'Professor Moms' & 'Hidden Service' in Pandemic Times: Students Report Women Faculty more Supportive & Accommodating amid U.S. COVID Crisis Onset.

Emerging data suggests the COVID-19 crisis exacerbated preexisting, long-documented gender inequities among U.S. faculty in higher education. During the initial Spring 2020 'lockdown' in the U.S., 80 students conveyed their experiences with faculty across 362 courses. We evaluated whether students' reports of faculty supportiveness, accommodations granted, and pandemic-impacted, anticipated grade outcomes differed according to faculty gender via mixed linear models (data on 362 courses were nested within 80 student reporters). Students perceived their women instructors as more supportive, accommodating, and anticipated lesser course grade decreases across the semester than in courses taught by men. Accordingly, we interpret that amidst the 'lockdown' crisis, women faculty earned higher perceived supportiveness and positive student outcomes than their male counterparts. Further, the data likely reflects women faculty's greater conscription into demonstrated care work, despite the coding of such labor as "feminine," thereby rendering such work devalued. To reframe, to the degree that students expect more 'intensive pedagogies,' which invites faculty and administrators to gender disparate demands, such pressures likely translate to 'hidden service' burdens, and correspondingly, less time for career-advancing activities (such as research). Broader implications are discussed, alongside women faculty's documented experiences of acceleration in career and work/family pressures in pandemic-times, which combine to exacerbate long-standing, yet now-amplified penalties, potentially driving a widening, gendered chasm in academic career outcomes. We conclude by offering constructive suggestions to mitigate any discriminatory impacts imposed by students' gendered assessment inputs and expectations.

Stop talking about it already! Co-ruminating and social media focused on COVID-19 was associated with heightened state anxiety, depressive symptoms, and perceived changes in health anxiety during Spring 2020.

BACKGROUND: Social distancing presents a significant obstacle for relationships and threatens mental health. Identifying maladaptive, voluntary coping strategies may inform how to maintain interpersonal relationships and mental health during quarantine. Co-ruminating with peers on negative events, moods and fears has adjustment trade-offs of increasing depression and anxiety risk while also enhancing friendship quality. Similarly, social media use is associated with social benefits and risk to mental health. We extend prior research by examining whether co-ruminating on COVID-19, social media use, and social media use focused on COVID-19 during social isolation was associated with heightened depression and anxiety symptoms but also lower loneliness and higher social support during initial lockdown measures in the USA. METHODS: Adults were recruited through social media (n = 345) to complete self-report surveys on co-rumination, social media use, social distancing, social support from March-May 2020. During this cross-sectional assessment, in addition to completing surveys on current depressive symptoms and state and health anxiety, participants also provided retrospective report of their perceived health anxiety levels six months prior. RESULTS: Co-ruminating on COVID-19 with peers and greater time on social media focused on COVID-19 predicted perceived increases in health anxiety and were also associated with higher depressive symptoms and state anxiety, even after controlling for significant demographic predictors. Further, in the context of social distancing, both interaction strategies failed to confer social benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Results have direct implications for maintaining psychosocial health during social distancing restrictions. Adults may modify how they engage with peers by limiting COVID-19 content on social media and COVID-19 discussion.