Rushing through assignments due to poor time management can compromise the quality of the work produced. When students allocate sufficient time for research, critical thinking, and writing, they can produce well-structured and well-researched papers that demonstrate a deeper understanding of the subject matter.
In academic settings, students often have multiple assignments and projects to complete simultaneously. Effective time management allows them to prioritize tasks, allocate time appropriately for each, and avoid feeling overwhelmed by the workload.
Quality academic assignments require extensive research to support arguments and claims. Proper time management enables students to spend adequate time researching and gathering relevant and credible sources to enhance the assignment’s credibility and depth.
Procrastination is a common challenge among students, often leading to rushed and subpar work. Time management techniques, such as setting specific time blocks for working on assignments, helping students overcome procrastination, and maintaining a consistent pace in their work.
Time management provides students with opportunities to seek help and feedback from teachers, professors, or peers. When assignments are completed well in advance, students have time to clarify doubts, seek guidance, and incorporate valuable feedback to improve their work.
Effective time management enables students to strike a balance between academic commitments and extracurricular activities. By allocating time for both, students can excel in their studies while pursuing their interests and passions outside the classroom.
Properly managing time for academic assignments reduces the stress and anxiety associated with looming deadlines and incomplete tasks. Students can approach their work with a clear and focused mind-set, leading to better performance and overall wellbeing.
Time management for academic assignments helps students develop better time estimation skills. Over time, they become more adept at gauging how long tasks will take, allowing for more realistic planning and allocation of time for future assignments.
Learning time management skills fosters discipline and responsibility in students. They learn to prioritize their academic responsibilities, adhere to schedules, and take ownership of their learning process.
Effective time management is a fundamental skill for academic success. By cultivating time management skills early on, students can not only excel academically but also develop valuable life skills that will serve them well in their future endeavors.
Let us now explore the tips and strategies to manage time efficiently for successful academic assignments.
Now that you know all about time management, you, too, will be able to balance your life efficiently. Initially, you might need to take assistance from professionals of Myassignmenthelp, an assignment help company.
With these hacks, you can bid farewell to procrastination and embrace a newfound harmony between time and accomplishment. Rewrite the story of how you conquered your assignments, one well-managed minute at a time!
In the fast-paced world of software development and design, managing time effectively for assignments is not just a skill—it’s a necessity. At Designveloper , our extensive experience in delivering high-quality projects on schedule has taught us the importance of time management in ensuring both productivity and work-life balance. Drawing from this reservoir of knowledge, we offer insights and integrated advice on how to manage time effectively for assignments, ensuring that tasks are not just completed, but accomplished with efficiency and excellence.
Also published on
Share post on
Insights worth keeping. Get them weekly.
Simply register below to receive our weekly newsletters with the newest blog posts
4 tips to help you complete online assignments on time.
Most of the people who study online have other demanding commitments. As a result, online assignments can pile up and become overwhelming. At the last minute you may find yourself scrambling to get your assignment submitted before the clock strikes 12 midnight. Or, a worse scenario might be that you miss the deadline completely, thinking that you had more time. In order to avoid these mishaps and ensure you complete your online assignments on time, you should organize around your hectic schedule. The following strategies are what I used to ensure that all of my assignments were submitted on time.
At least a week before the official commencement of class, a course outline is usually posted in the course area. This course outline gives the assignments for each week. Get a head start by reviewing the eLearning course outline, a day or two prior, instead of waiting until class begins. Then create a time table; this way you already have a feel of what is expected of you for the entire course.
Pay specific attention to those assignments that are not a part of the discussion assignments. Usually, the weekly discussions are easier to complete than the written assignments. Use a calendar and mark the dates for the assignments for the course, depending on the length of the course. My courses at Walden University were 8 weeks long, which made it was easy for me to write down the courses on a ruled paper and stick it on my working desk where it was always visible.
The goal of writing down the assignments is to have a mental knowledge about how you will be able to fit in with your work schedule. For me working out how I will do my assignments was a little less challenging because we were given a monthly duty-sheet, at work, the majority of the times.
Usually, the assignments are interrelated to the classroom discussions; this makes it easier to source the information. Take time to read some of the recommended chapters and make sure to use the assignment questions and criteria for grading as a guide.
As you go along sourcing information, you may want to bookmark the pages you read, if it is a printed copy. If it is a digital book, you can print the relevant pages (if you have a preference for reading on paper than on a computer) and highlight the parts of the passage which you think answers the questions. Be sure to bookmark URLs to library articles you want to use for referencing, according to school’s reference guidelines. Also, remember to keep all printed material in a labeled folder so you can easily find when you are ready to construct your assignment.
If you have a brilliant idea while reading write it down and make sure your writing is legible. Sometimes we tell ourselves we will remember; however, if we fail to write, it is likely we will forget what these ideas were when it is time to do the assignment. If you are one who does not mind getting your book dirty you can make notes in the books as you go along.
For me, I enjoyed writing ideas alongside the text when it triggered an idea, but I used pencil which can be easily erased if I decide to sell my used books. When I wrote down my ideas, it was easier for me when it was time to do the first draft of my online assignment. Furthermore, if you fail to start your assignment early, the notes will provide a foundation on which to build your points, quickly.
Sometimes, you might have written assignments due weekly or bi-weekly; make sure that you recheck the date for submission. Review your reading material and use the notes and highlighted text as a guide to formatting your question.
When writing the draft for your online assignment, use the criteria and make sure that you answer the questions. Use appropriate headings and sub-headings to make your assignment look professional.
When writing the draft, you may find you may write more than the stipulated pages, but do not worry. The best way to make a brilliant online assignment is to write the thoughts as they flow then taking the time to arrange your content appropriately under the headings.
After you have done brainstorming and free-writing, look back at what you wrote and rearrange the content accordingly. A well written online assignment should be reader friendly. Avoid long sentences where necessary and use appropriate scenarios or examples to make your point to the instructor. Write as concisely as possible and ensure that you do not go above the page stipulations. If you did not write the introduction earlier on, now is the time to do so. Review guidelines for writing an introduction. Lastly, make sure to add a conclusion and references for your assignment (Check guidelines for referencing format), then proof read. (You can also use tools such as Grammarly for grammar check and Turnitin to help with avoiding plagiarism, if available in your classroom resources).
The tips above are flexible. Feel free to add your individuality or preferences and make the tips more relevant to your circumstances. These strategies worked for me and from my recollection I only submitted a late assignment once in my almost 3.8 years of online studying. Some instructors deduct marks for late submission of assignments so please strive to be early when submitting your online assignments. All the best in your online learning experience.
For further insight into how you can succeed in online learning, read the article Five-step Strategy for Student Success with Online Learning .
Examining the reasoning behind your assessments can help shape your approach to tardy work, says Jennifer Gonzalez.
When she was teaching, Jennifer Gonzalez used to plod through a “pointless” exercise at the end of the term: allowing a few students to complete late assignments and then docking their scores by 50 percent for tardiness. In her recent blog post , she reflects on why that practice didn’t help her students and offers suggestions from other educators on how cope with late work.
The first step, Gonzalez says, is to examine your assessment procedures as a whole. Ask, “What do your grades represent?” The emphasis should be on learning and growth, not compliance. “If your grades are too compliance-based,” Gonzalez says, “consider how you might shift things so they more accurately represent learning.” Look also at the quantity of what you grade, she advises. Many assignments function as practice, not assessment. Shift to fewer graded assignments, she says, even if it is a challenge to “convince your students that ungraded practice is worthwhile because it will help their performance on the big things.”
The final step for evaluating your grading system is asking yourself, “What do I assume late work means?” Gonzalez confesses, “I’m embarrassed to admit that when I first started teaching, I assumed most students with missing work were just unmotivated.” But lack of motivation is rarely the cause; many students don’t complete homework because they don’t have the resources of their peers.
The most important factor in your grading system? Creating a plan you can actually keep up with, Gonzalez says. Once you establish a system, you can develop a strategy for late work. She offers a range of possible options, curated from other teachers through social media, ranging from penalties to the elimination of deadlines.
Many teachers still opt for penalties, and there’s a reason: “When work is turned in weeks or even months late, it can lose its value as a learning opportunity because it is no longer aligned with what’s happening in class.” If you choose penalization for tardy assignments, a reduction in points can motivate students to complete the work, even if it is late. “This policy still rewards students for on-time work without completely de-motivating those who are late, builds in some accountability for lateness, and prevents the teacher from having to do a lot of mathematical juggling with a more complex system.”
Other teachers implement a policy that rewards students who turn things in on time by allowing them to resubmit their assignments for improved grades; if the work is late the student can’t retake the assessment for more points or receive feedback.
Punitive policies don't always work as motivators, Gonzalez says, because sometimes the reason for late work isn't related to a lack of motivation. As a result, many teachers are abandoning the practice. "Students may have issues with executive function and could use some help developing systems for managing their time and responsibilities. They may struggle with anxiety. Or they may not have the resources—like time, space, and technology—to consistently complete work at home," she writes.
Some teachers use a separate assessment to “measure factors like adherence to deadlines, neatness, and following non-academic guidelines like font sizes or using the correct heading on a paper.” Completing assignments on-time, in other words, is part of a separate evaluation from the mastery assessment--and students receive grades for both.
“Although most teachers whose schools use this type of system will admit that students and parents don’t take the work habits grade as seriously as the academic grade,” Gonzalez writes, “they report being satisfied that student grades only reflect mastery of the content.” Because better work habits can yield better academic results, having this type of “work habits” score can be used to show students the importance of staying on top of deadlines.
Another popular option for late work is to anticipate it and offer a pass the student can elect to use instead. “Most teachers only offer these passes to replace low-point assignments, not major ones, and they generally only offer 1 to 3 passes per marking period.” A “next day pass” serves a similar purpose; students can use them to extend the deadline by a day. One teacher reports that the introduction of the pass gave her “the lowest rate ever of late work.” Some teachers use extension requests so students can anticipate when they might be late and write a proposal about why their tardiness should be excused.
A floating deadline can help avoid the question of how to address late work altogether. Giving students a flexible range of dates when they can submit work allows them to take ownership in their work. “Some teachers offer an incentive to turn in work in the early part of the time frame, such as extra credit or faster feedback, and this helps to spread out the submissions more evenly,” Gonzalez writes. A variation on the flexible deadline allows students to turn in work that’s in process. Teachers then have the chance to review work and give feedback before the final grade. Students can also take responsibility by weighing in on when work should be due. “They may have a better idea than you do about other big events that are happening and assignments that have been given in other classes.”
What is the best policy on late work? The system that actually works for you. Gonzalez encourages teachers to experiment with different approaches and settle on the process that suits you and your students.
Our website uses cookies to offer you the most relevant experience and optimal performance.
By clicking ‘Accept’ you agree to the storing of cookies on your device. Cookie Policies.
It happens quite often that students perceive the home task as an additional burden to all the load of the work to be undertaken throughout a course. And they cannot cope with their homework due to lack of time. It happens since the majority of students do not perform homework immediately when they come home. Of course, it is understandable since they have other activities except performing all academic tasks. But if you want to be a successful student and do your homework in time, never put off till tomorrow what you can do today!
Homework provides students with necessary practice in writing, thinking, reading, and problem-solving. Doing homework in time is very important since it will show your professor that you are a serious student who is interested in the subject. If you perform all your tasks on time, this will result in good grades. In case you will have bad test results, you can fail the class. Performing all assignments in time will help you to learn how to properly manage your time. Also you should note that doing your homework in time will help you to build a sense of responsibility and stay focused.
Do not ignore performing homework tasks since it gives your brain a chance to continue learning and find more interesting information that will help you during classes or even in your future career. Though students understand that they should perform their tasks in time, they may simply forget about one of them as they are overloaded with tons of different assignments. Sometimes, there are also such situations when students are really frustrated. It occurs when they have to do their homework as well as go to work or maybe they feel sick or have some family troubles. We are all humans and we don’t know what to expect from tomorrow, in what situation we may find ourselves. But please do not worry since there is a little surprise for you, whenever you are lost and don’t know how to perform your task in time, you can always find real help right here – qualitycustomessays.com.
This is a usual practice of the educational process to give homework to students on a day-to-day basis. Does this strategy give results? Here are some reasonable arguments about the importance of homework. In fact, there is something hidden in our nature that pushes us to homework. Not depending on the age or social status, we complete different assignments in order to polish some skills. Do not get deluded that only students ought to deal with home assignments. Even mature people, for example, singers or actors, need to do repetitious things to learn and develop in the professional sphere.
There is no surprise that tutees regularly get something to do at home. A teacher is in charge of finding the most appropriate pieces of work and deciding on the frequency of the practice. Here is controversy. The majority of undergraduates witness suffering from the great amount of material to be covered in time after classes. The others claim that they truly derive pleasure from completing homework and admit how advantageous it is for them. So, is homework an effective method for students’ development?
Digging deeper.
First of all, we should clearly understand the essence of the collocation ‘daily homework’. It means a particular amount of work to be completed by a student on his or her own to deepen the knowledge of a topic.
It is worth mentioning that homework is vital not only in terms of learning. It also gives a possibility to get mature by taking the responsibility. One of the features of homework that definitely works for this is the presence of deadlines, which means you should submit a paper within the given amount of time. If not, a student will be punished by various means, for example, by lower points, additional tasks, etc. That is why there is motivation to plan the work and accomplish it on time.
What is more, we can also count to benefits of homework that it teaches to sort out priorities and, accordingly, devote time to the most crucial tasks. For sure, it never happens that you need to work on just one paper at a time; more often, you have a couple of deadlines, especially when the end of a semester is about to come. The best solution here will be to schedule your time and be attentive to the deadlines, so that you do not miss anything out.
Some people are so gifted that they grasp all the necessary information during a lecture, some even do not write any notes. But this is just the minority, most students forget what was discussed at a class the next day. The home task helps to recall and revise. There is research on the human perception that brings in the data that during listening we can memorize only up to twenty percent of the presented information. The rest eighty percent could be gained with the help of processing information on your own, due to the reading activity, exercising, etc.
Therefore, we come to a conclusion: homework takes its rightful place among the most helpful educational practices. It is oriented at encouraging awareness and understanding among learners. Refreshing something that you have heard in a class will serve for collective information to your long-term memory storage. Then, before an exam, there will be no need to cram everything in a night. This is a real chance to pass exams successfully not applying much effort.
We can consider homework to be both practice and experience. Regarding an exact subject, let us say physics, a class program involves having a look at main formulas and concepts of problem-solving, whereas, at home, you employ them to resolve an appropriate exercise. The time limit at school doesn’t give a possibility to cover all the possible problems. Undertake more of them as a part of your home task. It will make you thrive from being well-rounded in a subject. There is enough work performed behind each skill you have. The more you practice, the more erudite you become! Change the way you view things and think of homework as of valuable practice, which you can have for free.
You can easily imagine what happens every evening in thousands of homes: a schoolchild and a list of tasks given by a teacher. The characters may vary, but the course of action remains to be unchanged. Parents usually try to help and to counsel their youngsters to cope with the tasks successfully. It can be performed quite differently, some couples find it acceptable to explain something from time to time, while others fall back upon such methods, as bribery, reasoning, and threats. The problem remains unsolved these days. How to make a child or a student be eager to complete homework?
There is a great number of children who feel stressed at school. Having spent more than a half of a day at this place, they still have something to accomplish at home. Many doubt whether it could ever be efficacious if it evokes such unpleasant emotions in kids. Let us specify the strong and weak sides of the practice of assigning home tasks.
It helps students to reinforce what they have learned at school. Moreover, it may encourage a kid to do additional research on the subject that has lightened the sparkle of interest in him or her. Juniors who take charge of something feel more confident and independent; being in such a state helps them to grow up. The fact of having own role has a serious influence on the personality pushing to acknowledge one’s maturity and powers to move on. What is also beneficial is that being involved in exercising a kid is kept away from the TV and video games.
On the contrast, sometimes, children are so overloaded with homework, that they literally do not have time for anything else. Being chained to computer screen or books, students do not always devote time to have a breath of fresh air. Having no free time, how can a kid become acquainted with all the beauty of nature?
Homework may create an opposite effect when a child will be totally exhausted or will hate school and everything connected with it. There are so many children who wake up with a feeling of loathing because a school day is ahead.
Developing this type of attitude may have a negative impact on the performance and level of education. So, in the future you will notice how destroying school dislike may be. Playing games and having fun together with friends should be an integral component of childhood. It is vital not to let a kid be deprived of simple happiness to communicate with friends, playing tricks and discovering the World together.
Homework may be one of the reasons to prevent a person from developing social skills. Poring over books should not displace contacting and spending quality time with peers.
To sum up, despite all the positive sides of homework, we should keep in mind a couple of essential things. Some periods of a school term or academic year may be rather strained and burdensome. To avoid this, you should be very careful about planning your schedule and not put aside things that have been assigned to you recently. Prioritize the tasks according to their deadlines. Only being organized, you have a chance to ace. Perceive homework as your chance to polish skills, practice, focus on the concrete issues that are worth attention, learn how to deal with problems, and master your skills.
I’m new here 15% OFF
Post Categories
Looking where to BUY AN ESSAY?
for your first order
Recent Posts
Process Communication
Videos in Education: A Beneficial Trend for Studying
Join us today!
start earning A commission!
BMC Medical Education volume 24 , Article number: 973 ( 2024 ) Cite this article
Metrics details
Efficient learning strategies and resource utilization are critical in medical education, especially for complex subjects like renal physiology. This is increasingly important given the rise in chronic renal diseases and the decline in nephrology fellowships. However, the correlations between study time, perceived utility of learning resources, and academic performance are not well-explored, which led to this study.
A cross-sectional survey was conducted with second-year medical students at the University of Bergen, Norway, to assess their preferred learning resources and study time dedicated to renal physiology. Responses were correlated with end-of-term exam scores.
The study revealed no significant correlation between time spent studying and overall academic performance, highlighting the importance of study quality over quantity. Preferences for active learning resources, such as Team-Based Learning, interactive lessons and formative assignments, were positively correlated with better academic performance. A notable correlation was found between students’ valuation of teachers’ professional competence and their total academic scores. Conversely, perceived difficulty across the curriculum and reliance on self-found online resources in renal physiology correlated negatively with academic performance. ‘The Renal Pod’, a locally produced renal physiology podcast, was popular across grades. Interestingly, students who listened to all episodes once achieved higher exam scores compared to those who listened to only some episodes, reflecting a strategic approach to podcast use. Textbooks, while less popular, did not correlate with higher exam scores. Despite the specific focus on renal physiology, learning preferences are systematically correlated with broader academic outcomes, reflecting the interconnected nature of medical education.
The study suggests that the quality and strategic approaches to learning significantly impact academic performance. Successful learners tend to be proactive, engaged, and strategic, valuing expert instruction and active participation. These findings support the integration of student-activating teaching methods and assignments that reward deep learning.
Peer Review reports
Medical students are under pressure to acquire knowledge and skills in many fields during medical school, which means they need to prioritize their time and study efforts wisely. To study effectively, students must be able to choose among a variety of learning resources. Traditionally, students’ preferred mode of learning has been attributed to learning styles described as relatively stable personality traits [ 1 ]. However, recent studies indicate that students adapt their study approaches based on contextual factors, such as the perceived importance of the study topic, its difficulty, stress levels, assessment methods, and identified learning needs [ 2 , 3 ]. Research on teaching preferences among students yields mixed results regarding their inclination toward active learning methods versus passive formats such as lecturing [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ].
Notably, students do not always utilize learning resources that correlate with better exam performance. This discrepancy might stem from misaligned assessment methods or students’ challenges in accurately assessing their learning needs [ 4 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Investigating the relationship between students’ perceptions of learning resource usefulness and exam performance is likely to offer valuable insights for educators and students in selecting the most effective learning tools.
Our study specifically targets the learning of renal physiology, a subject of increasing importance due to the rising prevalence of chronic renal diseases, which poses a significant socioeconomic challenge [ 11 ]. This concern is compounded by a notable decline in nephrology fellowship enrollments [ 12 , 13 , 14 ], suggesting a potential future strain on the nephrology workforce. The complexity of renal physiology, and nephrology as a specialty, contributes to this issue. A survey of internal medicine subspecialty fellows revealed that 31% of the respondents found nephrology to be the most challenging physiology course in medical school, and 24% would have considered nephrology had it been taught effectively [ 13 ]. A revamped renal physiology course, incorporating diverse learning resources, yielded positive student attitudes toward both renal physiology and nephrology [ 12 ].
It is plausible that students who engage in active learning and utilize multiple resources also achieve better academically. Incorporating a range of active learning resources into the curriculum could enhance educational quality and, in the long run, boost the healthcare system, including nephrology recruitment. To our knowledge, the relationship between academic success and preferred learning resources has not been explored in the context of renal physiology. Our study aimed to examine the association between students’ study time, their perceptions of learning resource efficacy, and their summative assessment outcomes to identify characteristics of successful learners.
The study was conducted at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, which offers a six-year medical program. In 2015, an integrated curriculum was implemented, emphasizing basic sciences during the first two years and progressively integrating clinical exposure. The program is structured into 12 instructional units, divided into spring and fall semesters, with each year consisting of two semesters. Additionally, there are elective periods from the 6th semester (3rd year), consisting of four weeks each January, that allow students to delve into specific topics of interest.
The program is divided into two study tracks: one based entirely in Bergen and another called ‘Vestlandslegen,’ where students spend the first three years in Bergen and the last three years in Stavanger. This structure allows for diverse clinical exposure in different healthcare settings. Clinical practice is a significant component of the program, starting early in the education. From the fourth year, students are placed in extended clinical rotations across various specialties, including psychiatry, internal medicine, surgery, obstetrics/gynecology, pediatrics, general practice, and community medicine. These rotations take place in multiple hospitals, including Haukeland University Hospital in Bergen, Stavanger University Hospital, Førde Central Hospital, and Haugesund Hospital. The program also offers opportunities for international clinical placements in Uganda and Thailand during the final years.
Our study focused on MED4 (the 4th semester), where students encounter a broad spectrum of medical sciences, including the renal and urinary systems; cardiovascular, respiratory, endocrine, digestive, and reproductive systems; as well as energy and thermoregulation, nutrition, microbiology, environmental medicine, and general practice. Environmental medicine and general practice are assessed on a continuous basis with a pass/fail evaluation, while the rest of the subjects are assessed through a 33-credit, six-hour summative exam, held at the end of the semester. This exam includes a mix of short-answer questions requiring reasoning and predominantly reasoning-based multiple-choice questions (MCQs). The grading scale for MED4 ranges from A to F, where A represents excellent performance, B is very good, C is good, D is satisfactory, E is sufficient, and F is fail.
Teaching methods in MED4 include traditional lectures, TBL sessions, practical lab courses, quizzes, and online teacher-moderated discussion forums. At least half of the teaching time is dedicated to active learning methods to enhance student engagement and understanding. All lab courses and dissections are mandatory and include compulsory assignments that must be passed. A new and unique feature of the MED4 curriculum is the introduction of formative assignments with feedback. These activities are also mandatory and designed to train students in presenting solutions to academic questions to an instructor who is not a specialist in the field. The instructors receive prior instruction from specialists and are provided with a written guide to ensure consistency in feedback. Each semester, one session is held early, in the middle, and towards the end of the semester. During these sessions, students receive two central assignments from specific subject areas that have recently been covered. Students have 90 min to prepare their responses, and the preparation can involve any resources, including artificial intelligence tools. After the preparation period, students present their solutions in pairs to a faculty member. Each pair is allotted 15 min to present, with each student presenting one of the assignments for a maximum of five minutes. Feedback is provided on whether the presentation meets, falls below, or exceeds expectations regarding clarity and accuracy for non-specialists. After these sessions, a discussion forum is created for further questions, monitored by the task owner, with participation encouraged from the entire cohort.
The renal physiology segment of MED4 encompasses an in-depth exploration of renal function, including water and electrolyte balance and acid-base homeostasis. Students are required to engage in 3 mandatory Team-Based Learning (TBL) sessions and a full-day practical lab course. Additionally, they have the option to attend 4 interactive lessons structured as 1.5-hour flipped classroom sessions. These interactive lessons require preparation in the form of reading textbook chapters, watching instructional videos, or listening to selected podcasts that succinctly cover the content traditionally delivered in lectures. These optional interactive lessons are popular, with about two-thirds of the cohort attending regularly. Complementary learning resources for this segment include suggested study group assignments, a FAQ with previously answered student questions, and ‘The Renal Pod’ podcast series. This multi-faceted approach aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of renal physiology and prepare students for clinical practice.
A 13-question survey was developed using SurveyXact to collect data for this cross-sectional study (supplementary file). The survey was designed in accordance with established guidelines [ 15 , 16 ] while being sensitive to the study context to optimize relevance for the students being surveyed. To ensure validity, we informally tested the questions with students and colleagues, and consulted with experts from the Center for Medical Education at the University of Bergen. Reliability was promoted through the use of clear and unambiguous wording to ensure consistent responses.
The survey comprised both closed- and open-ended questions, designed to identify factors students considered most important for learning renal physiology, assess the perceived difficulty of renal physiology relative to other MED4 subjects, and determine the time dedicated to studying these areas. Additionally, it evaluated the perceived utility of different learning resources, the time invested in preparing for learning activities in renal physiology, the effectiveness and optimal episode length of the renal podcast, and recommendations for the formative assignment pilot. The learning resources included in the survey were chosen based on their availability to students, previous usage in the course, and their relevance as identified in preliminary discussions with faculty and students.
The survey was distributed to 201 students enrolled in MED4. Participation was voluntary, and unique exam identifiers enabled the correlation of survey responses with exam outcomes. Anonymity was ensured, as these identifiers could not be traced back to individual students’ identities. Respondents were informed that their participation would not have any bearing on their grades, with no incentives provided. Out of the 201 students, 6 withdrew before the exam, leaving 195 students. Of these, 189 attended the exam and were considered eligible for analysis, resulting in a response rate of 38.1%.
The survey responses were compared to academic performance, as indicated by exam grades and scores, to discern patterns in learning efficacy and resource utilization. Respondents were categorized into three performance groups based on their MED4 exam grade A-F: ‘high performers’ (A or B, n = 24), ‘mid performers’ (C, n = 24), and ‘low performers’ (D, E, or F, n = 24). For each group, the percentage of responses to each closed-ended question was calculated and presented as bar charts (Figs. 2–7). The respondents’ exam scores were then organized from lowest to highest and plotted to show the cumulative distribution across the response categories (right panels of Figs. 1–2 and 4–7). In cases where fewer than eight respondents selected the same option, exam scores from respondents in adjacent categories with similar responses were combined for a more robust data representation.
To further analyze the data, Likert-scale responses from the survey were converted into numerical values on scales of 1–3, 1–5, or 1–7, depending on the question. These numerical values were subsequently correlated with total exam scores and renal physiology scores using Spearman’s rho analysis. The ‘not used’ responses from Sect. 4 of the survey were excluded from this analysis. To address potential biases introduced by merging different response categories (e.g., ‘useful’ and ‘very useful’), we re-analyzed the data without merging the categories and observed similar patterns, supporting the consistency of our findings.
Exam scores are presented as the mean values ± standard deviations (SD). The number of participants (n) in the different response cohorts is indicated in the figure legends. The differences in exam scores between the whole class ( n = 189), the sample population ( n = 72) and the nonresponders ( n = 117) were assessed using one-way ANOVA and linear regression analyses, assuming a normal distribution of scores. Differences in exam scores among the different response cohorts were evaluated using one-way ANOVA, with the assumption of homogeneity of variances being met, followed by Tukey’s post hoc test for multiple comparisons. Additionally, Spearman’s rho analysis was employed to examine the relationships between students’ preferences for various learning resources and their academic performance. We used Bonferroni correction for the multiple correlations to adjust for the increased risk of Type I error and report both uncorrected and adjusted p-values. All the statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism software version 10.1.1. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.
Out of 189 eligible MED4 students, 72 (38% response rate) completed the questionnaire and provided exam identifiers for anonymous grade linkage. The grade distribution centered around a ‘C’ for both the sample and the entire class, as shown in Fig. 1 A. Regression analyses revealed a high degree of explanation (R² = 0.61) for the linear relationship between total exam scores and renal physiology scores across the whole class, the sample population, and the non-respondents. The slopes and intercepts were similar across these groups ( p = 0.96), indicating a consistent pattern in the relationship between total scores and renal physiology scores. However, the sample population exhibited a tendency toward higher performance, particularly in the lower-performing group, as depicted in Fig. 1 B. Compared to the nonrespondents ( n = 117), the difference in total and renal scores was statistically significant (F (5, 750) = 10.24, p < 0.0001), indicating some degree of self-selection among the respondents.
Comparison of exam grades and scores between the whole class and the sample population. Left panel : Grades are categorized into AB ( n = 24/ n = 41), C ( n = 24/ n = 71), and DEF ( n = 24/ n = 77). Right panel : Scores, represented as fractions of the total obtainable score, are plotted in ascending order against the cumulative fraction of students for the whole class ( n = 189) and the sample population ( n = 72), with values ranging from 1/n to n/n
When evaluating factors that are critical to successful learning of renal physiology, 83% of the students across all the performance groups considered the communication skills of teachers to be ‘Very important’. Self-effort and teachers’ professional competence followed, with 67% and 58%, respectively, of the students rating these as ‘Very important’.
Notably, all the ‘high performers’ considered self-effort ‘Important’ or ‘Very important’, while 4% of ‘mid performers’ and 8% of the ‘low performers’ rated it merely ‘Somewhat important’. Teachers’ charisma was deemed the least influential, with 42% of ‘high performers’, 16% of ‘mid performers’, and 36% of ‘low performers’ reporting it ‘very important’.
Spearman’s rho analysis showed that students’ perceived importance of teachers’ professional competence positively correlated with their performance in renal physiology (rho, ρ = 0.23, p = 0.05), their perceived importance of self-effort (ρ = 0.25, p = 0.03), teacher communication skills (ρ = 0.23, p = 0.05), and the valuation of the following methods for learning renal physiology: TBL (ρ = 0.26, p = 0.03), interactive lessons (ρ = 0.29, p = 0.01), and instructive videos (ρ = 0.25, p = 0.04). However, these correlations were not significant after Bonferroni correction for repeated analyses (p adjusted > 0.05).
Additionally, self-effort was positively correlated with the perceived usefulness of interactive lessons (ρ = 0.32, p = 0.007, p adjusted > 0.05) and instructive videos (ρ = 0.30, p = 0.01, p adjusted > 0.05). In contrast, teachers’ charisma was negatively correlated to the time spent on preparing for the renal physiology lab (ρ = -0.34, p = 0.004, p adjusted > 0.05), and TBL (ρ = -0.24, p = 0.04, p adjusted > 0.05) as well as the valuation of ‘The renal Pod’ (ρ = -0.29, p = 0.01, p adjusted > 0.05) and ‘Renal physiology lab’ (ρ = -0.23, p = 0.05, p adjusted > 0.05).
Interestingly, the reported time ‘spent learning renal physiology compared to other subjects in MED4’ correlated positively to its perceived difficulty (ρ = 0.43, p < 0.001, adjusted p < 0.01) as well as difficulty of heart physiology (ρ = 0.45, p < 0.001, adjusted p < 0.01). Further, the perceived difficulty of renal physiology correlated positively with that of heart physiology (ρ = 0.51, p < 0.001, adjusted p < 0.01) and negatively to the valuation of TBL (ρ = -0.34, p = 0.004, p adjusted > 0.05), textbook (ρ = -0.33, p = 0.02, p adjusted > 0.05) and recommendation for continuing formative assignments with feedback (ρ = -0.30, p = 0.04, p adjusted > 0.05).
The most favored educational materials among the respondents were instructive video videos (96%), interactive lessons (94%), renal physiology labs (89%), and The Renal Pod (79%), each rated as ‘very useful’, ‘useful’ or ‘somewhat useful’.
As shown in Figs. 2 and 3 , ‘high performers’ and ‘mid performers’ predominantly rated ‘Interactive lessons’ (79%), ‘Asynchronous videos’ (75%), and ‘TBL’ (60%) as ‘very useful’ or ‘useful’. Conversely, ‘low performers’ preferred ‘Asynchronous videos’ (79%), ‘The Renal Pod’ (63%), and ‘Renal physiology lab’ (58%) as their top learning resources.
Comparison of the perceived usefulness of active learning methods and academic performance. The left panel shows the distribution of students’ preferences across different grade categories; high (AB), mid (C), and low (DEF) performers. The bars are divided into segments representing preference-cohorts as indicated by the legends. The right panels depict exam scores sorted from low to high as a function of the cohort-normalized number of students. Upper panel . Significant differences in exam scores were observed among the preference cohorts for ‘TBL’. Mean exam scores for the three cohorts (right panel): ‘Very useful/useful’; 74.6% ± 9.7%, n = 40), ‘Somewhat useful’; 72.8% ± 10.0%, n = 20, ‘Not very useful/not useful’; 63.4% ± 9.5%, n = 12. ANOVA: F (2, 69) = 6.121, p = 0.0036. Post hoc tests: **p = 0.0024 between the ‘Very useful/useful’ and ‘Not very useful/not useful’ cohorts, and *p = 0.0286 between the ‘Somewhat useful’ and ‘Not very useful/not useful’ cohorts. Middle and lower panels. No significant differences in exam scores were seen among the preference-cohorts for ‘Interactive lessons’ or ‘Renal physiology lab’
Students who rated active learning methods (TBL, interactive lessons and the renal physiology lab) as most useful also obtained the highest exam scores (Fig. 2 ). This trend was particularly pronounced for TBL, where the average exam score in the ‘Very Useful’ and ‘Useful’ cohorts was 0.75 ± 0.10, compared to 0.63 ± 0.09 in the ‘Not Very Useful’ and ‘Not Useful’ cohorts (p = 0.002). The ‘Somewhat Useful’ cohort also outperformed those who found TBL ‘not useful’ or ‘not very useful’ ( p = 0.029).
‘Other resources’, representing self-found online materials, and ‘Textbook’ were perceived as the least useful across all groups (Fig. 3 ). Notably, a trend emerged where ‘high performers’ seemed to value textbooks more than ‘low performers’ (21% vs. 8%), while ‘low performers’ showed a greater inclination towards ‘Other resources’ compared to ‘high performers’ (50% vs. 25%).
Comparison of perceived usefulness of indicated learning methods and academic performance ( p > 0.05). See Fig. 2 for a detailed explanation of the panel structure
Spearman’s rho analysis further supported these observations, revealing positive correlations between overall MED4 exam score and students’ valuation of TBL (ρ = 0.28, p = 0.02, p adjusted > 0.05) and interactive lessons (ρ = 0.27, p = 0.03, p adjusted > 0.05). Conversely, MED4 exam score correlated negatively with perceived usefulness of self-found online resources (ρ = − 0.27, p = 0.04, adjusted > 0.05), suggesting that reliance on these resources might not be as beneficial for academic success.
The survey data showed that circulatory and renal physiology were the most challenging subjects, with only 4% of students finding them ‘Very easy’ or ‘easy’. Specifically, 71% rated circulatory physiology and 33% rated renal physiology as ‘difficult’ or ‘very difficult’. In contrast, nutrition was perceived as the least challenging, with 58% considering it ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’, and none finding it ‘very difficult’.
Students who perceived subjects as less challenging tended to perform better academically. For instance, only 4% of ‘high performers’ found renal physiology ‘very difficult,’ compared to 8% of ‘mid performers’ and 21% of ‘low performers’. This expected trend across disciplines is exemplified in Fig. 4 , which shows that perceived difficulty in renal physiology and endocrinology is associated with lower exam scores.
Comparison of perceived difficulty of renal physiology and academic performance. See Fig. 2 for a detailed explanation of the panel structure. Upper panel . Significant differences in exam scores were observed based on the perceived difficulty of renal physiology. Mean exam scores for the three cohorts (right panel): ‘Easy/moderate’; 75.1% ± 9.7%, n = 32, ‘Hard’; 71.8% ± 10.3%, n = 33, ‘Very hard’; 64.3% ± 10.8%, n = 8. ANOVA: F (2, 70) = 3.793, p = 0.0273. Post hoc tests: *p = 0.0228 between the ‘Easy/moderate’ and ‘Very hard’ cohorts. Lower panel : Significant differences in exam scores were observed based on the perceived difficulty of endocrinology. Mean exam scores for the three cohorts (right panel): ‘Very easy/easy’; 79.5% ± 7.8%, n = 13, ‘Moderate’; 73.8% ± 9.2%, n = 39, ‘Hard/very hard’; 64.9% ± 9.7%, n = 21. ANOVA: F (2, 70) = 11.49, p < 0.0001. Post hoc tests: ****p < 0.0001 between the ‘Very easy/easy’ and ‘Hard/very hard’ cohorts, and **p = 0.0017 between the ‘Moderate’ and ‘Hard/very hard’ cohorts
These observations align with Spearman’s rho analysis, revealing negative correlations between MED4 exam score and perceived difficulty across the MED4 curriculum. Specifically, perceptions of difficulty in endocrinology (ρ = − 0.52, p < 0.0001, p adjusted < 0.01), heart physiology (ρ = − 0.35, p = 0.002, p adjusted > 0.05), renal physiology (ρ = − 0.30, p = 0.01, p adjusted > 0.05), and digestive system (ρ = − 0.25, p = 0.04, p adjusted > 0.05).
Similarly, endocrinology showed a pattern where perceived difficulty correlated positively with perceived difficulty in other topics such as digestive system (ρ = 0.46, p < 0.001, p adjusted < 0.01), respiratory system (ρ = 0.29, p = 0.01, p adjusted > 0.05), Heart (ρ = 0.27, p = 0.02 p adjusted > 0.05 and circulation (ρ = 0.26, p = 0.03 p adjusted > 0.05. These correlations, along with negative correlations with MED4 exam score (ρ = − 0.52, p < 0.001, p adjusted < 0.01) as well as renal score (ρ = − 0.34, p = 0.003, p adjusted > 0.05) and the valuation of TBL (ρ = − 0.24, p = 0.04, p adjusted > 0.05) support the conclusion that students’ perceptions of subject difficulty are aligned with both their preferred learning methods and their academic outcomes in the broader MED4 curriculum.
The left panels of Fig. 5 indicate that mid-performers (grade C) are more likely to dedicate extensive time to preparation (more than 2 h), whereas high performers (grades A and B) tend to be more efficient with shorter preparation times (less than 30 min), Among low performers (grades D, E, and F), the most frequently reported preparation time is less than 30 min, followed by 1–2 h, with a notable portion also reporting no preparation.
Comparison of time spent preparing for active learning sessions and academic performance. See Fig. 2 for a detailed explanation of the panel structure. Upper and middle panel. No overall significant difference for TBL and Interactive lessons (p > 0.05). Lower panel. Mean exam scores for the four cohorts (right panel) based on time spent preparing for the ‘Renal Physiology lab’: ‘Not prepared’; 72.4% ± 7.9%, n = 10, ‘Less than 30 min’; 75.1% ± 8.9%, n = 31, ‘More than 1 h’; 67.2% ± 12.5%, n = 19, ‘Anything more than 2hurs’; 73.0% ± 9.7%, n = 14. ANOVA: F (3, 70) = 2.498, p = 0.0667. Post hoc tests: *p = 0.0400 between the ‘Less than 30 min’ and ‘More than 1 h’ cohorts
As shown in Fig. 5 , (lower right panel), an 11% lower exam score was noted in the cohort spending 1–2 h (0.672 ± 0.125) compared to those spending less than 30 min (0.751 ± 0.089) on preparation for ‘The renal physiology lab’ (adjusted p = 0.04). This suggests that while time spent preparing is a factor, the quality and effectiveness of study strategies are likely more crucial for academic performance.
Notably, a positive correlation was observed between the reported time students spent on interactive lectures and their perceived usefulness (ρ = 0.38, p = 0.01, p adjusted > 0.05), as well as with the time dedicated to preparation for these lectures (ρ = 0.51, p < 0.0001, p adjusted < 0.01) and the ‘Renal physiology lab’ (ρ = 0.43, p < 0.0001, p adjusted < 0.01). Conversely, a negative correlation was found with ‘self-found online resources’ (ρ = -0.38, p = 0.008, p adjusted > 0.05). However, as with time spent on other available learning methods, no correlation was found between reported preparation time and exam score.
These findings highlight the interconnectedness between the time spent on preparation for active learning methods, their perceived value, and academic performance.
While approximately 70% of respondents reported spending more time on renal physiology compared to other MED4 subjects, this increased study time did not translate into significantly different academic performance across the cohorts (Fig. 6 upper panel). Specifically, the average exam score for respondents who spent considerably more time on renal physiology was 69.6% ± 12.4%, compared to 72.2% ± 9.9% for those who spent more time, and 73.4% ± 11.0% for those who spent a similar amount or less time studying the subject ( p = 0.69).
The impact of study time and podcast engagement on academic performance. See Fig. 2 for a detailed explanation of the panel structure. Upper panel. No significant difference in academic performance based on time spent studying renal physiology ( p > 0.05). Lower panel . Significant differences in performance based on podcast usage. Mean cohort exam scores (right panel): ‘All the episodes multiple times’; 71.4% ± 10.0%, n = 13 ‘All episodes once’; 76.3% ± 8.7%, n = 22 compared to those who listened to only some episodes: 66.2% ± 8.7%, n = 16. ANOVA, F (4, 67) = 2.958, p = 0.0259) post hoc test: * p = 0.0217
As depicted in Fig. 6 (lower left panel), a substantial majority (85%) of respondents engaged with ‘The Renal Pod’, with 63% having listened to most or all episodes at least once, and 18% reporting multiple listenings of all episodes. Notably, high-performing students (AB) in contrast to their low-performing peers (DEF), predominantly listened to all the episodes once (46%) or not at all (21%) suggesting a strategic approach to podcast utilization.
The results revealed a statistically significant differences ( p = 0.026) in academic performance based on podcast usage (Fig. 6 , lower right panel). Specifically, students who listened to all episodes once achieved higher mean exam scores (76.3% ± 8.7%) compared to those who listened to only some episodes (66.2 ± 8.7%). This finding suggests that moderate and consistent engagement with the podcast is more beneficial for academic success than sporadic listening.
Despite these nuanced usage patterns, a strong desire for more podcast-based learning resources was expressed across all performance levels, with 69 out of 72 respondents advocating for broader podcast availability.
The introduction of the formative assignment pilot in Spring 2022 allowed us to examine its impact on the academic performance of MED4 students. This assignment involved collaborative problem-solving and individual feedback sessions, as described in the study context.
Students across all grade categories expressed a preference for the expansion or continuation of the formative assignment. Specifically, 50% of AB, 42% of C, and 46% of DEF students supported this view (Fig. 7 , left panel). However, 29% of DEF students recommended discontinuation compared to only 4% of AB students (red segments in Fig. 7 , left panel). Additionally, students could respond with ‘other’, which required a free-text explanation. The majority of these free-text responses also supported the formative assignment, indicating a general preference for its continuation or expansion.
Comparison of academic performance and recommendations for the formative assignment, showing significant differences in exam scores based on students’ perceptions of the formative assignment. See Fig. 2 for a detailed explanation of the panel structure. Mean exam scores for the three cohorts (right panel): ‘Should be expanded or continued’; 73.2% ± 10.3%, n = 33, ‘Should be discontinued’; 63.4% ± 10.4%, n = 12, and ‘Other’; 75.0% ± 8.7% n = 27. ANOVA: F (2, 69) = 6.136, p = 0.0035. Post hoc tests: *p = 0.0117 between the ‘Should be expanded or continued’ and ‘Should be discontinued’; **p = 0.0029 between ‘Other ' and ‘Should be discontinued’ cohort
The right panel of Fig. 7 shows that students advocating for the continuation or expansion of the formative assignment had a 13% higher mean exam score (73.2% ± 10.3%) compared to those who preferred its discontinuation (63.4% ± 10.4%, adjusted p = 0.01). ‘Other’ respondents, who largely supported the pilot, had a 15% higher mean exam score (75.0% ± 8.7%, adjusted p = 0.003). Altogether, these results indicate potential benefits of the formative assignment approach.
Our study explored the correlations between time spent studying, students’ perceptions of the utility of learning resources, and their academic performance within the MED4 curriculum, aiming to identify characteristics of successful learners in medical education. While our focus was on renal physiology, primarily due to its comprehensive use of active learning resources, the exam results we analyzed encompassed the entire MED4 curriculum, including scores in specific subjects.
The findings reveal that there is a good correlation between students’ performance in renal physiology and their overall academic success and an interconnectedness between time spent on preparation for active learning methods, their perceived value, and academic performance. This suggests that the learning strategies and resources employed in this challenging subject have transferable value to other academic areas.
In line with our findings, Bin Abdulrahman et al. [ 17 ] highlighted that highly effective medical students tend to employ structured study habits and strategic use of learning resources, which are critical for academic success. In their study, top-performing students reported regular revision, active engagement with learning materials, and a preference for diverse study methods. These habits align with our observation that high-performing students (grades A and B) are more likely to engage with active learning resources such as Team-Based Learning (TBL), interactive lessons, and formative assignments.
We observed that both high and low performers prepared for teaching, with a tendency for most students to report investing more time in learning renal physiology compared to other subjects. However, a significant correlation between time spent studying and academic performance was not evident. This observation, reflecting the heterogeneity within both high and low performer groups, highlights how individual differences in learning strategies, cognitive capabilities, and motivation levels can influence the effectiveness of study time. Although we did not measure students’ prior knowledge, it seems that the essence of what distinguishes more effective learners is not the quantity, but rather the quality of their study time. Aligning with this concept, findings from West and Sadoski emphasize the importance of effective management skills in higher education [ 18 ]. Several other studies support this [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ]. For example, Liles et al reported that 77% of students achieving ‘A’ grades reviewed lecture material on the same day, compared to just 25% of those with ‘C’ grades. Additionally, high achievers were more likely to attend classes, limit online lecture usage, and study for 6–8 hours daily [ 21 ]. In addition to time management skills, West & Sadoski suggest that self-testing skills may improve academic performance [ 18 ]. This aligns with the extensive body of work on retrieval practice, where Roediger and Butler, Karpicke and Blunt, and Dobson have demonstrated the efficacy of retrieval practice in enhancing long-term retention and academic performance [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. This may partly explain why TBL was one of the most popular resources among high performers in our study, as it provided questions that enabled students to test their understanding of the subject. Emke et al. also found that Team-Based Learning can enhance short-term knowledge acquisition, though its long-term effects are less clear without continued practice [ 26 ].
Bansal et al. also found that high-performing students had a preference for deep and strategic learning strategies, contrary to low-performing students, who mostly used the surface approach to learning [ 19 ]. The classification of deep and surface learning approaches, along with their implications for educational practice, is based on the seminal work of Marton and Säljö [ 27 ]. While the deep approach emphasizes understanding concepts and relating ideas, the surface approach emphasizes route memorization [ 28 ].
While TBL shares some similarities with flipped classrooms, such as pre-class preparation and active learning during class, there are key differences. In a flipped classroom, students typically engage with lecture material at home through videos or readings, and then participate in interactive activities during class to deepen their understanding. TBL, on the other hand, emphasizes team-based activities where students work together to solve problems and apply concepts during class. Both approaches aim to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes, but TBL specifically focuses on collaborative learning and peer-to-peer teaching, which can foster a deeper understanding through group discussion and problem-solving.
We observed an 11% improvement in academic performance equivalent to an absolute difference of 20 points out of 179, among respondents who favored TBL and who supported the continuation of formative assignments compared to those who found TBL less favorable and recommended discontinuation of the formative assignment pilot. Notably, formative assignments were not conducted in renal physiology but in other subjects such as cardiology, endocrinology, and digestion and nutrition. Therefore, the potential influence of formative feedback on renal physiology exam performance was not directly evaluated. This suggests that some students might be less adept at interpreting and constructively utilizing the feedback inherent in TBL and formative assignments. In the literature, these abilities are described as feedback literacy and denotes “the understandings, capacities and dispositions needed to make sense of information and use it to enhance work or learning strategies” [ 29 ]. Furthermore, our findings align with studies on flipped classroom methodologies in physiology, which found improved performance in new students [ 30 ] and enhanced students’ learning effectiveness and skills like self-study and problem-solving [ 31 ].
In addition, low performers tended to rank ‘self-effort’ and ‘Textbook’ as a less important factor for learning renal physiology and to rely more on ‘self-found online materials’ and ‘The Renal Pod’ compared to their better performing counterparts. Their perception of subject difficulty, especially in challenging areas like renal physiology, was negatively correlated with academic performance. This attitude, combined with their lower satisfaction with TBL and formative assignments, characterizes low performing students and aligns with their preference for passive learning resources [ 20 , 32 , 33 ]. This preference may stem from their perception of active learning methods as more cognitively demanding, as found by Deslauriers et al. [ 7 ].
While these methods are associated with better academic performance, as supported by the present study, the perceived challenge might drive some students towards passive resources which they believe are less demanding. This highlights a potential disconnect between student perceptions of learning resource effectiveness and their actual impact on academic performance. Moreover, the distinction aligns with the findings of Roediger and Karpicke, who demonstrated that students’ predictions of their own learning are often uncorrelated with actual performance, emphasizing the critical role of retrieval practice in consolidating learning [ 34 ].
An interesting finding in our study is the distinct podcast listening habits among the different student performance groups. While low performers rated ‘The Renal Pod’ as highly useful and 92% engaged with it, their listening patterns varied, with a notable proportion not completing the episodes. In contrast, high performers predominantly listened to all episodes once or not at all, suggesting that a strategic approach to using podcasts as a learning tool is associated with better academic performance in medical education.
Previous literature shows conflicting reports on whether educational podcasts can help students improve their examination scores [ 35 ]. McCarthy et al. argue that podcasts have potential as a supplement to existing curricula, where they can fulfill the need for interested learners [ 36 ]. However, if students perceive podcasts as a replacement for other learning resources, they risk reduced learning efficiency. In particular, since students often engage in other activities while listening to podcasts and listen at double speed, the educational impact may be limited [ 36 ].
In our study, textbooks were perceived as the least useful learning resource, regardless of academic performance. Previous research has indicated that replacing textbooks with evidence-based articles and summary questions does not have a negative impact on students’ academic performance or satisfaction [ 37 ]. Furthermore, studies have revealed that older students do not advise new students to buy many textbooks but rather focus on PowerPoints from professors, old exams and summary notes [ 38 ]. Since teachers typically create exams, this may lead to bias toward the lecture material and undermine students’ motivation to use textbooks. Moreover, when experiencing curriculum overload, many medical students may be compelled to adopt coping strategies and surface approaches to learning.
Although this study was conducted at a single medical school, the findings may have broader applicability. The curriculum at the University of Bergen shares similarities with many European medical schools, particularly in the preclinical phase, where integrated curricula and active learning methods are widely used. This suggests that our findings could provide valuable insights for other educational contexts employing similar strategies. Extending this research to a variety of settings would further validate these results and enhance their generalizability.
Our findings suggest that educators in similar contexts consider placing greater emphasis on active learning resources, such as TBL and formative assignments, to foster deeper learning. By strategically integrating active teaching methods into the curriculum, medical schools may enhance student engagement and academic performance, particularly in complex subjects like renal physiology.
In summary, our findings highlight the relationship between student engagement with learning materials and academic performance. Although we measured correlations between reported use or preferences and academic success, rather than the quality of engagement, we argue that the strategic use of active learning methods and resources like ‘The Renal Pod’ is more critical than the quantity of study time. This emphasize the need to teach students effective study habits. Consequently, educational approaches should extend beyond content delivery to include fostering skills in resource selection, time management, and feedback utilization. Finally, our study implies that assignment methods should be carefully considered for their educational impact, as they are likely to influence student learning behavior and outcomes.
This study, while providing valuable insights into the learning resource preferences of successful learners in medical education, has several limitations.
It is important to acknowledge that correlation does not imply causation. While our correlation analyses highlight relationships between learning resource usage and exam scores, these associations may be influenced by other factors such as students’ intrinsic motivation, prior knowledge, and engagement levels.
The response rate of 38% raises concerns about potential self-selection bias, as the respondents might have been more engaged or motivated, potentially influencing the study’s outcomes. This is evidenced by our finding that the sample population exhibited a higher average total score compared to non-respondents, indicating some level of self-selection among the respondents. Even though the sample population’s academic performance in renal physiology was consistent with the overall class, the self-selection bias might limit the generalizability of our findings. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings.
High exam scores do not necessarily equate to a deep understanding of the subject matter. The exam’s broad scope and its combination of essay questions and reasoning-based MCQs aim to reduce the likelihood of achieving good results solely through memorization. Further studies with practical assessments and long-term retention tests are recommended to better evaluate deep understanding and learning achievements.
The reliance on surveys for data collection introduces potential biases as students might not accurately report their study behaviors. These biases should be considered when interpreting the correlations between learning resource preferences and academic performance.
The absence of demographic data leaves potential factors influencing students’ preferences and performances unexplored. This decision was made to maintain participant anonymity and streamline the survey process, but we recognize that demographic factors could influence the results. The absence of questions regarding traditional lectures, which were not used in renal physiology teaching, may also limit the comprehensiveness of our findings.
While the study was conducted in a single institution, the relevance of the findings has been discussed in detail earlier. However, caution should still be exercised when applying these results to different educational contexts without further validation.
Students who perform well on exams tend to prefer active learning strategies and make strategic use of resources, suggesting that the quality of study time impacts academic performance more than the quantity. Based on these findings, we recommend that educators consider integrating student-active teaching methods into the curriculum and providing guidance on effective study practices to enhance learning outcomes.
All data supporting the findings of this study are contained within the manuscript, the accompanying figures, and the supplementary file. Additional data related to this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
The University of Bergen
European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System
Multiple choice questions
Standard deviation
Team-Based Learning
Case-Based Learning
Newble DI, Gordon MI. The learning style of medical students. Med Educ. 1985;19(1):3–8.
Article Google Scholar
Abdulghani HM, Al-Drees AA, Khalil MS, Ahmad F, Ponnamperuma GG, Amin Z. What factors determine academic achievement in high achieving undergraduate medical students? A qualitative study. Med Teach. 2014;36(sup1):S43–8.
Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R. Learning styles:concepts and evidence. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2008;9(3):105–19.
Wynter L, Burgess A, Kalman E, Heron JE, Bleasel J. Medical students: what educational resources are they using? BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):36.
Bhalli MA, Khan IA, Sattar A, LEARNING STYLE OF MEDICAL STUDENTS, AND ITS CORRELATION WITH PREFERRED TEACHING METHODOLOGIES AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2015;27(4):837–42.
Google Scholar
Bansal S, Bansal M, Ahmad KA, Pandey J. Effects of a flipped classroom approach on learning outcomes of higher and lower performing medical students: a new insight. Adv Educational Res Evaluation. 2020;1(1):24–31.
Deslauriers L, McCarty LS, Miller K, Callaghan K, Kestin G. Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019;116(39):19251–7.
Holland JC, Pawlikowska T. Undergraduate medical students’ usage and perceptions of anatomical case-based learning: comparison of facilitated Small Group discussions and eLearning resources. Anat Sci Educ. 2019;12(3):245–56.
Minhas PS, Ghosh A, Swanzy L. The effects of passive and active learning on student preference and performance in an undergraduate basic science course. Anat Sci Ed. 2012;5(4):200–7.
Ramnanan CJ, Pound LD. Advances in medical education and practice: student perceptions of the flipped classroom. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017;8:63–73.
Lv JC, Zhang LX. Prevalence and disease burden of chronic kidney disease. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2019;1165:3–15.
Roberts JK, Sparks MA, Lehrich RW. Medical student attitudes toward kidney physiology and nephrology: a qualitative study. Ren Fail. 2016;38(10):1683–93.
Jhaveri KD, Sparks MA, Shah HH, Khan S, Chawla A, Desai T, et al. Why not Nephrology? A survey of US Internal Medicine Subspecialty fellows. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61(4):540–6.
Nair D, Pivert KA, Baudy A, Thakar CV. Perceptions of nephrology among medical students and internal medicine residents: a national survey among institutions with nephrology exposure. BMC Nephrol. 2019;20(1):146.
Artino AR, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide 87. Med Teach. 2014;36(6):463–74.
Artino AR, Phillips AW, Utrankar A, Ta AQ, Durning SJ. The questions shape the answers: assessing the quality of published Survey instruments in Health professions Education Research. Acad Med. 2018;93(3):456–63.
Bin Abdulrahman KA, Khalaf AM, Bin Abbas FB, Alanazi OT. Study habits of highly effective medical students. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2021;12:627–33.
West C, Sadoski M. Do study strategies predict academic performance in medical school? Med Educ. 2011;45(7):696–703.
Bansal S, Bansal M, White S. Association between Learning Approaches and Medical Student Academic Progression during Preclinical Training. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2021;12:1343–51.
Bickerdike A, O’Deasmhunaigh C, O’Flynn S, O’Tuathaigh C. Learning strategies, study habits and social networking activity of undergraduate medical students. Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:230–6.
Liles J, Vuk J, Tariq S. Study habits of Medical students: an analysis of which Study habits most contribute to success in the Preclinical years [version 1]. MedEdPublish. 2018;7(61).
Zhou Y, Graham L, West C. The relationship between study strategies and academic performance. Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:324–32.
Roediger HL, Karpicke JD. Test-enhanced learning:taking memory tests improves Long-Term Retention. Psychol Sci. 2006;17(3):249–55.
Karpicke JD, Blunt JR. Retrieval Practice produces more learning than Elaborative studying with Concept Mapping. Science. 2011;331(6018):772–5.
Dobson JL. Retrieval practice is an efficient method of enhancing the retention of anatomy and physiology information. Adv Physiol Educ. 2013;37(2):184–91.
Emke AR, Butler AC, Larsen DP. Effects of Team-based learning on short-term and long-term retention of factual knowledge. Med Teach. 2016;38(3):306–11.
MARTON F, SÄLJÖ R. ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES. IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS*. Br J Educ Psychol. 1976;46(1):4–11.
Samarakoon L, Fernando T, Rodrigo C, Rajapakse S. Learning styles and approaches to learning among medical undergraduates and postgraduates. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13(1):42.
Carless D, Boud D. The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assess Evaluation High Educ. 2018;43(8):1315–25.
Sanchez JC, Lopez-Zapata DF, Pinzon OA, Garcia AM, Morales MD, Trujillo SE. Effect of flipped classroom methodology on the student performance of gastrointestinal and renal physiology entrants and repeaters. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):401.
Lu C, Xu J, Cao Y, Zhang Y, Liu X, Wen H, et al. Examining the effects of student-centered flipped classroom in physiology education. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):233.
Cen XY, Hua Y, Niu S, Yu T. Application of case-based learning in medical student education: a meta-analysis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2021;25(8):3173–81.
Goyal P, Parmar C, Udhan V. Active learning in renal physiology. A students’ perspective and its outcome. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2020;2020; 10(9) 701–704.
Karpicke JD, Roediger HL 3. The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science. 2008;319(5865):966–8.
Cho D, Cosimini M, Espinoza J. Podcasting in medical education: a review of the literature. Korean J Med Educ. 2017;29(4):229–39.
McCarthy J, Porada K, Treat R. Educational Podcast Impact on Student Study Habits and Exam Performance.
Ju C, Bove J, Hochman S. Does the removal of Textbook Reading from Emergency Medicine Resident Education negatively affect In-Service scores? West J Emerg Med. 2020;21(2):434–40.
Schlenker M, Joseph P. Are Printed Textbooks Obsolete in Medical Education? University of Toronto Medical Journal. 2008.
Download references
We thank the students who participated in the survey for their contributions. Special thanks to Professor Arne Tjølsen for his assistance with data analysis, and to Birgitte Skjeldal Hageseter and Bianca Cecilie Nygård for their help in distributing the survey. We also gratefully acknowledge Media City Bergen for providing the facilities and support necessary to produce ‘The Renal Pod’ podcast.
Open access funding provided by University of Bergen.
Sofie Fagervoll Heltne and Sigrid Hovdenakk contributed equally to this work.
Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Jonas Lies vei 91, Bergen, N- 5009, Norway
Sofie Fagervoll Heltne, Sigrid Hovdenakk & Olav Tenstad
Center for Medical Education, Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Monika Kvernenes
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
SFH, SH, and OT conceived the idea for the study. SFH, SH, OT, and MK designed the survey questionnaire. The data analysis and interpretation were carried out by SFH, SH, OT, and MK. The initial draft of the manuscript was written by SFH and SH, while MK and OT provided guidance throughout the study, with OT making the final revision to the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Correspondence to Olav Tenstad .
Ethics approval and consent to participate.
Research ethics guidelines were followed, and the project, identified as S1872, is registered in RETTE (System for Risk and Compliance), a system for processing personal data in research and student projects at the University of Bergen. The introduction to the survey questionnaire informed participants about the collection of candidate numbers and the linking of answers to exam grades. Participants gave informed consent by completing the questionnaire.
Not applicable.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .
Reprints and permissions
Cite this article.
Heltne, S.F., Hovdenakk, S., Kvernenes, M. et al. Study preferences and exam outcomes in medical education: insights from renal physiology. BMC Med Educ 24 , 973 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05964-4
Download citation
Received : 22 December 2023
Accepted : 27 August 2024
Published : 06 September 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05964-4
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
ISSN: 1472-6920
Domenico Montanaro
There have been significant population shifts in the last two decades in this country, and that has had a big impact on U.S. politics.
These demographic shifts are, in large measure, the reason why some states, like Ohio and Iowa, are no longer swing states — and why some have come on the map, like Georgia and Arizona.
These demographic shifts have also coincided with shifts within the parties. Republicans have been able to win over larger percentages of whites without college degrees, while Democrats have gained with college-educated white voters and Asian Americans, while also largely maintaining advantages with Black voters and Latinos.
Stop stressing about the polls. watch these four indicators in the election.
Still, issues matter. The fundamentals on various issues favor Republicans, from views of the economy to immigration, which is why demographics are not necessarily destiny. But they are a crucial part of explaining the political shifts, where the campaigns are focused, and why the seven states everyone is watching most closely are, in fact, the current crop of swing states.
NPR utilized data and projections from William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, as well as presidential exit polls conducted by Edison Research to do a deeper dive into the data and see what it could mean for this year’s presidential election.
Here are eight important findings:
Whites without degrees were a majority of voters overall in 2008, but are now projected to be less than 40% in 2024.
They are down dramatically in all three Blue Wall states as well since 2008: 12 points in Pennsylvania, 8 in Michigan and 7 in Wisconsin. This is happening without much change to nonwhite groups in the Blue Wall states.
Among the seven swing states, the increase in Latinos has been especially acute in Arizona and Nevada, where they now represent 3-in-10 eligible voters in Arizona and 1 in 5 in Nevada. At the same time, white non-college voters are down significantly in the four Sun Belt swing states since 2008: 14 points in Nevada, 13 in Arizona, 13 in North Carolina and 10 in Georgia.
In the Blue Wall states, white non-college voters make up a significant share of the eligible voting population — half or more.
Trump turned them out in greater numbers in 2020 than in 2016. But Biden was able to win all three Blue Wall states because he ate into Trump’s margins with the group in Wisconsin and Michigan and kept it even in Pennsylvania, while also turning out nonwhite groups in his favor.
In fact, Biden did better than Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee, with white non-college voters in five of the seven swing states.
White voters without degrees in the two southern swing states, Georgia and North Carolina, are much more conservative.
On average in the Blue Wall states, Trump won whites without degrees 61%-38% in 2020, according to exit polls. In Georgia and North Carolina, on the other hand, Trump won them by an average of 79%-21%.
That's a 23-point margin vs. 58 points.
In Arizona and Nevada, whites without degrees voted more like those in the Blue Wall.
Whites with degrees, meanwhile, are on the rise in the Blue Wall states — up 8 points in Pennsylvania, 6 points in Wisconsin and 5 points in Michigan since 2008. In Wisconsin, they're up 4 points just since 2020.
It wasn’t just the Blue Wall, either. White college-educated voters shifted heavily away from Trump almost everywhere. In Georgia, North Carolina and Arizona, they moved away from Trump by double-digits — by 30 points in Georgia, 19 in North Carolina, 13 in Arizona and 9 in Nevada.
Democrats’ performance with college-educated white voters is one underreported reason the party continues to stay competitive against Trump.
White voters are down double-digits since 2008 as a share of eligible voters in Nevada, Arizona and North Carolina, and 9 in Georgia. It's a huge change that has put these states in play.
Latinos and AAPI voters are up significantly in these places as well. Latinos are up 10 points in Arizona, 7 in Nevada, have doubled their eligible-voter population in Georgia and quadrupled in North Carolina since 2008.
Of the swing states, AAPI voters could have the largest impact in Nevada, where they are now almost 10% of the eligible voter population. While AAPI voters are smaller portions of the electorate in other swing states, they have doubled as a share of eligible voters in Arizona, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in that time.
That trend is only going to continue, because, as of right now, a majority of those under 18 are nonwhite. Gen Z is forecast to be the last generation that is majority white .
Notably, these demographic shifts have helped Democrats to statewide victories for the Senate and governorships. Six of the eight Sun Belt swing-state senators now either are Democrats or caucus with them. That’s a big change from 2008, when seven of the eight were Republicans.
(In the Blue Wall, five of the six senators are Democrats, the same margin as 2008.) Overall, five of the seven swing-state governors are also currently Democrats.
Both of these Sun Belt states are diverse, have similar Latino, AAPI and white non-college populations.
But two things make them distinct from each other: Georgia has a larger Black population, and North Carolina has more white college-educated voters.
North Carolina white voters with degrees also vote more for Democrats than those in Georgia do. In 2020, for example, Trump won college-educated white voters in Georgia by 11 points, but Biden won them by 1 in North Carolina.
The size of the Black population in Georgia — 1 in 3 eligible voters — also generally gives a Democrat a better chance than in North Carolina. That is part of the reason why both senators in Georgia are Democrats, but both in North Carolina are Republicans.
Don't overlook the importance of reducing the margins with college-educated whites or Harris potentially winning them by bigger margins than in 2020, as lots of polls have shown this cycle, which could keep North Carolina’s vote margin very close.
Democrats have made major inroads in Arizona, while maintaining close but consistent victories in Nevada.
Latinos are key in both places. Arizona’s eligible-voter population is 28% Latino, up from 19% in 2008. Nevada is 20%, up from 13% in the same time period. As noted earlier, AAPI voters are also crucial in Nevada, up from 7% to 10% since 2008.
Those increases are crucial for Democrats, especially in Nevada, where just 19% are whites with college degrees, the lowest of any of the seven states.
In fact, Nevada has the lowest level of college attainment of the seven states — just 27% have college degrees, which tends to make for a less politically engaged population and one that is most likely to engage now, post-Labor Day and up to Election Day.
In other words, you can probably throw out all the polls up until Labor Day in Nevada.
About 8 in 10 college-educated white voters cast ballots in presidential elections, compared to 6 in 10 or less of whites without degrees.
Trump has turned out whites without degrees at higher rates than in the past – 64% in 2020, for example. His campaign’s theory is that it’s a group Trump still has room to grow with.
That could be true, but turnout will likely be down overall compared to 2020 just by virtue of the fact that mail-in voting is not as widely available — and it’s very difficult to buck turnout trends with lower-propensity voters, experts say.
That’s partially why whites with degrees are 26% of the eligible voter population, but projected to be 32% of the actual voters in 2024. White non-college voters are projected to be higher than that at 38%, but that would be the closest the two groups have ever been.
Just how big a change is that? In 2008, white voters without degrees were 51% of actual voters, compared to 28% of whites with degrees.
While Latinos are 14% of the eligible voter population overall, Brookings projects them to be just 11% in 2024.
Why? It tracks with history, including 2020, when Latinos made up 13% of eligible voters, but voted at less than 11%.
Still, their continued increases, especially in the Southwest, make Latinos a politically powerful group.
Vice President Kamala Harris flashed a thumbs up during a break from preparation for Tuesday’s debate with former President Donald J. Trump. A New York Times/Siena College national poll found the race very close.
Simon J. Levien
Vice President Kamala Harris declared herself “ready” for Tuesday night’s debate against former President Donald J. Trump during a brief break from her preparations to take a walk with her husband, Doug Emhoff, at a Pennsylvania military base on Sunday.
As the debate looms, a new poll released on Sunday showed Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris entering the campaign’s homestretch in a tight race. Mr. Trump is retaining his support and Ms. Harris faces a sizable share of voters who still say they need to know more about her, according to a national poll of likely voters by The New York Times and Siena College .
With just two days before they meet in a debate hosted by ABC News, both candidates were off the campaign trail, leaving most of the talking to surrogates. Mr. Trump’s running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, was set to attend a fund-raiser in Los Angeles.
Here’s what else to know:
On the trail: The Harris campaign announced plans for a post-debate tour of battleground states, with the vice president and her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, to visit North Carolina, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Ms. Harris has been hunkered down in western Pennsylvania preparing for the debate, while Mr. Trump has been engaging in what his team calls “policy time.” Read more about how the candidates are getting ready.
A Zoom fund-raiser: A livestreamed “Paisans for Kamala” fund-raiser on Sunday night was the latest of several dozen similar efforts that have raised millions of dollars on behalf of Ms. Harris.
Liz Cheney chides Republicans: Former Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, a vocal anti-Trump Republican who endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, criticized Republicans — including Mr. Trump’s top primary challenger, former Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina — for being too beholden to the party’s nominee. She said another Trump presidency would be an “unrecoverable disaster” and accused Republicans who back Mr. Trump of betraying both the Constitution and their conservative principles.
An offer to assist: Ms. Haley told CBS’s “Face the Nation” that she was ready to campaign for Mr. Trump, even as she acknowledged that she did not think Mr. Trump was a good candidate. But Ms. Haley said the choice between Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris was easy, adding, “These are the candidates we have been given.” Some of Ms. Haley’s supporters are moderate Republicans who have considered supporting Ms. Harris.
Sanders calls Harris ‘pragmatic’: Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont said he believed Ms. Harris was a progressive, even though “she is not where I am.” Asked about her shifts away from the positions on universal health care and fracking that she held in 2020, which were closer to Mr. Sanders’s own, he replied, “I think she’s trying to be pragmatic and doing what she thinks is right in order to win the election.”
A threat from Trump : In the latest escalation in Mr. Trump’s language concerning the election, the former president threatened in a social media post on Saturday to prosecute lawyers, political donors, election officials and others if he were elected and people were found to have engaged in “unscrupulous behavior” in connection with voting.
New Harris ad on abortion: Ms. Harris’s campaign released a TV advertisement on Saturday reminding voters that Mr. Trump had taken credit for helping overturn Roe v. Wade, targeting the growing share of voters who say that abortion is their top issue.
Trump calls for an overhaul: Mr. Trump vowed to reshape the federal bureaucracy in his speech in Wisconsin on Saturday, pledging to ultimately eliminate the Department of Education, redirect the efforts of the Justice Department, and fire civil servants charged with carrying out Biden administration policies that he disagreed with.
Charles Homans
Every presidential election brings with it a technological innovation or two: the Bill Clinton and Bob Dole campaigns’ first-ever campaign websites, Barack Obama’s email list, Donald Trump’s candidacy-by-tweet.
For the weeks-old Kamala Harris campaign, it has been a Zoom window.
On Sunday night, former Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York was holding forth from one such window, swirling a glass of Montepulciano d’Abruzzo in a restaurant in Baltimore’s Little Italy, trying to draw an Italian family dinner memory out of Robert De Niro at “Paisans for Kamala,” a livestreamed online fund-raiser billed as an Italian Sunday Dinner that was hosted by the Italian American Democrats .
“Tell us a story!” Mr. de Blasio implored. “Tell us a memory! Tell us a dish!”
“I guess the closest thing I have is Marty Scorsese’s mother,” Mr. De Niro replied from a neighboring Zoom box. “She makes great pizza. She did. She passed away years ago.” He warned Democrats against complacency — “We know what’s coming, we see it coming”— and then excused himself to attend a Harris fund-raiser with Nancy Pelosi, who popped up in her own Zoom window later in the evening.
The streamed fund-raiser was the latest of several dozen similar efforts that have raised millions of dollars on behalf of Ms. Harris since the group Win With Black Women hosted the first on July 21. Subsequent events have included “White Dudes for Harris” (featuring the actor Jeff Bridges, in character as the Dude from “The Big Lebowski”), “Cooking for Kamala” (hosted by Padma Lakshmi and featuring celebrity chefs like José Andrés and Giada de Laurentiis), “Deadheads for Kamala” (Ben and Jerry, inevitably), and many more.
The events are a very post-pandemic spin on the small-donor fund-raising that powered the campaigns of Mr. Trump and Bernie Sanders in recent cycles, a sort of telethon adapted to the technologies Americans learned to know and tolerate during years of remote work and school. (On Sunday night’s stream, both Leon Panetta, the former secretary of defense and director of the C.I.A., and Steve Buscemi, the actor, struggled briefly with the mute button.)
The relative ease of participating, as well as Democrats’ sense of urgency around the election, have meant that even small groups have assembled significant wattage for their calls. Besides Mr. De Niro and Mr. Buscemi, Sunday night’s stream featured Marisa Tomei, John Turturro, Mark Ruffalo and Lorraine Bracco.
“It’s a much cheaper format, to just put together a group of people who might be interesting and fun to watch on Zoom, and have people come in and go, ‘Hey, I want to give $5 to this,’” said Lisa Ann Walter, the comedian and actor on the ABC sitcom “Abbott Elementary,” who appeared on Sunday’s Zoom.
As the events have lost their novelty, they have lost some of their fund-raising potency. The first few drew millions of dollars each, but more recent efforts have fallen far short of that.
The “Paisans for Kamala” event was billed as a virtual red-sauce Sunday family dinner. Some of the participants took the dinner theme more literally than others, including Mr. De Blasio, who defiantly ate a slice of pizza onscreen with a fork and a knife to the performative outrage of Tim Ryan, the former Ohio congressman.
When Ms. Pelosi appeared in her own Zoom window later in the evening, the emcee, the comedian Paul Mecurio, commended her for standing up to Mr. Trump over the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. “That’s an Italian right there,” he said.
“An Italian grandmother,” Ms. Pelosi said.
Advertisement
Haiyun Jiang
Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, took a walk on Sunday at a National Guard base outside of Pittsburgh amid intense preparations for Tuesday night’s debate . Asked if she was ready for the event, Harris flashed reporters a thumbs up and answered, “I’m ready.”
Ruth Igielnik
Our polling shows that arguments from Democrats about Project 2025 seem to be taking hold. Most voters have heard of it at this point, and of that group, a majority disapprove of the policies. But while Trump has tried to distance himself, most voters who have heard of Project 2025 expect him to enact some or most of the policies.
In our latest poll, we asked voters if Trump offended them and, if yes, recently or not recently. Among the group who said Trump offended them recently, Harris leads +75. For voters who say Trump offended them, but not recently, Trump is up +40.
Maggie Astor
Former Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, a vocal anti-Trump Republican who endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, criticized a number of other Republicans on Sunday for being too beholden to former President Donald J. Trump.
Ms. Cheney said in an interview on ABC News that she had never voted for a Democrat before, but would vote for Ms. Harris because she believed electing Mr. Trump would result in “unrecoverable catastrophe” for the country. She accused Republicans who back Mr. Trump — including Nikki Haley, who opposed him during the Republican primaries but now supports him — of betraying both the Constitution and their conservative principles in the service of allegiance to the party.
Ms. Cheney’s father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, also endorsed Ms. Harris on Friday. She strongly criticized Mr. Trump’s running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, contrasting him unfavorably with former Vice President Mike Pence, who refused to go along with Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
Mr. Vance “has said specifically that he would, in fact, do that, that he would put Donald Trump’s orders and instructions ahead of the Constitution, and it is hard to imagine a much graver danger than a president and a vice president who will put themselves above the Constitution,” she said. (Mr. Vance has said that if he had been vice president on Jan. 6, 2021, he would have told swing states Mr. Trump lost to send multiple slates of electors to Congress and let Congress decide which to accept.)
Ms. Cheney said that her decision to support Ms. Harris was based primarily on concern for democratic principles, saying, “Donald Trump presents a challenge and a threat fundamentally to the republic.” But she also argued that Mr. Trump’s policies, including his support for tariffs and an isolationist foreign policy, were antithetical to conservatism.
She had particularly harsh words for Ms. Haley, who ran against Mr. Trump in the Republican primary this year and criticized some of the same elements of his character, policy and actions that Ms. Cheney has, but who has since committed to doing whatever she can to help elect him.
“I can’t understand her position on this in any kind of a principled way,” Ms. Cheney said. “The things that she said, that she made clear when she was running in the primary, those things are true.”
Ms. Haley sat for her own interview on CBS News on Sunday and said that her decision to support Mr. Trump was about policy.
“I don’t have to like him or agree with him 100 percent of the time to know that life for Americans would be better under the policies where we have strong immigration, where we have law and order, where we have an economy where we can look at opportunities, where we’ve got national security that is strong,” she said. “I don’t need to sit there and like someone to decide those policies are better.”
Ms. Haley acknowledged that she did not think Mr. Trump was a good candidate, saying she wouldn’t have run herself if she had. But she said that for her, the choice between him and Ms. Harris was easy, adding, “These are the candidates we have been given.”
The past few days have brought several prominent Republican rejections of Mr. Trump, even as a vast majority of Republican voters and elected officials continue to support him. Jimmy McCain, the son of John McCain, who was the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, criticized the Trump campaign last week for getting into a confrontation with an employee at Arlington National Cemetery and said he planned to support Ms. Harris .
On Saturday, former President George W. Bush’s office said he would not endorse either candidate. “President Bush retired from presidential politics years ago,” his office said.
No other former Republican president is still alive. The three living former Democratic presidents — Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter — are supporting Ms. Harris.
Ms. Cheney’s disdain for Mr. Trump has been no secret — she was a member of the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, and she lost her Republican primary as a result of her opposition to Mr. Trump. But she had not previously confirmed whether she would vote for Ms. Harris or for a third-party or write-in candidate, as some other anti-Trump Republicans, including Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, have indicated they may do.
Mr. Trump’s campaign, asked for comment on Sunday, referred to a post Mr. Trump made on social media saying, “Dick Cheney is an irrelevant RINO, along with his daughter.”
Gov. Roy Cooper of North Carolina, a Democrat leading a Republican-leaning state that may be competitive this year, spoke on CBS News about Harris’s decision to endorse a smaller increase to the capital gains tax than President Biden had. “I think what Kamala Harris found out in the period of time, the three and a half plus years that she’s been vice president, is that you have to achieve consensus to get things done,” he said.
On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, a Trump primary rival who is now a campaign surrogate, declined to say whether threats of prosecuting Democrats that Trump made Saturday on Truth Social were “appropriate.” Burgum said he believed that Trump meant “everybody’s got to follow the rules” in order for there to be free and fair elections and the former president was “just putting people on notice.”
In his post, Trump repeated familiar and widely disproven claims about Democrats “cheating” in the 2020 election, and warned that if he wins in November, “those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences.”
Nikki Haley, who ran against Donald Trump in the Republican primary but is now supporting him, acknowledged on CBS News that she did not think he was a good candidate, saying she wouldn’t have run herself if she had. But she said it was “not a question” for her to back him against Kamala Harris, even if she doesn’t like “his approach.”
“When I look at the policies and how they affect my family and how I think they’re going to affect the country, that’s where I go back and I look at the differences,” she said. “These are the candidates we have been given.”
Haley said she does not “have to like him or agree with him 100 percent of the time to know that life for Americans would be better under the policies where we have strong immigration, where we have law and order, where we have an economy where we can look at opportunities, where we’ve got national security that is strong.” She denied a suggestion by the interviewer, Margaret Brennan, that she was “grading on a curve.”
On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont said he believes Kamala Harris is a progressive, even though “she is not where I am.” Asked about her shifts away from the positions on universal health care and fracking that she held in 2020, which were closer to Sanders’s own, he replied, “I think she’s trying to be pragmatic and doing what she thinks is right in order to win the election.”
Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders of Arkansas, who served as White House press secretary under Donald Trump, downplayed former Rep. Liz Cheney’s endorsement of Harris. “I do think she actually is significantly in the minority here,” she said told ABC News.
“Prominent Republicans are supporting President Trump. But ultimately, I think she’s a non-factor. I’m not trying to be rude, but you don’t get to call yourself a conservative or a Republican when you support the most radical nominee that the Democrats have ever put up.”
Former Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, one of the most vocal anti-Trump Republicans just told ABC News that her recent endorsement of Harris would be the first time she voted for a Democrat. “It tells you, I think, the stakes in this election,” she said. “Donald Trump presents a challenge and a threat fundamentally to the republic.”
“You have many Republicans out there who are saying, well, you know, we’re not going to vote for him, but we will write someone else in,” Cheney said. “I think that this time around, that’s not enough, that it’s important to actually cast a vote for Vice President Harris.”
Cheney also argued that in some respects, Harris represents a more traditional conservative approach to policy than Trump. She cited Trump’s isolationism and support for sweeping tariffs as examples. “That is not the party of Ronald Reagan,” she told ABC news.
Harris does seem to have more room for growth than Trump. Twenty-eight percent of voters said they feel like they need to learn more about her, compared to 9 percent who say the same about Trump. It’s a reminder of how even though she is vice president, she remains less defined as a candidate.
Her campaign’s efforts to cast Ms. Harris as a change-maker seem not to have been as effective as some Democrats hoped. Fifty-five percent of people say she would represent “more of the same,” while 53 percent said Trump would be a “major change.”
Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, said on CNN this morning that he was unconcerned about the news that Russia paid an American media company millions of dollars to push Russian propaganda through conservative social media commentators.
“People should not knowingly take money from the government of Russia, Iran or China, or any other adversarial nation, to try to influence the election,” he said. “But I also think it’s fair to say that a few memes or videos in the vast sea of political commentary is not going to make much of a difference.”
Katie Rogers
Asked for a response, a Harris campaign official, who spoke anonymously to describe the internal reaction to the poll, said that they have long anticipated a margin-of-error race. That person also pointed to the policy initiatives that Harris has rolled out recently, specifically a capital gains tax at a far lower rate than the president had initially proposed. Of course, Harris has the challenge of talking about those policies on Tuesday with Trump standing just feet away, trying to undercut them.
Maggie Haberman
Harris’s strategy has been to stay fairly minimalist as Trump, for several weeks, seemed to flail as he tried to define her. But the poll, as Nate Cohn suggests, demonstrates the risks of that approach. Among other things, it elevates every milestone event — interviews, the debate — to greater significance.
The tightness of the race underscores how crucial a moment the coming debate will be. It is likely to be the biggest audience of the campaign and only certain opportunity for the candidates to change the dynamic of what our polls show is a tight race.
Shane Goldmacher
The overwhelming share of TV ads in this race since Harris entered have been about her — and this poll explains why. Already, 90 percent of the electorate says they know pretty much what they need to know about Trump. But the share for Harris is much lower, 71 percent, making her very much the subject of the race.
Harris has publicly been clear that she considers herself the underdog in the race even as her campaign rakes in cash. And many of her allies have argued that Trump’s base of support has a ceiling, while she only has room to grow. But the fact that his support has not dwindled and she is not breaking away amounts to a sobering update for Harris supporters who have spent weeks all but ecstatic about the odds.
Jonathan Swan
The new NYT/Siena poll is directionally consistent with the private polling of the Trump campaign. Trump’s top pollster, Tony Fabrizio, has stressed to the former president that the race is far more stable than public polls suggest. Fabrizio’s polling has shown that Harris stopped gaining ground on Trump after recapturing traditional Democratic constituencies that had soured on Biden.
Our latest poll shows a race that is tight, but with some warning flares for Harris heading into the crucial debate on Tuesday. This statistic, highlighted by our Nate Cohn in a piece, stands out: “28 percent of voters said they needed to learn more, compared with only 9 percent who said the same about Mr. Trump.”
What’s also striking in the poll is that more voters see Trump as representing “change” compared to Harris, which had been the case while President Biden was in the race. That all underscores why the debate is so crucial as a chance for Harris to define herself.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who ran for president against Kamala Harris in 2019, said on CNN that he thought the main challenge for the vice president in the debate would be keeping the focus on policy instead of on Donald Trump. “I think the main task will be to make sure Americans understand the difference in visions and are reminded that they already agree with her on the issues that matter most to them,” he said.
“It will take almost superhuman focus and discipline to deal with Donald Trump in a debate,” Buttigieg added. “It’s no ordinary proposition. Not because Donald Trump is a master of explaining policy ideas and how they’re going to make people better off — it’s because he’s a master of taking any form or format that is on television and turning it into a show that is all about him.”
Buttigieg was also asked about an upcoming report from the Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee on the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, which has been a political liability for the Biden-Harris administration. “If they’ve had three years to assess what happened, why are they delivering a report after Labor Day in a presidential election year?” he said. “I think it really feeds into a sense that this is something they’re using as a political football.”
Former President Donald J. Trump on Saturday threatened a wide range of people, including lawyers, political donors and operatives, with prosecution if he wins the November election and people have been found to have “cheated” or engaged in “unscrupulous behavior” in connection with the voting.
The statement, which Mr. Trump made on his social media site, Truth Social, was the latest escalation in the former president’s language concerning election fraud as early voting is set to begin in the coming weeks in some states.
Mr. Trump has increasingly spoken publicly about the 2020 election, repeating his false claims that widespread fraud had affected the outcome and insisting that he is guarding against it in 2024.
On Saturday, however, he threatened to use the power of the government against people if he is sworn in as president for a second term in January.
“CEASE & DESIST,” Mr. Trump wrote in his post. “I, together with many Attorneys and Legal Scholars, am watching the Sanctity of the 2024 Presidential Election very closely because I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election.”
Mr. Trump’s post continued: “It was a Disgrace to our Nation! Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again.
“We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON’T! Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.”
He later posted the message to X, the website formerly known as Twitter, where he has a significantly larger following than he does on Truth Social.
In response to Mr. Trump’s post, Marc Elias , a prominent Democratic election lawyer who recently joined Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign team, wrote on X: “We won’t let Donald Trump intimidate us. We won’t let him suppress the vote. We won’t let him subvert the election. We won’t let him cheat. We will fight and we will WIN.”
Mr. Trump has repeatedly called for prosecutions against people who he believes have wronged him.
After he was indicted by the federal government for the first time in 2023, Mr. Trump vowed to have a “real special prosecutor” who would go after President Biden and his family if he won the presidency in 2024.
On Friday, speaking to reporters in the lobby of Trump Tower, in Manhattan, Mr. Trump said the criticisms of judges by Democrats “should be illegal” and that the Justice Department should look into “the legality of these people” attacking jurists like Aileen Cannon, the federal judge he appointed who recently dismissed an indictment against him. That indictment accused Mr. Trump of wrongly retaining classified information after he left office and obstructing the investigation into it.
Also on Friday, while he accepted an endorsement from the Fraternal Order of Police, Mr. Trump urged police officers to “watch for the voter fraud.” If the police were to follow through on that appeal, their actions could conflict with multiple state laws and prompt accusations of voter intimidation.
“Believe it or not, they’re afraid of that badge, they’re afraid of you people,” Mr. Trump said.
Michael Gold
Reporting from Mosinee, Wis.
Former President Donald J. Trump vowed to vastly reshape the federal bureaucracy on Saturday in a wide-ranging, often unfocused speech at a rally in Wisconsin.
He pledged to ultimately eliminate the Department of Education, redirect the efforts of the Justice Department and fire civil servants charged with carrying out Biden administration policies that he disagreed with.
And he told his supporters that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leading vaccine skeptic who recently endorsed him, would be “very much involved” in a panel on “chronic health problems and childhood diseases.” Mr. Kennedy rose to prominence as a vaccine skeptic who promoted a disproved link between vaccines and autism.
At one point Mr. Trump got in a dig at Vice President Kamala Harris, whom he has frequently accused without evidence of covering up signs that Mr. Biden was not fit to be president, by saying that he would support modifying the 25th Amendment to the Constitution to make it an impeachable offense for a vice president to cover up the incapacity of the president. It was a long-shot proposal at best, which would entail a difficult process that he does not control.
Mr. Trump — who spent four years overseeing the federal bureaucracy — stood at an airport in front of hundreds of people holding “Drain the Swamp” signs distributed by his campaign and promised to “cut the fat out of our government for the first time meaningfully in 60 years,” a period that includes his presidency.
Many of the proposals in Mr. Trump’s speech align with plans reported by The New York Times to conduct a broad expansion of presidential power over government, and to effectively concentrate more authority within the White House, if he wins in November.
And many of his pledges dovetailed with the stated goals and proposals of Project 2025 , an effort by a group of conservative organizations to develop policies for the next Republican president. Mr. Trump has disavowed Project 2025 as Democrats have seized on some of its more radical proposals, even as he has said that he agrees with some of its efforts.
Throughout his third presidential campaign, Mr. Trump has signaled a willingness to end the post-Watergate norm that the Justice Department operates independently from White House political control.
On Saturday, he said he would “completely overhaul” the department to shift it away from what he called politically motivated prosecutions, a term he has used to encompass the cases of his supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in a bid to stop President Biden from taking office.
Mr. Trump again repeated his vow to pardon those people, saying that his administration would “rapidly review the cases of every political prisoner unjustly victimized” and that he would “sign their pardons.”
Mr. Trump also suggested that he would root out federal bureaucrats who were not ideologically aligned with him, including some career civil servants who are charged with carrying out policies ordered by the current administration.
The Harris campaign said in a statement that Mr. Trump was “obsessed with payback.”
“If he wins this November, Donald won’t lift a finger to help the American people,” Sarafina Chitika, a Harris campaign spokeswoman, said in the statement. “Aided by his Project 2025 allies and a Supreme Court that has given him near total immunity, he will use his unchecked power to prosecute his enemies and pardon insurrectionists who violently attacked our Capitol on Jan. 6.”
During the rally, Mr. Trump repeated his recent promise to create a so-called government efficiency commission that has been pushed for by the billionaire Elon Musk, mistakenly calling him “Leon” at one point.
He vowed to fire “warmongers,” to conduct a “cleanup of the military industrial complex” and to “fire every federal bureaucrat” who he said had infringed on free speech. And he said he would eliminate “so-called equity policies,” a favored culture war target of Republicans.
And Mr. Trump, who at the end of his presidency railed against the federal public health apparatus, suggested that he would rethink it by getting rid of what he vaguely described as corruption at the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization.
Mr. Trump’s rally, held outdoors at the Central Wisconsin Airport in Mosinee, Wis., was his last scheduled campaign event before Tuesday’s debate with Ms. Harris. Though the focus was intended to be his renewed calls to “drain the swamp,” Mr. Trump, in his usual fashion, jumped all over the map.
As he was outlining his nine proposals to, as he put it, “break the grip” of President Biden and Ms. Harris, Mr. Trump detoured to question the size of the crowds at Ms. Harris’s rallies and to criticize an effort announced this week to push back on Russian influence campaigns in the election.
Mocking the effort, Mr. Trump jeered Democrats for being overly concerned with Russia. “I don’t know what it is with poor Russia,” he said.
Though American spy agencies have assessed that the Kremlin favors Mr. Trump, the former president made light of President Vladimir V. Putin’s apparently sarcastic statement recently that he supported Ms. Harris. “He endorsed Kamala,” Mr. Trump said. “I was very offended by that. I wonder why he endorsed Kamala. No, he’s a chess player.”
Later, as he criticized the Biden-Harris administration’s stance on the economy, Mr. Trump misled on statistics. Though the official unemployment rate last month edged down to 4.2 percent, Mr. Trump seized on an alternative measure to lament that the “real” rate was 7.9 percent. And he once again falsely claimed that all the job growth under the Biden administration had gone to “illegal migrants.”
Mr. Trump also spent considerable time discussing immigration, part of what he acknowledged was an effort to revive a strategy from his successful 2016 campaign. He pointed to high-profile crimes that the authorities have said were committed by undocumented immigrants, claiming they offered evidence of a surge of violent “migrant crime” that available data does not support.
Mr. Trump once again spoke at considerable length about a story that a Venezuelan gang had taken over an apartment complex in Aurora, Colo., though the local police have disputed the claim . But as he spoke, his campaign displayed menacing images of supposed gang members with captions like “your apartment building under Harris” meant to stoke fear.
Then, even as he was addressing a crowd in Wisconsin — a battleground state that proved critical in his 2016 victory and in his 2020 loss — he repeatedly singled out states political analysts have said are likely out of Republicans’ reach in November.
“If I don’t win Colorado, it will be taken over by migrants, and the governor will be sent fleeing,” Mr. Trump said. He urged its residents to do a “protest vote,” and then added: “Illinois is really the same thing. And Maine, another one.”
As he sought to portray his opponents as overly liberal, Mr. Trump seized on a culture war issue that has fired up conservatives, falsely claiming that transgender children were getting surgeries at schools.
“Can you imagine, you’re a parent and your son leaves the house and you say, ‘Jimmy, I love you so much. Go have a good day in school,’” he said. “And your son comes back with a brutal operation.”
And in a continued attempt to redirect political fallout from his role in appointing the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade, Mr. Trump claimed that six states led by Democrats allowed the executions of babies after birth. Mr. Trump routinely tells versions of this falsehood; infanticide is illegal in all 50 states.
Mr. Trump also repeated his false and debunked claims of election fraud in 2020, and again made unsubstantiated accusations that the four criminal cases against him were political persecution by the Biden administration.
He once again compared undocumented immigrants to Hannibal Lecter and went on an extended defense against Democrats who have been calling him and his running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, “weird.”
“I happen to be very solid,” Mr. Trump said. “I have other problems, perhaps, but I’m a very solid person.”
Simon J. Levien contributed reporting from New York.
Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign released a TV advertisement on Saturday reminding voters that former President Donald J. Trump has taken credit for helping overturn Roe v. Wade, and targeting the growing share of voters who say that abortion is their top issue.
The new 30-second ad will appear on broadcast and cable networks in seven swing states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin — and in Nebraska’s competitive Second Congressional District, the campaign said. It is part of a broader $370 million advertising blitz by the Harris campaign, which said it had not determined how much it would spend to broadcast the abortion spot.
Over ominous music, the ad opens with a clip of Mr. Trump saying in 2016 that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who seek abortions. It then shows him saying this year that for “years, they were trying to get Roe v. Wade terminated and I did it, and I’m proud to have done it.”
The narrator then says that Mr. Trump “wants to go further, with plans to restrict birth control, ban abortion nationwide, even monitor women’s pregnancies.”
Mr. Trump’s 2016 statement about “punishment,” made in a forum with Chris Matthews of MSNBC, was almost immediately seen as a gaffe from a candidate new to politics, and Mr. Trump reversed himself within hours.
But he has repeatedly expressed pride in appointing three Supreme Court justices who voted in 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to abortion and leading to bans or restrictions in 22 states .
Some of the claims about Mr. Trump’s future plans are drawn from Project 2025 , a set of conservative policies drawn by up some of the former president’s allies; Mr. Trump has distanced himself from the blueprint. Mr. Trump has by turns said that he likes the idea of a 15-week federal ban and that he would not sign a national abortion ban . He has also said that he does not support restricting birth control, but has suggested that he might support allowing states to do so.
A spokeswoman for the Trump campaign, Karoline Leavitt, said in a statement that the vice president was “lying about President Trump’s position on abortion,” adding, “President Trump has been unequivocally clear: He does not support a federal ban on abortion.”
The ad is aimed at exploiting voters’ unease with the Republican Party’s position on abortion, centering the issue as polling shows that voters in swing states increasingly say abortion is key to their choice in the fall.
For women younger than 45, abortion has eclipsed the economy as the top issue, according to New York Times/Siena College polling. In an August survey of voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, significantly more voters said they trusted Ms. Harris on abortion: She led Mr. Trump on that issue by 24 percentage points in those states.
The former president is said to have privately told his advisers that abortion could sink his party in the election.
Mr. Trump has sent mixed signals about abortion this year. He seemed to suggest last week that he might support a Florida ballot measure to expand abortion rights, only to say one day later that he would vote against it .
The abortion ad arrived four days before the debate between Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump on ABC News on Tuesday night , when the topic is likely to come up.
Immigrants’ rights clinic—significant achievements for 2023-24.
The Immigrants’ Rights Clinic (IRC) had a busy year with several federal lawsuits and multiple victories for our clients. As always, IRC took on a variety of immigration-related cases, including individual representations, federal impact litigation, challenges to immigration detention, national security-related cases, and applications for humanitarian relief. In addition, IRC welcomed staff attorney Melissa Segarra, an Immigrant Justice Corps fellow. IRC enrolled twenty students, most of whom remained in the clinic for the entire year.
Nizar Trabelsi is a Tunisian national who was arrested on September 13, 2001, for plotting an attack against a US military base in Belgium. He claims that he is innocent and that he confessed because his interrogators told him if he did not, he would be sent to Guantanamo and tortured. After being convicted in Belgium and serving his ten-year sentence, he was extradited to the United States to be prosecuted for the same crime. During this process, the United States promised Belgium that it would not return Mr. Trabelsi to Tunisia but would instead return him to Belgium due to the risk of torture and the fact that he had been sentenced to a ten-year sentence in absentia for his alleged crime. Belgium presumably believed that he would be convicted and sentenced to life in the United States and it would not have to accept him back.
The European Court of Human Rights subsequently declared his extradition illegal and awarded his family EUR 150,000 in damages and ordered the Belgium government to demand his return after his prosecution. To comply with the court order, Belgium sent a diplomatic note in 2022 demanding his return.
In a shocking turn of events, in July 2023, Mr. Trabelsi was acquitted by a jury in Washington, DC. He was immediately transferred to ICE custody and issued a notice to appear. It appears that the government intends to send him to Tunisia despite the fact that Belgium is required to accept him. IRC was brought in by his federal defender, who sought our experience in national security-related immigration cases.
IRC represented Mr. Trabelsi in his removal proceedings over five days of trial in December 2023 and January 2024 and is awaiting a decision from the immigration judge on whether Mr. Trabelsi can be returned to Tunisia. IRC is also co-counseling with the ACLU National Security Project to bring a habeas petition and challenge to his detention conditions in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Press coverage:
In March 2022, IRC filed a motion seeking the release of a Chicago resident being held by Will County on a material witness warrant as an end run around the Illinois Way Forward Act, which prohibits local jurisdictions from detaining non-citizens for civil immigration violations. After the Illinois Attorney General Office intervened, Will County agreed not to turn him over to ICE and released him instead. He has now reunited with his family.
Press Coverage:
In March 2023, IRC filed a lawsuit against Will County under Section 1983 for the unlawful detention. Centro de Trabajadores Unidos (CTU), one of IRC’s community partners, held a press conference to draw attention to the issue of local non-compliance with Illinois sanctuary laws.
The case is currently in discovery and motions to dismiss are pending. This year, IRC students drafted initial disclosures, served and responded to discovery requests, handled meetings with opposing counsel, and filed status reports with the court. Beginning in the summer of 2024, IRC has begun to take depositions of the defendants and other parties.
IRC represents a father and son who were separated at the US-Mexico border during the Trump Administration’s Zero Tolerance Policy. Under this policy, the government separated thousands of migrant families as a means of deterring migration and penalizing asylum seekers. Although President Biden officially rescinded this policy in 2021, these families continue to suffer from long-lasting trauma.
Selvin, Sr. and his then sixteen-year-old son, Selvin, Jr., fled Guatemala after receiving multiple credible death threats from local gangs that wanted to force Selvin, Jr. to join their gangs. After an arduous eighteen-day journey on foot, car, and bus to the border to lawfully seek asylum, they were quickly separated and put into different detention facilities in horrendous and inhumane conditions.
The first facility was known as a hielera , or “icebox” in English. The last time they would see each other for twenty-one months was through a window that divided the rooms in this facility. Amongst the crying, yelling, and even fighting within the enclosures, this facility was freezing and provided minimal food and water, no blankets, and no opportunity to brush their teeth or take a shower.
Eventually, they were both transferred separately to what was known as a perrera , or “dog kennel” in English. The smell had grown so foul that people were covering their noses and mouths with their clothing. Soon, Selvin, Sr. had to ask for a new pair of pants because he had lost so much weight from the lack of food. Selvin, Jr. and other children were also physically assaulted by immigration officers who would kick them awake and loudly drag their batons against the chain link fences.
Selvin, Jr. found out about his father’s deportation when he called his family in Guatemala and heard his father’s voice. Selvin, Sr. had been deported after being told by a government official that if he signed a document, his son would get to stay in the United States. The paper was in English, with no Spanish translation, and the official threatened Selvin, Sr. that he would be deported if he did not sign the paper. After Selvin, Sr. signed the paper, he was put on multiple flights and was eventually deported back to Guatemala.
After nearly two years of separation, Selvin, Sr. reunited with his son in Chicago in 2020 after a federal court found his deportation unlawful and permitted him to return to the United States. However, the father and son still suffer from long-lasting physical and emotional trauma.
IRC filed a federal lawsuit in February 2023 under the Federal Tort Claims Act seeking compensation for their extended separation. The parties entered into a settlement in January 2024 for $250,000, which will allow father and son to recover from their trauma and begin their life in the United States. IRC is now representing both father and son in their removal proceedings with the goal of obtaining permanent immigration status for the family so that they can remain in the United States.
Omar Ameen came to the United States as a refugee from Iraq in 2014 and settled in Sacramento with his wife and children. Then, in 2018, he was arrested by the FBI-DHS Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and placed into extradition proceedings for the murder of a police officer in Iraq. The proceedings, which spanned three years, ended with the magistrate judge refusing to certify the extradition request and ordering Omar released. The court concluded that there was no evidence that he was a member of ISIS as the government alleged and that the evidence incontrovertibly showed that he had been in Turkey applying for refugee status at the time of the murder and could not have committed it. The court further found that the government’s key witnesses were not credible.
The case garnered national attention because of its importance to the Trump Administration’s position that terrorists were entering the United States through the refugee resettlement program. In January 2020, the New York ran a piece called “The Fight to Save an Innocent Refugee from Almost Certain Death,” which reported on how the investigation into Omar had come about and why the government’s witness in Iraq might have had a motive to lie.
After losing the extradition case, the government did not release Omar, but instead placed him in removal proceedings, arguing that he lied on his refugee application and that he had connections to ISIS, which rendered him deportable. After almost a year of removal proceedings, the immigration judge (IJ) found Omar removable on several non-terrorism related misrepresentations on his refugee application (while rejecting the terrorism allegations) and granted him relief under the Convention Against Torture. Both sides have appealed to the BIA.
In January 2022, IRC and Immigrant Legal Defense (ILD) filed a habeas petition challenging Omar’s detention after the IJ denied bond. In April 2022, Judge William Orrick granted the habeas petition in part and ordered the government to give Omar another bond hearing at which the government would bear the burden of proving dangerousness and flight risk by clear and convincing evidence.
Unfortunately, the IJ denied bond a second time and Judge Orrick denied our motion to enforce, in which we had argued that the second bond hearing was also constitutionally deficient. Both sides appealed to the Ninth Circuit. After a lengthy mediation, the parties agreed to a settlement which limited the amount of time that Mr. Ameen will be forced to remain in detention and provided for secure immigration status for his wife and three children. The government is currently looking for a country other than Iraq where Mr. Ameen can be transferred to begin a new life after his ordeal.
IRC represents Kibambe Mwendapeke, who came to the United States as a refugee from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) as a child and later became a lawful permanent resident. In 2016, he was convicted of “complicity to robbery in the first degree” under Ky. Rev. Stat. § 515.020 and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment (and served eight and a half years). DHS put him in removal proceedings, arguing his conviction was an aggravated felony crime of violence, theft offense, and attempt or conspiracy offense.
In fall 2021, IRC filed a motion to terminate removal proceedings on the grounds that his conviction was overbroad for three different grounds of removability. IRC won on two of the three grounds. However, the immigration judge (IJ) found that Kibambe had been convicted of an aggravated felony crime of violence. Because the IJ found him removable, we had a trial to determine whether Kibambe had any relief from removal. In February 2022, we won our claim of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. We appealed the IJ’s finding that he had been convicted of an aggravated felony crime of violence. The case raises important issues related to how overbroad complicity offenses
IRC students briefed a petition for review in spring 2023 and Brantley Butcher, ’24 , argued the case at the Seventh Circuit in September 2023. While the petition was denied, Mr. Mwendapeke can remain in the United States because he was granted relief under the Convention Against Torture.
IRC continues to represent over forty Afghans who were left behind after the US evacuation from Afghanistan in August 2021. In 2021 and 2022, IRC filed applications for humanitarian parole on their behalf, but for several years the government sat on the applications and did not grant or deny them. Just recently, however, six of the applications have been approved and those individuals are in the process of getting travel documents to the United States. IRC anxiously awaits to hear about the applications filed on behalf of the other families.
IRC represents Macario Reyes-Herrera, a former long-time resident of the United States who was arrested and turned over to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in 2017 as a result of a racially motivated traffic stop. He was subsequently deported to Mexico and separated from his three US citizen children. In 2019, IRC brought a civil action against the state troopers who arrested him under Section 1983 for violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution. Shortly before the trial was set to begin in August 2022, New York state offered a generous settlement to Mr. Reyes-Herrera to settle his claims. The settlement will allow him to send his youngest child to college.
Although Mr. Reyes-Herrera was able to successfully settle his civil lawsuit, he and his wife Isabel, who returned to Mexico to care for him after he was deported, are still in Mexico separated from their children. Their children could sponsor them to come back to the United States. Unfortunately, they are not eligible due to their prior undocumented status and previous deportations. IRC continues to advocate for them to be allowed to return to the United States on humanitarian parole.
IRC has collaborated with the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) on their “A Chance to Come Home” campaign, which asks the Biden Administration to set up an administrative process to allow deported individuals to apply to return to the United States. NIJC has profiled Mr. Reyes-Herrera as part of this campaign and IRC continues to do advocacy with elected officials and political appointees within the Department of Homeland Security.
In addition, IRC is collaborating with Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Caitlin Dickerson of the Atlantic on a book about the subject of deported people. Tentatively titled, The Deported: An American Story , the book will profile Mr. Reyes-Herrera, his family, and the work of IRC.
IRC represents many individuals whose cases cannot be shared in detail due to safety and privacy concerns. In the past year, IRC represented a lawful permanent resident from Somalia who was placed in removal proceedings after receiving several criminal convictions. The student team spent months identifying and working with experts, gathering evidence, drafting declarations, drafting a pre-trial brief, and preparing witnesses. In May 2024, after a two-day trial, IRC won Convention Against Torture relief for the client, who will be able to avoid deportation to Somalia.
IRC represented a refugee from the Democratic Republic of Congo in his application for asylum. Students prepared the case, identified and worked with experts and drafted declarations. The client is now awaiting an interview at the asylum office.
IRC represented an Afghan family in their applications for asylum and for a special immigrant visa. In December 2023, the family were interviewed by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and in May 2024, every member of the family was granted lawful permanent residence.
IRC represented a crime victim from Mexico in her application for a U-visa, a special visa available for victims of certain violent crimes. In May 2024, she received a bona fide determination and grant of deferred action that will allow her to get work authorization while she is waiting in the queue for a U visa.
IRC represented a man in Nicaragua in his bond hearing in immigration court. IRC students were successful in convincing the immigration court to grant bond and then facilitated help from a bond fund so that he could post bond. He is now home with his family.
Finally, IRC represented a woman from Haiti who won asylum in September 2021 to bring her nine-year-old daughter to the United States as a derivative refugee. The unrest in Haiti, as well as custody issues, has complicated the process. However, her application for humanitarian parole was just approved and she is in the process of getting travel documents to come to the United States.
U-nonimmigrant status, also known as the “U-visa,” was created by Congress in 2000 as part of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act. The visa is meant to encourage “victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse” to cooperate with law enforcement in the “investigation or prosecution of criminal activity.” Applicants are required to submit a form that has been signed and approved by their local law enforcement agency, certifying that they are a qualifying victim of a crime aiding law enforcement. With a U-visa, victims are eligible for work authorization and after three years, they can apply for lawful permanent residence.
The Voices of Immigrant Communities Empowering Survivors (VOICES) Act is an Illinois law that directs Illinois law enforcement agencies on how to certify victims of crimes for federal immigration benefits. The VOICES Act was passed by the Illinois state legislature on November 30, 2018 with bipartisan support after consistent advocacy from a coalition of immigrant rights organizations, the Campaign for a Welcoming Illinois (CWI). CWI pushed for the VOICES Act because of perceived issues with how law enforcement agencies were handling requests for U-visa certifications, including lack of accountability and uniformity. Before the act was passed, law enforcement agencies could take numerous weeks in responding to victims’ certification form requests, while others refused to complete the form or provide explanations for denial. Some offices did not make changes to policy or certifying officials publicly available, or referred applicants to other agencies, such as the state’s attorney’s office. The VOICES Act attempted to solve these problems by requiring law enforcement agencies in Illinois to designate a certifying official and removing discretion to certify U-visas, requiring that they certify eligible victims within ninety days.
In 2022, at the request of Centro de Trabajadores Unidos (CTU), IRC began putting together a guide for victims detailing how to apply for U-visas in each county. To our surprise, we learned that most law enforcement agencies had never heard of the VOICES Act and definitely were not complying with it. In summer 2023, we set out to more systematically determine whether law enforcement agencies were in compliance, submitting Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to every Sheriff’s Office, State’s Attorney Office, and the largest police department of every county in Illinois. We discovered that non-compliance was systematic and practically universal. In May 2024, IRC published a policy report entitled “Voices Ignored: Illinois’s Failure to Protect Immigrant Victims of Crime.”
Thousands of Africans go missing each year attempting to cross international borders in search of safety and better opportunities. Despite the broad recognition among states of the importance and need to address the situation of missing migrants, there is a lack of formal coordination and procedures among all relevant stakeholders relating to missing migrants, and in some instances, even within countries, there is a lack of information sharing. Moreover, fragmentation, lack of a coordinated and standardized investigative/forensic approach, mistrust, and lack of contextual knowledge impair the effective identification of missing migrants from Africa.
Groundbreaking initiatives such as the Border Project (Proyecto Frontera) have sought to identify missing migrants from Central America. However, there have been very few efforts to understand migration routes from sub-Saharan Africa to Southwest Europe, and to develop a systematic framework for tracing and sharing information about missing and deceased migrants. As a result, families searching for their loved ones spend years waiting for answers. This project seeks to fill that vital gap and jumpstart work developing a comprehensive framework to address the needs of missing and deceased migrants.
This year, IRC and the Global Human Rights Clinic (GHRC) worked with our partner, the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (EAAF), to pilot the Border Project in parts of Africa. Students spent the year learning about the issue and drafting a lengthy legal memo that identified the gaps in legal protection for missing migrants and their families. A planned trip to Tunisia to meet with local partners was cancelled because of domestic unrest in the country. However, other trips are being planned. IRC and GHRC are also collaborating on a workshop that will be held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in fall 2024.
IRC responded to the overwhelming need of Venezuelan migrants who have arrived in Chicago since September 2022 and conducted four legal clinics during the 2023-2024 academic year. At these clinics, law students assisted migrants living in Hyde Park and Woodlawn with applications for work authorization, Temporary Protected Status, and asylum. The latter two clinics were done in partnership with the Hyde Park Refugee Project, which has been providing support to recently arrived families in Hyde Park. IRC was also able to take on the full representation of several people who had particularly strong claims for asylum.
IRC and Centro de Trabajadores Unidos (CTU) run a weekly legal clinic during the academic year that provides brief legal advice and assistance to community members from the south side of Chicago. To date, the clinic has assisted over 200 community members with their immigration issues. This clinic helps CTU recruit new members and organize around issues related to immigration in the city and more broadly.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Timely assignment completion plays a crucial role in ensuring academic success and fostering a positive learning environment. It requires planning, organization, and prioritization of tasks. By adhering to deadlines, students learn to allocate their time wisely, juggle multiple assignments, and balance their academic workload.
To change your behavior, you must start placing as much value on the timely completion of your assignments as you do on their overall quality. List the characteristics that make you proud of your work-it's original, unconventional, and so on - and add "completed on time" to that list. In addition, set deadlines for completing portions ...
How to Focus on Homework to Get It Done on Time
Completing assignments on time transcends the realm of punctuality; it is an embodiment of dedication, accountability, and effective time management. The importance of this practice extends beyond the classroom, influencing various aspects of students' personal and professional lives. By adhering to deadlines, students build a foundation of ...
5 Points About Benefits Of Doing Your Homework In Time
12 Reasons Why It's Important To Be on Time for Work
The psychological benefits of completing homework on time are profound and multifaceted. From enhanced time management and reduced stress to improved self-esteem and better sleep patterns, the ...
A "2" assignment is important. Some negative consequences will occur if this assignment is not completed tonight. Examples: Studying for a quiz coming up tomorrow. Completing a homework sheet that is due tomorrow. Reading a chapter that is due tomorrow. A "3" assignment needs to be finished by the end of the week.
The Importance of Time Management. When it comes to completing assignments, time management is key. Properly managing your time allows you to stay organized, reduce stress, and meet deadlines with ease. ... Turn off notifications on your phone, close unnecessary tabs on your computer, and find a quiet space where you can focus.
Below we will go over some of the ways you learn how to submit assignments on time. 1. Create a Calendar. Once you start a semester or recognize your struggle to stay on schedule, you should create a calendar of all of the assignments and due dates. Your professor will either provide a schedule or you can find one in the syllabus.
Teachers confirm that 11:59 is the magic hour - Three Penny Press. Why do students procrastinate? Teachers confirm that 11:59 is the magic hour. The timeline of students turning in assignments before class the next day. You have definitely done it before. We all have. Your teachers did it. Your parents did it. So, you turned in that ...
Important things should be tackled first to make sure that vital parts are finished on time. Setting goals helps make good use of both resources and time. Create a Routine: Setting a routine helps ...
Submit. Give your assignment one last read before submitting. You may choose to complete one step of the writing process per day, break your paper up into pieces or allot time for feedback (such as the Writing & Speaking Center). Whatever you choose to do, pace yourself and remember to schedule breaks such as weekends to give yourself a chance ...
By allocating time for studying, attending classes, and completing assignments, students can ensure that they have sufficient time for relaxation, hobbies, and socializing.
6. Manage your time effectively. Effective time management is necessary in order to turn in an assignment timely. When writing an assignment, make sure to allocate your time wisely and prioritize tasks based on their importance and urgency. This step can also help improve the quality of the final product.
4. Self-discipline: By completing assignments on time, you can develop discipline and self-control. You learn to prioritize the responsibilities and make the most of the time to meet deadlines. Discipline creates a stress-free environment for learning. 5. Independence: Assignments allow you to work independently and develop problem-solving skills.
Unlike traditional classroom settings, online courses offer students a flexible schedule, which requires self-discipline and organization to meet deadlines and stay on top of assignments. Effective time management helps students allocate adequate time for studying, participating in discussions, completing assignments, and preparing for exams ...
Time Management (Photo: Sonja Langford_unsplash.com) Time management is one of the most important things for successful learning. It allows students to complete their college assignments on time, become more productive, and boost their academic performance. If you want to discover even more benefits of time management, this article is right for ...
Be on Time: 7 Reasons Why It's Important to Be Punctual
Why completing assignments on time is important. Time management is an essential aspect of life that is vital to success. By completing homework on time, students can better manage their time, providing them with more freedom to engage in other activities. ... In conclusion, the importance of turning in work on time can not be overestimated as ...
Let us now explore the tips and strategies to manage time efficiently for successful academic assignments. 1. Create a Schedule and Set Priorities. Develop a weekly or monthly schedule that includes all academic and extracurricular activities. Set clear priorities for each assignment based on deadlines and importance.
1. Create A Time Table. At least a week before the official commencement of class, a course outline is usually posted in the course area. This course outline gives the assignments for each week. Get a head start by reviewing the eLearning course outline, a day or two prior, instead of waiting until class begins.
Methods for Managing Late Work. Examining the reasoning behind your assessments can help shape your approach to tardy work, says Jennifer Gonzalez. When she was teaching, Jennifer Gonzalez used to plod through a "pointless" exercise at the end of the term: allowing a few students to complete late assignments and then docking their scores by ...
Why is it Important to Do your Homework in Time?
Background Efficient learning strategies and resource utilization are critical in medical education, especially for complex subjects like renal physiology. This is increasingly important given the rise in chronic renal diseases and the decline in nephrology fellowships. However, the correlations between study time, perceived utility of learning resources, and academic performance are not well ...
Significant changes in the U.S. population in the last two decades have already made an impact on politics. Here's how it's playing out in the seven most closely watched states this election.
What model do you follow?
Vice President Kamala Harris flashed a thumbs up during a break from preparation for Tuesday's debate with former President Donald J. Trump. A New York Times/Siena College national poll found ...
The Immigrants' Rights Clinic (IRC) had a busy year with several federal lawsuits and multiple victories for our clients. As always, IRC took on a variety of immigration-related cases, including individual representations, federal impact litigation, challenges to immigration detention, national security-related cases, and applications for humanitarian relief. In addition, IRC welcomed staff ...