacy and academic self-concept but not science identity. BUILD students increased science self-efficacy while non-BUILD students did not show the same pattern. Belonging differences between BUILD and non-BUILD groups were not statistically significant.
Methodology
At a large California public university, researchers followed biomedical majors with surveys in 2019 and 2020 spanning the onset of COVID-19. Using propensity-score matching, they compared 22 BUILD undergraduate research participants with 111 non-BUILD peers on science identity, science self-efficacy, academic self-concept, and sense of belonging.
Limitations
Matching reduces but does not eliminate selection bias, and the BUILD cell is small. The study cannot prove that BUILD caused the self-efficacy gains or that results generalize beyond one campus and biomedical pathway.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.