thesis about remote learning

Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Remote Teaching: A Student's Perspective

By a purdue student.

As many teachers are well aware, the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 required sudden, drastic changes to course curricula. What they may not be aware of are all of the many ways in which this has affected and complicated students’ learning and their academic experiences. This essay, which is written by a student enrolled in several Spring and Summer 2020 remote courses at Purdue University, describes the firsthand experiences (and those of interviewed peers) of participating in remote courses. The aim of this essay is to make teachers aware of the unexpected challenges that remote learning can pose for students.

Emergency remote teaching differs from well-planned online learning

During the past semester, many students and faculty colloquially referred to their courses as “online classes.” While these courses were being taught online, it is nonetheless helpful to distinguish classes that were deliberately designed to be administered online from courses that suddenly shifted online due to an emergency. Perhaps the most significant difference is that students knowingly register for online courses, whereas the switch to remote teaching in spring 2020 was involuntary (though unavoidable). Additionally, online courses are designed in accordance with theoretical and practical standards for teaching in virtual contexts. By contrast, the short transition timeline for implementing online instruction in spring 2020 made applying these standards and preparing instructors next to impossible. As a result, logistical and technical problems were inevitable. I've listed a few of these below.

"...students knowingly register for online courses, whereas the switch to remote teaching in spring 2020 was involuntary..."

Observed Challenges

When teachers are forced to adjust on short notice, some course components may need to be sacrificed..

Two characteristics of high-quality online classes are that their learning outcomes mirror those of in-person classes and that significant time is devoted to course design prior to the beginning of the course. These characteristics ensure the quality of the student learning experience. However, as both students and faculty were given little chance to prepare for the move to remote teaching in spring 2020, adjustments to their learning outcomes were all but unavoidable. Instructors were required to move their courses to a remote teaching format in the span of little over a week during a time when they, like their students, would normally be on break. It was a monumental challenge and one that university faculty rose to meet spectacularly well. However, many components of courses that were originally designed to be taught in person could not be replicated in a remote learning context. Time for the development of contingency plans was limited, which posed additional challenges for the remainder of the semester.

Students' internet connections play a big role in their ability to participate.

At the start of the remote move, many instructors hoped to continue instruction synchronously, but this quickly became infeasible due to technological and logistical issues (e.g., internet bandwidth, student internet access, and time differences). A large number of my fellow students shared internet with other household members, who were also working remotely and were also reliant on conferencing software for meetings. The full-time job of a parent or sibling may be prioritized over a student’s lecture in limited-bandwidth situations. Worse, students in rural areas may simply not have a strong enough connection to participate in synchronous activities at all. These common realities suggest that less technologically reliant contingency plans are necessary and that course material should be made accessible in multiple formats. For example, in addition to offering a video recorded lecture, instructors could also consider providing notes for their lecture.

"These common realities suggest that less technologically reliant contingency plans are necessary and that course material should be made accessible in multiple formats."

It’s also important to design assignments carefully in online courses. For example, group projects, which can pose challenges even when courses are held in person (e.g., in terms of communication, coordination of responsibilities, and access to needed materials), can nevertheless offer students valuable opportunities for personal growth. However, these challenges only become more significant when group projects must be completed remotely. In these cases, access to secure internet and needed materials becomes critical to student success. Partnered students may be in different time zones or may even have been affected by COVID-19 in a way that hampers their ability to contribute to the project. Therefore, teachers may find it advisable to provide students with the option to complete work that would normally constitute group projects as individual assignments.

Teachers underestimate how much harder it is to focus in online courses.

When students no longer share a single learning environment, environmental diffferences can cause significant differences in their engagement. Students forced to use their home as a mixed work/academic space may encounter distractions that wouldn't be a factor in a traditional classroom. These distractions challenge students’ abilities to focus and self-regulate. The shift to remote leadning may also disrupt students’ academic routines. Experts in educational psychology and learning design and technology I spoke to for this piece argued that students’ abilities to handle this transition is partly age-dependent. Older students may not only have more familiarity with online classes, but also with the sort of self-regulation and planning that is required for academic success in the university. Thus, age and course level should be taken into consideration when devising ways to engage, challenge, and support students in remote learning contexts.

"...age and course level should be taken into consideration when devising ways to engage, challenge, and support students in remote learning contexts."

When students are new to taking classes online, explicit prompting from the instructor can be needed to replicate the missing human interactions that normally spur enagagement in the classroom. Thus, it is especially important that instructors closely monitor online learning spaces like discussion boards, looking for appropriate opportunities to chime in. An expert in learning design and technology I spoke to said that instructors should ideally be in touch with their students twice per week. They should frequently outline course expectations and maintain some availability to answer questions. This is especially true in instances where course expectations change due to the shift to online learning. This expert also noted that it is important that instructors provide timely feedback on assignments and assessments. This communicates to students where they stand in their courses and helps students adjust their study strategies as needed.

Students need opportunities to connect and collaborate.

One of the most special parts about being a student at Purdue University is being part of a single large learning community made up of a spectrum of smaller learning communities. At Purdue, students can form bonds with classmates, neighbors, and roommates with a diverse range of skills and interests. Through these friendships and connections, social networks develop, providing emotional and academic support for the many challenges that our rigorous coursework poses.

The closure of the university's physical classrooms created a barrier to the utilization and maintenance of these networks, and it is important that students still have access to one another even when at a distance. One way in which instructors can support their students in remote learning contexts is to create a student-only discussion board on their course page where students can get to know one another and connect. Students may also have questions related to course content that they may feel uncomfortable asking an instructor but that can be easily answered by a classmate.

Many students are dealing with a time change/difference.

For personal reasons, I finished the spring 2020 semester in Europe. Navigating the time difference while juggling the responsibilities of my job, which required synchronous work, and my coursework was challenging (to say the least). One of my courses had a large group project, which was a significant source of stress this past semester. My partner, like many of my instructors, did not seem to understand the significance of this time difference, which often required me to keep a schedule that made daily life in my time zone difficult. When having to make conference calls at 10:00 p.m. and respond to time-sensitive emails well after midnight, work-life balance is much more difficult to achieve. This was abundently clear to me after dealing with time difference of merely six hours. Keep in mind that some students may be dealing with even greater time differences. Thus, try to provide opportunities for asynchronous participation whenever you can.

"Navigating the time difference while juggling the responsibilities of my job, which required synchronous work, and my coursework was challenging (to say the least)"

While flexibility is necessary, academic integrity is still important.

Both teachers and students in my courses expressed discomfort and concern over issues relating to academic integrity. Some students questioned why lockdown browsers (i.e., special browsers used to prevent students from cheating during exams) were not used. According to a learning design and technology expert I spoke to, the short timeline for the transition to remote teaching and learning made the incorporation of such software infeasible. In addition this software can be incredibly expensive, and many professors do not even know that it exists (much less how to use it effectively).

However, several students I spoke with reported that, in their efforts to maintain academic integrity via exam monitoring, some of their professors mandated that students take exams synchronously. This decision disregarded the potential for technical issues and ignored the time differences many students faced, placing unfair stress on students in faraway countries and those with poor connections. Other faculty took an opposite approach by extending the window of time in which students could take exams. Receiving changing and often unclear instructions led to confusion about what students' instructors expected of them. Incorporating this software more consistently in online or remote courses may be a good way to ensure both students and teachers are familiar with it in the future.

The most difficult part of this pandemic has not been the coursework, nor the transition the remote learning, but instead the many unknowns that have faced students and teachers alike. We at Purdue are lucky that our education has been able to continue relatively unabated, and we can be grateful for that fact that most of our instructors have done their best to support us. This coming fall, nearly 500 courses will be offered as online courses, and many others will be presented in hybrid formats. With more time to prepare, courses this fall can be expected to be of higher quality and to have more student-centered contingency plans. As long as it strives for flexibility and gives consideration to students’ evolving needs, the Purdue educational experience will continue to earn its high-quality reputation.

Thank you. Boiler up!

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

A pragmatic evaluation of university student experience of remote digital learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on lessons learned for future practice

Contributed equally to this work with: Menna Brown, Alice E. Hoon

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Swansea University Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences. Singleton Park, Swansea, United Kingdom

Roles Formal analysis, Investigation, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

• Menna Brown, 
• Alice E. Hoon, 
• Maisie Edwards, 
• Shawn Shabu, 
• Imannuella Okoronkwo, 
• Philip M. Newton

• Published: May 4, 2023
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742
• Reader Comments

The Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent national lockdowns resulted in drastic changes to the way that higher education was delivered. A mixed-methods research study was conducted to explore university students’ perceptions of online learning during the 2020/21 academic year. Students from across all Welsh higher education institutions were invited to participate. First, a series of focus groups (n = 13) were conducted to explore students’ experiences of online learning during the pandemic. Two were conducted in Welsh, the remaining eleven in English. Thematic analysis led researchers to develop eight key themes: Seeking the positives, Facilitators to learning, Barriers to learning, Lost sense of community, Let down by University, Workload, Assessment, and Health and well-being. These themes informed the design of a quantitative survey which was completed by 759 students. It was found that students were largely satisfied with the quality of online learning, however there were specific challenges associated with a lack of community, wellbeing concerns, and challenges with loneliness and isolation. Data from the focus groups and survey informed recommendations for practice in three key categories; teaching practice, institutional level recommendations, and student health and wellbeing considerations.

Citation: Brown M, Hoon AE, Edwards M, Shabu S, Okoronkwo I, Newton PM (2023) A pragmatic evaluation of university student experience of remote digital learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on lessons learned for future practice. PLoS ONE 18(5): e0283742. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742

Editor: Peter James Rowlett, Sheffield Hallam University, UNITED KINGDOM

Received: October 21, 2022; Accepted: March 15, 2023; Published: May 4, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Brown et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files, as well as at the preprint site https://edarxiv.org/62hz5/

Funding: The research was funded by a Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, Higher Education Investment and Recovery Fund (W21/08HE) project to establish a Universities Wales Learning and Teaching Network (LTN). The LTN then awarded funds to PMN to complete the project. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic caused an unprecedented global disruption to everyday life [ 1 ], including sudden closures of educational institutions [ 2 ]. This included Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) across Wales, United Kingdom which made an immediate and unplanned move to a fully digital, remote, delivery of all teaching and learning in the 20/21 academic year and a blended approach in 21/22. This was a huge challenge for us all. But crisis is often a significant driver of innovation [ 3 ], and, even early in the pandemic, there was an expectation that it would drive innovation and long lasting change in Higher Education [ 4 , 5 ].

Survey studies were deployed across the sector to capture the student experience of this transition to online learning, and the early indications were that the transition to online learning was associated with many negative experiences for students. For example, students reported dissatisfaction with a lack of peer and teacher interaction, and the challenges of engaging exclusively via a screen [ 6 ]. Motivation and focus decreased, while students were more distractable [ 7 ]. Students reported anxiety and uncertainty about education [ 8 – 11 ], as well as burnout, with cynicism, emotional and mental exhaustion [ 12 , 13 ]. Overall levels of stress increased, along with a decrease in attention span [ 14 ]. Students sense of belonging decreased [ 11 ], and their academic social networks fractured, or did not develop at all [ 10 ]. Engagement also decreased, an effect that was exacerbated in under-represented groups, in part due to challenges with the home environment [ 7 ], and in countries where the technological infrastructure and financial challenges already put students at a disadvantage with online learning [ 15 ]. Technical challenges were also reported, including problems with Wi-Fi, and access to suitable quiet space for studying and engaging with online teaching [ 13 ]. The lack of access to hands on teaching and laboratory/practical work was a common theme of many of these studies. The studies cited above are from all over the globe, representing every continent.

The transition was also a considerable challenge for university staff, many of whom were not experienced in online teaching and who were dealing with their own challenges caused by the pandemic. This resulted in a significant negative impact of staff wellbeing, increases in workload, and a further erosion of trust in university leadership [ 16 ], although studies in the United Kingdom and Pakistan reported that staff felt prepared, supported and competent to engage in online teaching [ 17 , 18 ]. Where in-person teaching did happen, staff had to familiarise themselves with public health policy, becoming adept at sanitizing and designing socially distanced learning and teaching environments [ 19 ].

Universities also experienced significant institutional challenges. There was a need to rapidly train both staff and students so that they could teach and learn online [ 20 ]. Different leadership skills were called for, with an emphasis on responsible, experienced, and adaptable leaders [ 5 ]. Some of the long established challenges in university leadership, such as the lack of meaningful gender representation, were exacerbated when attempting to tackle pandemic-induced lockdowns which themselves had differential effects on groups with caring responsibilities [ 21 ]. There was a variety in institutional responses, for example where resource-rich universities with high student numbers were quicker to use social media to communicate with their students about issues surrounding the pandemic [ 22 ].

Despite these challenges, a number of positives also emerged from the data. Students reported enthusiasm about the flexibility and convenience afforded by online learning [ 8 ]. A ‘Remote Teaching Satisfaction Scale’ developed to specifically measure student satisfaction with the transition showed that students appreciated the efforts of staff to established a respectful and cordial atmosphere in the online teaching environment [ 23 ]. Staff and students were plunged into a communal challenge, which for some, fostered increased collaboration and a sense of community often found during crisis [ 5 , 19 ].

Overall though, the experience appears to have been a net negative for both staff and students. However, one theme that is common to almost all the research cited here, is a feeling that the pandemic has forced changes to HE that will persist for a long time. For example, an increased proficiency in online delivery may reframe student’s choice about whether or not to actually attend a physical campus, particularly those students from deprived or rural backgrounds where the logistics are especially complicated [ 24 ]. Therefore, it is important to try and capture those aspects of online learning and teaching that were effective, and to try and improve those that were ineffective, for future consideration.

In this study we adopted a pragmatic approach to try and capture the student voice through focus groups and a survey. Pragmatism is an approach to education research, that prioritises asking research questions whose answers are intended to be practically useful. In pragmatic research, epistemological and ontological considerations are of less significance to the methodology than the practical utility of the findings [ 25 ]. The aim of this study then was explicitly to generate recommendations for future practice in learning and teaching, based upon a pragmatic evaluation of the student experience of remote digital learning at Welsh Universities during the 2020/21 academic year (September 20-July 21). The vast majority of learning and teaching was remote online at this time, with some exceptions for courses in the health professions.

Ethical approval was granted by Swansea University Medical School Research Ethics committee, stage 1 (reference number 2021–0037 26.4.21) and stage 2 (reference number 2021–0037). All participants provided written consent.

Participants

A two-staged mixed methods research study was undertaken between March and September 2021. Students registered to study in any Welsh HEI were eligible to participate. There are eight HEIs in Wales, with a total of 81,670 registered undergraduate students (2019/20).

Inclusion criteria for participating in either stage were:

• A student at a Welsh HEI
• Aged 18 plus
• Ability to consent
• Access to a WiFi/internet enabled device and (freely accessible) zoom software (for focus groups).

Procedure: Stage 1 qualitative enquiry

Participants were invited to take part in a series of focus group discussions facilitated via Zoom between April and June 2021. The study advert and flyer ( S1 – S4 Files ) were emailed to potential participants via several routes: relevant staff contacts at each HEI, the National Union of Students Wales (NUS), and HEI Students Union (SU) leads, as well as staff who are members of the All-Wales Learning and Teaching Network (LTN), a group set up to oversee sector management and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The study’s digital advert and flyer were posted on relevant student intranet pages or e-mailed to students. Social media pages were established for participant recruitment purposes.

Interested participants provided consent and arranged a pseudonym prior to participation (if requested). Focus groups were facilitated in English and Welsh and video recorded via zoom software. Transcripts were anonymised prior to analysis. Participants were thanked with a £20 voucher.

Procedure stage 2: All-Wales survey

The questionnaire was hosted online on Survey Monkey™ (the complete survey is given in S1 File ) Participant recruitment was the same as for Stage 1. A voluntary prize draw was included to incentivise participation. All data was collected via Survey Monkey™. The survey was live from 15 th June 2021 to 30 th August 2021. On clicking the survey link, participants were first required to read the Participant Information Sheet. The survey then took them to a Consent page, and once consent had been given, the survey commenced. At the end of the survey, participants could click a second survey link to enter their e-mail address for the optional prize draw. These survey links were kept separately to ensure that it was not possible to link a participants e-mail address to their survey responses, therefore ensuring anonymity. There were 57 questions in the survey (including demographics), under the following sub-headings: About me, Quality of online learning, Community and collaboration, My workload, Online assessments, Accessing teaching and resources, Managing my health when learning online, Caring for dependents, and Thinking ahead. Questions were a mix of closed Likert questions and open, free text questions.

Data analysis

Qualitative data were analysed using interpretative thematic analysis (ITA) informed by the work of Braun and Clarke [ 26 , 27 ]. A staged process was undertaken [ 1 ] familiarisation [ 2 ] initial coding was undertaken in the following way: the facilitators (MB, ME, SS, IO) independently read, re-read and coded focus group one and two. Codes identified independently were shared and discussed and compiled into a coding structure document. Agreed codes were then applied to the remaining transcripts. New codes were shared and discussed as they emerged [ 3 ]. The final codes were independently organised into themes. Themes were discussed until agreement was reached. Subthemes were created during this iterative process. [ 4 ] Finally, theme names were given, and extracts identified for each theme. A final review of each theme was undertaken to ensure no data were missed and coded data aligned with themes. Final themes were discussed with the research team and informed the survey design.

Stage 2 –Quantitative survey data.

Quantitative survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics and visual analysis of graphed data. Likert-scale data were analysed by one-sample Wilcoxon test to determine whether the distribution of responses was significantly different to the mid-point of the scale. Statistical analysis and graphing were undertaken using Graphpad Prism 9 (San Diego, CA, USA).

Stage 2—Qualitative survey data.

Qualitative data from each free text question were analysed using a pragmatic content analysis [ 28 , 29 ], informed by the results from Stage 1 and Stage 2. This was conducted by the research team (AH, MB, PN). Frequency analysis was then undertaken to identify the most commonly occurring themes.

Participant characteristics.

One hundred and twenty-eight expressions of interest from seven different Welsh HEIs were received. A total of 54 participants took part in 13 focus group discussions, two of which were conducted in Welsh. The majority of participants were women (32/54, 59%). Mean age was 24 years old (range 18–64, SD, 9.497), ( S2 File ). Participants studied a range of 40 different programmes, across all levels of study.

Focus group theme.

Each focus group included between two and five participants. Duration ranged from 1 hour 13 minutes to 2 hours 18 minutes.

Through qualitative data analysis, the following eight themes were identified: Seeking the positives , Facilitators to learning , Barriers to learning , Lost sense of community , Let down by University , Workload , Assessment , and Health and well-being . The themes are summarized in Table 1 . Overall, the themes describe the wide range of student experiences, both positive and negative, which arose as a result of the pandemic. The themes can inform future teaching and learning by identifying best practice through a better understanding of the context and nuisances of remote, digital and hybrid learning models that students experienced.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.t001

Each theme is outlined briefly below, with participant extracts.

Theme 1. Seeking the positives.

Participants identified new learning opportunities encountered as a result of changes to the educational environment. These opportunities included learning new software and hardware which led to the development of new technical skills. Participants took time to learn or revise their digital skills and develop their confidence and digital literacy. Participating in extracurricular educational opportunities (e.g., webinars, Instagram takeovers, ambassador roles, internships) and increased access to online conferences helped develop transferable skills. Students also reported that staff created networking opportunities. Participants reflected on what they gained from remote delivery of teaching, for example, inclusion of international voices across time zones, additional learning resources that had not previously been made available, reduced travel, ability to revisit learning materials, laboratory and practical skills being taught in a different way.

“I’ve had to do a project on Zoom, which was a complete online production of Shakespeare’s The Tempest on Zoom, which was weird, but really good . So, it was just another learning experience for me, so it was positives and negatives to what I’m missing out on, and also the new experience that I’m gaining through all this technological voodoo stuff . So, you know, it’s branching out, learning new things and taking experience where you can” . (Man, FG1, 83–88) “doing more things over Zoom has developed my IT skills because I can, like, understand how to go on Zoom and stuff and, I don’t know, do different stuff . So it has developed that element of things that maybe I wouldn’t have done” (Man, FG9, 938–944)

However, the way such experiences were discussed indicated that participants were searching for a positive outcome during the crisis period, and there were attempts to ‘make the best of a difficult situation’. Positive experiences were countered by comments expressing a desire to return to face-to-face teaching and learning, or a hope for hybrid environments in which peer and staff interaction are reinstated.

Theme 2: Facilitators to learning.

This theme referred to aspects of remote and digital learning which supported student’s ability to learn. This theme is organised into three sub-themes.

Sub-theme 1 : Interaction and engagement . Interactive teaching methods and approaches which encouraged students to take part and contribute to live sessions aided ability to engage with teaching and learning in both synchronous (live) and asynchronous (pre-recorded) delivery modes.

“multiple question tests at the end of each week, and it wasn’t for a mark, but still you can catch up and see what is going on, if you can understand the theory or not . So, that was really helpful” . (Woman, FG1, 418–420) “some modules I’ve got , the tutor does a poll halfway through and gets involved, gets us discussing it” (Man, FG4, 1230–1231)

Sub-theme 2 : Flexibility and control . Remote learning afforded students increased personal control over the time and pace of their learning which helped some organise their time more effectively. For example, some participants explored how they had scheduled their own learning timetables around their home/personal/work and general life commitments. This flexibility was facilitated by the reliance on pre-recorded lectures, the removal of travel requirements and other life commitments (as a result of UK wide lockdown restrictions). Students highlighted that the flexibility and control afforded to them meant that they were better able to take part in learning at times which suited them.

“I think the most valuable thing in the whole digital approach to learning this year was the flexibility and the availability of the learning ” (Woman, FG12, 46–50)

This was particularly prominent for those with pre-existing physical and mental health conditions, whereby health conditions had previously limited or affected their ability to participate in in-person teaching due to fatigue, illness, medical appointments or social anxiety.

“I’ve got three children, I’ve got a fulltime job, and just that kind of family friendly–and being more flexible . I can do it from home while my daughter’s doing whatever she’s doing, you know . I think actually a positive from this move is going to be, moving forward, diversity and inclusivity and accessibility for people, and I think that can only be a good thing, you know, a really good thing, and actually a rationale for keeping an element of a blended approach” . (Woman, FG10, 150–156)

Equally, international students highlighted the benefits of technological functions like, pause, speed control and subtitles which helped them better understand learning materials. For others availability of recordings supported active listening, in the knowledge that materials can be re-watched and repeatedly accessed.

“they’ve been really useful , and I go back and like re-watch them constantly” (Woman, FG1, 148–149)

Sub-theme 3 : Positive communication . Effective and timely communication supported learning and ability to engage, while frequent and supportive communication from lecturers, academic mentors and personal tutors provided support.

“my academic tutor , even though it’s just fifteen minutes , is always like, “Oh, how are you?” and like really checks in, which is really nice to have (Woman, FG1, 1036–39)

Theme 3: Barriers to learning.

This theme is described via four sub-themes which highlight the range of experiences that had a negative impact on learning and ability to engage in learning.

Sub-theme 1 : Lost learning opportunities . Students identified a range of lost learning opportunities, these included, changes to programme delivery and the structure and format of modules available, the removal of course components such as laboratory experiments, fieldwork, practical workshops, and industry/workplace placements. Participants widely acknowledged their dismay and perceived this to be a barrier to learning which reduced their ability to develop required knowledge and transferable skills. This was particularly prominent for those undertaking scientific, healthcare, education and performing arts degrees.

“Regards with online labs , I mean, it’s just ridiculous . I’m doing medical biochemistry . If I wanted to go into a research field and work in a lab, dragging a pipette with my mouse into a test tube is completely different compared to physically doing it . There’s so many more human errors . So, in that aspect, it’s ridiculous, but at the same time of course I understand the situation (Man, FG6, 1068–1072) “We were meant to have a language clinic every Monday, and that was supposed to be for two hours, but we missed most” . (Man, FG9, 464–470)

Sub-theme 2 : Technological barriers . A lack of access to technology (hardware and software), internet enabled devices and limited, poor or intermittent Wi-Fi presented a practical barrier to learning. Particularly evident for those living in shared accommodation where several students were required to negotiate access to Wi-Fi simultaneously or following a return to family homes where other members of the household were also using the Wi-Fi for their own studies or employment purposes. Instances were discussed where students had to rely on expensive 4G data to access live sessions or to avoid experiencing anxiety and worry arising from poor Wi-Fi. This was also a prominent issue for those in rural locations.

“I’m always like to my housemates, “Can no one use the wi-fi for a bit?” And then I just have to plug in my headphones and my microphone, and just hope that that works, but it is quite worrying that it is all very temperamental, and even if you have good wi-fi, there are always going to be bad days where it could drop out” . (Woman, FG1, 968–971)

Other technology related barriers included limited skill set, confidence and willingness to adapt to technology led learning environments. Further complicated by technical difficulties, poor functionality, inadequate equipment, poor usability and navigation issues of Virtual Learning Environments (VLE) (e.g., different layouts across modules, a general lack of consistency, or poor organisation by individual lecturers), and digital tools which culminated in wasted time, frustration and/or inability to access required learning resources.

“I would say basic structure–basic infrastructure or a layout , just to be sure that everything that will give you points, and ultimately credits , is in something called assessment and feedback , or assessment and practicals… another teacher would do it differently” (Man, FG2, 232–234 / 237)

Sub-theme 3 : Learning environment . Participants described how their personal ‘learning environment’ often acted as a barrier to engagement. For example, many had to share IT devices with family (during the UK lockdown), experienced frequent interruptions by family/friends meant that study time wasn’t always available as planned and reduced ability to concentrate. Often participants needed to adapt their study routines and to access content at unusual hours while others did not have a private/safe place to study at all. Others felt embarrassed by their ‘learning environments’ which contributed to poor engagement in live remote teaching, and meant that cameras were not turned on which affected peer engagement and motivation.

“I know a lot of people are hindered with disturbances . I’m quite lucky to be able to just say to my family, “Can I have a bit of quiet on the upper floor for my lecture?” It hasn’t stopped my mother coming in with a hoover when I’m in the middle of a presentation” (Man, FG7, 847–50) “I know that there’s a few on my course who are embarrassed about their rooms and embarrassed about–you know, they don’t want people judging their rooms.” She said, “And there’s a few that just simply won’t go on screen unless they’ve got a full face of makeup on, because they just feel that they need to be ready, you know, eyelashes…” (Woman, FG10, 193)

Sub-theme 4 : Poor communication . Poor communication relating to timetables (last minute timetable changes for lecturers, seminars, meetings and assessment deadlines, poor and/or inconsistent communication including inconsistent use of channels of communication i.e., the message failed to reach students equitably, ad-hoc communication) meant that some students missed out on vital information. This was of particular concern following periods of unexpected illness; and poor and inconsistent communication regarding module content (such as availability of pre-recorded content).

“we received email at 10pm the day before, actually, now it’s from three till five . Have a good night.… So I would say that the slightest mistake cost you a lot . You miss one email, you miss one notification, you click mark as read or ignore or letter… . And you could be losing . It’s a dangerous game” (Man, FG2, 190–199)

Theme 4: Lost sense of community.

Participants described a real sense of lost community during online learning. In the main this resulted from the loss of all in-person interactions (peer to peer and peer to staff due to UK wide lockdown) and the resultant loss of the hidden curriculum, that is, the benefits associated with learning from and supporting each other academically and socially (including loss of support, passion, energy from others, engagement in wider learning, diverse ways to embed skills).

“throughout my last two years, I’ve not actually known who are in my class because they just come up with little icons, so that’s why I’m really disappointed” . (Man, FG4, 146–148) “you feel still quite alone because you are one of a 100 person–people, and you are alone in this group” . (Woman, FG2, 816)

The lost sense of community had a detrimental impact on student mental health and wellbeing. Many talked about how their experiences of isolation and loneliness led to feelings of unwanted stress, anxiety and depression. Many shared their lowest points, their concerns moving forwards and their hopes for the future (see theme 2). There was a lack of opportunity to meet new people, make friends, form a social group and generally to find a place at university for themselves. The impact was significant, particularly for first year students who were only beginning to embed themselves in university life, form friendships and networks and establish themselves as independent learners.

“this isn’t emotional, this is a screen, this is a computer, it’s like there’s no one here . So yeah, the university experience has not been with humans” (Man, FG4, 497–499)

However, this sense of loss was not restricted to new students. Participants across all levels of study talked at length about how they missed social interaction arising naturally via in-person interactions in a range of academic and social environments and the how this affected their learning and motivation to learn. For example, the sense of isolation and lack of community meant, for some difficulty engaging with lecture materials, exacerbated further by pre-recorded lecture content which built up over quickly over the semester and became overwhelming. Participants also noted the impact of zoom/screen fatigue, distractions and the monotony associated with studying in one single environment (mainly their university bedroom) with no access to wider university learning environments (e.g., libraries and study halls) which impacted on motivation.

“The motivation, trying to get motivation behind–because being a student behind a screen is blooming hard work” . (Woman, FG13, 1741) “I need to get up and get out of my bedroom . I can’t work in my bedroom from my bed . That’s where I sleep, not where I work.” (Man, FG4, 492–499)

Theme 5: Let down by university.

Participants described being let down by the university (and for some the UK or Welsh governments) during the pandemic. Key issues included a lack of access to critical university resources and services which supported learning (including self-directed study) and independent living. For example, library and computer lab closures, removal of transport links (which impaired ability to attend teaching or move about the city), campus-based food halls and food supplies were closed (which meant international students were particularly affected and those isolating). Participants felt there was inadequate provision of mental health resources or support systems for students (particularly Welsh language students where resources were not translated). Fees and monetary issues not addressed by the university which affected individual’s ability to access remote learning resources, and gave way to resentment and anger for those unable to afford technologies required (previously provided via computer labs and libraries). Limited consideration of training needs for themselves and staff. Students discussed examples of staff who were unable to effectively use new technology, who failed to adequately adapt their learning content for remote delivery and who wasted time during live virtual sessions through a lack of understanding of how to use the new technologies in situ. Combined, students felt a significant loss of the anticipated university experiences and important social and cultural rites of passage.

“if anyone sort of said to me, “What is the one thing that you feel you’ve missed out on?” That would be it, just sort of going into the library and, yeah, like chatting to the staff and things like that, and asking them, you know, “Have you got any books on this?” ‘Cos I think, yeah, although I’m quite good with technology, I did sort of really struggle initially to use like Met Search and stuff … I do kind of miss that–just being in the library.” (Woman, FG10, 617–624) “with mental health there’s been no support offered by the University… . institutionally, I think there’s been systemic failure” . (Man, FG5, 191–201)

Two focus groups were held through the medium of Welsh. Welsh speaking students faced additional challenges, from a lack of Welsh language mental health support, a dearth of Welsh language provision for digital resources, to practical barriers of rural life with poor Wi-Fi connectivity.

“finding resources or sources has been a bit harder, especially in Welsh . Like, if you need an old book, the chances are that there isn’t an electronic copy available, so you then have to go through the process of ordering the book from the library, see if they release it to you and then, obviously, go and pick that up . You’re okay if you live in [redacted], but when I was home, it was a bit more awkward . I had to plan a day so that I could pick the books up because the resources just aren’t really available .” (Woman, FG9, 592–598)

Theme 6: Workload.

Some participants perceived an increase in workload as a result of the increased time and energy required to adapt to new ways of learning, such as, using VLEs, learning new software, and accessing online resources. Participants reported that watching pre-recorded lectures was more time consuming than a traditional in-person lecture, as they required pausing materials, stopping for breaks, distractions, or to follow up on areas of interest. Students also found they would rewind and re-watch the pre-records to ensure understanding and language translation. The incessantness of the digital environments was challenging. There was also a need to develop new skills whilst simultaneously trying to keep up with the teaching content and assessments.

“uni’s non-stop . Because we’ve got Canvas on our phones then, so that’s what we do our work through . And that combined with all the announcements I get on that and the WhatsApp group and everything, it’s just–there is no break from uni . Your life is now university” (Man, FG5, 596–99)

Theme 7: Assessment.

Experiences of online assessment were coupled with perceived higher workloads. The move to open-book examinations led to a reliance on Google™ and a change in the way students revised and studied. Some students noted that they found open-book exams harder and required additional time to prepare and complete the assessments. Others were concerned with technical failures and errors which affected time available to complete assessments. These were exacerbated by varying home learning environments which meant some individuals were disadvantaged.

“my discipline is only decreasing … , I’ve found it that they’ve styled the question that I’m going to still need to look up the answer on Google , whether I’m confident or not, just because I can, and if I can, why shouldn’t I?” (Man, FG6, 1062–68)

Theme 8: Health and wellbeing.

Remote learning impacted on students’ health and well-being. Students discussed their emotional responses to the challenges, changes and adaptations required of them and the support they received or wished they had received. Physical health was impacted by extended period of screen time, inadequate or a complete failure to schedule breaks between timetabled lectures. hidden health conditions were exacerbated by long periods of sedentary screen time, back pain, stiffness, and reduced ability to undertake self-care routines, whereas previously the educational setting had afforded opportunity to move, stretch, and take a break from screens and intense periods of concentration. Mental health was impacted via a lost sense of community and isolation (see theme 4).

“Tuesdays last term I had lectures from about 9am or 9:30 , all the way until 6pm. And the one until 6pm always overran because it was a practical . So, there’s no time to have lunch . I don’t know how we were expected to do that because every lecture ran until the end” . (Man, FG8, 833–6) “after a year of being out of social circles, how are we going to fit in there again? How are we going to find our feet in our groups again? Maybe it’s going to be a new group, maybe it’s the same group, but, you know, lots of people will lose that thing that makes them fit into their group . So, I think it’s going to be difficult to fit in” . (Woman, FG12 420–4)

The qualitative themes discussed above directly informed the development of the survey for Part 2. Through triangulation and discussion amongst the research team, the themes were translated into distinct areas of enquiry which were used to structure the survey and develop the questions. Four of the qualitative themes were directly translated into survey subsection (workload, assessment, health and wellbeing and lost sense of community). Three of the learning related qualitative themes ( Seeking the positives , Facilitators to learning , Barriers to learning) were streamlined to focus on specific areas of learning (Quality of online teaching’ and ‘Accessing teaching and resources’). The final two survey subsections were included to identify the different situations that students noted impacted their ability to study and engage effectively (‘Caring for dependents’) and finally to reflect their hopes and views for the future of remote learning (‘Thinking ahead’).

Stage 2 results

Participant demographics..

In total, 759 participants (466 women, 188 men, 13 non-binary, 92 did not want to answer) participated in the survey. Participants were representative of all years of study, from those studying a foundation year, through to those who had been studying for 6–7 years, and came from a range of different degree types. Just over five per cent were foundation students, 72.15% were undergraduate students and 22.67% were postgraduate students. The full range of demographics is shown in S3 File .

Quality of online learning.

Students were asked to rate their satisfaction with their experience of the different types of online learning during the 2020–2021 academic years. Results are shown in Fig 1 . For analysis, the five text points on the scale were converted to a numerical 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied) scale. A one-sample Wilcoxon test was used to test whether, for each online learning format the distribution of responses was significantly different from the midpoint of the scale. The distribution of responses was significantly different for live online lectures (W = 60822, P<0.0001), pre-recorded lectures (W = 53532, P<0.0001), live seminars and tutorials (W = 61135, P<0.0001) and live Q+A (W = 52568, P<0.0001). The distribution was not significantly different for live practical classes and virtual labs (W = 1378, P = 0.75).

Data shown are arranged around the mid-point of a five-point scale. Distribution of responses was tested using a one sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test to determine whether they were significantly different from the midpoint of the range * = p<0.05. An asterisk to the right of the bar indicates the sample agreed with the statement. No asterisk means the sample neither agreed or disagreed. The distribution of responses indicated that participants were overall satisfied with their experience of most online teaching formats.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.g001

These data suggest that, overall, the majority of participants were satisfied with the quality of online teaching. Content analysis of free text data (see S4 File ) found that participants would have liked more interactive elements in both live and pre-recorded lectures. Participants had mixed views about how satisfied they were with online practical classes and virtual labs, and free text data suggested that these worked better when recorded in a laboratory environment, and when students were given practical tasks to do.

On the basis of the Stage 1 data, we asked two separate specific questions about breakout rooms used in online teaching; students were asked to state, on a five-point scale, whether they found breakout rooms engaging or useful. For analysis, the five text points on the scale were converted to a numerical 1 (‘Not at all engaging/useful’) to 5 (‘Very engaging/useful’) scale. The majority of participants responded that breakout rooms were not very engaging, with 32.28% selecting that they were ‘Not at all engaging’ and 22.83% selecting ‘A little engaging’ (22.83%). The majority also did not find them very useful with 32.64% responding that they were ‘Not at all useful’, and 20.37% selecting ‘A little useful’. A one-sample Wilcoxon test was used to test whether, for each online learning format the distribution of responses was significantly different from the midpoint of the scale. The distribution of responses was significantly different for both responses (W = -23175, P<0.0001 for ‘engaging’, W = -20730, P<0.0001 for ‘useful’.). These data indicate that, as a group, those participants who were taught using breakout rooms had a negative experience. Free text data revealed that participants found these awkward, and that other students were often reluctant to speak at all, making for an unsatisfactory learning environment.

Students were then asked to rate their agreement with a series of statements regarding their experience with Community and Collaboration, Workload, and Online Assessments. Again, students were largely positive about their experience, except for online practical classes, and regarding the opportunity to meet and interact with their peers. Summary results are shown in Fig 2 , and the full dataset and analyses are shown in S5 File .

Distribution of responses was tested using a one sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test to determine whether they were significantly different from the midpoint of the range * = p<0.05. An asterisk to the right of the bar indicates the sample agreed with the statement, whereas an asterisk to the left means they disagreed. No asterisk means the sample neither agreed or disagreed.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.g002

Community and collaboration.

Thirty-seven percent of participants agreed that they had sufficient opportunities to interact with other students, whereas 46% percent disagreed. When asked if they would have liked more opportunities for interaction, 73% said yes. Over 40% of the sample agreed they had experienced sufficient opportunities to work with other students, and 18% disagreed. Sixty-one percent would have liked more opportunities to work with others. Only 25% felt they had enough opportunities to meet their coursemates, with 53% disagreeing with this statement. A large majority of participants agreed that they were able to get answers from teaching staff (69.8%) and interact with staff (66.0%) during online learning. Content analysis of qualitative data revealed that many participants felt there was no sense of community, and that group work was difficult to conduct online. The majority of free text comments suggested that teaching staff were not very responsive to e-mail and that it was harder to interact with staff and ask questions, though some found it easier to interact with staff online. This however confounds with the quantitative responses (see Fig 2 ), which suggested that students were able to interact effectively with staff.

My workload.

Fifty-four percent of students responded that online learning made them feel overwhelmed, whereas 29% disagreed with this statement. Additionally, fifty percent said that online learning made them feel anxious, 61% felt isolated, and 48% did not feel motivated. These findings highlight the impact that online learning had on mental health. The advantages of online learning however were found in the flexibility that it offered. Fifty-seven percent said that it enabled them to work at their own pace, and 62% reported that it enabled them to manage their time flexibly.

Online assessments.

Fifty percent of participants responded that online assessments were fair. The free text data (23% responses) suggested that Universities needed to make sure that the examination criteria were clear, but that participants largely wanted online assessments to continue. Participants also said online examinations were less stressful than in person exams, and open books exams were viewed positively. The possibility of internet issues during an exam was mentioned in 10% of comments, and 8% of comments were concerned with people cheating.

Accessing teaching and resources.

Over 75% of respondents experienced issues with internet connection during teaching, and just over a third of students were not able to access a device when they needed it. These findings highlight the need for recordings to be made available so that students are still able to access teaching. With regard to accessing recommended resources, participants had mixed experiences. Almost 70% of free text comments reported that they needed better access to resources. Some participants said that they were able to easily access online texts and journals, however others said that only physical copies of key textbooks existed, therefore they could not access them due to libraries being closed or living too far away. Some respondents highlighted that online resources were available, but that they did not always know how or where to access them, and that they needed training in the different VLEs. A number of participants praised the institutional library for the service and support they provided. Data are shown in Figs 3 and 4 .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.g003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.g004

Managing my health when learning online.

Qualitative data revealed that many participants felt more anxious, depressed isolated, overwhelmed, and lonely during online learning. Participants also reported that these issues impacted their ability to access learning, as they found it harder to engage and felt unmotivated. Content analysis found that over 76% of comments stated that their physical and or mental health was negatively affected by online learning. Participants reported physical health issues including back pain, eye strain, sedentary behaviours, and weight gain. Some respondents however, found that online learning helped them better manage their pre-existing health conditions, due to the flexibility of learning and lack of travel.

Caring for dependents.

Twenty-four per cent of participants reported that they cared for dependents. Content analysis showed that 44% of comments reported online learning made caring for dependents harder, whereas 32% said it was easier. The impact that online learning had was mixed depending on individual circumstances. Participants with children often reported that online learning was harder, but some of these difficulties were due to school or childcare closures relating to the pandemic, rather than online learning per se. Participants with children found it challenging to find a quiet place to study, especially during live teaching, and found it more difficult to focus on their learning. Advantages of online learning for these participants was the lack of commute therefore being closer to a child’s school or dependent’s home; and the flexibility around when they studied due to recordings being available.

Thinking ahead.

Participants were asked how they would like to learn in future ( Fig 5 ), with 39% stating that they would like all face-to-face teaching, whereas 44% would like blended learning. Only 16% showed a preference for learning completely online.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.g005

This research study explored student perceptions of learning across Welsh HEIs during the pandemic in the 2021/22 academic year. The intention of the research was to identify sector-wide recommendations for future online learning practice, informed by student views.

Principal findings

Qualitative analysis developed eight broad themes. These subsequently informed the development of the online questionnaire which was structured into six domains. The key findings from each domain are summarised below.

Quality of online learning : Overall, the majority of participants were satisfied with the quality of online teaching they received. However, students highlighted the need for additional interactive elements in both live and pre-recorded lectures. When asked about specific digital teaching techniques, breakout rooms were negatively perceived due to student feelings of awkwardness and limited engagement and interaction form other students, including non-use of cameras.

Community and collaboration : Overall, students felt that the sense of community was missing during online learning. Survey data reported that only 37% felt they had had sufficient opportunities to interact with other students during their learning and the overwhelming majority (73%) wanted more interaction. However, a large majority of participants (70%) agreed that they were able to get answers from teaching staff and interact with staff during online learning, suggesting that staff were able to interact with students during the pandemic period, and that perhaps peer-to-peer interaction was most missed.

My workload : Just over half of students surveyed (54%) indicated that online learning had made them feel overwhelmed. Additionally, half said that online learning made them feel anxious, isolated (61%), and un-motivated (48%). In contrast 62% indicated they benefitted from increased flexibility and (57%) the option to work at their own pace.

Online assessments : Half the students surveyed felt online assessments were fair, and that they largely wanted online assessments to continue, citing reduced stress. Concerns were raised regarding the clarity of assessment instruction, assessment criteria, and information on how to handle internet issues arising during examination periods.

Accessing teaching and resources : 75% of respondents experienced issues with internet connection during teaching, and just over a third of students were not able to access a device when they needed it.

Managing my health when learning online : Survey respondents free text data indicated many felt anxious, depressed isolated, overwhelmed, and lonely during online learning which impacted their ability to engage with digital learning content. Content analysis found that over 76% of respondents stated that their physical and/or mental health was negatively affected by online learning. Participants reported detrimental physical health aspects including back pain, eye strain, sedentary behaviours, and weight gain.

Caring for dependents : Almost a quarter (24%) of survey respondents had caring responsibilities. Content analysis showed that 44% of comments reported that online learning made caring for dependents harder. Participants with children found it challenging to find a quiet place to study, especially during live teaching, and found it more difficult to focus on their learning.

Further analysis was not undertaken on the basis of specific demographics, e.g. gender and individual higher education providers. This is partly due to the overall size of the sample, along with a desire to make general, sector-wide recommendations rather than recommendations for specific universities or groups of students. However future work could examine these questions in more detail

Comparison to the literature

Key findings support previous research on remote learning which highlighted the challenges associated with navigating the new screen-based, remote, digital landscape [ 6 ]. These included limited peer and teacher interaction, [ 6 ] and issues with motivation and engagement [ 7 ]. Closure of institutional facilities such as libraries, study spaces and cafes [ 11 ] impacted on ability to access pre-recorded learning content and online assessments. Students struggled with single space living arrangements (such as university halls of residence) and unsuitable home environments [ 7 ], which often resulted in limited or no access to an appropriate study space. This also led to an unwillingness to switch cameras ‘on’ during live teaching sessions for fear of embarrassment. Technical challenges were further exacerbated access due to poor and intermittent Wi-Fi.

Similar to the current study, Bastos et al [ 6 ] surveyed Italian and Portuguese student perceptions of their transition to remote delivery of learning and teaching during the pandemic. Their study reported that students perceived learning was ‘not the same’ as prior classroom experiences due to a disconnect between students and staff, which impacted motivation. This loss of community and its resultant detrimental impact on students’ motivation to engage with their studies was in line with findings of the current study, where students discussed at length in the qualitive stage, their difficulties of learning, socialising and living in one space. Students reported a lack social connectedness and contact, and the loss of peer support and interaction. Engagement like this is a critical component of the learning environment (Bandura 1977).

Wu & Teets [ 7 ] reported a decrease in American chemistry students’ engagement and motivation to study at undergraduate level during the pandemic. Participants discussed their difficulties attending lecturers and watching pre-recorded materials, poor motivation, and issues surrounding access to required technology and safe/private study spaces. Authors concluded that “student’s home environment and circumstances play a significant role in their adaptation to emergency remote online instruction, with students who live in large family environments and/or are financial providers for their family facing the largest hurdles to maintaining their engagement.” (p3641). This effect is reported as more challenging in countries where the technological infrastructure for online learning was not as well developed before the pandemic [ 15 ]

Kulikowski et al. [ 30 ] highlighted the multi-dimensional impact of distance learning on cognitive demands, engagement, and the emotional experience of e-learning. Different domains had a differential impact on student perceptions of e-learning, not unlike the qualitative findings from the current study. Those students who reported difficulties in adapting to and navigating new technology, perceived their overall experience negatively. Whilst others, who found benefits and enjoyment from the increased flexibility in self-guided study perceived their experience to be useful and discussed their experiences in a positive way. A lack of information and dysfunctional communication at the university was reported by Kulikowski et al. (2021) which led to the perception of chaos. Whilst this was not the same for Welsh students, the impact of poor and disorganized communication had a significant impact on emotional experience, motivation and critically, the ability to study and meet the requirements of their courses on time. Kulikowski et al. (2021) also discussed the impact of digital immigrants teaching digital natives on ability to engage and study. This also resounded with the Welsh student experiences. Participants widely discussed staff lack of technical skills and ability to navigate the digital environment adequately, which was felt to further reduce (already diminished) learning opportunities.

Finally, authors drew attention to student perceptions at baseline, for e-learning and the impact on outcomes. Specifically, a positive attitude towards eLearning could enhance student engagement, motivation and ability.

Garris & Fleck [ 31 ] conducted a similar student survey to that of the stage 2 survey reported here. Their sample of 482 American undergraduate students evaluated their learning experiences during covid. However, their findings reported an overall negative evaluation of the transition to online learning. Specifically, courses were perceived to be less enjoyable, less interesting and of decreased pedagogic value. Similar to current findings, flexibility afforded by online learning was highlighted as a positive outcome. Authors identified that self-efficacy, emotional well-being and student engagement with online resources predicted positive evaluation. In line with current data that highlighted the importance of encouraging and supporting student engagement to ensure positive outcomes for learning.

The general level of satisfaction with online learning during the pandemic is perhaps surprising. Media coverage of Higher Education, in the UK, during lockdown, contained many negative reports of students who were unhappy with their university experience, particularly when this extended into a second academic year [ 32 ]. Some media outlets actively encouraged students to seek a refund on their tuition [ 33 ]. These reports were supported by petitions and other initiatives. For example a petition to the UK parliament, demanding refunds for students on their tuition fees, gathered over 270000 signatures, triggering a debate in parliament, although students were directed by the government to seek recourse through the relevant adjudicator [ 34 , 35 ]. Our data suggest that a majority of students were generally content with most aspects of their educational experience, although this finding should be tempered with another finding that students were generally sympathetic to the efforts being made by their universities, in a time of crisis, and it seems reasonable to conclude that satisfaction levels would decrease if online learning were continued in the manner delivered during lockdown, particularly if elements such as mental health and poor WiFi were not addressed.

Overall, whilst the findings of the present study reported benefits of online learning in terms of flexibility and time management, institutions need to be aware of some of the downfalls of online learning, to be able to mitigate these. The present study suggested that students were largely satisfied with the quality of online learning during 2020–2021, suggesting that much content can be successfully transitioned to an online format. Nevertheless, whilst quality can be maintained with careful lecture design, qualitative data from both the focus groups and the survey suggested that students missed many aspects of the face-to-face learning experience. Furthermore, there were negative impacts on mental health including feeling overwhelmed, lack of motivation, and increases in depression and anxiety. Some of these can also be mitigated through effective pedagogical design, for example by using shorter formal lectures, with the time replaced by more informal discussion-based sessions [ 11 ].

Recommendations for future practice

On the basis of the data in the present study, some key recommendations for future practice were developed by the team and then finalised by three authors (MB, AH, PN). The recommendations were focused on capturing lessons learning during the pandemic and turning them into positives aspects for online learning in a post-lockdown era. The recommendations were intended to be practically useful across the sector, but with a focus on the HE sector in Wales. They are categorised into three main areas: teaching practice, institutional level recommendations, and mental health and wellbeing.

Teaching practice recommendations

• Use bite size lectures . The structure of a lecture is key to maintaining motivation and engagement. Pre-recorded lectures should be broken into smaller sections (approximately 15 minutes), and live lectures should include breaks. The lecturer should ensure that their camera is switched on to foster a connection between the lecturer and the student. Closed captions should be used.
• Ensure asynchronous access . Access to recorded content was a great success of lockdown teaching, and provides many obvious benefits to learning, some of which students now expect as basic requirements in return for tuition fees.
• Promote Interactivity and engagement . Interactive activities such as quizzes polls, and live word clouds were popular features of online learning, as these encouraged interaction and kept students engaged. It is important that opportunities for students to ask questions are included. When mostly pre-recorded teaching is used, students valued the opportunity to attend live Question and Answer sessions to complement these.
• Set clear expectations for online breakout rooms . Breakout rooms can be made more effective by ensuring that students are given clear guidance in advance about what tasks they will be expected to do. Ideally, students should be allocated to the same group each time or be able to sign up to a particular room with students that they know. This helps reduce some of the awkwardness and allows students to develop social networks
• Practical classes should remain in-person wherever possible . Practical classes did not translate well to an online medium. Some of the key learning can be achieved online, but the hands-on practical element is a key feature of in-person teaching.

Institutional level recommendations

• Ensure consistent communication . Students found it confusing when important information about their learning was communicated through different communication channels.
• Conduct a technology training needs analysis . Many students reported that staff were not able to use the technology required for online learning, which hindered the learning experience. Similarly, many students themselves felt unequipped to use this technology. We recommend conducting a training needs analysis for both staff and students, to identify knowledge gaps.
• Ensure access to IT support . One source of stress for students, particularly during online assessment periods, was when they had issues with technology but were unable to access help to resolve it.
• Address basic barriers to online learning . Many students reported that they did not have access to an appropriate device for online learning, did not have a suitable place to study, and had issues with WiFi. Institutions should therefore ensure that students can access shared study spaces, computer laboratories, and that suitable equipment is available to loan. The technological requirements should also be made clear when students are making study choices.
• Foster a sense of community . Many students reported that there were unique University experiences that they had missed due online learning during the pandemic. These consisted of rites of passage such as freshers’ week, the experience of campus based learning, meeting fellow students, and learning practical course skills. This should be factored in should students miss out on these events in future.

Health and wellbeing recommendations

• Reduce student overwhelm . Many students reported that online learning was overwhelming. This can be reduced by providing clarity as to which components of a course are mandatory and which are optional and providing students with weekly checklists detailing which tasks need to completed.
• Provide first language mental health resources . Students that were first language Welsh speakers reported that they did not have access to mental health resources in Welsh. Welsh speakers reported that when talking about their mental health, it was more difficult conversing and expressing themselves in English.
• Schedule dedicated social opportunities at course or module level . Many students reported feeling isolated during online learning, therefore it is vital that social opportunities are timetabled to foster community.
• Timetabling breaks . All learners need regular breaks, particularly when learning online–both within a teaching session and between teaching sessions. This ensures they can take comfort breaks, have a screen break for their eyes, move around, and consume food and drink.
• Be aware of social anxiety online . Enforcing that cameras are switched on during teaching may induce social anxiety. Some students feel that having cameras on is an invasion of privacy, increases stress and means they cannot move around. Furthermore, some students feel like they are being watched which can make them uncomfortable. Neurodivergent students are more likely to experience some of these difficulties. In the interests of inclusivity and accessibility, switching cameras on should not be mandatory.

Supporting information

S1 file. full text of the part 2 survey..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.s001

S2 File. Participant demographics stage 1.

Focus group participant demographics.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.s002

S3 File. Participant demographics stage 2.

Survey participant demographics.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.s003

S4 File. Survey content analysis part 2.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.s004

S5 File. Histogram of student experience.

This is the raw data.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283742.s005

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 31. Garris CP, Fleck B. Student evaluations of transitioned-online courses during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scholarsh Teach Learn Psychol. 2020;No Pagination Specified-No Pagination Specified.
• 32. Universities keeping lectures online into autumn term. BBC News [Internet]. 2021 May 18 [cited 2022 Sep 15]; Available from: https://www.bbc.com/news/education-57150071
• 34. University student complaints over courses hit record. BBC News [Internet]. 2022 May 4 [cited 2022 Sep 15]; Available from: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-61314662

Capturing the benefits of remote learning

How education experts are applying lessons learned in the pandemic to promote positive outcomes for all students

Vol. 52 No. 6 Print version: page 46

• Schools and Classrooms

With schools open again after more than a year of teaching students outside the classroom, the pandemic sometimes feels like a distant memory. The return to classrooms this fall brings major relief for many families and educators. Factors such as a lack of reliable technology and family support, along with an absence of school resources, resulted in significant academic setbacks, not to mention stress for everyone involved.

But for all the downsides of distance learning, educators, psychologists, and parents have seen some benefits as well. For example, certain populations of students found new ways to be more engaged in learning, without the distractions and difficulties they faced in the classroom, and the general challenges of remote learning and the pandemic brought mental health to the forefront of the classroom experience.

Peter Faustino, PsyD, a school psychologist in Scarsdale, New York, said the pandemic also prompted educators and school psychologists to find creative new ways of ensuring students’ emotional and academic well-being. “So many students were impacted by the pandemic, so we couldn’t just assume they would find resources on their own,” said Faustino. “We had to work hard at figuring out new ways to connect with them.”

Here are some of the benefits of distance learning that school psychologists and educators have observed and the ways in which they’re implementing those lessons post-pandemic, with the goal of creating a more equitable, productive environment for all students.

Prioritizing mental health

Faustino said that during the pandemic, he had more mental health conversations with students, families, and teachers than ever. “Because COVID-19 affected everyone, we’re now having mental health discussions as school leaders on a daily and weekly basis,” he said.

This renewed focus on mental health has the potential to improve students’ well-being in profound ways—starting with helping them recover from the pandemic’s effects. In New York City, for example, schools are hiring more than 600 new clinicians, including psychologists , to screen students’ mental health and help them process pandemic-related trauma and adjust to the “new normal” of attending school in person.

Educators and families are also realizing the importance of protecting students’ mental health more generally—not only for their health and safety but for their learning. “We’ve been seeing a broader appreciation for the fact that mental health is a prerequisite for learning rather than an extracurricular pursuit,” said Eric Rossen, PhD, director of professional development and standards at the National Association of School Psychologists.

As a result, Rossen hopes educators will embed social and emotional learning components into daily instruction. For example, teachers could teach mindfulness techniques in the classroom and take in-the-moment opportunities to help kids resolve conflicts or manage stress.

Improved access to mental health resources in schools is another positive effect. Because of physical distancing guidelines, school leaders had to find ways to deliver mental health services remotely, including via online referrals and teletherapy with school psychologists and counselors.

Early in the pandemic, Faustino said he was hesitant about teletherapy’s effectiveness; now, he hopes to continue offering a virtual option. Online scheduling and remote appointments make it easier for students to access mental health resources, and some students even enjoy virtual appointments more, as they can attend therapy in their own spaces rather than showing up in the counselor’s office. For older students, Faustino said that level of comfort often leads to more productive, open conversations.

Autonomy as a key to motivation

Research suggests that when students have more choices about their materials and activities, they’re more motivated—which may translate to increased learning and academic success. In a 2016 paper, psychology researcher Allan Wigfield, PhD, and colleagues make the case that control and autonomy in reading activities can improve both motivation and comprehension ( Child Development Perspectives , Vol. 10, No. 3 ).

During the period of online teaching, some students had opportunities to learn at their own pace, which educators say improved their learning outcomes—especially in older students. In a 2020 survey of more than 600 parents, researchers found the second-most-valued benefit of distance learning was flexibility—not only in schedule but in method of learning.

In a recent study, researchers found that 18% of parents pointed to greater flexibility in a child’s schedule or way of learning as the biggest benefit or positive outcome related to remote learning ( School Psychology , Roy, A., et al., in press).

This individualized learning helps students find more free time for interests and also allows them to conduct their learning at a time they’re most likely to succeed. During the pandemic, Mark Gardner, an English teacher at Hayes Freedom High School in Camas, Washington, said he realized how important student-centered learning is and that whether learning happens should take precedence over how and when it occurs.

For example, one of his students thrived when he had the choice to do work later at night because he took care of his siblings during the day. Now, Gardner posts homework online on Sundays so students can work at their own pace during the week. “Going forward, we want to create as many access points as we can for kids to engage with learning,” he said.

Rosanna Breaux , PhD, an assistant professor of psychology and assistant director of the Child Study Center at Virginia Tech, agrees. “I’d like to see this flexibility continue in some way, where—similar to college—students can guide their own learning based on their interests or when they’re most productive,” she said.

During the pandemic, many educators were forced to rethink how to keep students engaged. Rossen said because many school districts shared virtual curricula during the period of remote learning, older students could take more challenging or interesting courses than they could in person. The same is true for younger students: Megan Hibbard, a teacher in White Bear Lake, Minnesota, said many of her fifth graders enjoyed distance learning more than in-person because they could work on projects that aligned with their interests.

“So much of motivation is discovering the unique things the student finds interesting,” said Hunter Gehlbach, PhD, a professor and vice dean at the Johns Hopkins School of Education. “The more you can facilitate students spending more time on the things they’re really interested in, the better.”

Going forward, Rossen hopes virtual curricula will allow students greater opportunities to pursue their interests, such as by taking AP classes, foreign languages, or vocational electives not available at their own schools.

Conversely, Hibbard’s goal is to increase opportunities for students to pursue their interests in the in-person setting. For example, she plans to increase what she calls “Genius Hours,” a time at the end of the school day when students can focus on high-interest projects they’ll eventually share with the class.

Better understanding of children's needs

One of the most important predictors of a child’s success in school is parental involvement in their education. For example, in a meta-analysis of studies, researchers linked parental engagement in their middle schoolers’ education with greater measures of success (Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F., Developmental Psychology , Vol. 45, No. 3, 2009).

During the pandemic, parents had new opportunities to learn about their kids and, as a result, help them learn. According to a study by Breaux and colleagues, many parents reported that the pandemic allowed them a better understanding of their child’s learning style, needs, or curriculum.

James C. Kaufman , PhD, a professor of educational psychology at the University of Connecticut and the father of an elementary schooler and a high schooler, said he’s had a front-row seat for his sons’ learning for the first time. “Watching my kids learn and engage with classmates has given me some insight in how to parent them,” he said.

Stephen Becker , PhD, a pediatric psychologist at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, said some parents have observed their children’s behavior or learning needs for the first time, which could prompt them to consider assessment and Individualized Education Program (IEP) services. Across the board, Gehlbach said parents are realizing how they can better partner with schools to ensure their kids’ well-being and academic success.

For example, Samantha Marks , PsyD, a Florida-based clinical psychologist, said she realized how much help her middle school daughter, a gifted and talented student with a 504 plan (a plan for how the school will offer support for a student’s disability) for anxiety, needed with independence. “Bringing the learning home made it crystal clear what we needed to teach our daughter to be independent and improve executive functioning” she said. “My takeaway from this is that more parents need to be involved in their children’s education in a healthy, helpful way.”

Marks also gained a deeper understanding of her daughter’s mental health needs. Through her 504 plan, she received help managing her anxiety at school—at home, though, Marks wasn’t always available to help, which taught her the importance of helping her daughter manage her anxiety independently.

Along with parents gaining a deeper understanding of their kids’ needs, the pandemic also prompted greater parent participation in school. For example, Rossen said his kids’ school had virtual school board meetings; he hopes virtual options continue for events like back-to-school information sessions and parenting workshops. “These meetings are often in the evening, and if you’re a single parent or sole caregiver, you may not want to pay a babysitter in order to attend,” he said.

Brittany Greiert, PhD, a school psychologist in Aurora, Colorado, says culturally and linguistically diverse families at her schools benefited from streamlined opportunities to communicate with administrators and teachers. Her district used an app that translates parent communication into 150 languages. Parents can also remotely participate in meetings with school psychologists or teachers, which Greiert says she plans to continue post-pandemic.

Decreased bullying

During stay-at-home orders, kids with neurodevelopmental disorders experienced less bullying than pre-pandemic (McFayden, T. C., et al., Journal of Rural Mental Health , No. 45, Vol. 2, 2021). According to 2019 research, children with emotional, behavioral, and physical health needs experience increased rates of bullying victimization ( Lebrun-Harris, L. A., et al., ), and from the U.S. Department of Education suggests the majority of bullying takes place in person and in unsupervised areas (PDF) .

Scott Graves , PhD, an associate professor of educational studies at The Ohio State University and a member of APA’s Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education (CPSE), said the supervision by parents and teachers in remote learning likely played a part in reducing bullying. As a result, he’s less worried his Black sons will be victims of microaggressions and racist behavior during online learning.

Some Asian American families also report that remote learning offered protection against racism students may have experienced in person. Shereen Naser, PhD, an associate professor of psychology at Cleveland State University and a member of CPSE, and colleagues found that students are more comfortable saying discriminatory things in school when their teachers are also doing so; Naser suspects this trickle-down effect is less likely to happen when students learn from home ( School Psychology International , 2019).

Reductions in bullying and microaggressions aren’t just beneficial for students’ long-term mental health. Breaux said less bullying at school results in less stress, which can improve students’ self-esteem and mood—both of which impact their ability to learn.

Patricia Perez, PhD, an associate professor of international psychology at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology and a member of CPSE, said it’s important for schools to be proactive in providing spaces for support and cultural expression for students from vulnerable backgrounds, whether in culture-specific clubs, all-school assemblies that address racism and other diversity-related topics, or safe spaces to process feelings with teachers.

According to Rossen, many schools are already considering how to continue supporting students at risk for bullying, including by restructuring the school environment.

One principal, Rossen said, recently switched to single-use bathrooms to avoid congregating in those spaces once in-person learning commences to maintain social distancing requirements. “The principal received feedback from students about how going to the bathroom is much less stressful for these students in part due to less bullying,” he said.

More opportunities for special needs students

In Becker and Breaux’s research, parents of students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), particularly those with a 504 plan and IEP, reported greater difficulties with remote learning. But some students with special learning needs—including those with IEPs and 504 plans—thrived in an at-home learning environment. Recent reporting in The New York Times suggests this is one reason many students want to continue online learning.

According to Cara Laitusis, PhD, a principal research scientist at Educational Testing Service ( ETS ) and a member of CPSE, reduced distractions may improve learning outcomes for some students with disabilities that impact attention in a group setting. “In assessments, small group or individual settings are frequently requested accommodations for some students with ADHD, anxiety, or autism. Being in a quiet place alone without peers for part of the instructional day may also allow for more focus,” she said. However, she also pointed out the benefits of inclusion in the classroom for developing social skills with peers.

Remote learning has improved academic outcomes for students with different learning needs, too. Marks said her seventh-grade daughter, a visual learner, appreciated the increase in video presentations and graphics. Similarly, Hibbard said many of her students who struggle to grasp lessons on the first try have benefited from the ability to watch videos over again until they understand. Post-pandemic, she plans to record bite-size lessons—for example, a 1-minute video of a long division problem—so her students can rewatch and process at their own rate.

Learners with anxiety also appreciate the option not to be in the classroom, because the social pressures of being surrounded by peers can make it hard to focus on academics. “Several of my students have learned more in the last year simply due to the absence of anxiety,” said Rosie Reid, an English teacher at Ygnacio Valley High School in Concord, California, and a 2019 California Teacher of the Year. “It’s just one less thing to negotiate in a learning environment.”

On online learning platforms, it’s easier for kids with social anxiety or shyness to participate. One of Gardner’s students with social anxiety participated far more in virtual settings and chats. Now, Gardner is brainstorming ways to encourage students to chat in person, such as by projecting a chat screen on the blackboard.

Technology has helped school psychologists better engage students, too. For example, Greiert said the virtual setting gave her a new understanding of her students’ personalities and needs. “Typing out their thoughts, they were able to demonstrate humor or complex thoughts they never demonstrated in person,” she said. “I really want to keep incorporating technology into sessions so kids can keep building on their strengths.”

Reid says that along with the high school students she teaches, she’s seen her 6-year-old daughter benefit from learning at her own pace in the familiarity of her home. Before the pandemic, she was behind academically, but by guiding her own learning—writing poems, reading books, playing outside with her siblings—she’s blossomed. “For me, as both a mother and as a teacher, this whole phenomenon has opened the door to what education can be,” Reid said.

Eleanor Di Marino-Linnen, PhD, a psychologist and superintendent of the Rose Tree Media School District in Media, Pennsylvania, says the pandemic afforded her district a chance to rethink old routines and implement new ones. “As challenging as it is, it’s definitely an exciting time to be in education when we have a chance to reenvision what schools have looked like for many years,” she said. “We want to capitalize on what we’ve learned.”

Further reading

Why are some kids thriving during remote learning? Fleming, N., Edutopia, 2020

Remote learning has been a disaster for many students. But some kids have thrived. Gilman, A., The Washington Post , Oct. 3, 2020

A preliminary examination of key strategies, challenges, and benefits of remote learning expressed by parents during the COVID-19 pandemic Roy, A., et al., School Psychology , in press

Remote learning during COVID-19: Examining school practices, service continuation, and difficulties for adolescents with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder Becker S. P., et al., Journal of Adolescent Health , 2020

Recommended Reading

Contact apa, you may also like.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Remote and In-Person Learning: Utility Versus Social Experience

Panos photopoulos.

1 Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of West Attica, Athens, Greece

Christos Tsonos

2 Department of Physics, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece

Ilias Stavrakas

Dimos triantis, associated data.

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

The massive transition from in-person to remote teaching increased the impact of technology on the everyday life of the universities. Without the face-to-face component, learning and teaching became a completely different experience for students and teachers. Recording the attitudes and perceptions of the undergraduate students on the new situation became necessary for the faculties to support them effectively. This research collected quantitative and qualitative data from 336 students of all the years of studies. The students preferred in-person teaching and reported higher engagement, learning, and understanding during classroom teaching. More senior students, who had developed face-to-face ties with their colleagues before the pandemic, found it easier to continue their interactions remotely. They were interested in matching learning with the duties and needs at the particular period of their life, despite their beliefs concerning the effectiveness of in-person teaching. The first-year students found it challenging to develop relationships remotely, and they were the most frustrated. Overall, students in the first years of their studies perceived remote teaching as dissatisfactory compared to the more senior students. Similar to other publications, the respondents of this study challenged the effectiveness of remote teaching and the concomitant transition from in-person to remote social relationships.

Introduction

The period of remote teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic was a challenge for Higher Education. In March 2020, the Greek ministry of education announced that all the educational activities would go online. The University of West Attica purchased laptops for the academic and administrative staff, organised webinars on educational platforms, and provided a venue for sharing practices, methods and ideas. A few weeks after the COVID-19 outbreak, more than 95% of the undergraduate courses were delivered remotely [ 1 ]. The transition from onsite to remote teaching caused a tremendous workload for teachers and students [ 2 , 3 ]. The teachers had to digitise teaching materials and devise methods to secure learning continuity in the new environment. Before the pandemic, communication with the students was happening all the time. After March 2020, communication became more complicated, requiring consecutive mails to resolve simple issues. The fast transition from in-person to remote teaching gave the impression of continuity in Higher Education. The lectures were delivered remotely and synchronously, the students appeared to follow the lectures, and at the end of the semester, they sat distance examinations. A new order prevailed but with less emotional energy.

Crises and extreme events are not simply overgrown routine events; they require a successful interplay between centralisation and local improvisation [ 4 ]. Centralised decisions and guidelines diffuse the expertise of the few knowledgeable individuals across remote sites, allowing local actors to take initiatives on more specific issues. However, during the COVID crisis, the support received from central authorities was somewhat limited [ 5 ]. Until the end of the spring semester, June 2020, no COVID-specific quality teaching policy was communicated. The feedback questionnaires administered to the students collected the same information as the years before the COVID-19 crisis. With the Universities closed, traditional feedback mechanisms were barely adequate.

Under these circumstances, a short survey was administered to students of the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering to collect information on how they experienced distance teaching. The findings of this survey, presented at the International Conference CSEDU 2021, explored the students’ preference towards face-to-face and remote teaching and studied the variation of the answers with the year of enrolment [ 6 ]. This publication revisits the findings of our previous work and expands further on the text answers collected at the same period.

Our research conclusions guided our pedagogical practices during the period of the movement restrictions to support students’ learning endeavour. However, international organisations like OECD and UNICEF promoted the idea of a complete transition of in-person education to online. In some cases, politicians, business leaders, and part of the media further enhanced their vision to articulate persuasive accounts regarding higher education in the post-COVID era [ 6 ]. Such descriptions influence the way people understand and interpret reality, and in the case of Higher Education, they affect the interpretation of the research findings. We identify two issues that significantly affect research in education. The first is the researcher’s background beliefs regarding technology, and the second is the relationship between learning and education.

This publication aims to understand students’ modality preferences and the criteria for making preference decisions. Because of the importance of these questions, “Technology and Education” of this publication outlines our understanding of technology. “The Significance of the “No Significant Difference”” discusses the “no significant difference” argument and its importance within a dialogue that overemphasises learning. “Past Research Findings on ERT” gives a snapshot of the literature regarding students’ experiences during the period of emergency remote teaching. “ Methods” comments on the methodology of our research. The results and discussion of the findings are the subjects of “Results and Discussion”, and the publication ends with some conclusive remarks.

Technology and Education

In Western culture, technology is considered an autonomous entity, which proceeds almost naturally along a predetermined path. From this perspective, technology is an external factor determining our society’s adjustments [ 7 ]. Mechanical arrangements, integrated circuits, or computer programs are considered the successful outcome of human efforts to push boundaries back in an endless course of progress [ 8 ]. Technology is considered inherently progressive and politically neutral, bringing changes to work and education. It is a force beyond particular interests that dictates changes in society. Society can only take full advantage of technological achievements if education, employment, or healthcare adjust to technology. Technology not only drives but also legitimises change.

Technology has always had an impact on education. Individualised learning has been the aim of technological innovations since 1966 [ 9 ]. Computers were introduced in Higher Education in the seventies with the promise to customise education to the individual [ 10 , 11 ]. Computers were a decentralised technology operating at the faculty or university level to enrich classroom learning [ 12 , 13 ]. Ideas about replacing the teacher and subsuming the individual learner to the computer system were also circulated in those days. A finely tuned computer system promising improved attention during learning unavoidably led to comparisons between computer-assisted and in-person instruction [ 11 ]. Teaching machines, like Autotutor, were used in the UK to “supplement the shortage of specialist mathematics teachers [ 10 ], i.e. the replacement of expertise by automation. Regarding the learner, the collection of “information on behaviours such as eye movement or irrelevant body responses during Computer Assisted Instruction” was deemed desirable although unattainable back then [ 11 ].

The idea of the supremacy of the automatic systems has been dominant since the beginning of the twentieth century, and it was reheated every time a new technology was considered capable of inflicting the decisive blow to in-person teaching. Around 2000, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) innovations, hand-in-hand with the interest of big corporations to compete in the education market [ 14 – 16 ], revitalised the rhetoric of individualised learning. Courses delivered over the internet [ 17 ] became the alternative to classroom teaching. In the new setting, students do not have to commute to the campus or follow lectures in crowded auditoria, but they are responsible for fitting learning into a schedule of personal duties and interests [ 3 ]. The teacher’s new role is that of the “Guide on the Side” [ 18 , 19 ]. References to technology replace the role of the human actors of education in public policy texts [ 20 ], educators’ knowledge and skills are subsumed to the technological artefact [ 21 ], and the teachers are portrayed as mainly ancillary to students’ learning [ 16 ].

Immediately after the pandemic broke out, education companies and platform owners intensified their efforts to expand the EdTech industry and prepare the ground for future profits [ 14 , 22 ]. During the movement restrictions, they offered their services free of charge to smooth the transition from onsite to any format of non-traditional education. The explosive growth of online education before 2019 [ 14 , 23 ] was further amplified in 2020 as several EdTech companies treated the pandemic as a business opportunity. The expected increase in capital investments in EdTech [ 22 ] was realised and reported in January 2021, showing that during a disruptive year in education, EdTech venture capital investments in the US increased by 30% [ 24 ], while globally, this percentage reached 100% [ 25 ]. The expansion of existing partnerships between international organisations, prestigious universities, and big corporations [ 15 , 26 ] allowed private platform owners to penetrate public education further.

Collecting learning data during the transition from onsite to remote teaching was presumably an opportunity for EdTech companies and scholars to record the behaviour of students and teachers during the pandemic [ 10 , 22 ], although for the latter, collecting information on student experiences during the pandemic was a prerequisite for responding meaningfully to their needs [ 27 , 28 ].

Technology and automation have a century’s history in education. As Leo Marx has convincingly argued [ 8 ], most technologies have the legal status of private property, and individual businessmen, corporate managers, and government officials make vital decisions concerning their design. The corporations invest capital and expertise and anticipate enjoying returns on their investments. Focusing our attention solely on technology usage without considering its design characteristics and ownership status, we remain blind to much that is intellectually and practically crucial.

Based on the above arguments, this publication asserts that low preference for remote teaching does not indicate a problem for technology, nor a lack of understanding or conservativism for the students. Computer-aided instruction does not have to be a substitute for in-person education. Numerous publications have shown that computer-aided instruction can be an effective strategy in learning. They provide examples of technology applications symbiotic with face-to-face education’s social relationships. These are technology applications designed for several purposes, such as: to reduce the administrative burden of large classes, maintain student interest and deliver learning outcomes [ 29 ], expand the physical learning space and enrich the learning experience [ 30 ], to assist students facing learning difficulties [ 31 ] to enrich teaching and learning using simulations [ 32 , 33 ] and to offer the opportunity to follow the lecture remotely for students who are ill or abroad [ 34 ].

Remote teaching can supplement face-to-face education, and it does not necessarily imply a complete transition from education to online learning. For example, virtual microscopes can be used remotely and offer students an engaging learning experience. However, this cannot substitute the experience of using a real microscope during a lab session [ 32 ]. Although visiting a virtual Museum is instructive to the students, “The authentic experience of being present at the museum, being able to look around or to be absorbed in a painting, listen to the sounds of the visitors’ talk or whisper and the rattle of coffee cups, the sensation of the hardness of the floor, the temperature in the room, etc., all of this cannot be reproduced through video or image” [ 30 ].

The Significance of the “No Significant Difference”

Jerome Bruner in 1966 described teaching as a call for participation in a process that makes possible the establishment of knowledge. Teaching aims not to produce living libraries but to get students to think. Knowing is a process, not a product. Gert Biesta has resisted the overemphasis on learning, noticing that education is about learning and socialisation and subjectification [ 35 ].

Learning is the dominant term in mainstream technology discourse. If online learning is equally effective to in-person learning, it could be an alternative to traditional teaching; otherwise, its benefits would be highly suspected. From this perspective, the possibility of the transition from in-person to online learning requires the firm assurance that there is no significant difference between the two modalities in the learning outcomes. Media comparison studies compare the level of achievement of two groups of learners who have taken the same course delivered by different media. Such research is considered of weak design because student performance is not a question of the medium alone. No medium is inherently better or worse than another; it is the medium and the design of the course which must be considered together [ 36 , 37 ].

A vital assertion extracted from media comparison studies is the no significant difference phenomenon. According to this, “a large number of media comparison studies have found no statistical difference between learning outcomes of different delivery methods” [ 17 ]. Self-selection bias is a problem associated with comparisons between online and in-person learning. In online learning, self-selection bias means that certain factors that influence students’ level of achievement also influence their modality preference. A student’s persistence in learning, engagement with learning, maturity, and human capital endowment, which influence his/her learning achievements, may also influence the choice of a particular modality. Students who choose online courses are probably more comfortable in that format and perform better [ 17 , 36 ]. Self-selection bias is a point for attention in education and other research fields [ 38 ]. There is evidence suggesting that self-selection bias undermines the meaningfulness of the research supporting the no significant difference phenomenon [ 17 ].

In March 2020, Zimmerman [ 39 ] proposed that the transition from in-person to distance teaching offered a unique opportunity to examine how students “perform in these courses compared to the face-to-face kind, without worrying about self-selection bias.” The next day, George Veletsianos published on his webpage a reply to Zimmerman stating that this is a piece of bad advice for two reasons: the first was the large body of literature showing that there are “no significant differences between in-person and online courses.” The second said that online courses prepared in a week would not be as good as those prepared in months or even years.

Two weeks later, Thomas Tobin commented that if self-selection bias is a problem for students who follow online courses, it is also a problem for those who choose face-to-face programs: “The two types of instruction are apples and oranges” [ 40 ]. Finally, Hodges et al. [ 37 ] shifted the attention from methodology to terminology. Their article insisted that the type of instruction offered in response to the COVID-19 crisis should be named emergency remote teaching (ERT) because it has nothing in common with well-designed online courses. They also warned the educators that “The rapid approach necessary for emergency remote teaching may diminish the quality of the courses delivered.”

Hodges et al. drew a line between the experiences of the academic community since the pandemic outbreak and the idealisation of online learning. Synchronous remote teaching during the pandemic is different from asynchronous online learning. However, both of them are non-in-person learning modalities. According to Susan Ramlo, ERT impoverishes our understanding of the online experience [ 41 ] because it separates the latter from lessons learned during the pandemic. Besides, it does not clarify what research findings would serve as evidence for or against the claim regarding ERT quality. Students and teachers use the ERT experience to get an idea of their lives under online education. Research findings from different countries indicate a strong desire to return to classroom relationships. Are these findings irrelevant to the online proposal? Does the students’ verdict indicate that the rapidness of the transition from in-person to remote teaching diminished the quality of teaching? Research findings on students’ attitudes towards ERT offer valuable considerations regarding the prospects of online education in the post-COVID era.

Past Research Findings on ERT

In July 2021, we searched the Scopus database using the keywords “emergency remote teaching” and “research.” The search returned 72 documents. Twenty-one of them were research articles recording students’ experiences and attitudes during ERT. Thirteen were based on quantitative research, seven on qualitative, and one on mixed methodology.

Quantitative studies published soon after the movement restrictions reported that students consider ERT useful for their studies [ 42 , 43 ]. More recent publications have verified this conclusion [ 2 , 44 ]. Petchamé et al. [ 44 ] compared students’ perceptions of Face-to-Face, ERT and Smart Classroom teaching during the pandemic and found that students perceived face-to-face classes as better than the other two options in most facets, except in the amount of time that students spend arriving at the University. Students reported better student–teacher interaction, a higher concentration level, and more effective teamwork when in the classroom. However, some academic teachers considered needing more resources and training [ 45 ] to perform effectively in the remote digital environment.

Recent publications have moved further from questions regarding the preference and effectiveness of learning during ERT to the nuances of students’ lives. Publications based on qualitative research [ 3 , 27 , 28 , 41 , 46 ] made more explicit some of the students’ experiences during ERT capturing their feelings during the pandemic. Despite the rigid procedures and centralisation characterising professional bureaucracies, university teachers responded flexibly to the new situation and moved away from conventional obligations to take care of the well-being of their students [ 47 ]. Research conducted at the University of San Diego found that students reported similar or lower stress levels and found their remote courses similarly or less challenging. The students spent approximately the same number of hours on their courses, and there were no notable increases in dropouts, failure rates, or disparities [ 47 ]. The faculty members were interested in the well-being of the students and made changes in their practices to ensure educational continuity [ 3 ]. Research has successfully captured the compassion and flexibility shown by faculty members to ease the students’ lives [ 27 ], while the students appreciated policy changes to classes and grading. Academic teachers took care of course continuity and the human aspect of teaching, responding promptly to questions, providing clear and transparent information, or connecting the students to resources or people to help them. “ERT created a physical divide between faculty and students, but it also required the faculty to pay more attention to their students’ personal lives” [ 27 ].

Several interesting issues emerged from the research conducted on ERT. Publications from different countries having different research objectives are summarised under the following headings: students’ preference, student–instructor interaction, student’s concentration/motivation, teamwork/interaction with peers, time to commute to the University, technical ease, workload, and emotions–loneliness–stress.

Students’ Preference

A few publications communicated results showing preference or satisfaction with distance learning [ 47 , 48 ]. In most of the studies, the students preferred in-person education. This was manifested as a lack of interest in continuing with the online mode [ 2 ]; positive emotions during face to face classes [ 44 , 49 ]; preference for face to face albeit the initial enthusiasm with the online format [ 45 ]; significant reluctance towards emergency remote teaching from first-year students [ 50 ]; and problems with the withdrawal of the teacher in remote assessment [ 51 ].

Student–Instructor Interaction

Students value direct communication with their teachers during face-to-face classes [ 44 ] regarding learning effectiveness and social exchanges between the community members. In that respect, the disruption of social relationships has affected both the students and the teachers [ 2 ]. Especially for the students, the unmediated social interactions (didactic and socio-relational) with instructors and peers [ 45 ] has been described as a reason for preferring the in-person modality. The students considered that the in-person courses enhance their ability to connect and interact with their teachers [ 46 ].

Level of Concentration/Distraction, Motivation

Low motivation, low concentration, and distraction caused by the home environment are commonly reported problems during ERT. This was accompanied by difficulty to understand the content [ 2 ], low engagement with the course and the course material [ 46 ] and difficulty to remain engaged when studying at home [ 50 , 52 ].

Teamwork/Interaction with Peers

Face-to-face interaction makes teamwork more effective than virtual online teams. The students considered that non-face-to-face teaching does not benefit the communication between classmates [ 26 ], with the students in introductory classes being more affected [ 47 ]. Other problems were interference from family obligations, higher drop/fail rates in some classes [ 47 ], and the reduced ability of the students to interact with their colleagues [ 46 ].

The Time Needed to Commute to the University

Whenever asked, the students express their pleasure for not commuting to the campus: students consider the amount of time needed to commute to the university negative [ 44 ]. The main three advantages of e-learning are time efficiency, convenience, and accessibility [ 52 ].

Technical Ease

A practical recommendation that emerged during the pandemic was to record the lectures and make them available for future use: “recording and posting lectures and offering asynchronous or makeup exams and quizzes… could be carried over into non-pandemic quarters to help improve the student experience” [ 47 ]; “Recording class sessions in the Smart Classroom modality is considered a useful option” [ 44 ]; “the factor most highly ranked was watching recorded lecture videos” [ 46 ].

Some articles commented on the increase in workload for both teachers and students [ 2 ]. Other publications reported lower stress and less time on the courses or an equal amount of work for the two modalities [ 47 ].

Emotions–Loneliness–Stress

One of the most interesting findings in ERT literature is the students’ desire to restore their social relationships [ 50 , 52 ]. This is expressed as a desire to return to the classrooms or frustration for losing contact with peers. This point has been raised mainly in qualitative research findings. Quantitative research based on models like the technology acceptance model usually misses this point’s details. The classroom environment offered a higher degree of positive feelings [ 44 ]. The switch to emergency remote teaching has been a stressful experience. The loss of interaction and communication with instructors and fellow students has been described as a source of frustration and diminished learning [ 46 ]. The students missed their academic rituals and interactions with peers and teachers. As Cernicova-Buca, and Dragomir notice, “students feel comfortable within human interaction (colleagues and not robots, familiar/class teacher, not other teachers)” [ 51 ]. The lack of human interaction and unmediated social relationships are the most significant factors affecting the psychological state of the students and the effectiveness of learning. The possibility of a total transformation of education through technology under the promise of more efficient learning includes risks of less learning not because of the lack of sophistication of the digital learning tools but because of the absence of human interaction and coherent social relationships. The consequences of such decisions require careful thinking since very little is known about their long-term effects [ 53 ].

To draw sound conclusions from the literature review, the various findings are understood within the context of the movement restrictions imposed and the concomitant feelings of stress, disappointment and frustration due to the disruption of the social relationships. In that respect, the non-preference for remote education is partly the result of frustration due to the disruption of normal social relationships during the pandemic. However, it conveys a message for the future, saying that separating learning from social experience undermines learning itself. The research findings of Petchamé et al. [ 44 ] are illuminating as they show that even the well-prepared and well-structured Smart Classroom did not attract the students’ preference compared to in-person teaching.

A second conclusion is the flexibility and adaptability of the academic teachers to the new situation despite the rigid procedures of the bureaucratic universities. The university teachers not only transferred their teaching material to digital form within a few days but also paid particular attention to supporting their students during the difficult period of movement restrictions. We speculate that the characteristics of the technological basis did not much affect teachers’ actions dictated by compassion and professionalism.

Despite the widely held beliefs that technology frees people from the excess workload, research findings have shown that the situation is the opposite. Digitisation of the material and the communication increased the workload for students and teachers.

The most important lesson learnt from the literature review is the positive influence of student–student and student–teacher face-to-face relationships in effective learning. However, teachers’ interest in students’ well-being cannot effectively combat feelings of isolation in the long run [ 47 ]. Current findings indicate that well-prepared distant teaching lags in terms of psychological support to the students [ 44 ] and the development of competencies like teamwork and peer-to-peer cooperation [ 2 , 44 , 46 , 47 ]. Our interpretation of the literature review concludes that socialisation is not just a feature of education but a prerequisite for successful learning, and therefore learning outside the social context is a risky strategy [ 53 ].

Students consider the broader environment and their experiences during the global pandemic, and they miss classroom socialisation and learning [ 3 ]. Students do not perceive learning as distinct from the rest of their life. They adopt a holistic approach where learning is embedded in their social activities and is part of their social experiences. A life depleted from experiences of face-to-face communication is not the proper context for effective learning [ 54 ]—student engagement occurs when learning is integrated with meaningful social experiences.

The data were collected using an anonymous questionnaire administered to the students via the Open eClass platform, an Integrated Course Management System offered by the Greek University Network (GUNET) to support asynchronous e-learning services. The respondents were full-time students of the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of West Attica. A 25-item questionnaire was administered to gauge the students’ perceptions, attitudes, and experiences during ERT compared to face-to-face teaching. The questionnaire included one open-ended question, asking the respondents to express their views and feeling on the new learning reality. The data were collected between September and October 2020. The students were encouraged to fill out the questionnaire, but participation was voluntary. A total number of 336 students replied to the questionnaire.

Demographic data included gender, age, and year of enrolment. Thirty-nine per cent of the respondents were first-year students enrolled in 2020, 21% enrolled in 2019 (second year), 10% in 2018, 11% enrolled in 2017, and the rest 19% were students enrolled in 2016 or earlier. The first-year students did not have experience of in-person university lectures, but they had experienced remote teaching during the final year of their Lyceum studies. The gap between students’ expectations regarding university life and reality can cause anxiety [ 55 ], poor academic performance, and increased drop-out rates [ 56 ] if not managed successfully. The research method, the questionnaire, the theoretical underpinning of its items and the quantitative findings have been presented in another publication [ 6 ]. This publication focuses in the analysis of the text answers collected.

Results and Discussion

The quantitative findings presented in a previous publication [ 6 ] show variations in the preference of the teaching modality with the year of studies. This article makes a brief reference to the quantitative results, focusing on the text answers of the respondents.

The Questionnaire Findings

Overall, the majority (60%) preferred face-to-face teaching, 31% preferred remote teaching, and 9% expressed no particular preference. First and second-year students expressed a stronger preference for in-person teaching. Eighty-five percent of the first-year and 59% of the second-year students preferred face-to-face teaching, while 61% of the senior students (fourth or fifth year) preferred remote education.

The students were asked which modality they would choose if there were no restrictions. The percentages were close to those of preference: 63% would choose in-person, and 30% remote courses. However, 42% of the students replied that ERT was a pleasant solution given the movement restrictions and 33% characterized remote teaching as an unpleasant solution.

Overall, 77% of the respondents expressed positive feelings for not having to commute to the campus. This percentage was high (68%) even among the students who preferred in-person teaching, while it reached 93% among the respondents who preferred distance teaching. Not commuting to the campus was not a factor differentiating the students’ difference in modality preferences, and therefore it cannot explain the modality choices.

Table ​ Table1 1 shows the students’ replies on active participation during lectures, e.g. asking questions, expressing ideas easily, remaining concentrated to the lecture for longer, understanding, remaining concentrated during the classes, and more effective communication with the teacher.

Class participation ( N  = 336)

Forty-four percent of the respondents reported that they express their ideas and ask questions more easily during in-person classes, while the respective percentage for remote teaching was 22%. The majority of the respondents replied that they remained more time concentrated, understand better, are more engaged with learning, and communicate more effectively with the teacher during in-person classes. Another 34% replied that the teaching modality does not influence class participation. These results varied with the year of studies. First-year students considered face-to-face teaching more effective in all aspects, followed by second-year ones. Overall the students considered that in-person teaching facilitates learning compared to remote classes.

The quantitative results showed that the students who prefer in-person teaching consider that this modality makes learning more effective. These students considered that during face-to-face classes, communication with the teacher is more effective (66%), understanding the material is better (81%), concentration is longer (73%), and better (76%), and expression of ideas is more straightforward (56%). The preference for face-to-face teaching was influenced by perceptions of effectiveness in learning and communication.

However, this is not the case with the students who prefer remote teaching. Only 33% of these students agreed that expressing ideas is easier during remote lectures. Only 27% considered that remoteness makes communication with the teacher more effective, 42% said they understand better, and 44% said they remain concentrated for longer. Overall their preference for remote teaching was not strongly influenced by perceptions of higher effectiveness of the particular modality in terms of learning, engagement, class participation, and communication.

Our findings show that a higher preference for remote teaching is not proof of superiority in terms of learning but is mainly related to pressures for accommodating life demands to education. Fitting the preferred teaching modality to the way of living was an essential factor of the two groups of students, 67% for those who preferred in-person teaching and 61% for those preferring remote. Compared with the percentages to the answers related to learning effectiveness, fitting education modality to life duties is more critical than learning effectiveness for students who prefer remote teaching.

Text Answers

The text answers allowed students to explain their attitudes in their own words. The comments showed the perplexity of the modality preference question, particularly for the students who preferred remote teaching.

We received 82 text answers in total. Twenty-seven of them were from students with a preference for remote teaching, 50 from students with a preference for in-person teaching, and five from students who expressed no particular preference for any of the two modalities. Some of the students replied in a very emotional way. For example, two students commented on remote education: “It is horrible!”, (S121, Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person). “At the beginning, it looked nice and welcomed, but soon it became too tiresome.” (S217, Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person). A second-year student expressed a particularly negative view of this modality: “Every time I follow a remote lecture, I feel something is dying inside me. I have already failed in the past semester. I am afraid I will fail this semester despite my efforts to be consistent with my studies. Distance education is the worst thing that happened in my academic life.” (S218, Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person). Opposite to these considerations, a third-year student noticed: “I dream of a day in the future when I will have the opportunity to complete a course even if I cannot, or I do not want to follow the lectures in-person” (S67, Enrolment: 2017, preference: remote).

The respondents commented on the following issues:

Socialisation (17 comments). The students expressed negative feelings for the lack of face-to-face communication during the classes, e.g., S12: “in-person teaching is superior because it allows direct interaction between the people.” (Enrolment: 2014, no-preference); S37: “Remote lectures don’t allow socialisation” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: remote); S67: “I miss socialising with my colleagues at the refectory, I miss the mushroom soup and tichou” (Enrolment 2017, preference: remote); S69: “Socialisation between the students is diminished” (Enrolment: 2016, preference: remote); S135: “Sadly, socialisation is reduced giving rise to addiction to technology” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person); S143: “There are no social relationships and this is something we don’t like. The screen is not our friend and computer communication is not like face-to-face” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person); S146: “I have the gut feeling, that this teaching modality (remote) will increase the distance between humans and accustom them to staying in front of a screen the whole day” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person); S181: “The lack of direct contact with other persons during the day or during the lessons, generates feelings of isolation and alienation, affecting our psychological health” (Enrolment: 2017, preference: in-person).

Student–teacher communication (14 comments). Half of the comments made were from the students who preferred in-person learning. Quite interestingly, some students who preferred remote teaching commented on the importance of the student–teacher interaction, e.g., S51: “Remote learning is not like in-person, where one can communicate directly with the teacher.” (Enrolment: 2018, preference: remote); S169: “There is no face-to-face interaction with the teachers, and this makes teaching difficult for both the students and teachers” (Enrolment: 2018, preference: in-person); S81: “The absence of physical presence hampers the development of a relationship between the student and the teacher” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: remote).

Technical issues (13 comments), e.g., S100: “The biggest problem is the internet connection. It would be convenient if the lectures were recorded and uploaded on the LMS platform” (Enrolment: 2017, no preference).

Contingency issues (19 comments). e.g., S15: “Given the health risks because of the pandemic, remote lecturing is the best way to protect ourselves and the others” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: remote).

Fatigue/convenience (22 comments). Students commented on the convenience of not having to commute to the university, but also on the so-called “zoom fatigue” [ 57 ], e.g., S143: “(remote teaching) is convenient because we can do whatever we want behind the screen in the comfort and warmth of the home environment” (Enrolment: 2020, preference in-person); S109: “Remote teaching is very convenient for me because it allows me to work.” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: remote); S3: “Looking at the screen for long hours is not good for the eyes” (Enrolment:2020, no-preference); S72: “eye-fatigue is obvious after 5 or 6 hours of lectures” (Enrolment: 2016, preference: remote); S128 “At the end of an ordinary day I feel exhausted” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person); S182: “being in front of a screen for 6 to 12 hours is bad for my physical and psychological health.” (Enrolment: 2017, preference: in-person).

Saving of money (4 comments). Some students linked “not having to commute” with saving money. e.g., S33: “I do not have to commute from the town I live to Athens. I do not spend money, and I do not get tired” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: remote).

Learning/understanding/concentration (7 comments). Most of these text answers considered the higher effectiveness of the classroom environment; e.g., S209: “The opportunity for deep quality discussions is limited because we spent a lot of time on technical issues related to the platform or questions on practical issues” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person); S69: “It is easier to follow a remote lecture because there is no classroom noise and distance from the board” (Enrolment: 2016, preference: remote); S108: “In-person education is more effective because you have to follow a strict schedule of lectures and this is very helpful for people who have other responsibilities as well” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person); S164: “There were too many students in the auditoria, and I lost contact with the lectures” (Enrolment: 2018, no preference); S114: “I want to follow the (remote) lectures, but I cannot get concentrated” (Enrolment 2020, preference: in-person); S160: “When students follow a lecture in the classroom, they remain concentrated because they know that their fellow students are trying as hard as they do” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person);

Labs (7 comments). All the respondents agreed, irrespectively of the modality of preference, that remote labs are inefficient compared to on-site delivery; e.g., S89: “Doing the labs remotely is a disaster. During the previous semester, I followed the labs remotely, but I learned very few things.” (Enrolment: 2019, no preference); S108: “Doing labs remotely is ridiculous.” (Enrolment: 2019, in-person); S131: “Labs must be done with a physical presence.” (Enrolment: 2018, preference: remote).

Exams (14 comments). The students complained of not having enough time to complete their answers. The comments regarding distance exams were mixed. Some students questioned the fairness of the remote exams, while others happily commented on the possibility to pass the exams more easily; e.g., S108: “Distance examination is unfair, especially for the students who are consistent with their responsibilities. They cause much anxiety because they are impersonal.” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person); S139: “Distance exams are less stressful because I can use my notes” (Enrolment: 2018, preference: in-person); S180: “Getting help from my friends is precious during the exams!” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person); S157: “I have problems with the time given to answer the exam questions” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person); S78: “… 80% of the exams are easier to pass (crucial to me)” (Enrolment: 2015, preference: remote).

Discussion of the Text Answers

Analysis of the text answers illuminated aspects of students’ life during the period of the movement restrictions [ 30 ]. It provided a richer picture regarding the students’ preference towards the two modalities and raised the issues of remote examinations and labs.

Laboratory education is central in engineering studies, and it is a challenge to deliver remotely. Some publications attribute the observed lag of engineering education in adopting online teaching to the difficulties of remote lab education [ 58 ]. Students enrolled in 2019 or earlier raised the issue of remote lab education in their text answers. These students had the experience of on-site labs compared to the experience of remote synchronous labs. The respondents contrasted the two experiences and commented on the perceived ineffectiveness of the latter. Labs in electrical and electronic engineering involve psychomotor and sensory faculties, which are difficult to exercise remotely [ 59 ]. The students appreciated the teachers’ effort to ensure the continuation of lab education, but they considered that lack of direct contact with the apparatus undermines the essence of lab education.

Cheating during remote exams includes accessing resources, collusion, and impersonation. The transition from in-person to remote assessment added new problems to existing ones [ 60 ]. The students focused on inadequate time given during remote exams [ 61 , 62 ], anxiety, and increased opportunities for cheating. For some students, the internet connection quality was a source of anxiety during the exams, while for others, the home environment and the teacher’s absence reduced stress and anxiety. Some of the respondents commented enthusiastically on the possibility of cheating during remote exams. Considerations regarding the easiness of remote exams appear to influence the modality preference [ 63 ].

Other publications have reported reduced stress when the examination is taken from home, accompanied by feelings of easiness for being alone without the teacher’s presence [ 51 ]. Recommendations for diminishing unfair practices [ 62 ] assume that remote exams are a manageable problem. However, as students’ replies showed, instructions for stricter time limits to prevent dishonest behaviours have generated more problems [ 64 ] than those intended to solve.

Understanding the students’ modality preference:

Student satisfaction was significantly lower during ERT because of the absence of in-person interaction with peers and teachers [ 65 – 67 ]. Even in periods of political unrest, when the design characteristics of online learning undermined students’ solidarity, teachers and students preferred working together, meeting at coffee shops, or elsewhere outside the university [ 68 ].

The students were concerned with the disruption of the social relationships when teaching moved online. Social relationships are influenced by the materiality of the environment [ 69 ]. The fast transition to remote teaching challenged the taken-for-granted materiality of in-person education, which included official learning activities (e.g., classrooms, labs), extracurricular activities (e.g., attending seminars, students’ union), and physical places (e.g., library, coffee shop) [ 70 ]. Students who had developed valuable relationships in the traditional university felt uneasy when obliged to confine themselves to the digital space of ERT. Some students expressed their appreciation for face-to-face interactions while preferring remote learning options [ 41 ].

Qualitative information collected via free-text answers provides student-specific details on the rationale of their choices. According to the text answers, preference for remote teaching is influenced by the need to accommodate the fulfilment of personal duties or needs with education. O’ Neil et al. [ 63 ] found that students with experience in online courses, students who avoid academic work and those competent in time management are more likely to take a course online. However, our quantitative findings indicate that preference for remote education is not strongly related to beliefs of more effective learning.

The quantitative and qualitative findings show that preference for remote teaching is triggered by pressures to accommodate personal needs, duties or personality characteristics with education, and it is less related to perceived effectiveness in learning. Students who already had a job were more positive towards remote education, hoping that, in the new environment, they would manage to continue their studies while working. One student who felt uncomfortable when surrounded by many people welcomed remote teaching (text answer 73).

Moreover, preference for remote teaching was related to the pressures or needs during a particular period of students’ lives. Belonging comprises four dimensions: affect, place, social relationships, and politics [ 70 , 71 ]. Conceptualising belonging in a time–space context makes the transition from belonging to un-belonging more intelligible. Students may feel closer to the university space at a certain period of their life, attaching themselves to in-person teaching, while in another period, they may feel that the university is not an important setting for them to belong to [ 72 , 73 ]. Some of the text answers emphasised the contextual factors (timing, family or job obligations) to explain their preference for remote teaching. Remote teaching is the preferable option in response to temporal and contextual pressures.

Balancing learning with personal responsibilities and duties was central for students who preferred remote teaching. Some of the students appreciated the importance of face-to-face interactions and explained their preference for remote teaching by referring to their obligations at the particular period of their lives. This is far from considering that the convenience of studying from home is attractive to all the students. The following text answers clarify this point: S12: “My preference for remote teaching is based on my duties during this period of my life. I prefer remote teaching because I save time for my job. However, in-person teaching is superior because it allows interaction between the people.” (Enrolment: 2014, no-preference); S51: “I have been in the classrooms for years… remote teaching is suitable for me now.” (Enrolment: 2018, preference: remote); S60: “The reason I prefer remote lectures during this period is that I have to pass some previous-semester exams. Remote education allows me to follow more classes.” (Enrolment: 2018, preference: remote); S73: “I get very anxious when people surround me, and remote lectures help me feel calm.” (Enrolment: 2016, preference: remote); S83: “Remote lectures are an opportunity for the students who have a job, and they would not come to the campus anyway, to follow the lectures.” (Enrolment: 2014, preference: remote).

The qualitative data collected show that students see ERT as an alternative modality and make complicated decisions based on the specific needs they face during a specific period of their student life. The importance of not commuting to the campus is challenged by the text answers collected [ 74 , 75 ]. Although the vast majority of the respondents considered “not having to commute to the campus” attractive, only a tiny portion of them explained their preference on the basis of learning from the comfort of their home environment. Other students preferred ERT in response to practical difficulties they faced during a specific period of their life, such as family and job obligations or studies. Some of them preferred remote teaching to avoid in-person assessment [ 63 ]. Therefore, preference for remote teaching is not proof of the superiority of online education characteristics.

The effectiveness of learning is essential for the students who prefer in-person teaching. These students consider that class participation, concentration during the lectures and understanding of the taught material is more effective when classes are taken in person, and they explain their preference in terms of more effective learning. Their text answers indicate the importance they attribute to the cultivation of social relationships to increase student engagement and make learning and understanding more probable. However, the role of social relationships is not confined to effective learning. They also stressed the importance of socialisation for their psychological and mental health. Therefore, they consider learning and socialisation complementary aspects of education.

Preference for in-person teaching was primarily influenced by the belief that the classroom is a more effective learning environment [ 76 ]. Although not commuting to the university was considered attractive, the effectiveness of learning and socialisation were considered more important. These students value face-to-face relationships and consider their importance for learning and personality development. They also expressed worries regarding the prolonged absence of face-to-face communication and addiction to technology on psychological health and human relationships [ 77 ].

As described in the introduction, the objective of this publication is to understand the modality preference and the criteria of preference decisions. Our interpretation of the information collected indicates that the criteria underlying preference decisions are different for the two modalities. The survey results showed that the students who prefer in-person teaching consider this modality more effective in learning. However, only a minority of the students who prefer remote teaching consider that their preferred modality makes learning more effective.

Table ​ Table2 2 resumes the different preference criteria of the two groups of students. This list is not exhaustive, and further research can enrich our understanding of the differences between the two preferences. However, the findings of this publication indicate that students consider that the characteristics of classroom teaching facilitate learning, and for this reason, they prefer in-person teaching. For other students accommodating education with family and job obligations or health issues or convenience and comfort is more important, and consider remote teaching is the best option for them.

Preference criteria

The students who prefer in-person teaching consider that the classroom environment, student–student and student–teacher direct communication, facilitates learning. They enjoy university socialisation which presumably satisfies their need of belonging. The situation is more complicated with the students who prefer remote education. Some of them appreciate the importance of in-person social relationships with their colleagues and teachers despite their preference for remote teaching. Others were detached from the university environment and preferred the comfort and convenience of the home environment. A third group admitted the importance of social relationships, but they explained that they did not need them during the current period of their life. Finally, some students explained their preferences based on the easier remote exams.

The students who preferred in-person teaching adopted a more collectivistic approach. They compared the two modalities on the basis of what is good or bad or what makes learning more effective for the students as a whole. The main focus of their answers was not on fulfilling particular individual needs. The majority of the in-person preference texts commented on the positive influence of socialisation and communication between teachers and students on learning. Two of the respondents adopted a more collegial view emphasising the role of a community of peers in learning. S160: “When students follow a lecture in the classroom, they remain concentrated because they know that their fellow students are trying as hard as they do” (Enrolment: 2019, preference: in-person); S199: “(during in-person classes) the students gather together and pursue a common goal. This generates a friendly environment.” (Enrolment: 2020, preference: in-person). These comments correspond to mutual focus attention, i.e., feelings of interpersonal solidarity generated when some people focus their attention on the same thing and are all aware of that [ 77 ].

The students who preferred remote teaching adopted a rather individualistic perspective in explaining their modality preference. Half of the text answers (14 out of 27) received from these students explained how remote teaching serves better some of their duties or needs. S19: “With remote teaching, … I have the comfort and the cleanliness of my home” (Enrolment:2017, preference: remote); S78: “I get up 5 min before the lecture. I have breakfast during the lesson. I can follow the lecture from any place in my home. I can make notes easily by taking screenshots. Finally, 80% of the exams are easier to pass (crucial to me).” (Enrolment:2015, preference: remote); S67: “Remote lectures are convenient. I do not have to commute to the campus and move from one classroom to another. My armchair is far more comfortable than the wooden seats of the classroom, where I get sweaty. The temperature at home is nice…” (Enrolment:2017, preference: remote); S37: “(Remote lectures) are convenient until I get my driving license.” (Enrolment:2020, preference: remote).

Students who preferred in-person teaching focused on effective learning, and although they expressed their satisfaction for not commuting to the campus, they raised the problem of “zoom fatigue.” They were interested in preserving and developing face-to-face relationships with their colleagues and teachers. They stressed the importance of face-to-face interactions in learning, socialisation, and psychological health and viewed education in a collectivistic way rather than focusing on fulfilling their individual needs.

Students with a preference towards remote learning emphasised accommodating learning with other personal interests and duties and adopted a rather individualistic approach in their text answers. The students linked their preference for remote teaching to the fulfilment of duties facing at the particular period of their life, rather than an all-purpose any-time solution. In-person education was not considered less effective to remote while expressing worries about disrupting face-to-face relationships and “zoom fatigue.”

Views on maintaining social experiences and in-person interactions, and utility were identified among the respondents. ERT maintained order in Higher Education, although the students felt frustrated with the difficulty of carrying out satisfactory social relationships remotely.

Open access funding provided by HEAL-Link Greece.

Data availability

Declarations.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

This article is part of the topical collection “Computer Supported Education” guest edited by James Uhomoibhi and Beno Csapó.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Original article
• Open access
• Published: 02 November 2021

Emergency remote learning during the pandemic from a South African perspective

• Rashri Baboolal-Frank   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4648-1036 1  

International Journal for Educational Integrity volume  17 , Article number:  22 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

3915 Accesses

5 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

The COVID-19 pandemic created a situation for the implementation of emergency remote learning. This meant that as a lecturer at a traditionalist University of contact sessions, the pandemic forced us to teach remotely through online methods of communication, using online lectures, narrated powerpoints, voice clips, podcasts, interviews and interactive videos. The assessments were conducted online from assignments to multiple choice questions, which forced the lecturers to think differently about the way the assessments were presented, in order to avoid easy access to answers found in a textbook and online. This meant that more application questions of theory to practice were assessed in a more challenging way to prevent cheating and collaboration with peers. Formal assessments completed during emergency remote learning, have become the past practice, as innovative methods have been adopted for learning and for assessment purposes in order to preserve the integrity and attainment of the degree through online modes of learning. The aim of the paper investigates and explores the methods of teaching, together with the results obtained from the students of 2019 and 2020 in their final year relating to two final year modules against the literature relating to learning processes and methodologies.

Introduction

The aim of this paper elucidates the traditional modes of assessments versus the emergency remote learning methodologies during the pandemic. The paper discusses the applicable literature against the results and postulates that students’ results did not improve during emergency remote learning assessments as there were other factors that affected their learning processes. The University of Pretoria in South Africa is a contact traditional tertiary institution. The study illustrates those students fared better in the traditional form rather than under the emergency remote learning methodologies relating to the online assessments. There are various reasons for that, in that over the years’ students have become accustomed to the traditional form of teaching, as well as consulting in physical form. The google meet and virtual classrooms, does not replace the gap that holistic physical contact possesses in relation to real time thinking. It is evident that learning at one’s leisure, which often leads to complacency. The competitive edge against peers is lost in the space of internet connectivity issues because fibre and data are expensive, home based learning environmental challenges, more responsibilities of helping out younger siblings with their schooling on the online flipped classroom. Since the COVID-19 virus has mutated into various strains, we are still learning about the symptoms and spread of the virus, online teaching is fast becoming the new normality for both the student and lecturer’s protection against the virus.

Assessment results

The assessment results are compared against the traditional mode of learning versus the online learning modality results. Two final year subject results are considered in the 4th year LLB curriculum, namely an elective module of alternative dispute resolution and the final year compulsory module of civil procedure. The tabulated figures illustrate the total number of students for the year as well as the assessment in relation to the exams. The assessment for the module civil procedure in 2019 constituted of two semester tests, an online quiz and an exam. The assessment for 2020 followed the same assessment criteria however, the exam was conditional, meaning, that if an assessment overall average of 65% was obtained, the student was exempt from writing the exam, which resulted in a 97% promotion of the number of students, being exempt from writing the exam. Of the 13 students that wrote the exam, 8 passed and the resulting four did not and qualified for a supplementary exam, where 3 passed with one failure. Whereas in 2019, all the students passed the exam and there were no supplementary exams.

Tabulated results

The table for alternative dispute resolution, illustrates that in 2019 there was a total of 86 students, and that all students passed the exam successfully, taking away the need for a supplementary exam. In 2020, there were a total of 126 students, with a 98% promotion rate of exemption from the exam. The two students that wrote the exam passed successfully, and as a result, there were no supplementary exams written. There were thus no failures in both years. The assessment opportunity for 2019 consisted of an oral component, semester test and online quiz. The assessment opportunity in 2020 was the same, except all forms of assessment were online. This online assessments includes the semester test being multiple choice, consisting of matching columns. This form of assessment is unlike the traditional framing of questions which is usually essay questions and short answers prior to the implementation of online assessments. The rationale for avoiding short answer and essay type questions is to prevent copying and to ensure that students think quickly relating to application questions, and protecting the values, integrity and ethics of independent studying as a critical thinker.

Literature review

There has been a trend and need for online teaching methodologies in the teaching of law. In order to modernise the curriculum in accordance with the fourth industrial revolution, it is necessary for the law schools to move away from traditional contact sessions. (McGrath et ∼ al. 2020 p.6) McGrath et ∼ al. ( 2020 p.6) argues that it is evident that more law schools are utilising web-based multimedia material to improve the quality of legal education. According to the literature study conducted by McGrath et ∼ al. ( 2020 p.6) there have been an array of mediums for improving the classroom experience and replace the flipped classroom experience with computer-aided tools for law students as well as digital learning resources to ensure a safe training environment for the students. The digital learning resources provides a platform to utilise and mobilise the knowledge acquired by students. (McGrath et ∼ al. 2020 p.6) Professor Crick ( 2021 , p.16) expounded that the COVID-19 pandemic was the catalyst for change in digital education. These propositions align with the view that Covid-19 provides an opportunity for more opportunities for creation into a new realm of digital education, with your work environment being at home. The literature also explores other theories that supports the theory of learning in the digital age of the pandemic.

Rowland and Hall postulate the exploration of organizational learning through recognised management systems that are responsible for contributing to organizational effectiveness and competitive advantage. (2014 p.342) There have been numerous authors that have contributed to the intellectual caucus of organizational learning prior to the 1990s such as Argyris and Schon ( 1978 ), Cyert and March ( 1963 ), Simon ( 1955 ), Kolb and Fry ( 1975 ), Lewin ( 1951 ), Emery and Trist ( 1960 ) and the Tavistock Institute (Miller 1976 ; Rice 1965 ) (Rowland & Hall 2014 ,p. 343) The approach relating to systems thinking that Schein (1965 p.95) adopts consists of “open systems concepts of constant interaction, multiple goal seeking, interdependence, the input-transformation-output model, subsystems and system boundaries in his redefinition of organization in terms of processes.” The adaptation to the environment circumstance is about maintaining a dynamic equilibrium through homeostasis. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) Another aspect that is essential to organizational learning is the different levels of learning. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) Chris Argyris ( 1977 ) described the organizational process as “a process of detecting error”. Rowland & Hall expounds that the process relates to any aspect that hinders learning. (2014 p. 344) When the process facilitates the organization to continue its goals, objectives and present policies, the process is termed “the single loop learning.” (Argyris 1977 p.116) Argyris developed the double loop learning and theories with Donald Schon (Argyris and Schon 1974 ). Single loop learning identifies errors and proposes the solutions. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) Double loop learning focuses on the values and assumption and is the process to challenge the fundamental norm and aims together with exposing the differences between theories in use and adopted theories. (Rowland & Hall, 2014 p. 344) The double learning loop has been described as “holistic, adaptive and future oriented.” (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) Broersma ( 1995 ) has described the double learning loop as systemic learning. The triple loop learning was discussed by Tosey et al. ( 2012 ). The triple loop learning is described “as deuteron learning” by Bateson ( 1973 ) and termed as “transformational learning” by Broersma ( 1995 ). (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) The triple learning loop focuses on the process of how to learn, reflection on the previous constructs and conditioning of learning and devising and creating new learning strategies to overcome the barriers to learning. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) Rowland & Hall ( 2014 p.344) postulates that the process aims to develop a tolerance for failure and to acknowledge that the outcome and the expectations are not synchronized, hence fostering the skill of resilience. Rowland & Hall ( 2014 p.344) further espouses to challenge the theories relating to collaborative review and encouraging inquiry and reflection relating to the learning process. The psychological definition of learning is that it is “any relatively permanent change of behaviour that occurs as a result of experience.” (Collins 2012) Individual learning utilizes cognitive, effective and behavourial domains. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 344) The measurement of organizational learning is against performance and reward. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.346–347) Similarly with organizational learning, tertiary education also creates a similar stimulus for learning in and beyond the classroom in relation to engaging with peers, the study material and experts in the field relating to complex subject matter for deconstruction and analysis. The theory of organisation learning is important as it illustrates the different learning complexities that students explore in an educational context, that prepares them for an organisation context of a law firm.

Strategic quality and management and human resource alignment have aimed to improve the performance of the organization through the development of people as human capital. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.346) Similarly, the value that is placed on the student’s quality of production in their results and work that is produced, provides them with employment opportunities. When we engage with the employees of the organisation, we gauge the challenges and assist them to effectively overcome challenges and contribute to the bottom line of the organization. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p. 346) Positive engagement with students, reaps benefits for both the University and lecturer, to understand the needs of the students in their lack of performance. Reward is an expansive concept in that it stretches the dimensions of personal growth and autonomy. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.347) There are other theorists that state that models of motivation, like Maslow’s self-actualisation, assist with the learning process and personal growth and development. (Maslow 1943 ) The research conducted by Seligman ( 2011 ) postulates the idea of positivity and introduces the acronym of PERMA, which stands for Positive emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning and Achievement. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.347) He hypothesises that happiness is what people seek in the workplace. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.347) Fisher ( 2010 ) similarly argues for happiness at work, which determines the loyalty and commitment of employees to the organization. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.347) The development of organization management and learning theories is continuously evolving for the enhancement of performance. (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.354.) Happier employees are more productive in the workplace, similarly the development of the app, and working for reward would motivate employees to ensure it is a success. Likewise, students gain their reward through the marks that they receive, in order to gain experience into a good firm after attaining their degree, as the market is incredibly competitive when it comes to securing articles for prospective candidate attorneys. A positive engaging environment, creates a safe space for the students to freely engage with their peers and lecturers, creates an ideal opportunity for the learning and development of the students. When a student is happy and motivated, they are able to overcome any challenge that is in their path of learning.

Figure 1 illustrates the importance of the different learning loops, that is applicable to student learning. The triple loop learning consists of determining ‘what’ is right, in problem solving, that is the correct approach to determine the right answer. The double loop learning provides for inquiring the assumption whether the student is actioning the right thing in relation to problem solving and cognitive thinking. The single loop thinking, before even acting, the student ponders whether their approach to the question is correct, that is the application of the theory to the problem posed.

Adaptation of Thorsten.org (Rowland & Hall 2014 p.345)

An investigation was conducted into research ethics and integrity through a case study of interviews with researchers and it was concluded that research ethics and integrity are formulated through experience, conditioning, development, mentorship and values that have been inculcated in childhood phase and through sport and by parental guidance. (Satalkar & Shaw 2019 ) It is apparent that effective communication is pivotal to the successful completion of the project. (Mountain and Davidson, 2011 ) The complexities of the organization, require time, patience, consultation and an innovative approach to study it thoroughly to understand the intricacies, mechanisms and movement of the organization to obtain success. (Pavlovska 2013 ) Kahler’s five drivers of human behaviour are observable in distancing language namely, “Be strong”, “Try hard”, “Be perfect”, “Hurry up” and “Please me”. (Kahler 1975 ) Tudor ( 2008 ) postulates the sixth driver as “Take It”. The driver messages are to encourage reaching one’s goals despite the circumstances. (Tudor 2008 p.53) These aspects encourage the management of employees of the company to adopt a positivist approach in the adoption of a mobile app. Hugman proposes that the modern ethical practitioners display various characteristics relating to discursive code of ethics. (Hugman 2003 p.1037) The aspects that are displayed is on principles and values. (Hugman 2003 p.1037) The embracing of diversity in all forms is a characteristic that is imbibed by a morally active practitioner. (Hugman 2003 p.1037) The internal struggles between the individualist goals versus the collective goals in an organization. (Hugman 2003 p.1037) To support others to be morally active and encourage a strong code of values and rules. (Hugman 2003 p.1037) The recognition of the contextual nature of the practice in relation to maintenance, change and caring of others and the organisation. (Hugman 2003 p.1037) Social discrimination of minority groups are the unfair treatment based on prejudice. (Sarantakis 2017 p.135) Cognitive discrimination is when psychological and pragmatic determinations is placed into specific categories to demonstrate biased opinions and judgments of specific groups. (Sarantakis 201, p.135) The behaviour of cognitive and social discrimination is the manner of reasoning that one makes daily decisions and thus is intertwined with behaviours and patterns of individuals. (Sarantakis 2017 p.135) The behaviour and practices of anti-discriminatory practices is dictated by awareness and critical thinking of self-reflection of one’s behaviour and choices, together with the knowledge of legislation that prevents discriminatory practices and behaviour in organisations. (Sarantakis 2017 p.139) There should be active voices of the management and leadership in support of anti-discriminatory practices and behaviour, which sets the example for all employees to follow. (Sarantakis 2017 p.139) Similarly, effective communication is pivotal for learning, all voices of the students must be heard by the lecturers, regarding the different needs and wants in order to engage with the subject material. It is necessary for all students to engage without fear or prejudice or the fear of being discriminated against, in the creation of a safe space of learning online or virtual is quintessential.

Driscoll and Allan (2014) suggest that the implementation of reflective writing has the ability to enhance learning outcomes, fostering student learning and engaging the faculty in professional development. The research-based assessment process assists the students to gain profound insights. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 ) Research based learning further promotes metacognition and transfer of learning that allows for professional development. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 ) “When students reflect upon their learning, they engage in a potentially transformative act of responding to, connecting with, and analyzing an experience, event, process, or product.” (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.37) Reflection is a process that allows for thought and action to synchronise. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.37) An opportunity is provided to students to reflect upon their internal processes, criticize their challenges and celebrate their successes and achievements. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.37) This process is transcribed into words that allows them an opportunity to self-reflect onto paper. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.37) Dewey postulated that reflective thinking culminates into powerful educational transformations. Reflective practices provide an opportunity for the student to engage with learning in a very fluid manner. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.38) The primary purpose for learning is to allow students to imbibe the learning lessons into a variety of contexts such as personal, professional, educational and civic contexts. (Perkins, Tishman, Ritchart, Donis, & Andrade 2000; Russel & Yanez 2003) Reflection is empowering for the student and it allows them to deconstruct the learning process and plan their future learning contexts. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.39) Reflection allows the student to engage and examine the work that they have learnt in a personal manner that allows for critical self-review of the discipline learnt together with the learning outcomes. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.50) The student also has another method to take accountability of their studies by allowing for metacognition relating to the challenges they confronted and the solutions for overcoming these challenges successfully. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.50) This exercise of reflective writing is becoming more important in the virtual space to obtain the feedback from students relating to the subject matter from a critical discourse.

We live in a society that is evolving faster than we can keep up as humans are constantly forced to evolve with the times. Transformative learning is a method of adapting the learning processes to correlate with the environmental changes of teaching. (Illeris 2014 p.573) The individual personality keeps evolving with the present context of change, one has to constantly digest the emotions and environment and elect a path forward as a coping mechanism, which marries into transformative learning as the personality transformation is interlinked to one’s learning context. (Allan & Driscoll 2014 p.579) Transformative thinking for law students and lawyers must become the norm to adapt to versatile circumstances.

Kolb’s experiential learning for reflective learning is distinctive from an accommodative learning style (see Fig. 2 ). (Li & Armstrong 2015 p.422) Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory (ELT) is defined as:

“...the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience. Knowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience.” (p.41)

Kolb’s ELT relates to two dimensions namely the abstract concrete dimension and the theoretical concepts that grapple with tangible new experiences. (Li & Armstrong 2015 p.423) It is apparent that the personality is different from the ELT, as these aspects are different, however the ELT affects one’s personality. When applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle to practice it is apparent that concrete experience, provides for students taking action in carrying out tasks and exercises of the courses. The reflective observation allows students to reflect upon the actions of the learnings processes and assessments of the course. The abstract conceptualization allows us to learn from the experience, relating to the challenges that students confronted in the courses. The active experimentation allows students to apply all the theoretical knowledge that they have gained through traditional forms of study and apply it to practice by doing the respective tasks of the courses to achieve the objectives and outcomes of the courses.

Adaptation: Kolb’s experiential learning (1984)

It is apparent that the theory relating to organisational learning is applicable in relation to traditional learning. Kolb’s experiential learning cycle is still relevant for tertiary students in 2020. The navigation from traditional modes of learning to online learning is not an easy leap, yet it is still very possible, and students still excel overall from the results that were produced. However, the protection of integrity, values, respect, independent learning becomes a challenge that is constantly evolving in relation to more challenges that appear in different forms as barriers to learning and teaching. It is quintessential for both the lecturer and the students to be equipped to mentally and physically adjust to the new normality of online tertiary education, with a renewed vigour, passion, grit and pursuit for the learning experience of gaining an education.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable. I do not wish to share the data because it is confidential information of the students.

Abbreviations

Experiential Learning Theory

Legum Baccalaureus/Bachelor of Laws

Positive emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning and Achievement

Allan EG, Driscoll DL (2014) The three-fold benefit of reflective writing: improving program assessment, student learning, and faculty professional development. 2:37–55

Argyris C (1977) Double-loop learning in organizations. Harv Bus Rev 55(5):115–125

Google Scholar  

Argyris C, Schon DA (1974) Theory in practice: increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA

Argyris C, Schon DA (1978) Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA

Bateson G (1973) Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Paladin, London

Broersma T (1995) In search of the future. TrainDev 49:38–43

Crick, Tom (2021) “Covid-19 and Digital Education: A Catalyst For Change?” ITNOW pp/16–17

Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

Emery FE, Trist EL (1960) Socio-technical systems. In: Churchman CW, Verhulst M, editors. Management Sciences, Models and Techniques, vol. 2. Pergamon, Oxford

Fisher CD (2010) Happiness at work. Int J Manag Rev 12(4):384–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00270.x

Article   Google Scholar  

Hugman R (2003) Professional values and ethics in social work: reconsidering postmodernism? Br J Soc Work 33(8):1025–1041. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/33.8.1025

Illeris K (2014) Transformative Learning re-defined: as changes in elements of the identity. International Journal of Lifelong Education 33(5):573–586

Kahler T (1975) In response. Trans Anal J 5(4):425–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/036215377500500426

Kolb DA, Fry R (1975) Towards an applied theory of experiential learning. In: Cooper C, ed. Theories of Group Process. John Wiley, London

Lewin K (1951) Field Theory in Social Science; Selected Theoretical Papers. In: Cartwright D, editor. Harper and Row, New York

Li M, Armstrong SJ (2015) The relationship between Kolb’s experiential learning styles and big five personality traits in international managers. Personality and Individual Differences Volume 86:422–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.07.001

Maslow AH (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 50(4):370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

McGrath C, Gunnerstad A, Storr C, Örnberg A (2020) Making the case for virtual law cases: introducing an innovative way to teach the law. The Law Teacher pp:1–15

Miller EJ (1976) Task and Organization. Wiley, Chichester

Mountain A, Davidson C (2011) Organizational transactional analysis and business performance. Hum Resour Manag Int Dig 20(4):1–5

Pavlovska M (2013) An analysis of dominant working styles in different professions in Macedonia. International Journal of Transactional Analysis Research 4(2):30–38

Rice AK (1965) Learning for Leadership. Tavistock, London

Rowland, C and Hall, R (2014) Management learning, performance and reward: theory and practice revisited Vol.33 No 4 pp.345–356. Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Sarantakis NP (2017) Reflections on an anti-discriminatory stance in psychotherapy. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy 47(2):135–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-016-9353-4

Satalkar P, Shaw D (2019) How do researchers acquire and develop notions of research integrity? A qualitative study among biomedical researchers in Switzerland. BMC Medical Ethics 20(72):1–12

Seligman MEP (2011) Flourish a visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. Free Press, New York

Simon HA (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart J Econ 69:99–118

Tosey P, Visser M, Saunders MNK (2012) The origins and conceptualizations of ‘triple loop’ learning. Manag Learn 43(3):291–307

Tudor K (2008) “Take it”: a sixth driver” Trans Anal J 38(1):43–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/036215370803800107

Download references

Acknowledgments

I thank my husband and my daughter for allowing me to devote time to research and constructing this article.

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Procedural Law, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X20 Hatfield, Pretoria, South Africa

Rashri Baboolal-Frank

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

I am the sole author. I constructed the entire article. The author reads and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

I am a practising advocate and a Senior Lecturer at the Department of Procedural Law. My areas of interest are access to justice, procedural law and education.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rashri Baboolal-Frank .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

Not applicable. I have no competing interests to declare.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

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/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Baboolal-Frank, R. Emergency remote learning during the pandemic from a South African perspective. Int J Educ Integr 17 , 22 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00087-5

Download citation

Received : 22 December 2020

Accepted : 30 July 2021

Published : 02 November 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00087-5

Share this article

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

• Emergency remote learning
• Experiential learning
• South Africa

International Journal for Educational Integrity

ISSN: 1833-2595

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Student Experiences of Emergency Remote Learning and Teaching During COVID-19

Master Thesis

Permanent link to this Item

Supervisors, journal title, link to journal, journal issn, volume title, description.

Nzala, A. 2021. Student Experiences of Emergency Remote Learning and Teaching During COVID-19. . ,Faculty of Humanities ,School of Education. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/36555

Collections

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2024 LYRASIS

Developing student connectedness under remote learning using digital resources: A systematic review

• Published: 28 June 2021
• Volume 26 , pages 6531–6548, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Elizabeth Hehir   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9281-3196 1 ,
• Marc Zeller   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2473-2949 1 ,
• Joanna Luckhurst   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6782-5803 1 &
• Tara Chandler   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8608-9613 1  

29k Accesses

33 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Online learning is negatively associated with student connectedness. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Higher Education (HE) institutions have pivoted to blended and online learning. Subsequently, HE institutions have seen a shift in student connectedness resulting in loneliness, isolation, social and psychological distance. Consequently, it is essential for teacher practitioners to respond with innovative digital learning resources that aim to develop student connectedness. The current systematic review aimed to explore the research question: what are the characteristics of effective digital teaching resources when the aim of the resource is to build student connectedness? This systematic literature review was conducted in line with published guidance for undertaking reviews (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2009 ). Successively, 17 papers met the inclusion criteria and were analysed using a thematic synthesis approach. Results identified five key themes that are important when designing digital resources to build connectedness: usability; teacher interaction; immediacy; synchronicity; and community. The findings of this research are expected to provide a template to assist teacher practitioners in creating innovative digital resources that facilitate connectedness.

Similar content being viewed by others

Portuguese higher education students’ adaptation to online teaching and learning in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: personal and contextual factors

Barriers to teaching and research provision in the uk higher education sector during the covid-19 pandemic.

Online Teaching and Academic Resilience During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lived Experience of College Students in Mainland China

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Connectedness is defined as the perception of belonging (Lee & Robbins, 1995 ). Connectedness is achieved when an individual experiences a sense of social relationship and integration (Kuwabara et al., 2002 ). Feeling connected increases the likelihood of student health and wellbeing (Arslan, 2021 ), academic success (Wilson, 2018 ), and graduate prospects (Bridgstock et al., 2019 ). Hence, it can be inferred that feeling connected is an essential component of the student experience. Yet due to the global changes in teaching and learning as a response to the Covid-19 pandemic, student interaction in the learning process has been challenged. As a response to the Covid-19 pandemic, education institutions globally have seen a rise in remote, distance, and blended learning approaches (Aristovnik et al., 2020 ; Motala & Menon, 2020 ; Osman, 2020 ; Thistlethwaite et al., 2020 ). These digital teaching and learning approaches have become a substitute to in-person classroom settings. Subsequently, students have described feelings of psychological distance, loneliness, isolation, and disconnection from their peers and education institutions (Arslan, 2021 ). As a byproduct of disconnection, students have reported increased mental health problems (Aucejo et al., 2020 ; Elmer et al., 2020 ; Sahu, 2020 ), heightened anxiety around academic performance, and reduced academic self-efficacy (Alemany-Arrebola et al., 2020 ).

Arslan ( 2021 ) has identified that belongingness or connectedness can moderate the effects of isolation and loneliness. Therefore, connectedness is shown to encourage student psychological health and wellbeing. Connectedness acts as a protective factor against physical and psychological distance and from feelings of isolation and loneliness. However, due to Covid-19 social distancing guidelines, it is essential to encourage connectedness via alternative methods to traditional face-to-face interactions. The successful use of digital resources to maintain social presence and connection is paramount to ensure students feel a sense of control over their socialisation, learning, and assessment. It is therefore essential to ensure that information and communication technologies (ICT) promote social identity and social connection amongst student cohorts. Furthermore, ICT may offer the opportunity for increased avenues of connection through varied mediums i.e., use of smart phones, social networking sites, and topic-specific forums. For example, the use of smart phones for educational purposes has significantly predicted increased feelings of connectedness outside of the classroom involvement (Liu et al., 2016 ). In addition, increasing the diversity to which students can interact may heighten the likelihood of individuals experiencing connection (Wyn et al., 2005 ).

While online education has seen a rise in the use of technology platforms, literature now includes the topic of ''Zoom Fatigue''; referring to experiences of tiredness and anxiety regarding the use of virtual platforms (Wiederhold, 2020 ). Furthermore, virtual learning is also impacted by technology efficacy amongst students (Lai & Bower, 2020 ). Subsequently, Farid et al., ( 2018 ) explained that a poorly designed e-learning software is a catalyst for issues around effective learning and a poor design can impact student engagement (Czerkawski & Lyman, 2016 ). Poor design can be related to usability, functionality, security, reliability (Farid et al., 2018 ) and an effective pedagogical framework (Brereton et al., 2007 ). As connectedness relates to engagement and negatively correlates with attrition, learning providers have been encouraged to ensure digital teaching resources promote student connectedness in order to alleviate challenges that are associated with online learning during COVID-19 (Aguilera-Hermida, 2020 ). The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate existing literature on the effectiveness of digital resources used in remote learning. It is anticipated that the findings of this systematic review can be adopted to facilitate the design of digital teaching methods that augment feelings of connectedness. To address the aim of exploring factors that promote connectedness under remote and blended learning, the following research question was devised: what are the characteristics of effective digital resource design when the aim of the resource is to build student connectedness? The following sub-questions were also considered to address the stated research aims: a) what factors contribute to connectedness in remote learning environments? b) what digital resources have been used to develop connectedness in remote learning environments? c) have digital resources been successful in developing connectedness in remote learning environments?

2.1 Objectives of the review

This research aimed to explore factors that promote connectedness under digital learning approaches. To address this aim, a systematic review of literature was conducted using the following research question: what are the characteristics of effective digital resource design when the aim of the resource is to build student connectedness? The following sub-questions were also considered: a) what factors contribute to connectedness in remote learning environments? b) what digital resources have been used to develop connectedness in remote learning environments? c) have digital resources been successful in developing connectedness in remote learning environments?

A systematic review was conducted between August and December 2020 in line with published guidance for undertaking reviews (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2009 ). Table 1 . presents a summary of the stages of the systematic review.

2.3 Search Methods

The inclusion criteria for this systematic review (Box 1) were developed to incorporate the disciplines of psychology, education, and technology. Literature was acquired using the following databases: APA Psych net (Info and Articles), Pro Quest Psychology, Science Direct, Scopus, Directory of Open Access Journals, High Wire Press, Taylor & Francis, The Dart, EthOS and IEEE Explore. Databases were searched using combinations of the following terms : ‘'campus connectedness'' OR ''connectedness'' OR ''psychological connectedness'' OR ''student connectedness'' AND ''remote learning'' OR ''distance learning'' OR ''online learning'' OR ''e learning'' OR ''digital learning'' OR ''online education'' OR ''education'' OR ''digital device'' OR ''digital resources'' OR ''technology'' .

Box 1. Inclusion criteria.

2.4 Search Outcomes

The initial paper identification search produced a total of 1,126 papers that met the inclusion criteria (after duplicates were removed). The PRISMA (Fig.  1 .) study selection process was used to narrow the selection of papers based on the research aims and the inclusion criteria (Moher et al., 2009 ). A total of 17 articles remained after the study selection process was completed. Table 2 summaries the final sample of 17 papers included in the review.

PRISMA flow chart on paper identification, screening, eligibility assessments and inclusion

2.5 Quality appraisal

Due to the heterogeneity of the papers selected for inclusion, the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields (Kmet et al., 2004 ) was used to evaluate the quality of the sample of papers. Two authors independently rated each paper for inclusion. The authors selected a minimum threshold for inclusion of 0.65 for the average summary score. This threshold reflected a balance between the relatively conservative figure of 0.75 and the relatively liberal value of 0.55 (Kmet et al., 2004 ). Only one paper (Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2009 ) attained a score below the minimum threshold for inclusion (summary score: 0.50) and was excluded from the final sample. Table 3 provides a synopsis of the quality appraisal results for all papers.

2.6 Data abstraction and synthesis

Due to the heterogeneous nature of the articles included in the present review (i.e., correlation design, quantitative experimental studies, qualitative studies, literature reviews, and case studies) it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis or further quantitative comparisons. Accordingly, the results were analysed using a thematic synthesis technique. Themes were developed using Braun and Clarke’s ( 2012 ) six step process for building themes. Using consensus coding, two researchers developed the themes and subthemes to present the research findings. The consensus approach offered validity of the findings and reduced the potential for researcher bias. Findings were presented using a discursive narrative approach. Both the analysis and data presentation technique offered a collective narrative thread from which themes could be derived (Thomas et al., 2012 ).

Based on the final sample of papers (N = 17), this systematic review was able to identify five key factors that are shown to encourage connectedness when using digital teaching methods. Usability, teacher presence, immediacy, synchronicity, and community were the five components identified as being essential to encourage student feelings of connectedness (Fig. 2 ). Figure two presents each theme and corresponding subthemes. The researchers suggest that digital resources should incorporate all aspects of the model presented in figure two. A narration of each theme is provided.

Five characteristics of effective digital resources to enhance connectedness

3.1 Theme one: Usability

Digital learning resources must have comprehensive IT support available to students to eliminate any accessibility issues and help foster connectedness (Slagter van Tryon & Bishop, 2009 ). Laux et al. ( 2016 ) identified that familiarity and ease of use was more likely to increase connectedness in a remote learning environment than unfamiliar, difficult-to-use digital resources. Budiman ( 2018 ) similarly found that familiarity with a digital resource increased connectedness. Specifically, the ability to access the resource from both laptops and mobile phones was an important usability factor. Due to participants’ familiarity with the technology, Ortega and Falconer ( 2015 ) found that embedding a virtual digital resource into the existing remote learning course was successful in increasing connectedness. Stone and Springer ( 2019 ) highlighted that accessibility issues with digital resources can act as a barrier to connectedness. They further concluded that an effective digital resource must be accessible to all students and easy to use. Kuong ( 2015 ) demonstrated the importance of functionality and highlighted that digital resources that utilise online discussion forums are user-friendly and allow additional convenience, flexibility, and time to reflect.

3.2 Theme two: Teacher interaction

Stone and Springer ( 2019 ) found that "teacher presence" increased connectedness. When teacher presence was a factor of the digital resource, students rated their perceptions of the remote learning environment as supportive, engaging, and inclusive. Stark and Warne ( 1999 ) showed that feelings of connectedness were impaired when student expectations of their relationship with the teacher were not met. Martin et al. ( 2018 ) identified that higher perceived professionalism of the teacher was associated with greater student connectedness. Although a positive correlation between student-to-teacher connectedness and student–student connectedness has been found (Bireda, 2019 ; Stone & Logan, 2018 ), a positive student–teacher relationship has been shown to encourage feelings of involvement and engagement and therefore feelings of connectedness (Mandernach et al., 2018 ). Of central importance is the approachability of the teacher and immediate feedback was valued highly by students (Stark & Warne, 1999 ). Students are more likely to feel connected to their course when their individual abilities are recognised by the teacher and when teachers engage in regular, meaningful communication (Stone & Springer, 2019 ).

Two recurring sub-themes emerged throughout the literature that explain the importance of student–teacher relationships when building connectedness in remote learning scenarios.

3.3 Subtheme: Teacher presence

Stark and Warne ( 1999 ) highlighted the importance of teacher familiarity for developing connectedness under remote learning conditions. Similarly, Pierson ( 2017 ) found that seeing the teacher’s face in an instructional video had a positive effect on students’ self-reported feelings of connectedness, satisfaction, and engagement with the remote learning course. Tailored course material and personalised teacher interaction were strongly linked with student perception of teacher presence and the development of connectedness (Mandernach et al., 2018 ). Individual differences in student preferences for teacher presence in remote learning have been identified, but many prefer active interaction and participation in discussion from their teacher as opposed to passive teaching (Jamison & Bolliger, 2020 ). Students reported feeling greater support with their course material and connection with their remote learning when there was a strong teacher presence (Wheeler, 2007 ). Stone and Springer ( 2019 ) highlight the importance of teacher presence in combination with regular and engaging course content in remote learning for student connectedness.

3.4 Subtheme: Teacher voice

Mandernach et al. ( 2018 ) found that personalised audio lectures featuring the teachers’ voice increased student connectedness and engagement with the course. Stark and Warne ( 1999 ) refer to the aspect of ''human touch'' for student connectedness in remote learning due to the limited face-to-face interaction in most courses. Lambrinidis ( 2014 ) identified that some students prefer hearing the teacher voice in instructional videos and synchronous online lectures as opposed to reading text-based messages in online discussion boards. Zhao ( 2002 ) found that students who reported audio difficulties with the digital resource and could not hear the teacher voice were less connected to their course and institution.

In the literature where teacher presence and voice were investigated simultaneously, Ortega and Falconer ( 2015 ) found that immersive virtual world technology helped create a sense of community and connectedness by recreating social interaction and communication. Here students were provided with personalised avatars within virtual environments both within course sessions and extracurricular activities. Lia-Hoagberg et al. ( 1999 ) demonstrated that the combination of teacher presence and voice in Interactive Television was linked with higher student connectedness with the teacher in a distance-learning site. Martin et al. ( 2018 ) found that video-based introductions led by the teacher at the start of the course were one of the highest-rated facilitation strategies to increase connectedness in remote learning.

3.5 Theme Three: Immediacy

Stark and Warne ( 1999 ) identified that immediate feedback to emails was one of the most important factors that increased students’ connectedness to their teacher. Wheeler ( 2007 ) identified that of three communication strategies, students reported highest levels of connectedness from email as opposed to telephone or face-to-face due to the immediacy of detailed feedback. van Tryon ( 2007 ) examined a number of “e-mmediacy” strategies and found that digital resources that facilitated immediate interaction between students and their peers, as well as students and teachers, were most effective in developing connectedness. van Tryon ( 2007 ) advised that teachers would need to play a proactive role in facilitating communication with students if the digital resource did not accommodate immediate responses. Jamison and Bolliger ( 2020 ) identified that delayed responses from teachers was one of the key factors for students who reported lower levels of connectedness. Martin et al. ( 2018 ) found that students rated timely response to questions and instructors' timely feedback on assignments and projects highest in developing connectedness.

A lack of responsiveness and immediate feedback in remote learning is associated with course dissatisfaction and unhappiness in students as well as increased levels of attrition (Bireda, 2019 ; Stone & Springer, 2019 ). When compared to responsive and available tutors, course satisfaction, happiness, and attrition increased (Stark & Warne, 1999 ). Students rate immediate responses as one of the most important factors when they experience a problem with their remote learning course with an increased level of motivation to continue to completion (Budiman, 2018 ). Immediate and tailored feedback via a digital resource is linked with increased student engagement and connectedness with their remote learning course, teacher and institution (Jamison & Bolliger, 2020 ; Martin et al., 2018 ).

3.6 Theme four: Synchronicity

Lambrinidis ( 2014 ) found that online lectures that are conducted in combination with on-campus lectures increased connectedness in remote learners. This synchronicity allowed real-time interaction with peers and live feedback from teachers, both of which students reported as essential for connectedness. Zhao ( 2002 ) found that any digital resource needs to aim to recreate the physical, on-campus experience as much as possible. When online lectures run alongside physical lectures, students developed a greater sense of self-report connectedness. Kuong ( 2015 ) demonstrated a lack of synchronicity and immediate feedback is linked with lower student self-reported confidence, self-efficacy, and student-to-student connectedness in remote learning. Further, students demonstrated a strong preference for synchronous face-to-face interaction in discussions. Synchronous course sessions are associated with student self-reported confidence in using a digital resource in remote learning. Confidence and therefore usability, are also shown to build connectedness (Budiman, 2018 ). Zhao ( 2002 ) demonstrated that difficulties with the administration and use of digital resources often resulted in asynchronous course sessions for students in remote learning which were linked with lower connectedness, disengagement, and a feeling of a loss of control.

3.7 Theme five: Community

Lambrinidis ( 2014 ) found that online lectures and discussion boards create a sense of community between distance learners and those studying on campus which is essential for connectedness. Zhao ( 2002 ) showed that digital resources develop connectedness in students over an extended period and is associated with an increasing sense of community. Jamison and Bolliger ( 2020 ) found that students reported a lack of sense of community in their remote learning courses as one of the key reasons for their lack of connectedness. Kuong ( 2015 ) also found that a lack of social connection and sense of community led to lower connectedness among remote learning students and suggested the need for a digital intervention. Laux et al. ( 2016 ) found that a digital intervention utilising collaborative learning groups helped develop a sense of community, which in turn increased connectedness and organisational commitment. Furthermore, developing a sense of community improved student turnover and reduced intention to dropout. A stronger sense of community is also associated with improved group collaboration and greater emotional support which is linked with increased student retention and satisfaction (Bireda, 2019 ).

4 Discussion

Collating research that explored the effectiveness of digital resources in developing connectedness, allowed researchers to create a model for innovative digital resource design. The model can be used to encourage student connectedness under distance, remote, and blended learning approaches. These findings reflect an international perspective and therefore can be deemed globally-relevant. It is suggested that to optimise connectedness amongst student populations, teacher practitioners develop digital resources in line with the current findings. The findings of this research highlighted that digital resources aid connectedness amongst students when usability, teacher presence, immediacy, synchronicity, and sense of community are incorporated. The researchers predict that connectedness will be optimised when the five themes are collectively incorporated into digital resource design.

The themes that emerged from the literature are telling of how connectedness is formed and maintained in remote learning. The literature explained how digital resources can enhance student connectedness in conjunction with these themes. Similarly, data also highlighted that connectedness can be implicated when digital teaching resources neglect to include the five factors. For example, immediacy is established in real life interaction via social cues and body language and online immediacy encourages feeling of connectedness. Online immediacy, such as instant feedback and timely responses on a chat group or email, replicates the social cues that are present in a real time interaction. Another example is that technology can also provide video or audio footage of tutors which emphasises teacher presence in real time scenarios. For example, Slagter van Tryon & Bishop ( 2009 ) outlined that role differentiation, norm development, and status assessments encouraged group cohesion, the development of a sense of community, and therefore feelings of connectedness. However, when a sense of immediacy, lack of teacher presence, and community are impounded, connectedness is reduced.

Literature collated as part of this systematic review highlighted the importance of considering individual differences in digital resource design (Jamison & Bolliger, 2020 ). Although the data presented general themes that are typically beneficial to developing connectedness amongst students, individual differences may act as an irregularity to increased feelings of connectedness under remote conditions. For example, individual differences between students in terms of motivation and commitment should be considered when reviewing experiences of connectedness in remote learning. A caveat of how connected students feel can be dependent on intrinsic motivation to engage, and therefore experience connectedness. Some students have little desire to be part of the learning community and do not require the feeling of connection to develop a positive student experience. In addition, some students may be unable to attend synchronous online lectures and group workshops due to other commitments such as childcare or other employment. Consequently, some student may prefer a more autonomous style of remote learning. As with teaching and learning strategies, differentiation and understanding the nature of the student cohort is an essential factor to consider when designing digital teaching resources. Future research should consider the implications of individual differences in feelings of connectedness under blended or remote learning conditions.

4.1 Limitations of the research

It is important for teacher practitioners to remain mindful of ambiguity within the literature in terms of how connectedness is framed. Connectedness is regarded by some as having a sense of community whereas others frame connectedness as a social or technological concern. The current review focused on psychological connectedness and adopted the operational definition presented by Lee and Robbins ( 1995 ). Therefore, the sample of papers included in the review reflected connectedness as framed by Lee and Robbins’ ( 1995 ) definition (or alluded to, without being explicit). Although, the conclusions of this research are based on a combination of large numbers of quantifiable data and rich qualitative findings that are reflective of the student experience, the theoretical perspective is restricted to only psychological connectedness.

Further, due to the methods of data collection i.e., a range of qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods approaches, the researchers were unable to conduct comparative analysis of the quantitative studies. A series of connectedness scales were used in the research papers that adopted quantitative survey design, comparisons between these scales were unfeasible. Therefore, the researchers adopted a thematic synthesis technique where the data was presented using a discursive narrative approach.

5 Conclusions

Education has been impacted by COVID-19 on a global scale. Reports of higher levels of anxiety and stress in students has impacted concentration and commitment to academic work (Borelli et al., 2020 ). Additionally, increased anxiety has impacted student confidence and preparedness (Choi et al., 2020 ), and ultimately caused delay in academic work (Cao et al., 2020 ). Academic work has also been affected by poor study environments, which has inevitably reinforced stress and anxiety amongst students. However, by incorporating usability, teacher presence, immediacy, synchronicity, and sense of community into digital resource design could offer the opportunity for students to develop a feeling of connectedness and overcome issues of isolation.

Aguilera-Hermida, A. P. (2020). College students’ use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to Covid-19. International Journal of Educational Research Open . Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100011 .

Aristovnik, A., Keržič, D., Ravšelj, D., Tomaževič, N., & Umek, L. (2020). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: A global perspective. Sustainability, 12 (20), 8438.

Article   Google Scholar  

Alemany-Arrebola, I., Rojas-Ruiz, G., Granda-Vera, J., & Mingorance-Estrada, Á. C. (2020). Influence of COVID-19 on the perception of academic self-efficacy, state anxiety, and trait anxiety in college students. Frontiers in psychology, 11 . Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.570017 .

Arslan, G. (2021). Loneliness, college belongingness, subjective vitality, and psychological adjustment during coronavirus pandemic: Development of the College Belongingness Questionnaire.  Journal of Positive School Psychology, 5 (1), 17–31.

Aucejo, E. M., French, J., Araya, M. P. U., & Zafar, B. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on student experiences and expectations: Evidence from a survey. Journal of public economics, 191 . Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104271 .

Bireda, A. D. (2019). Doctoral student connectedness in open distance learning: a case of students and supervisors. Africa Education Review, 16 (5), 16–28.

Borelli, J., Lai, J., Yunusova, A., Rivera, A. P., Labbaf, S., Hu, S., ..., Rahmani, A. (2020). Nine months in the life of a college student during 2020: A case study using multi-modal assessments to capture personalized contexts of well-being. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/wb4ds .

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012).  Thematic analysis.  In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.),  APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological  (p. 57–71). American Psychological Association.

Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., Turner, M., & Khalil, M. (2007). Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain.  Journal of Systems and Software, 80 (4), 571–583.

Bridgstock, R., Jackson, D., Lloyd, K., & Tofa, M. (2019). Social connectedness and graduate employability: Exploring the professional networks of graduates from business and creative industries. In R. Bridgstock & N. Tippett (Eds.), Higher Education and the Future of Graduate Employability . Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Budiman, R. (2013). Utilizing Skype for providing learning support for Indonesian distance learning students: A lesson learnt. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83,  5–10.

Budiman, R. (2018). Factors related to students’ drop out of a distance language learning programme. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 7 (2), 12–19.

Cao, W., Fang, Z., Hou, G., Han, M., Xu, X., Dong, J., & Zheng, J. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry research, 287 , 112934. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934 .

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009). Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Systematic Reviews in Health Care. Retrieved January 07, 2021, from www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/Systematic_Reviews.pdf .

Choi, B., Jegatheeswaran, L., Minocha, A., Alhilani, M., Nakhoul, M., & Mutengesa, E. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on final year medical students in the United Kingdom: a national survey. BMC Medical Education, 20 (1), 1–11.

Czerkawski, B. C., & Lyman, E. W. (2016). An instructional design framework for fostering student engagement in online learning environments. TechTrends, 60 (6), 532–539.

Elmer, T., Mepham, K., & Stadtfeld, C. (2020). Students under lockdown: Assessing change in students’ social networks and mental health during the COVID-19 crisis. PLoS ONE, 15 (7), e0236337.

Farid, S., Ahmad, R., Alam, M., Akbar, A., & Chang, V. (2018). A sustainable quality assessment model for the information delivery in E-learning systems. Information Discovery and Delivery., 40 (1), 125.

Google Scholar  

Jamison, T. E., & Bolliger, D. U. (2020). Student perceptions of connectedness in online graduate business programs. Journal of Education for Business, 95 (5), 275–287.

Kmet, L. M., Cook, L. S., & Lee, R. C. (2004). Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research .  https://doi.org/10.7939/R37M04F16 .

Kuong, H. C. (2015). Enhancing online learning experience: From learners’ perspective. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191 , 1002–1005.

Kuwabara, K., Watanabe, T., Ohguro, T., Itoh, Y., & Maeda, Y. (2002). Connectedness oriented communication: Fostering a sense of connectedness to augment social relationships. Paper presented at the Proceedings 2002 symposium on applications and the internet (saint 2002).

Lai, J. W., & Bower, M. (2020). Evaluation of technology use in education: Findings from a critical analysis of systematic literature reviews. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36 (3), 241–259.

Lambrinidis, G. (2014). Supporting online, non-traditional students through the introduction of effective e-learning tools in a pre-university tertiary enabling programme. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36 (3), 257–267.

Laux, D., Luse, A., & Mennecke, B. E. (2016). Collaboration, connectedness, and community: An examination of the factors influencing student persistence in virtual communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 57 , 452–464.

Lee, R. M., & Robbins, S. B. (1995). Measuring belongingness: The social connectedness and the social assurance scales. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 42 (2), 232–241.

Lia-Hoagberg, B., Vellenga, B., Miller, M., & Li, T.-Y. (1999). A partnership model of distance education: Students’ perceptions of connectedness and professionalization. Journal of Professional Nursing, 15 (2), 116–122.

Liu, X., Burroughs, N. F., Tian, Q., Harvey, V. L., Housel, T. H., & Wellingon, N. (2016). The impact of smartphone educational use on student connectedness and out-of-class involvement. Electronic Journal of Communication, 26 (3–4).

Mandernach, B. J., Robertson, S. N., & Steele, J. P. (2018). Beyond Content: The Value of Instructor-Student Connections in the Online Classroom. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 18 (4), 129–150.

Martin, F., Wang, C., & Sadaf, A. (2018). Student perception of helpfulness of facilitation strategies that enhance instructor presence, connectedness, engagement and learning in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 37 , 52–65.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The Prisma Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6 (7), e1000097.

Motala, S., & Menon, K. (2020). In search of the ‘new normal’: Reflections on teaching and learning during Covid-19 in a South African university. Southern African Review of Education, 26 (1), 80–99.

Ortega, M. C. G., & Falconer, L. (2015). Learning spaces in virtual worlds: Bringing our distance students home. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 7 (1), 83–98.

Osman, M. E. (2020). Global impact of COVID-19 on education systems: the emergency remote teaching at Sultan Qaboos University. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46 (4), 463–471.

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Pierson, A. (2017). The effect of seeing an instructor's face within an instructional video on connectedness, attention, and satisfaction. (Ph. D), Northcentral University, San Diego. (10289276).

Sahu, P. (2020). Closure of universities due to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): impact on education and mental health of students and academic staff. Cureus, 12 (4). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7541 .

Slagter van Tryon, P. J., & Bishop, M. (2009). Theoretical foundations for enhancing social connectedness in online learning environments. Distance Education, 30 (3), 291–315.

Stark, S., & Warne, T. (1999). ‘Connecting’ the distance: Relational issues for participants in a distance learning programme. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 23 (3), 391–402.

Stone, C., & Springer, M. (2019). Interactivity, connectedness and’teacher-presence’: Engaging and retaining students online. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 59 (2), 146–169.

Stone, S., & Logan, A. (2018). Exploring students’ use of the social networking site WhatsApp to foster connectedness in the online learning experience. Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning Ireland, 3 (1), 42–55.

Thistlethwaite, J., Locke, R., Buckley, S., Chandratilake, M., Jensen, G., van Schalkwyk, S., & Weller-Newton, J. (2020). Global perspectives on Covid-19 from the editorial board. The Clinical Teacher, 17 (3), 234.

Thomas, J., Harden, A., & Newman, M. (2012). Synthesis: Combining Results Systematically and Appropriately . Sage Publications.

van Tryon, P. J. S. (2007). E-mmediacy strategies for online learning: An instructor's guide and instrument for the design and evaluation of social connectedness in web-based courses. (Doctor of Education in Educational Technology), Lehigh University, Pennsylvania. (3314496).

Wheeler, S. (2007). The influence of communication technologies and approaches to study on transactional distance in blended learning. Research in Learning Technology, 15 (2), 103–117.

Wiederhold, B. K. (2020). Connecting through technology during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: Avoiding “Zoom Fatigue.” Cyberpsychology, Behaviour, and Social Networking, 23 (7), 437–438.

Wilson, K. M. (2018). School Connectedness and Academic Success. (Master of Arts), Old Dominion University, Sociology and Criminal Justice Thesis and Dissertations. Retrieved January 07, 2021, from https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/sociology_criminaljustice_etds/21 .

Wyn, J., Cuervo, H., Woodman, D., & Stokes, H. (2005). Young people, wellbeing and communication technologies. Melbourne, VicHealth .

Zhao, L. (2002). Interactive television in distance education: Benefits and compromises. Paper presented at the IEEE 2002 International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS'02). Social Implications of Information and Communication Technology. Proceedings (Cat. No. 02CH37293).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Bolton, Deane Road, Bolton, BL3 5AB, UK

Elizabeth Hehir, Marc Zeller, Joanna Luckhurst & Tara Chandler

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tara Chandler .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

There are no conflicting or competing interests to publish this research. The researchers give consent to publish. The research was funded by a small internal university Ryley Award.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hehir, E., Zeller, M., Luckhurst, J. et al. Developing student connectedness under remote learning using digital resources: A systematic review. Educ Inf Technol 26 , 6531–6548 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10577-1

Download citation

Received : 17 February 2021

Accepted : 03 May 2021

Published : 28 June 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10577-1

Share this article

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

• Covid-19 Pandemic
• Connectedness
• Online learning
• Distance learning
• Remote learning
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• På svenska
•   Ammattikorkeakoulut
• Vaasan ammattikorkeakoulu
• Opinnäytetyöt (Avoin kokoelma)
• Näytä viite

Remote learning experience and personality types : During COVID-19

Senchikhina, anna (2021).

Avaa tiedosto

Tiivistelmä, selaa kokoelmaa, henkilökunnalle.

• All Insights
• Top-Rated Articles
• How-to Guides
• For Parents

The Benefits of Remote Learning for Students

Discover the advantages of remote learning and how it can positively impact students' education and future.

Enhanced Flexibility and Convenience

Remote learning offers enhanced flexibility and convenience for students. With the ability to access their coursework from anywhere and at any time, students have the freedom to create their own schedules and learn at their own pace. This flexibility allows students to balance their academic responsibilities with other commitments, such as part-time jobs or extracurricular activities. Additionally, the convenience of remote learning eliminates the need for commuting to a physical classroom, saving students time and energy.

Another advantage of remote learning is the ability to review and revisit course materials whenever necessary. Students can easily go back to previous lectures, notes, and resources, ensuring a deeper understanding of the subject matter. This accessibility to course materials promotes effective learning and helps students retain information for longer periods of time.

Improved Access to Resources

Remote learning provides students with improved access to a wide range of resources. Through online platforms, students can access digital libraries, academic journals, and educational websites that offer a wealth of information. This access to diverse resources allows students to explore different perspectives, conduct comprehensive research, and broaden their knowledge beyond the limitations of traditional classroom materials.

Furthermore, remote learning enables students to connect with experts and professionals from around the world. Virtual guest speakers, webinars, and online forums facilitate interactions with professionals in various fields, offering invaluable insights and real-world experiences. This exposure to a global network of resources enhances students' understanding of different cultures, industries, and career opportunities.

Promotes Self-Directed Learning

Remote learning promotes self-directed learning, which is a crucial skill for students to develop. In a remote learning environment, students take responsibility for their own education, setting goals, managing their time effectively, and taking the initiative to seek help when needed. This autonomy fosters a sense of self-motivation and accountability, preparing students for lifelong learning and independent problem-solving.

Moreover, remote learning encourages students to develop critical thinking and decision-making skills. With the freedom to explore topics independently and engage in self-paced learning, students have the opportunity to delve deeper into subjects of interest and develop a deeper understanding of complex concepts. This active involvement in their own education cultivates a love for learning and nurtures intellectual curiosity.

Encourages Collaboration and Global Connections

Contrary to popular belief, remote learning can actually foster collaboration and global connections among students. Through online discussion boards, group projects, and virtual study sessions, students can collaborate with their peers from different geographical locations, cultural backgrounds, and perspectives. This diversity of ideas and experiences enriches the learning process and encourages students to think critically and engage in meaningful discussions.

Additionally, remote learning opens doors to global partnerships and cross-cultural collaborations. Students can participate in international conferences, joint research projects, and virtual exchange programs, allowing them to connect with students from around the world. These global connections not only broaden students' horizons but also prepare them to thrive in an increasingly interconnected and multicultural society.

Develops Technological Skills

Remote learning equips students with essential technological skills that are highly valued in today's digital age. By utilizing various online platforms, students learn how to navigate virtual learning environments, access and utilize digital resources, and communicate effectively through digital tools. These technological skills are transferable and can be applied to future educational pursuits, careers, and everyday life.

Moreover, remote learning encourages students to adapt to emerging technologies and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields. Students become proficient in using video conferencing tools, collaboration software, and online learning management systems. This familiarity with technology not only enhances their learning experience but also prepares them for the demands of the modern workforce, where digital literacy is increasingly important.

Related Insights

Understanding logos in literature, debate class: what is international relations and its principles (part 2), debate class: what is international relations and its principles (part 1).

• 5 Prep Tips for BP
• Top Speech Introductions
• Public Speaking and Debate Competitions
• Incorporating Humor
• Logical Fallacies
• How-To: Prepare for Debate Tournaments
• How-To: Judge a Debate
• How-To: Win a BP Debate
• How-To: Win An Argument
• How-To: Improve at Home
• Team China Wins World Championship
• Ariel Wins Tournament
• Jaxon Speaks Up
• Tina Improves

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

Student Academic Support Services

Academic Coaching

What is Academic Coaching?

Academic coaching is a free support service available to all PSU students. Students work with coaches to create measurable plans to meet their academic goals. Goals may address school/life balance, active learning and studying strategies, organization, communication skills, how to access resources, and more. Coaches can also serve as an accountability partner for students throughout their studies. 

How to Make an Academic Coaching Appointment

Choose the option that works best for you:.

• Browse our academic coaches' bios and specializations to determine who might be a good fit for you! Use the links within the bios to schedule directly with your preferred coach.
• No preference? View all availability here  (use the "no preference" option at the bottom of the coach selection page)
• Reach out to us by phone or email ( 503.725.4005 ; [email protected] ).

Summer Term 2024 Hours

Monday-thursday: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, friday (remote): 9:00am - 5:00 pm, check our coaching schedule for current availability., email: [email protected]  , phone: (503) 725-4005 , office: fariborz maseeh hall (fmh), suite 360.

The most valuable aspect [of my coach] is their great ability to listen and then immediately come up with practical solutions that work. I have been able to share some of these suggestions with other students and friends.

What are the benefits of academic coaching?

During coaching, students receive custom-tailored tools to fit their needs. Coaches share strategies for deeper engagement with class material, while students hone self-reflection skills and identify behavioral changes that will enhance academic success. Goals are utilized to drive motivation and persistence, relieve anxiety and overwhelm, and help students to take control of their learning. 

We are here for you!

Academic coaching is not academic advising

If you'd like help planning your courses, understanding a degree audit, or have other questions regarding courses related to your major or degree program, please see an academic adviser in your major department.

No show policy

During any single term, students who miss three appointments without advance notice to either their academic coach or Learning Center staff will forfeit their preferred appointment time. Scheduling any future appointments will be at the discretion of the academic coach.

• Student Success
• Academic Life

Are Students College-Ready, or Are Colleges Student-Ready?

As pandemic-related learning issues become more prominent among incoming students, institutions of higher education can consider how structural barriers impact student success.

By  Ashley Mowreader

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

College readiness metrics are declining among high school students. How can institutions position themselves better to be ready for a new generation of learners?

Alberto Menendez/iStock/Getty Images

Colleges and universities will welcome the class of 2028 to campus this fall, another cohort of learners whose high school experience was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic and remote learning .

Over the past few years, higher education practitioners have noticed differences in how today’s students learn compared to their peers, some disparities directly attributed to the pandemic and others a symptom of isolation and online learning.

Rather than asking students to catch up and mold to higher ed’s traditional structures, experts in the field are asking, are colleges set up to help students succeed?

Survey Says

A July 2023 report from Tyton Partners found 60 percent of student were unaware of the full scope of support services offered at their college or university. Higher education professionals—including administrators, advisers and faculty members—were much more likely to say resources were available, highlighting a gap in how institutions recommend and refer students to resources.

What’s different: Student readiness has declined from a number of angles: historically low ACT scores , a lack of study skills, class attendance, classroom participation and meeting deadlines consistently. Teenagers entering higher education are also more likely to say they struggle with their mental health and loneliness .

In addition to the new challenges traditional-aged students face in higher education due to their pandemic-related learning loss, today’s student demographics are changing, says EAB’s Alexa Silverman, senior director of student experience and well-being research.

Close to half are employed and many are simultaneously caring for a dependent and an older adult in their family. Additionally, the number of students with psychological-based disabilities have increased and more first-generation learners are enrolled than ever before.

Higher ed tends to make assumptions about what students know how to do. “We tell students ‘You should know how to study,’ but have we really broken down what those skills are?” Silverman says.

Making use of office hours is one example of an assumed-skill, Silverman says. Many students aren’t familiar with the language of office hours and don’t know how to effectively engage with their professor when they do show up.

“While a lot of these changes to processes and resources have been made to address learning loss for the traditional student, I think this set of challenges or barriers have also faced our post-traditional students, adult learners and first-generation students ,” Silverman says.

Reframing the issue: College readiness is the idea that a student should be prepared and equipped to succeed at their institution, but many in higher ed want to shift the conversation to institutional readiness . Student success leaders share their perspective that, if a college enrolls a student, that is the indication the student can be successful there.

In speaking to over 100 administrators and leaders , Silverman found institutional readiness was a strong theme in their conversations about serving students, but how that’s being modeled is just starting to be seen.

Editors’ Picks

• Indiana Argues Professors Lack First Amendment Rights in Public Classrooms
• Inside an HBCU’s Big Endowment Push
• State Grants Spread Thin

Instead of placing responsibility on students, she says, colleges and universities can model institutional readiness through:

• Making implicit assumptions explicit. Also called the “ hidden curricula of higher education ,” institutional leaders, staff and faculty members can provide education to students about the college experience and what skills they need to be successful. Montclair State University launched a campaign in spring 2024 to provide weekly themes of student success and practical strategies to students to promote their academic and co-curricular achievement.
• Modeling a growth mindset. Historically, higher education has had a “weed out” mentality that assumes a student who struggles is not capable of completing their degree. Rather, Silverman argues institutions should emphasize growth and that struggles are part of learning. Practitioners should share with learners that asking for help is not failure and using campus resources such as tutoring is part of good practice. Colorado College integrated an intervention in its first-year seminar that frames support resources as athletic trainers or coaches to hone academic skills, making students aware of services and how those services can serve their individual needs.
• Supporting faculty development. Many of today’s learners are very different from the faculty who are teaching them now, Silverman says, so campus leaders should increase instructors’ awareness of student demographics, how to break down implicit requirements in the classroom and how to refer learners to other offices, if needed. Administrators can also make investments in peer-coaching models or ready-to-use tools and materials to support this work. Texas A&M University at Kingsville implemented the Caring Campus program from the Institute for Evidence-Based Change to promote belonging among diverse student groups and implement best practices for student success.

Get more content like this directly to your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribe to the Student Success newsletter here .

Report: How to Train Student Leaders in the Classroom

A recent white paper highlights strategies for raising up student leaders through effective leadership education in p

Share This Article

More from academic life.

Academic Success Tip: Promoting Inclusivity With the Syllabus

A study from Worcester Polytechnic Institute found students believe their instructors are more inclusive if they incl

Listen: Where Upward Transfer Fails and How Institutions Are Improving Processes

On the latest Voices of Student Success episode, hear about the state of upward transfer in the U.S., the opportuniti

Success Program Launch: Wraparound 2-Year Program for First-Gen Learners

Boston College established a two-year residential college for low-income, first-generation students, which equips the

• Become a Member
• Sign up for Newsletters
• Learning & Assessment
• Diversity & Equity
• Career Development
• Labor & Unionization
• Shared Governance
• Academic Freedom
• Books & Publishing
• Financial Aid
• Residential Life
• Free Speech
• Physical & Mental Health
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Socioeconomics
• Traditional-Age
• Adult & Post-Traditional
• Teaching & Learning
• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Publishing
• Data Analytics
• Administrative Tech
• Alternative Credentials
• Financial Health
• Cost-Cutting
• Revenue Strategies
• Academic Programs
• Physical Campuses
• Mergers & Collaboration
• Fundraising
• Research Universities
• Regional Public Universities
• Community Colleges
• Private Nonprofit Colleges
• Minority-Serving Institutions
• Religious Colleges
• Women's Colleges
• Specialized Colleges
• For-Profit Colleges
• Executive Leadership
• Trustees & Regents
• State Oversight
• Accreditation
• Politics & Elections
• Supreme Court
• Student Aid Policy
• Science & Research Policy
• State Policy
• Colleges & Localities
• Employee Satisfaction
• Remote & Flexible Work
• Staff Issues
• Study Abroad
• International Students in U.S.
• U.S. Colleges in the World
• Intellectual Affairs
• Seeking a Faculty Job
• Advancing in the Faculty
• Seeking an Administrative Job
• Advancing as an Administrator
• Beyond Transfer
• Call to Action
• Confessions of a Community College Dean
• Higher Ed Gamma
• Higher Ed Policy
• Just Explain It to Me!
• Just Visiting
• Law, Policy—and IT?
• Leadership & StratEDgy
• Leadership in Higher Education
• Learning Innovation
• Online: Trending Now
• Resident Scholar
• University of Venus
• Student Voice
• Health & Wellness
• The College Experience
• Life After College
• Academic Minute
• Weekly Wisdom
• Reports & Data
• Quick Takes
• Advertising & Marketing
• Consulting Services
• Data & Insights
• Hiring & Jobs
• Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

• Sign Up, It’s FREE

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

17 Team-Building Activities for In-Person, Remote, and Hybrid Teams

• Rebecca Knight

Employees with strong relationships at work are more creative, collaborative, and likely to stay with their organization.

Managers sometimes turn to team-building activities to build connections between colleagues. But which activities and practices would work best for your team? And how can you put them into action most effectively? In this article, the author offers advice and recommendations from three experts. Their activity suggestions are intended to inspire ideas that you can then tailor to your team’s size, sensibilities, and circumstances. These activities don’t need to be extravagant or overly structured — what matters is being intentional about making team building happen. Stay attentive to your team members’ needs, involve colleagues in planning, and show sincere interest in getting to know them. By doing so, you’ll help build a positive, inclusive team culture that tackles loneliness and helps everyone succeed together.

In the era of remote work and scattered teams, managers face a key challenge: fostering connections among employees, no matter where they happen to be located.

• RK Rebecca Knight is a journalist who writes about all things related to the changing nature of careers and the workplace. Her essays and reported stories have been featured in The Boston Globe, Business Insider, The New York Times, BBC, and The Christian Science Monitor. She was shortlisted as a Reuters Institute Fellow at Oxford University in 2023. Earlier in her career, she spent a decade as an editor and reporter at the Financial Times in New York, London, and Boston.

Partner Center

More From Forbes

How to leverage remote engineering teams.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Kerri Davis is the CEO of Fortress , an end-to-end operations platform for the property management industry.

Remote teams do come with inherent difficulties: communication, culture, time zones and accountability, to name a few. But when local talent is hard to find and hiring direct is expensive, time-consuming and hard to scale, almost all tech companies leverage remote engineers at some point.

The question is, should we consider it a necessary evil or an incredible opportunity?

I won’t claim that I’ve perfected this, nor that it’s easy, but you actually can bring remote teams together for immense success. In fact, I’ve found that by following three key strategies, we can create a remote team that thrives, leveraging all of the remote upsides and benefiting from diverse perspectives and increased innovation.

Treat Everyone, Literally Everyone, Amazingly

I’m a firm believer that we should assume every member of our team is amazing—and thus, treat them amazingly—from day one. As a part of that, it’s important to treat everyone the same, regardless of where they live, how they are employed/contracted, what primary language they speak or what time zone they occupy. This creates a sense of community and, more importantly, psychological safety or, according to Harvard Business Review , “a shared belief that it’s OK to take risks, to express ideas and concerns, to speak up with questions, and to admit mistakes.”

In practice, this means providing the same PTO, the same welcome boxes, the same mandatory fun remote events and all-hands meetings, the same onboarding experience, the same swag, the same types of appreciation and recognition, the same opportunities for advancement, the same review and rewards systems and every other benefit you can provide to everyone.

Stranger Things Season 5 Leak—Hacker Claims New Episodes Release Anytime Now

Today’s nyt mini crossword clues and answers for thursday, august 15, the backlash against blake lively, explained, encourage, and even provide, learning for all.

In the case of both remote workers and full-time employees, you’ve hired the best and brightest. If you want to retain them, you need to keep them challenged and engaged. Remote workers especially will appreciate the chance to develop professional skills within the framework of a company as they often miss out on chances to learn from peers day to day.

In practice, this means intentionally setting aside time and money for learning opportunities. We schedule monthly lunch and learns, hold bi-weekly engineering training and quarterly company all-hands, moderate Slack channels for book clubs and encourage requests to spend time and money on company-approved courses.

Fire Everyone, Literally Everyone, Who Isn’t Amazing

It's relatively easy to hire—you post a position, interview three to five candidates, make a best guess on the best one and extend an offer letter. It’s harder to fire. And this can be especially true when working with remote engineers.

For every new team member who fits your team culture and loves your product the way you do, there’ll be another who doesn’t quite meet the mark. And yet as leaders, we often wait to fire them until long after we should. Why? Because firing is hard. It hurts us, it hurts them and we have to swallow our pride and acknowledge that we made the wrong hire, or that we weren't capable of making this person work.

I look at this from a different point of view. When considering the rest of my team, firing becomes easy. It's not about me or the person I hired. It's about the team. By giving a remote team the best and not burdening them with underachievers, you’ll foster real passion, commitment and energy.

Building and supporting technology is hard. It requires an engineering team with a very specific skill set, incredible passion and capability and a shared vision. Leveraging remote engineers and even full engineering teams can be incredibly valuable when done with focus and intention.

Creating psychological safety and trust, creating a pro-learning environment and surrounding every member of your team with incredible team members are all key to not only building your technology, but to building your company’s vision.

Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Trending Topics

• Tisha B’Av

Get JTA's Daily Briefing in your inbox

I accept the JTA Privacy Policy .

By submitting the above I agree to the privacy policy and terms of use of JTA.org

Tim Walz wrote a master’s thesis on Holocaust education, just as his own school’s approach drew criticism

In Judi Agustin’s freshman year at Mankato West High School, her teacher instructed her to wear a yellow star.

It was part of a Holocaust curriculum at the school, located in a remote area of Minnesota with barely any Jews. For a week, freshmen were asked to wear the yellow stars, which were reminiscent of the ones the Nazis made the Jews wear. Seniors played the part of the Gestapo, charged with persecuting the “Jews.”

Unlike everyone else in her class in the 2001-2002 school year, Agustin was Jewish. The experience “was incredibly hurtful and offensive and scary,” she recalled on Tuesday. Her father complained to the district, and wrote a letter to the local paper decrying the lesson.

In response, she recalled, a teacher intervened. That teacher, according to her recollection: current vice presidential nominee Tim Walz.

“When Tim Walz found out about it, he squashed it real quick, and as far as I understand they never did it again,” Agustin told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “So he was an advocate for my experience, as one of four Jewish kids in the entire school district. And I always felt like he had our back.”

A progressive favorite in Minnesota, where he is now governor, Walz is also heralded for his background as a public school educator. Lesser known is the fact that, while teaching in rural, largely white Midwestern school districts, Walz developed a particular interest in Holocaust and genocide education.

Walz is on the campaign trail this week with Vice President Kamala Harris, his running mate, and did not immediately respond to a request for comment. JTA could not independently verify that he was the teacher who stopped the Mankato West lesson.

But it’s clear that how to teach the Holocaust well has occupied Walz for decades. In 1993, while teaching in Nebraska, he was part of an inaugural conference of U.S. educators convened by the soon-to-open U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. Eight years later, after moving to Minnesota, he wrote a thesis arguing for changes in Holocaust education. And as governor, he backed a push to mandate teaching about the Holocaust in Minnesota schools.

Through it all, Walz modeled and argued for careful instruction that treated the Holocaust as one of multiple genocides worth understanding.

“Schools are teaching about the Jewish Holocaust, but the way it is traditionally being taught is not leading to increased knowledge of the causes of genocide in all parts of the world,” Walz wrote in his thesis, submitted in 2001.

The thesis was the culmination of Walz’s master’s degree focused on Holocaust and genocide education at Minnesota State University, Mankato, which he earned while teaching at Mankato West. His 27-page thesis, which JTA obtained, is titled “Improving Human Rights and Genocide Studies in the American High School Classroom.”

In it, Walz argues that the lessons of the “Jewish Holocaust” should be taught “in the greater context of human rights abuses,” rather than as a unique historical anomaly or as part of a larger unit on World War II. “To exclude other acts of genocide severely limited students’ ability to synthesize the lessons of the Holocaust and the ability to apply them elsewhere,” he wrote.

He then took a position that he noted was “controversial” among Holocaust scholars: that the Holocaust should not be taught as unique, but used to help students identify “clear patterns” with other historical genocides like the Armenian and Rwandan genocides.

Walz was describing, in effect, his own approach to teaching the Holocaust that he implemented in Alliance, Nebraska, years earlier. In the state’s remote northwest region, Walz asked his global geography class to study the common factors that linked the Holocaust to other historical genocides , including economic strife, totalitarian ideology and colonialism. The year was 1993. At year’s end, Walz and his class correctly predicted that Rwanda was most at risk of sliding into genocide.

“The Holocaust is taught too often purely as a historical event, an anomaly, a moment in time,” Walz Told the New York Times in 2008, reflecting on those Alliance lessons. “That relieves us of responsibility. Obviously, the mastermind was sociopathic, but on the scale for it to happen, there had to be a lot of people in the country who chose to go down that path.”

In his thesis, he noted that he intended to bring this curriculum to the Mankato school district as a “sample unit.” But another kind of lesson was unfolding there at the same time.

For years at Mankato West, high school students had been engaged in a peculiar lesson that was, all the same, not unusual for its time: In an effort to teach students who had never met a Jewish person what it might have been like to live under the Nazis, teachers had them role play.

For a week, freshmen wore the yellow stars, and seniors playing the Gestapo were given permission to torment them.

Such lessons had been going on since at least the 1990s, recalled Leah Solo, a Jewish student who graduated from Mankato West in 1998. For Solo, these lessons weren’t so bad.

“People knew I was Jewish, people knew to be sensitive around me,” Solo told JTA. Her teacher, who was not Walz and whom she liked, “was doing his best to try to teach a really hard subject to folks who had no idea. Most of these kids had never met a Jew before.” In her senior year she was given the choice of whether she wanted to play a Nazi or another kind of role, and chose the latter.

Things were different by the time Agustin took the class several years later. By then, the Holocaust role-playing wasn’t just limited to the confines of the classroom.

“They could come up to you in the lunchroom,” recalled Anne Heintz, a fellow student at the time. Local students whispered about the lesson before they got to high school, she said.

One senior, in Agustin’s recollection, got violent and started shoving the “Jewish” freshmen into lockers.

Outraged, her father wrote a letter to the local newspaper, and some parents complained to the school district. Agustin left the high school after her sophomore year. None of this happened in Walz’s classroom, according to the students, and Heintz recalled that the lessons had ended by the time she graduated in 2004.

“I’m not sure what his involvement was. I know it just ended,” Heintz, who is not Jewish, told JTA. “He was teaching at the time it ended.”

JTA could not verify whether Walz knew about the lessons, which had been going on for years, before they were stopped. A spokesperson for the high school told JTA they “don’t have any information” on the details of the lessons, but noted, “When Governor Walz was at Mankato West High School he was primarily a Global Geography Teacher and Football Coach. Subjects such as the Holocaust were taught in history courses.”

Agustin’s father, Stewart Ross, told JTA that he did not recall Walz being involved. Neither did Bob Ihrig, one of the teachers who taught the lesson as part of a World War II unit. He said it continued in a limited, classroom-only version until his retirement in 2014.

Ross, Ihrig and all three Mankato West High students spoke highly of Walz as a teacher and community leader, though only one, Heintz, actually had him in the classroom.

“What I remember most is, he always made all the subjects that we talked about super engaging,” she said. “It always seemed like he was able to make a subject really exciting for folks and really engage everyone in class. And I think that is part of how he speaks now that he’s on a national stage as well.”

Solo, who had Walz’s wife Gwen for a different class, took a student trip led by the couple to China, where Tim Walz taught for a year early in his career. She recalled how, in 2004, Walz stood up for her when she was working with John Kerry’s presidential campaign and security for a George W. Bush rally tried to boot them from the premises.

“When security also tried to kick him out, he was like, ‘I am a former Teacher of the Year who just returned from being deployed. I don’t think you want to kick me out,’” Solo recalled, describing an incident that made local news at the time. “And then after the rally, he came and signed up to volunteer with the Kerry campaign, because he did not appreciate that.”

Volunteering with Kerry’s campaign led directly to Walz’s entrance into politics . Solo would go on to work for Walz’s congressional campaigns.

Walz stuck with teaching as he began his political career; when he was elected to represent Mankato in 2006, he was the only active educator in Congress.

Last year, as Minnesota’s governor, Walz returned to Holocaust education, and supported and signed a law requiring the state’s middle and high schools to teach about the Holocaust. The law, initiated and championed by the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas, also encourages schools to teach about other genocides. A working group for the curriculum hit snags earlier this summer when a pro-Palestinian activist was removed from the committee amid debates on whether Israel’s conduct in Gaza constitutes genocide.

The mandate is still anticipated to go into effect in the 2025-2026 school year. “This is going to work out, this is going to be good, because the governor and his staff are highly attuned to the concerns and sensitivities of the Jewish community,” Ethan Roberts, the JCRC’s deputy executive director, told JTA.

Speaking at a JCRC event in June, Walz said he had been “privileged and proud” to have participated in the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum training early in his career. But he said more needed to be done, and he emphasized that the curriculum chosen to accomplish the requirement would determine its success.

“We need to do better on Holocaust education. We need to do better on ethnic studies,” he told the crowd. “And I tell you this as a teacher and as governor, too, we don’t need test scores or anything to tell us that we’re failing.”

It was the kind of message that former Mankato West students said they came to expect from him.

“He is what you hope a great teacher is,” said Solo, “which is someone who’s not only teaching, but also learning at all times.”

With additional reporting by Jackie Hajdenberg. 

Correction and updates (Aug. 8): This story has been corrected to remove a reference to Tim Walz as department chair. It has also been updated to reflect additional sources about Holocaust instruction at Mankato West High School.

Share this:

Recommended from jta.

100 US rabbis and cantors urge Netanyahu to finalize deal to free remaining hostages

Tel Aviv’s ‘Hostage Square’ is coming to Chicago for the DNC — whether or not a pro-Israel march gets a permit

Tim Walz says he has no personal relationship with imam who shared pro-Hitler video

Sen. Chuck Schumer to release book warning about antisemitism in the United States

Ilhan Omar, fierce critic of Israel in Congress, easily wins primary after 2 stinging defeats for progressive ‘Squad’

Kamala Harris’ Hebrew merch is taking shape — in the form of a punctuation mark